Ludicrous racism charges

Jesse D Serrins

New member
Yeah, that's actually really disgusting. In fact, it's sinking in as I type, and it makes me really sad.

(referring to what the pope said, that is)
 
B

be.jazz

Guest
Apparently, current UK immigration thought is spreading. Since it's increasingly obvious that the EU needs massive immigration to retain a large enough active population, negotiations are starting to figure out EU-level policies. Some of the topics under discussion are whether these work-approved, qualified immigrants should be able to move between EU countries or change employer. Seems like even "good immigrants" are second-class people.
 

k-punk

Spectres of Mark
I wonder if everyone who finds the Pope's comments 'offensive' still objects to my supposedly 'over the top' attacks on Catholicism? Because all the Pope is doing is following through the logic of the RCC's long-stated Pro-Creationist, Pro-Life philosophy. That such a logic has and must inevitably lead to misery, poverty, disease and atrocity on a mass scale was part of my reason for arguing that Catholicism is innately evil.

The Pope is precisely NOT being hyperbolic. If we accept the first principles of the RCC sacred life cult, i.e. that foetuses are equivalent to persons, then comparing abortion to the Jewish Holocaust is quite clearly a massive understatement.

Who is the comment offensive to any way? Holocaust victims or women who have had aboritions?
 

Jesse D Serrins

New member
k-punk said:
I wonder if everyone who finds the Pope's comments 'offensive' still objects to my supposedly 'over the top' attacks on Catholicism? Because all the Pope is doing is following through the logic of the RCC's long-stated Pro-Creationist, Pro-Life philosophy. That such a logic has and must inevitably lead to misery, poverty, disease and atrocity on a mass scale was part of my reason for arguing that Catholicism is innately evil.

The Pope is precisely NOT being hyperbolic. If we accept the first principles of the RCC sacred life cult, i.e. that foetuses are equivalent to persons, then comparing abortion to the Jewish Holocaust is quite clearly a massive understatement.

Who is the comment offensive to any way? Holocaust victims or women who have had aboritions?
Um, well, speaking only for myself: I'm not offended, I'm saddened. And that's what it is, saddening. But really mine was a totally offhand comment- of course there's nothing surprising in the parallels the pope draws. I'm not quite sure how you figure it's a "massive understatement" (that seems hyperbolic, but I'm not trying to get into an endless back and forth). But for my part I've never read what you've written about Catholocism, so while I'm not going to ascribe to it blindly, I wouldn't be surprised to find I agree with some of what you say at least based on the little bit quoted above. I have the urge (have had since the start of this thread) to try to extend this out into something a bit more general, but I don't have the time, and my own views (or whatever) are not that systematic at this point, I'm sloppy, I'll admit it. It seems to me your thinking is deliberatly cold, though, and while I find that intriguing I wonder if you recognize that people will be calling you over the top as long as that coldness is your aim.

Man, am I just setting myself up here? :eek:
 

k-punk

Spectres of Mark
Jesse, that certainly wasn't aimed at anyone in particular, certainly not you... and i obv expect ppl to disagree with what i write, that doesn't bother me at all, but i'm sometimes bemused about the inconsistencies in ppl's objections...

Seems to me that the 'offence' thing reveals the real power of politesse: it's OK to have views contary to liberal consensus so long as you don't have the poor taste to express them in public. :) All the Pope was doing was expressing the clear, stated position of the Catholic church. The reason it is not hyperbolic is that, once you have accepted that foetuses are people, then the amount of 'murder' that has happened in abortion clinics dwarfs the killings of the holocaust.
 

johneffay

New member
k-punk said:
Seems to me that the 'offence' thing reveals the real power of politesse: it's OK to have views contary to liberal consensus so long as you don't have the poor taste to express them in public. :) All the Pope was doing was expressing the clear, stated position of the Catholic church. The reason it is not hyperbolic is that, once you have accepted that foetuses are people, then the amount of 'murder' that has happened in abortion clinics dwarfs the killings of the holocaust.
Well, his argument was slightly more sophisticated than that (but only slightly). I agree with you about the logic of his position, I just found the deafening silence coming from certain sections of the media amusing given their horror at Ken's faux pas.
 

Jesse D Serrins

New member
k-punk said:
Jesse, that certainly wasn't aimed at anyone in particular, certainly not you... and i obv expect ppl to disagree with what i write, that doesn't bother me at all, but i'm sometimes bemused about the inconsistencies in ppl's objections...

Seems to me that the 'offence' thing reveals the real power of politesse: it's OK to have views contary to liberal consensus so long as you don't have the poor taste to express them in public. :) All the Pope was doing was expressing the clear, stated position of the Catholic church. The reason it is not hyperbolic is that, once you have accepted that foetuses are people, then the amount of 'murder' that has happened in abortion clinics dwarfs the killings of the holocaust.
And I wasn't in any way *ahem* offended by your remarks, K-Punk. Frankly, I'm just a bit new to posting publicly like this, and I guess I'm a little timid like one day I'll probably take a bruising. But hey...

Anyway, yeah, I mean I'm doing my best right now to focus my thinking, there's a lot I haven't read, etc. (*concerns about not being 'up to speed'), but I mean isn't the thing about liberalism in general that it falls short in this way- concerns about, as was discussed earlier, PC-ness and such subsuming the whole thing, and it just becomes more rhetorical wash over a capitalist reality that pays no mind to real social justice or whatever? And so John, with your comments it really does come back around to how the whole thing started- flailing arms and hurt feelings when it's somehow politically expedient (in however oblique a manner) but when it comes to real nitty-gritty, well, that's just not actually on the agenda.

For me- and I don't wanna make this too personal or anything- I'm just trying to get my head around certain things that are extremely contrary to popular belief if you will. Chomsky, Finklestein and the like can be very hard for me to swallow, but this is something they talk about a lot, no? I'm sure I'm leaving a bunch out here, but I guess that's basically what I wanted to say.
 

k-punk

Spectres of Mark
Of course, if you want to see REAL racism, you only had to watch the documentary on the treatment of asylum seekers last night. 'Tweaking the irons', groping female asylum seekers, advising fellow officers to do their beatings in places out of reach of CCTV, forcing mentally ill, traumatized people out of bed, taping up the skirt of a woman who was being 'sent back' because she was soiling herself out of sheer terror, referring to people who, at worst have left situations of extreme poverty to seek a better life in the UK but who are in fact more likely to be fleeing oppression and persecution, as 'scumbags'...

Yes, will that sort of behaviour lead to a two week witch hunt in the tabloids?

No, it will mean that you get 're-assigned duties.'

That's right. These characters have not even been sacked, just 'taken off the front-line'. Has the CEO of the laughably named Global Solutions offered to resign? No, of course not. Has the government immediately cancelled their contract? No. No. No.

This is the reality of Britain now: you can be castigated by all and sundry for saying words that a privileged journalist can pretend to be offended by, but you'll face only a mild rebuke if you exploit and abuse the most vulnerable people on earth.

What a country.
 

k-punk

Spectres of Mark
The latest twist to this is the bizarre cooked-up controversy concerning John Reid and Paxman. For those who haven't followed this, in a preamble to an interview Paxman described Reid as 'Labour's attack dog'. Reid thereupon refused to answer any questions until Paxman took back this 'insult'. Reid's reasoning? Paxman was only so describing him because of his 'Glasgow accent'.

I can't help but think that this whole thing has been cynically stage-managed by Labour to show that they too have members of a 'victim' group on their front bench.

More Westminster trivia, while the Sun adds gipsies to the list of viciously scapegoated ethnic minorities in this ugly, ugly pre-election campaign.
 

mms

sometimes
k-punk said:
The latest twist to this is the bizarre cooked-up controversy concerning John Reid and Paxman. For those who haven't followed this, in a preamble to an interview Paxman described Reid as 'Labour's attack dog'. Reid thereupon refused to answer any questions until Paxman took back this 'insult'. Reid's reasoning? Paxman was only so describing him because of his 'Glasgow accent'.

I can't help but think that this whole thing has been cynically stage-managed by Labour to show that they too have members of a 'victim' group on their front bench.

More Westminster trivia, while the Sun adds gipsies to the list of viciously scapegoated ethnic minorities in this ugly, ugly pre-election campaign.

i saw this, i would have told reid to fuck off personally.
the sun thing is horrific, where did it come from?
 

mms

sometimes
Diggedy Derek said:
Glasgow? Yeah right. That's just bizarre.

it was argued in such a smug way. that guy is labour's attack dog, always there ready to cover all bases when every other mp is having dinner or with the kids, he just knew at that moment he could get away with it is how it seemed to me. it was weak as fuck.
 

jenks

thread death
it's like suggesting john prescott is a socialist because he's got a working class accent.
reid is a bruiser, he is perfectly prepared to fight dirty and attempting to put the squeeze on the bbc is i am sure some none too subtle plan to make it easier to get away with further unpleasant comments during the election.
i don't think we are even close to the lows this election may reach
 
Top