The Truth

[Nay_Sayer]

You’ll find there’s a rule against hate speech slurs as well (‘negro’ is acceptable). You would get in trouble if you used an un-redacted slur here. But it wouldn’t be censorship, it would be a punishment for breaking the rules.

That’s the fourth time I’ve explained this to you. How are you not getting it?

Boru

  I already know about racial slurs around here.  Just about every other forum is the same.  Too bad I can't post a picture of a bunch of fags.  It's a picture of cigarettes.  That just happens to be what they're referred to in England.  Is England breaking a rule?

---

That there exists evolved traits that lead to racism and hatred does not mean that the suppression of such traits is oppressive, 'brainwashing' and bad, for several reasons.  The first of which is that while the goal of evolution may be facilitated by such things, it is possible that there are other evolutionary traits more important to our survival that entail the suppression of such traits.  As a social species, cooperation is as important as division, and if we are stronger by suppressing division so that we can create more effective cooperative societies, then it makes more evolutionary sense to suppress such things.  So you mistake that because something is evolved then preserving its expression is to our benefit.  This is a short-sighted view that fails to take into account that we are complex, composite creatures, with various traits waxing and waiting in their utility dependent upon whatever selective pressures exist in our environment.  You cannot simply take one trait of an organism and elevate that to an imperative.

The second mistake you make is that of an appeal to nature, which renders your argument invalid because it does not follow that because something is natural then it is therefore good.

And the third mistake you make is the genetic fallacy, in which you appeal to the way something has been while ignoring that the conditions attendant on that thing may have changed.  It may have been that at one time, when we existed primarily as nomadic bands based primarily on relations of kinship, competition was more important than cooperation.  It might make evolutionary sense for us to develop divisive traits and emphasize those if doing so leads to improved fitness for that environment.  But evolution moves slowly.  What was then, may not be now.  We also evolved brains so that we aren't required to react by rote to whatever composite of ability and circumstance presents itself.  We can wash our brains if doing so leads to a fitter organism given the current conditions and selective pressures.

And fourth, you make the same mistake as number one with respect to freedom of speech in ignoring that free speech is not the only good to be obtained.  Where free speech runs headlong into other, equally or more desirable goals, freedom of speech should be limited so as not to prevent the realization of multiple goods.  And in particular, I doubt forums curtailing your free speech has been the issue so much as you just being stupid and being discriminated against by these forums for the purpose of realizing other goods.   Providing a venue for shit for brains morons to scamper unbridled across the electronic savannah is hardly the most important aim of any forum.

  What a load of crap.  Tell it to your cult leader.

When you're banned and let's be honest you will be banned. How long until you start a blog or tweet patting yourself on the back for the accomplishment?

Either way, I suggest seeking psychiatric help after you get the boot.

Thoughts and prayers, RAmen

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

@Angrboda

Providing a venue for shit for brains morons to scamper unbridled across the electronic savannah is hardly the most important aim of any forum.

This should be our new banner. Or at least an AF t-shirt.

Boru

[Angrboda]

That there exists evolved traits that lead to racism and hatred does not mean that the suppression of such traits is oppressive, 'brainwashing' and bad, for several reasons.  The first of which is that while the goal of evolution may be facilitated by such things, it is possible that there are other evolutionary traits more important to our survival that entail the suppression of such traits.  As a social species, cooperation is as important as division, and if we are stronger by suppressing division so that we can create more effective cooperative societies, then it makes more evolutionary sense to suppress such things.  So you mistake that because something is evolved then preserving its expression is to our benefit.  This is a short-sighted view that fails to take into account that we are complex, composite creatures, with various traits waxing and waiting in their utility dependent upon whatever selective pressures exist in our environment.  You cannot simply take one trait of an organism and elevate that to an imperative.

The second mistake you make is that of an appeal to nature, which renders your argument invalid because it does not follow that because something is natural then it is therefore good.

And the third mistake you make is the genetic fallacy, in which you appeal to the way something has been while ignoring that the conditions attendant on that thing may have changed.  It may have been that at one time, when we existed primarily as nomadic bands based primarily on relations of kinship, competition was more important than cooperation.  It might make evolutionary sense for us to develop divisive traits and emphasize those if doing so leads to improved fitness for that environment.  But evolution moves slowly.  What was then, may not be now.  We also evolved brains so that we aren't required to react by rote to whatever composite of ability and circumstance presents itself.  We can wash our brains if doing so leads to a fitter organism given the current conditions and selective pressures.

And fourth, you make the same mistake as number one with respect to freedom of speech in ignoring that free speech is not the only good to be obtained.  Where free speech runs headlong into other, equally or more desirable goals, freedom of speech should be limited so as not to prevent the realization of multiple goods.  And in particular, I doubt forums curtailing your free speech has been the issue so much as you just being stupid and being discriminated against by these forums for the purpose of realizing other goods.   Providing a venue for shit for brains morons to scamper unbridled across the electronic savannah is hardly the most important aim of any forum.

  What a load of crap.  Tell it to your cult leader.

That runny brown liquid inside your skull? I quite agree. As noted earlier, you show all signs of having shit for brains. That your only response is an argumentum ad lapidem confirms it.

Appeal to the stone, also known as argumentum ad lapidem, is a logical fallacy that dismisses an argument as untrue or absurd. The dismissal is made by stating or reiterating that the argument is absurd, without providing further argumentation. This theory is closely tied to proof by assertion due to the lack of evidence behind the statement and its attempt to persuade without providing any evidence.

Appeal to the stone is a logical fallacy. Specifically, it is an informal fallacy, which means that it relies on inductive reasoning in an argument to justify an assertion. Informal fallacies contain erroneous reasoning in content of the argument and not the form or structure of it, as opposed to formal fallacies, which contain erroneous reasoning in argument form.

Wikipedia || Appeal to the stone

[Nay_Sayer]

@Angrboda

Providing a venue for shit for brains morons to scamper unbridled across the electronic savannah is hardly the most important aim of any forum.

This should be our new banner. Or at least an AF t-shirt.

Boru

Say no more.

[Angrboda]

[deepend]

  I'v seen this before.  Run Away!!!  Run Away!!!

What have you seen before? Could you elaborate?

C'mon man. Support the idea that Russia has been worse than America in protecting free expression. I dare you. I'd be did be pleasantly surprised if you did. But you won't.

I bet you're an empty vessel, with nothing to say without a "forum" to rage at.

  Somebody basically telling me that they are going to ignore from now on by saying buh-bye.  Russia has been worse than America in protecting free expression???  Didn't you mean to suggest that I said that America was worse than Russia in protecting free expression?  What I did say once though is that in limiting freedom of speech, any evil becomes possible.  Being possible, as is the nature of mankind, it has been done.  

  You think being thrown in jail in Russia is as bad as things can get?  Think again.  Maybe if I'm allowed to be around long enough I can post some pictures for you of a few of the tens of thousands of White children who have been brutally murdered by blacks in this country.  I might also be able to effectively go into some of the travsty's of justice that have occurred in this country against Whites.  Maybe the greatest genocide in human history might interest you.  Or how about ritual human sacrifice.  I could also post some videos showing some real racism.  And it isn't Whites committing it.  Etc. etc. etc. etc.  Tell the admins to take the fucking chains off me.  I will show you what an "empty vessel" I am.

[Silver]

It is astounding how people still confuse consequence for censorship.

You're free to speak your mind, but wisdom allows for the understanding that consequence isn't disgarded in a civilized society.

[deepend]

  Freedom of speech here?  Have you ever banned anybody?  Enough said on that point.  Next, don't tell me what I think.

I’ve banned plenty of people. Not for what they say or the views they hold, but for breaking the rules.

Five times. You must be fucking stupid.

Boru

  I would bet the only "rule" they broke was in going against your censorship.  That's what your rules are.  Censorship.  Now I could see not allowing child porn or things like that.  But everything else should be allowed.  But unlike some around here may see this, that isn't a command.  Just a suggestion.

[Angrboda]

[The Architect Of Fate]

 I would bet the only "rule" they broke was in going against your censorship.  That's what your rules are.  Censorship.  Now I could see not allowing child porn or things like that.  But everything else should be allowed.  But unlike some around here may see this, that isn't a command.  Just a suggestion.