Rationalskepticism,lol part III.

[DaveDodo007]

Now here are some other threads that he participated in

You can decide for yourself how disruptive he was being

http://rationalskepticism.org/news-poli ... 51137.html

http://rationalskepticism.org/is-jeremy ... -4990.html

http://rationalskepticism.org/news-poli ... -4660.html

Seriously the ratskep 'intellectuals' think Corbyn can win a election, I mean any election.

I know ratskeps are delusional fuckwits but this is jumping the shark.

[pErvinalia]

Well a number of the naysayers were proved conclusively wrong by suggesting he couldn't win the Labor leadership. Let's just wait and see what happens in the next election before getting too cocky. Most of his policies align with the majority of public expectations. It's really only the elite who are contemptuous of him.

[pErvinalia]

Here's one for Surr regarding Cito. Perfect!

[Brian Peacock]

Looks like a self-refuting argument eh?

[pErvinalia]

Yeah, probably. But it does fit Cito (and Seth to a degree) so perfectly.

[Brian Peacock]

I think you hate him because you love him.

[pErvinalia]

Impeccable logic..

[MrJonno]

Well a number of the naysayers were proved conclusively wrong by suggesting he couldn't win the Labor leadership. Let's just wait and see what happens in the next election before getting too cocky. Most of his policies align with the majority of public expectations. It's really only the elite who are contemptuous of him.

Depends on what you define as an elite, its certainly very elitish to even join a political party, 99% of the population don't. If anything Corbyn and his supporters are about as elite (and disconnected from the majority) as you can get

[pErvinalia]

People joined the party because of his anti-elitism.

[Hermit]

...its certainly very elitish to even join a political party

You confuse two words.

elite: a select group that is superior in terms of ability or qualities to the rest of a group or society.
minority: the smaller number or part, especially a number or part representing less than half of the whole.

[pErvinalia]

This is now the point where Jonno will double-down and the real kooky will start..

[Hermit]

If he wants a fight about it he can step outside. If I'm not out there in five minutes he can start without me.

[pErvinalia]

No way, you can't miss Jonno going all black and white authoritarian! It's some of the funniest stuff on the internet.

[Forty Two]

Bigotry against disadvantaged people. And you clearly missed DDs link to SDs disgusting rape apologetics. Go back and find it.

Bigotry has a cornucopia of meanings, but the chief one is "intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself." I don't see it. And no, I will not accept "read the thread" as evidence. That's too close to "find it your fucking self because I can't be bothered", which is pretty much all you and Surr have been doing so far. Give me some relevant quotes, thanks.

I would even add that I can't for the life of me figure out why bigotry would be considered an offense on a discussion board. So what if person X is intolerant of people who hold different opinions? As long as person X is not namecalling or personally attacking other people, and not derailing conversations or posting off topic material, then what in the world does "intolerance" have to do with anything?

A lot of people are intolerant of pedophiles, for example, or those who defend pedophilia. So what? Can't there still be a thread about pedophilia, where people can talk about it? Some of those people are just going to declare pedophilia to be indefensible and pedophiles to be monsters. They're bigoted against pedophiles.

Similarly, if someone is bigoted against "disadvantaged people," that doesn't actually effect the conversation. What if someone just doesn't tolerate trans people. Some feminists, for example, are bigoted against trans people. As long as they aren't namecalling and such, then what is the problem with them expressing their opinion?

Lastly, this trend to suggest that being bigoted against certain groups of people is forbidden, but being bigoted against other groups of people is o.k., is just a recipe for conversational disaster. There are many different opinions as to who is disadvantaged and why, and who is marginalized, and who is privileged, and who is advantages, and all that. Nobody agrees on it. Nor should it matter. Being a woman or a minority, for example, doesn't immunize one from criticism or argument.

[MrJonno]

...its certainly very elitish to even join a political party

You confuse two words.

elite: a select group that is superior in terms of ability or qualities to the rest of a group or society.
minority: the smaller number or part, especially a number or part representing less than half of the whole.

Well people who do join political parties do think they are better than everyone else, but not as much as people who go on demonstrations in a a democracy do.
Been outvoted in an election, hey lets have a street demonstration/riot/party because we don't like the results. of an election Let's face it people only take to the streets in a democracy because they have already lost the argument