Is it safe to speak?

BigEyeTenor
Posts: 109
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:23 am

Is it safe to speak?

Post by BigEyeTenor » Sun Jun 25, 2017 7:23 pm

This guy! I love this.


User avatar
deep state
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:38 pm

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by deep state » Sun Jun 25, 2017 9:29 pm

I love a lot of what JP says too, including here; but I can't help but think that he's got pulled into a Big Story & his Social Role & Responsibility as Spokesgoat, and that it's interfering with his ability to relax and communicate spontaneously, rather than preach from a pre-prepared script, which is IMO much less effective.

IMO, what we say matters much less than the place we are saying it from. Speaking the truth is hard, but speaking truly is much, much harder.

I think JP was probably a better public speaker before he decided/realized he was carrying the weight of the world's silence on his shoulders.

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by C_D » Tue Jul 04, 2017 9:17 am

Speaking the truth is hard, but speaking truly is much, much harder.
In what sense is speaking truly much harder?
This begs the question - are people with Tourettes Syndrome the most honest people you will ever meet? I suggest they are.

User avatar
Harvey
Posts: 76
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 8:56 pm

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by Harvey » Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:33 pm

There's almost certainly some truth in that thought, C_D.

I learned early on that it was easier for me to cut through the Gordian knot of social conventions and to live with the consequences of estrangement and suspicion than it was to learn the etiquette and tastes of my peers. I didn't seem to fear the same kinds of things they appeared to. I put it down to the loss of my father at an early age. I was free to invent who I was through finding my own father figures, mostly in literature and art though sometimes people I came into close contact with. Then I would remove them rather brutally from my affections at some stage in favour of a new and different figure. At least until I understood what I was doing. Looking back, the only continuity was perpetual change. I remember being beaten to the ground by my mother once (the only time she ever hit me) and she was entirely justified in the circumstances, and in a similar way, in an instant she had reached past all the sophistry of argument to bring me to the point of recognising that here was something she felt strongly enough about, that she needed to get my full attention, that it was worth my while considering. Of course, that isn't how I viewed it at the time, but it's probably a close approximation of the real dynamic. My surrogate fathers got my full attention because I thought that I had selected them. In truth, society had selected them in all sorts of ways, to be worthy of mine and others attention. My mother had to impress me with years of her fairness and understanding, and yes, one moment of blind rage to do the same. Something that was there all along had to work much harder to be seen.

Anyway, sometimes the only way to hang onto an understanding is the excruciating embarrassment of saying it out loud, as I often did. One virtue of saying the naively obvious is that many don't bother to for whatever reason. perhaps because they have something to gain. Another is that we might learn less from approval than we learn from embarrassment and error. Another virtue is the explosive and indelible impact of discovering that what we elide from our conscious life, and of which many will say "but of course, there's no need to say it dear fellow, we all know that" that thing is the thing everybody is really trying to avoid, for whatever reason, perhaps merely guilty pleasure. Speaking directly of a formerly tolerated evil is the point at which others are roused from slumber toward recognition of something they knew that they knew, but had somehow avoided knowing.

Which brings us back to our earlier discussion on the other thread.

User avatar
deep state
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:38 pm

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by deep state » Sun Jul 09, 2017 2:51 pm

C_D wrote:
Tue Jul 04, 2017 9:17 am
Speaking the truth is hard, but speaking truly is much, much harder.
In what sense is speaking truly much harder?
I mean in the sense of really knowing, feeling, embodying what we are saying in the moment of saying it, rather than reading from a mental script of what we think we believe.

User avatar
Harvey
Posts: 76
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 8:56 pm

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by Harvey » Mon Jul 10, 2017 12:03 am

Having said that, though, I also believe that panic is the last thing we need. There is great strength to be found in the simple truth that Buchanan and Koch came up with the kind of strategy now in play precisely because they knew that the majority, if fully informed, would never support what they seek. So, the best thing that those who support a robust, non-plutocratic society can do is focus on patiently informing and activating that majority. And reminding all Americans that democracy is not something you can just assume will survive: It has to be fought for time and again. This is one of those moments.
Any thoughts in relation to the topic?

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/4 ... bertarians

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by C_D » Tue Jul 11, 2017 7:28 am

deep state wrote:
Sun Jul 09, 2017 2:51 pm
C_D wrote:
Tue Jul 04, 2017 9:17 am
Speaking the truth is hard, but speaking truly is much, much harder.
In what sense is speaking truly much harder?
I mean in the sense of really knowing, feeling, embodying what we are saying in the moment of saying it, rather than reading from a mental script of what we think we believe.
It will probably sound disingenuous saying this, but what makes you so certain that everybody's mind works in the same manner as your own?
Your mind has been shaped by a series of events totally unique to you. In a truly infinite number of ways.
Forget the 'Universe' - if you wish to consider the concept of infinity, start with yourself.
Be what you are, not what you 'think' you are - this disassociative stepping of self is a self-induced, self-defence mechanism against self-reflection.
Lots of self in there. :-)

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by C_D » Tue Jul 11, 2017 7:55 am

Harvey wrote:
Mon Jul 10, 2017 12:03 am
Having said that, though, I also believe that panic is the last thing we need. There is great strength to be found in the simple truth that Buchanan and Koch came up with the kind of strategy now in play precisely because they knew that the majority, if fully informed, would never support what they seek. So, the best thing that those who support a robust, non-plutocratic society can do is focus on patiently informing and activating that majority. And reminding all Americans that democracy is not something you can just assume will survive: It has to be fought for time and again. This is one of those moments.
Any thoughts in relation to the topic?

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/4 ... bertarians
Thoughts:
Misinforming the Majority: A Deliberate Strategy of Right-Wing Libertarians
The concept of Right and Left (in political terms) is simple manipulation - created by minds with sly intent to encage - invisible not through lack of imagination, but because you are not of a similar mindset. Remember this.

Anyone who talks in terms of Left and Right (politically) is too ingrained within the paradigm to be of any significant use to those outside the paradigm. Until realisation.

Within the Right/Left political bread and circus, whatever one side does, so does the other. It's a controlled race to out-do one another. Two sides of the same coin. One ring to bind them all in division.

The second greatest liars on Earth are politicians.
The supreme liars are those that create the second in their own, diluted image.

Change is realisation that what went before is no longer tolerable.
Change is accelerating.

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by jakell » Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:26 am

Even though there are some great 'shorts' and interviews, I've also been enjoying Jordan Peterson's longer lectures, especially the Biblical series which coincides with a particular interest ATM.
This has surprised me because I've only relatively recently got into the frame of mind where I can glean stuff from the 'podcast' format, which has turned out to be far more useful than I anticipated, even so, about 45 mins was enough before I started getting mentally fidgety. The Biblical lectures are not also very long but also very rambling and it's interesting the extent to which his audience appreciate this, willing to be there for the ride... over and over again.

It seems he has created a Youtube genre all of his own, one that I didn't think would emerge from the vast sea of frenetic and highly focused vids, but the market is obviously there, and I welcome it. I sort of break through a 'concentration span' ceiling when viewing his stuff, something that had got pretty bad compared to my 'student' days.

He's turned out to be pretty versatile too (His recent Steven Crowder interview is a bit different), I particularly enjoyed this one where he is speaking very insightfully and entertainingly on Pepe/Kek (and Kermit):



"We're going to talk about frogs..."

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by C_D » Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 am

this guy cracks me up - he's almost got an English sense of humour!



and a follow-up


User avatar
jakell
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by jakell » Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:02 am

deep state wrote:
Sun Jun 25, 2017 9:29 pm
I love a lot of what JP says too, including here; but I can't help but think that he's got pulled into a Big Story & his Social Role & Responsibility as Spokesgoat, and that it's interfering with his ability to relax and communicate spontaneously, rather than preach from a pre-prepared script, which is IMO much less effective.

IMO, what we say matters much less than the place we are saying it from. Speaking the truth is hard, but speaking truly is much, much harder.

I think JP was probably a better public speaker before he decided/realized he was carrying the weight of the world's silence on his shoulders.
I think this was unavoidable to an extent, especially so late last year, he seems to have taken those lemons though and made some pretty good lemonade He has returned largely to his role as a lecturer, but with enormous bells on, and his travails with the University have not defined him.

The Pageau talk above actually dates from around that time, and the frog/headdress** one indicated in it from shortly before that, which shows he was on top of things, or at least riding it well, and finding some (dark) humour. In the Pageau talk they talk about how the best solutions are often to be found in the chaos, and it seems that is what he was doing, not wishing himself elsewhere.

His (very) long lectures also demonstrate some relaxed playfulness, but one has to develop the sort of attention that is not the default encouraged by the Youtube format to appreciate these, the Crowder interview is similar and more digestible.

-----------------

**ETA: from this video.... "The Frog is a harbinger of dangerous times..... As spokesfrog I'm announcing that there is something polluted about the water in which we're all swimming and we'd better clear it up...There's some syncronicity for you..."

Another syncronicity is that,in the post above, he was called a spokesgoat. (possibly one can get too carried away with this sort of thing though)

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by C_D » Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:21 pm



These two free thinking young ladies (is that allowed to be refreshing?) are tackling some problems - particularly the alienation of people from reality and the misplaced anger (towards relatively trivial matters) of a youth within a system that has stolen their future - and feels powerless in the face it's enormity.

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by jakell » Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:57 pm

I've been a fan of Lauren for some time now, Britanny has not been around for so long but her collaboration with Tara McCarthy (Virtue of the West) has come up with some great food for thought and has a good selection of guests.

I'm not exactly sure where this particular collaboration is going, but it seems they have big plans for it as well as solid backing. At present though it seems a bit lightweight and bubbly relative to their other outings, but I put this down to an initial high (they alsohad great chemistry when covering the 'Defend Europe' issue). Talking of which, Lauren has done a good job of getting past her Patreon debacle, which must have been a bit of a blow to her income, this coincides well with the 'Safe To Speak?' topic here, and evidently it wasn't particularly safe for her to do so in that instance.

With Laruen, Brittany and especially Tara, we are getting pretty firmly into White Identitarian territory, and this is not just the usual hyperbolic SJW labelling. The 'tone' of this video tends to fit in with Alt-Right perception of male and female tendencies, where females are the more agreeable and collaborative , I've noticed this with other similar meetups too.. even Lara Lotkeff has got a little bit girly at times.

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by C_D » Thu Aug 10, 2017 4:01 pm

Harvey wrote:
Mon Jul 10, 2017 12:03 am
Having said that, though, I also believe that panic is the last thing we need. There is great strength to be found in the simple truth that Buchanan and Koch came up with the kind of strategy now in play precisely because they knew that the majority, if fully informed, would never support what they seek. So, the best thing that those who support a robust, non-plutocratic society can do is focus on patiently informing and activating that majority. And reminding all Americans that democracy is not something you can just assume will survive: It has to be fought for time and again. This is one of those moments.
Any thoughts in relation to the topic?

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/4 ... bertarians
Sorry Harv - had some kind of blindness to this post that only became apparant 5 minutes ago.

Unfortunately, the premise in the article - "...the best thing that those who support a robust, non-plutocratic society can do is..." allied with the content of the next sentence - "...reminding all Americans that democracy is not something you can just assume will survive..." are completely at odds with one another because Americans do not live in democracy, never have - and continue to live in a plutocracy established in the 17th century. I caveat this statement by admitting that my perception of our 'reality' is so radically different to anyone I know, that I can be assumed to be completely unhinged.

I agree that this is one of those moments, but no new alternate is being offered. It's possible that we need a 'year zero' reset of mindset, where looking forward is untainted by the burden of looking back - into a past that has been manipulated to form an impression of now that suits it's benefactors.

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by jakell » Fri Aug 11, 2017 11:33 am

Relating to the thread title, I'm sure many people are aware of James Damore's problems with Google ATM, for anyone who isn't though I'll do a quick recap..

James Damore was a Google employee, and doesn't seem a rabble rouser or ideologue in any way. It seems he became increasingly uncomfortable with Google's push for 'equality' (inverted commas becuase they mean equality of outcome, not of opportunity), and also the internal secrecy about this, even though the 'push' was quite forceful.
Rather than simply grumble and become increasingly bitter he wrote a 'memo', which is a misleading word as it is was a pretty well researched and thought out document rationally addressing of all their attitudes on this. In spite of him taking the trouble to confront them rationally, he was fired on the spot. It clearly wasn't safe for him to speak.

He seems a pretty shy and well spoken guy, but evidently quite brave too and, at present, seems fairy unbowed. There are parallels with Jordan Peterson's position last year and, although Peterson wasn't fired, he got pretty close (and didn't back down). In this video interview I like how, in addition to doing a fairly thorough analysis of his 'memo', Jordan is pretty humane too, not an easy combinination.. by doing this he supports Damore's intellectual abililty plus his integrity, in contrast to taking the all to easy route of dwelling his victim status.

The first 25 minutes here are spent addressing his personal situation and the rest is taking a detailed look at his (lengthy)'memo'. Peterson does this well though and watching this is a good way of getting to grips with what Damore actually wrote:


User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by C_D » Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:22 pm

Have you seen many moves towards making ol' Whitey the enemy of the people in this country, Jakell? Can't say I've noticed that much of it here. Not like in the States.

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by jakell » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:19 pm

C_D wrote:
Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:22 pm
Have you seen many moves towards making ol' Whitey the enemy of the people in this country, Jakell? Can't say I've noticed that much of it here. Not like in the States.
I don't think any obvious 'moves' need to be made - it's sort of implied in the general transatlantic acceptance that our society is burdened with white privilege, something that can be labeled as a 'microaggression' and then inflated (with hot-air) into a major aggression. In America the Alt-Right has been pretty good at making white identity an issue, so what we see over there is probably a reaction to that, over here we have Alt-Right folks (Millennial Woes would be a good example), but no native movement as such.

A recent example might be the Cambridge tweet that I linked to in Sargon's video in this post, but a few other examples come to mind:

1) The killing of Joe Cox and it being linked to Britain First brought up a panic about Far right violence**
2) Brexit certainly brought up another panic about the issue of Xenophobic attacks by natives**
3) The BBC's no white males policy became pretty plain a while back, Sargon did a good video on this too. Not dissimilar to the Google situation.
4) That poster:

Image

Really though, this sort of thing has been dripped into our national psyche and institutions for so long now that there's no need to be as obvious as the above poster, or the Cambridge tweet... when it is, I wonder if we are moving on to a more open BLM/Evergreen form of expression.

** these were both talked of, SPLC style, as if they were definite happenings, but little actual data was provided

====================

ETA: Cambridge University are allegedly 'investigating' that tweet, but I suspect that, given the 'legitimate' target that the author chose, it was Safe To Speak.

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by C_D » Mon Aug 14, 2017 9:28 am

I had been following the Youtube censoring story - and had laughed at the 'algorithms' that were being deployed to root out all the evil thoughts. It sounded like some bullsheet science fiction - that policing google was being handed over to what is effectively an AI - in the form of an algorithm. Anyhoo, turns out, of course, it is bs. Just plain old human beings censoring, all along. Enjoy your cages, folks.


User avatar
jakell
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by jakell » Mon Aug 14, 2017 10:00 am

Evil thoughts cannot be detected by an algorithm, but evil speech can, or rather what is designated as evil speech. Until now Youtube has mainly relied on humans reporting stuff but this has turned out to be an overwhelming task and all that is needed for someone to avoid this is to start up a new, low subscriber, channel and (carefully) direct folks to it. Sargon has outlined in this video how Youtube are significantly increasing their group of specialists in 'Hate speech' but combining this with the algorithm that will tirelessly comb videos.
This is not science fiction or particularly new technology, it's been used for a while now in copyright detection and you can test this for yourself.. upload something from the BBC or a Father Ted clip to a underused channel, use a vanilla title, some clever editing and a bit of muffling and a bot will still find it and flag it. this is the only FT clip (that's not from Hat Trick) I've seen get through the filter so far.

Even stranger is that videos that have have been flagged as undesirable will still be viewable, they will just exist in a vault that cannot be found by casual searches, and no links or thumbnails will ever appear on Youtube's pages. One vlogger has mused that this may create a 'Streisand Effect', or an active Youtube subculture. This could turn out to be interesting, and could be a home for such as the much pursued Murdoch Murdoch videos.

ETA: Another proposed tweak is that the flagging of such videos will not be subject to appeal, although any outcry by the fans of such as Pewdiepie will certainly have an impact.

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: Is it safe to speak?

Post by C_D » Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:01 pm

Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression
Electronic Frontier Foundation

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/08/f ... expression
Jeezuz, these people are brave. Or stupid. Are they not aware that defending the concept of free speech = evil person that needs punching? ;)
Christ! - El Trumpino, dem Russkie bastards and Goebbel's grandkids must have got to 'em.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jakell and 1 guest