Political correctness gone mad?

Anything else you want to talk about.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7488
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Political correctness gone mad?

Postby RF » Thu Sep 14, 2017 8:35 am

paul.mercer wrote:Gentlemen,
Going back to my original post re political correctness, surely trying to influence children to be 'gender neutral', removing the word 'Christmas' from cards, taking off labels naming children clothes for 'Girls or 'Boys' and doing something similar for men and women's toilets amongst a host of other stupid ideas is taking this politically correct attitude too far? I do wonder just who these people who dream up this nonsense think they are doing.


Basically their strategy is to take control of the political agenda by manipulating and controlling public opinion.

As I explained in my earlier responses to your original post ''political correctness' is a tool to achieve an end. That end is the pursuance of the interests of the people pushing the political correctness strategy. The approach has been described, amongst others by Karl Liebneckt and Rosa Luxembourg as ''cultural marxism'' and is designed to override the existing norms of society - in the case of Britain today to make the previously unelectable Jeremy Corbyn into an eminently credible Prime Minister, so Labour can win a general election. The Conservatives realise that so they will go down the political correctness route themselves.
Retro parties such as UKIP - the UK Independence Party - fight against this political correctness, so they are seen as a threat to be targeted. They are subjected to smear and covert hate campaigns, not specifically because they are against the European Union but because they threaten the perceived new order. Again the Conservatives will go along with that because there is an electoral advantage for them to do so. That is the real reason why Britain had a snap general election in June called by the Conservatives. However they didn't quite get their timing right, as while they crushed the UKIP vote, the Labour Party was able to use the tactics of political correctness to erode the Conservative and Lib Dem vote and indeed take some of the UKIP vote themselves, so now the Conservative government has lost its House of Commons majority.

Coming back to the quote above - there are similarities here with China during the period of the ''Cultural Revolution'' where we had Chairman Mao's ''Little Red Book'' of correct political thoughts, emphasising amongst other things gender neutrality.
But the Cultural Revolution was actually a reaction to a perceived threat to Mao and his regime from ''revisionists'' who were described as ''capitalist roaders'' and behind this ''revolution'' were the deaths of millions of people cleverly hidden away from media scrutiny and reporting - just like Stalin's purges in the late 1930's.

No, to understand what is going on look behind the smokescreen of the ''loony left'' policies and see who is benefitting, who is controlling the situation.
Then you can see why.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1020
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Political correctness gone mad?

Postby Herr Nilsson » Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:04 am

RF wrote:Basically their strategy is to take control of the political agenda by manipulating and controlling public opinion.


Who is "their"?
Regards

Marc

paul.mercer
Senior Member
Posts: 568
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 10:25 pm

Re: Political correctness gone mad?

Postby paul.mercer » Thu Sep 14, 2017 10:42 pm

RF wrote:
paul.mercer wrote:Gentlemen,
Going back to my original post re political correctness, surely trying to influence children to be 'gender neutral', removing the word 'Christmas' from cards, taking off labels naming children clothes for 'Girls or 'Boys' and doing something similar for men and women's toilets amongst a host of other stupid ideas is taking this politically correct attitude too far? I do wonder just who these people who dream up this nonsense think they are doing.


Basically their strategy is to take control of the political agenda by manipulating and controlling public opinion.

As I explained in my earlier responses to your original post ''political correctness' is a tool to achieve an end. That end is the pursuance of the interests of the people pushing the political correctness strategy. The approach has been described, amongst others by Karl Liebneckt and Rosa Luxembourg as ''cultural marxism'' and is designed to override the existing norms of society - in the case of Britain today to make the previously unelectable Jeremy Corbyn into an eminently credible Prime Minister, so Labour can win a general election. The Conservatives realise that so they will go down the political correctness route themselves.
Retro parties such as UKIP - the UK Independence Party - fight against this political correctness, so they are seen as a threat to be targeted. They are subjected to smear and covert hate campaigns, not specifically because they are against the European Union but because they threaten the perceived new order. Again the Conservatives will go along with that because there is an electoral advantage for them to do so. That is the real reason why Britain had a snap general election in June called by the Conservatives. However they didn't quite get their timing right, as while they crushed the UKIP vote, the Labour Party was able to use the tactics of political correctness to erode the Conservative and Lib Dem vote and indeed take some of the UKIP vote themselves, so now the Conservative government has lost its House of Commons majority.

Coming back to the quote above - there are similarities here with China during the period of the ''Cultural Revolution'' where we had Chairman Mao's ''Little Red Book'' of correct political thoughts, emphasising amongst other things gender neutrality.
But the Cultural Revolution was actually a reaction to a perceived threat to Mao and his regime from ''revisionists'' who were described as ''capitalist roaders'' and behind this ''revolution'' were the deaths of millions of people cleverly hidden away from media scrutiny and reporting - just like Stalin's purges in the late 1930's.
No, to understand what is going on look behind the smokescreen of the ''loony left'' policies and see who is benefitting, who is controlling the situation.
Then you can see why.

A great summing up, thanks.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7488
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Political correctness gone mad?

Postby RF » Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:26 am

Herr Nilsson wrote:
RF wrote:Basically their strategy is to take control of the political agenda by manipulating and controlling public opinion.


Who is "their"?


Is that not defined in the quotation that I was commenting on?
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1020
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Political correctness gone mad?

Postby Herr Nilsson » Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:49 am

"Leftists"?
Regards

Marc

Mostlyharmless
Member
Posts: 146
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:45 pm

Re: Political correctness gone mad?

Postby Mostlyharmless » Thu Sep 21, 2017 6:06 pm

Some way back in the thread I mentioned that politicians do not always act exactly as if they regarded climate change as a priority. Here are some good but now old quotations that I found at http://www.inference.org.uk/sustainable ... sewtha.pdf on page 222 from Tony Blair.

Speaking on climate change at the launch of the Stern review, 30 October 2006:

“Unless we act now, not some time distant but now, these consequences, disastrous as they are, will be irreversible. So there is nothing more serious, more urgent or more demanding of leadership.”

Some quotes from an interview on 9th January 2007:

Interviewer: Have you thought of perhaps not flying to Barbados for a holiday and not using all those air miles?
Tony Blair: I would, frankly, be reluctant to give up my holidays abroad.
Interviewer: It would send out a clear message though wouldn’t it, if we didn’t see that great big air journey off to the sunshine? . . . – a holiday closer to home?
Tony Blair: Yeah – but I personally think these things are a bit impractical actually to expect people to do that. I think that what we need to do is to look at how you make air travel more energy efficient, how you develop the new fuels that will allow us to burn less energy and emit less. How – for example – in the new frames for the aircraft, they are far more energy efficient. I know everyone always – people probably think the Prime Minister shouldn’t go on holiday at all, but I think if what we do in this area is set people unrealistic targets, you know if we say to people we’re going to cancel all the cheap air travel . . . You know, I’m still waiting for the first politician who’s actually running for office who’s going to come out and say it – and they’re not.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7488
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Political correctness gone mad?

Postby RF » Fri Sep 22, 2017 8:31 am

Mostlyharmless wrote:“Unless we act now, not some time distant but now, these consequences, disastrous as they are, will be irreversible. So there is nothing more serious, more urgent or more demanding of leadership.”


I view politicians as professional windbags, the above is typical Tony Blair rhetoric.

What politicians say and what politicians think are two completely different things.

Tony Blair likes to say that he was always in favour of the European Union. He can count on the pro-EU media not asking him about the 1982 Beaconsfield by-election. Here Blair was standing as a Labour candidate in one of the safest Tory seats in the country, standing on a platform of openly wanting to take Britain clean out of the EU.

Ask yourself: How many politicians shout out how much they want ''climate change action'' whilst privately realising that ''climate change'' is a scam they can turn to advantage. Quite a few I think.
Then when the bubble of ''climate change'' has finally burst there won't be any party politicians who would admit to being in favour of ''climate change action.''
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

northcape
Member
Posts: 148
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:31 am

Re: Political correctness gone mad?

Postby northcape » Sat Oct 07, 2017 2:51 am


User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 2876
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Re: Political correctness gone mad?

Postby Dave Saxton » Sun Oct 08, 2017 1:41 am

It is humorous to see the high clergy of the orthodox AGW religion upset and whining that they do not control the dissemination of information, or the narrative, on the subject. It is analogous to the religious high clergy defending religious orthodoxy at the time of the Reformation and the Enlightenment.

This is not, nor has it been, about the established science struggling against misinformed skeptics and amateurs. Much like the leaders of the Reformation, the leaders of the skeptics are from among science’s own. The skeptic leaders are fully accredited PHDs who publish peer reviewed papers, and who are the most experienced, and with access to the best available raw data, in the field.
Entering a night sea battle is an awesome business.The enveloping darkness, hiding the enemy's.. seems a living thing, malignant and oppressive.Swishing water at the bow and stern mark an inexorable advance toward an unknown destiny.

northcape
Member
Posts: 148
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:31 am

Re: Political correctness gone mad?

Postby northcape » Sat Oct 28, 2017 4:40 am

This is such a ridicolous statement, it is unbelievable.

You obviously don't have any idea what peer-reviewed science is, and what peer-reviewed journals are. Have you ever published in a peer-reviewed journal ? (I did, more than 20 times; it is my job; not in climate studies, this is not my field).

This maybe gives you some idea:
https://www.omicsonline.org/peer-reviewed-journals.php

As an idea for you, it takes ca. 1 year to get a substantial paper in a peer-reviewed journal published (because one usually has to deal with 1 to 3 rounds of review by 2 to 3 reviewers, plus criticsism from Editor). Putting a video on Youtube (like your favored "scientists" do) or posting on Breitbart is much faster I guess, but maybe because it requires significantly less work?

Now look how much of the "mainstream" scientists publish in these journals, and how much of your "sceptics" publish in these journals. The answers are "a lot" and "virtually nothing". The people you refer too are outside the scientific arena, they don't participate in the peer-review process. They don't have access to anything besides money from the companies they are bought by. One of your favorites, Willie Soon, has just very few publications in very minor and insignificant journals (you can compare the impact factor of these journals).
https://www.skepticalscience.com/peerre ... s.php?s=12

What is much more important, his papers have very little citations, meaning nobody finds them relevant. His total output is ca. 10 publications in 10 years, Productive scientists with high standing publish or co-publish at least 5 papers per year.
His latest publication is from 2007(!), and has been published in a very minor journal. His most-cited paper from 2003 is the one where his co-authors accused him from wrongly interpretating the data. It was also published in a very minor journal. He is an astronomer, and no-one in the climate-science community takes him seriously. Everybody is welcome to do a bit research on him and similar tragic figures, who simply rely on the paycheck from companies because they are unsucessful academics.

IPCC relies on studies in peer-reviewed journals only, not on Breitbart or such. To state that the climate science mainstream (IPCC) does not rely on peer-reviewed studies, and only your sceptics do, is like calling the day a night and vice versa. Orwellian speach, or as it called today, Alternative Facts.

It is so so painful to experience so much ignorance, repeated over and over. I can agree with different scientific views, that is what science is about. But once again, the discussion here is beyond that and much more important; it is about facts on perception of climate change in the scientific community. The conclusion of the vast majority of peer-reviewed journals is that man-made CO2 is contributing to acceleration of global warming. The statement that this conclusion is not derived from peer-reviewed sciece, but that the opposite is true, is a blunt lie or based on total ignorance of the scientific process.


User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7488
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Political correctness gone mad?

Postby RF » Mon Oct 30, 2017 9:02 am

northcape wrote:
The conclusion of the vast majority of peer-reviewed journals is that man-made CO2 is contributing to acceleration of global warming.


This is incorrect. What you are stating is your incorrect opinion based on a misinterpretation of these articles, the majority of which have an open view on the subject.

The statement that this conclusion is not derived from peer-reviewed sciece, but that the opposite is true, is a blunt lie or based on total ignorance of the scientific process.


The conclusion is derived from an incorrect and biased interpretation from peer reviewed science, not that it is NOT from peer reviewed science.

This has already been gone into at length in this thread, now after some weeks you have chosen to resurrect it.

I repeat what I said some months ago - produce the scientific proof of AGW - and by proof I exclude ''balance of probability'' models - then the argument is resolved.

The problem you are faced with is there is no proof. So support for AGW has to be raised by using political campaigning methods.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
Terje Langoy
Supporter
Posts: 429
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 4:15 pm
Location: Bergen, Norway

Political correctness gone mad?

Postby Terje Langoy » Thu Nov 16, 2017 4:42 pm

G'day, all

Political correctness translates as censorship, plain and simple. Offence is taken, not given. By the way, nothing happens if you are offended. The world is not gonna plummet into darkness because of a few harsh words. People seems to be offended at everything. Even cereal boxes, which has absurdly turned out to be racist pieces of cartoon art. The whole thing is utterly bizzare. Just like social justice. I'm pretty sure Paine, Jefferson and Madison would shake their heads at what have become of things. They devised such a great nation and now social and main media goes apeshit over nonsense. Sad, sad times

By my regular train of thought, commonly knows as "banter" by you brits, I'd be racist, sexist, misogynist etc. whatever label you have available, I likely fit the bill

Do take note that the regular, working people don't have time for political correctness. It's a media thing


Return to “Off Topic”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest