[Cooper]

	Originally Posted by Munglik
	You're the one displaying the hate in these threads.

Just what threads are you reading?

[Munglik]

	Originally Posted by Distance
	I see. So you're suggesting that people just roll over and accept racism and sexism?

Insulting and mocking people doesn't change their minds.

[nowt]

It ain't the moronism of apathy. Sorry we're not that related.

	Originally Posted by Munglik
	You're the one displaying the hate in these threads.

[Munglik]

	Originally Posted by Cooper
	Just what threads are you reading?

Any thread where BL posts.

[nowt]

No? But Zsych would say, why do you feel insulted and mocked? Look at the pros--

	Originally Posted by Munglik
	Insulting and mocking people doesn't change their minds.

You can look at the pros, can't you? You can afford to be insulted and mocked--

And racially put down, and found automatically lesser due your sex--

It's all to be allowed as a learning experience.

[Distance]

	Originally Posted by Munglik
	Insulting and mocking people doesn't change their minds.

Nothing changes the minds of racists and sexists. It's why they're trapped inside their tiny worlds. But that doesn't mean people should roll over and accept hate propaganda.

[Danny]

Meanwhile, Batman is back at Headquarters taking a bath while the Joker runs rampant through this thread attacking most posters and Black Lieutenant, the joker's right hand, continues to successfully confuse moderators and posters alike what debate and discussion is while gaining support for propaganda--poorly disguised--but encouraged by indiscriminate minds.

*pours chili oil in Batman's bath water*
*mutters* That should heat things up.

[Zsych]

	Originally Posted by nowt
	Strangely, no surprise. You're conflating talking about bigotry -with- bigotry. That's retarded. You do understand that, right?-- They aren't the same, and it's your failing that you think they are.

Actually you're wrong. Bigotry and your form of automatic reaction have the same underlying emotional principles, so they are basically the same. In both cases people feel superior without any significant justification because they believe they are associated with the higher viewpoint.

When people fight for principles and against a problem, they've experienced the problems they sought to change, and they have a fair sense of what they were trying to achieve. However, when the next generation comes in, it no longer has that experience or action behind it, so it largely just copies what the previous one was saying, and then the one after that copies that already degraded copy, until the ideals and their meaning are nothing like what they were.
This is part of how societies often eventually fail. They think they are great, but they no longer are.

	Originally Posted by Distance
	Nothing changes the minds of racists and sexists. It's why they're trapped inside their tiny worlds. But that doesn't mean people should roll over and accept hate propaganda.

And you ask to be treated individually. When you deny people their individuality and that they may have legitimate reasons for their views, you remove any chance of agreement. Its actually very difficult to change almost anyone's mind unless you can figure out what the ideas actually underlying their thoughts are and target those (which takes a lot of conversation)

Although I agree that you should work towards what you believe is preferable.

[Distance]

Originally Posted by Zsych

Actually you're wrong. Bigotry and your form of automatic reaction have the same underlying emotional principles, so they are basically the same. In both cases people feel superior without any significant justification because they believe they are associated with the higher viewpoint. When people fight for principles and against a problem, they've experienced the problems they sought to change, and they have a fair sense of what they were trying to achieve. However, when the next generation comes in, it no longer has that experience or action behind it, so it largely just copies what the previous one was saying, and then the one after that copies that already degraded copy, until the ideals and their meaning are nothing like what they were. This is part of how societies often eventually fail.

This assumes that the subjective principles were any good in the first place and that people should remain stagnant forever, resistant to new knowledge and technology.

This is exactly the stance of sexism and racism. People who fear change.

[nowt]

You don't know what my principles are or how they are derived, let alone what originates in emotion versus what simply exhibits as, when faced with such self-congratulatory and uncritical thought--

But hey! At least you can say you tried, and that's the most you can be proud of for having gotten so little right.

	Originally Posted by Zsych
	<snip literal fucking nonsense>

[Distance]

	Originally Posted by Zsych
	And you ask to be treated individually. When you deny people their individuality and that they may have legitimate reasons for their views, you remove any chance of agreement. Although I agree that you should work towards what you believe is preferable.

As if racism and sexism have anything to do with individuality. They're herds of sheeple who buy into generalised hate propaganda, since they're unadaptable to change, hence resistant to individuality.

[Cooper]

Originally Posted by Zsych

Actually you're wrong. Bigotry and your form of automatic reaction have the same underlying emotional principles, so they are basically the same. In both cases people feel superior without any significant justification because they believe they are associated with the higher viewpoint. When people fight for principles and against a problem, they've experienced the problems they sought to change, and they have a fair sense of what they were trying to achieve. However, when the next generation comes in, it no longer has that experience or action behind it, so it largely just copies what the previous one was saying, and then the one after that copies that already degraded copy, until the ideals and their meaning are nothing like what they were. This is part of how societies often eventually fail. They think they are great, but they no longer are...

I have experienced racism first hand....my disgust and zero tolerance for it come from my life, not the generation before me. Do not assume you know where such things come from.

[Zsych]

	Originally Posted by Distance
	This assumes that the subjective principles were any good in the first place and that people should remain stagnant forever, resistant to new knowledge and technology. This is exactly the stance of sexism and racism. People who fear change.

As much as this thread has gone horribly off track...

Yes, at its core, I agree that its trying to maintain the existing system. The key problem then is whether the system should be changed. The problem with radical change based on ideals is that you often change other aspects of a system that are actually useful while making the improvement you seek (and lets assume that that improvement is actually a positive improvement by itself)

Think Business Process Redesign - you want a positive change (by some measure), but you really need to fully understand a system and the different often important aspects that aren't immediately obvious. Its not that it isn't worth doing. Its that you need to analyze and think it through.

The problem with latter day social changes is that there is no real thought. Its more collective thought and all manner of changes are happening in different areas. Individual humans don't think on a society level. Individual humans don't even consistently make good decisions with respect to their own lives and goals projected out a few years. Yet the lives of societies are measured in centuries if not longer.
... and its not like you can't see that things are going bad, even though the effects of the problems haven't fully matured yet (Changes in gender dynamics are only a small component of the overall issues though)

[nowt]

Well, I'll wait for stasis' grand defense of the pathologically stupid. It may be taken for granted to be better than watching them defend themselves--

Night/farewell.

[Distance]

Originally Posted by Zsych

As much as this thread has gone horribly off track... Yes, at its core, I agree that its trying to maintain the existing system. The key problem then is whether the system should be changed. The problem with radical change based on ideals is that you often change other aspects of a system that are actually useful while making the improvement you seek (and lets assume that that improvement is actually a positive improvement by itself)

Inequality based on gender and race shouldn't be changed? Hello?

Think Business Process Redesign - you want a positive change (by some measure), but you really need to fully understand a system and the different often important aspects that aren't immediately obvious. Its not that it isn't worth doing. Its that you need to analyze and think it through. The problem with latter day social changes is that there is no real thought. Its more collective thought and all manner of changes are happening in different areas. Individual humans don't think on a society level. Individual humans don't even consistently make good decisions with respect to their own lives and goals projected out a few years. Yet the lives of societies are measured in centuries if not longer. ... and its not like you can't see that things are going bad, even though the effects of the problems haven't fully matured yet (Changes in gender dynamics are only a small component of the overall issues though)

Social change isn't neat and tidy. Human beings aren't business processes. As with historical evolution of mankind, the maladaptives get left behind or better yet, left out of the gene pool.

[Zsych]

	Originally Posted by Cooper
	I have experienced racism first hand....my disgust and zero tolerance for it come from my life, not the generation before me. Do not assume you know where such things come from.

I believe you're also older than most of us. I didn't say that racism is a good thing (actually depending on what group was protecting itself, it could be worthwhile that they maintain their identity and keep others away - not all change is meaningful).
... Lets say that I agree that racism is often an attitude of people that aren't particularly wise and are acting emotionally and perhaps in a destructive fashion.

The point is still that where you have seen it and have real reasons, your kids, if they haven't seen it, may not have any real understanding of what they are opposing, beyond copying your views. Which is up to a degree fine, since that propagated learning is part of how humanity improves, but nevertheless, as the details of the experience vanish, the views and actions around the related ideals start to deviate from the original form.

[Danny]

Originally Posted by Zsych

Actually you're wrong. Bigotry and your form of automatic reaction have the same underlying emotional principles, so they are basically the same. In both cases people feel superior without any significant justification because they believe they are associated with the higher viewpoint. When people fight for principles and against a problem, they've experienced the problems they sought to change, and they have a fair sense of what they were trying to achieve. However, when the next generation comes in, it no longer has that experience or action behind it, so it largely just copies what the previous one was saying, and then the one after that copies that already degraded copy, until the ideals and their meaning are nothing like what they were. This is part of how societies often eventually fail. They think they are great, but they no longer are. And you ask to be treated individually. When you deny people their individuality and that they may have legitimate reasons for their views, you remove any chance of agreement. Its actually very difficult to change almost anyone's mind unless you can figure out what the ideas actually underlying their thoughts are and target those (which takes a lot of conversation) Although I agree that you should work towards what you believe is preferable.

Actually, Zsych, YOU are WRONG. What you fail to grasp in your poorly disguised hypocritical self disclosed belief of superiority, is that racism, sexism, anti-Semetism all serve to stifle speech and "quality debate".

What you may have missed that many, still living, have witnessed in our lifetimes is how these beliefs manifest not only shut speech and debate and expression entirely, but they kill. (Tianenmen square as one of many examples.)

And yet, YOU, Zysch, would attempt to persuade others that those deaths are merely trivial and necessary to explore stifled practices of hatred, horror, humiliation, lack of humanity, slavery, and murder.

YOU, Zych ARE wrong. And sorely, pathetically so.

[Zsych]

	Originally Posted by Distance
	Inequality based on gender and race shouldn't be changed? Hello?

Gender is a convoluted issue - I don't know what a definitely preferable form of gender dynamics would be. I think that any tests that could be built to validate ideas would still require generations before you really knew if a certain idea was better than others.

For the race issue... that's essentially equivalent to saying that all countries should treat all people equally and grant all members of humanity the same freedoms and rights. So if large numbers of people from other countries come to the US, everyone should have social security, the same protections under the law, the same rights on everything. We should change things to convenience people who speak different languages etc.

... the people who oppose illegal immigration aren't really wrong. That stuff is disruptive, and other people means other ideas.. some people for example, don't want to follow the laws of the land and will (in their own way) fight for their preferences.

Alternatively also... lets say your own economy is suffering, should you put your own people's welfare over others and make sure that their way of life survives, or should you allow their standard of living to be lowered for the sake of fairness?

... these are basically practical problems. Ideals are good, but real life and ideals don't always mesh well.

	Originally Posted by Distance
	Social change isn't neat and tidy. Human beings aren't business processes. As with historical evolution of mankind, the maladaptives get left behind or better yet, left out of the gene pool.

Apart from the last couple of centuries, it doesn't seem like there was that much progress. Its just been various civilizations rising up, reaching half decent levels, and then failing into the ground. It seems like humans don't manage to maintain decently advanced civilizations for very long... and they may still not manage to maintain a decent level of civilization this time... because the core problems have not been addressed and there is no higher level vision for really taking humanity beyond its animal past.

Incremental evolution/improvement without serious reanalysis and redesign, always focuses on perceived short term benefit. The highest hill you can see from where you are, isn't necessarily the highest one there is, that you should be striving for... and then if you got to that hill with a bad plan, you might find that its not really a place you can stay for long because your resources/infrastructure don't support it.

(lack of vision is always dangerous. Action without vision is usually only better than no action - if that)

[Danny]

	Originally Posted by Zsych
	As much as this thread has gone horribly off track...

If it did, the credit belongs to you.

Really, you have only served to demonstrate ignorance of the issue and why racism, bigotry, and murder through all such beliefs and practices should not be promoted here and only serves to disrupt and destroy--human beings AND this forum.

_____

I, too, shall await Stasis' response. I wonder if he esteems the question worthy of one word, or two.

[Shadizar]

Originally Posted by thod

Perhaps he would say the same. That despite his arguments, you have failed to come around to his way of thinking. Do you understand that I am not your friend nor do I want to be your friend? This forum is a debate forum and not a social chat room. All debating societies like to choose inflammatory subject material because if everyone agrees, there is no debate. You do get to choose which side you will argue. If you are assigned to the racist team, then that is the position you must argue. I could not give two hoots if you believe what you are arguing or not. I don't want to hear your feelings, I don't care about you. All I care about is the argument you present. What you are attempting to do is restrict free speech to those positions you agree with, which is closing down the debate and thus negating the purpose of the forum. No platform for racists, sexists, republicans or Christians, just people who agree with you. You have set yourself up as censor restricting what others may read so that they will hopefully come to think like you. A lot of people are really interested in hearing the thoughts of such people precisely because they are not mainstream, they are interesting. There is little difference between you deciding racists are bad people than racists deciding blacks are bad people.

Um, perhaps you have a point, but not here. If he would change his arguments to compensate for his lack of win, you point would have more bearing. However, he has three arguments, rinse, repeat, don't worry if everyone sees your already destroyed argument, rinse, repeat, add nothing, rinse repeat, add nothing, rinse repeat, ad-infinitude.

Yes, we're too stupid to have read his excellent arguments the first eight hundred times. See the silent repeated flame yet? Add nothing, rinse, repeat. I don't care for friends, I don't care for platitudes; why did you bring this up?

[Distance]

Zsych, not going any further into why it's acceptable to cling to the past in fear. Suffice to say, racism, sexism and anti-semitism are all examples of maladaptives incapable of handling change or understanding differences, hence using hate propaganda to attempt to swing opinion towards focusing on "the enemy" whereby the enemy is within each one of these maladaptives and that's irrational fear spiced with a full load (yes, load) of self interest at any expense to others.

But I'm going to follow nowt's lead and cut out. The only people who have the power to not allow racism, sexism and anti-semitism to continue dragging down intellectual content on INTJf are stasis and Jezebel.

[Zsych]

	Originally Posted by Danny
	Actually, Zsych, YOU are WRONG. What you fail to grasp in your poorly disguised hypocritical self disclosed belief of superiority, is that racism, sexism, anti-Semetism all serve to stifle speech and "quality debate".

Those are separate topics, where people are discussing because they choose to. I agree that bringing a pure sexist or racist view into an existing debate would likely reduce the quality of the discussion.

Originally Posted by Danny

What you may have missed that many, still living, have witnessed in our lifetimes is how these beliefs manifest not only shut speech and debate and expression entirely, but they kill. (Tianenmen square as one of many examples.) And yet, YOU, Zysch, would attempt to persuade others that those deaths are merely trivial and necessary to explore stifled practices of hatred, horror, humiliation, lack of humanity, slavery, and murder.

What you don't understand is that working on the same emotional level, and using the same kinds of emotions, you can't rise to a level high enough to find solutions to these problems.

You can only work forward into the future. None of those practices have gone away. Its not like the US government isn't responsible for its fair share of abuses, and will not continue to be. Or like the rest of the world have suddenly turned to saints. Your own hatred won't help you understand and improve anything, because it also disrupts your own thoughts. At least while you are far away from such problems and don't need to deal with them in your daily lives, you can afford to be unemotional in your analysis.

[idoj]

	Originally Posted by Zsych
	So attack those threads (although a thread vanishes more quickly when people ignore it) Actually the sexist, racist, anti-semitic threads are all valuable, in that they will give you a chance to actually express your own ideas and to realize the weaknesses in your own arguments, so that when they come up the next time (perhaps in real life), what you say will be a little more evolved.

So, intjf is functioning as a free debate prep site for Sexists and Racists... Fucking fantastic! I'm so tickled; I waste so much time here. Really progressively disgusting... keep up the good work!

[Danny]

REQUEST for one more point of clarification:

Administration: "was" the Anti-Semetic propaganda once disallowed not because of the epitome of hatred and murder promoted, but rather because of the inconvenience to the forum administration due to the effect on the software of the forum as JTG suggests?!

I think the answer is an important one to this and other users who want no part of such "hatred" falsely put forth as "tolerance" and "debate".

[psykhe]

Originally Posted by Danny

Meanwhile, Batman is back at Headquarters taking a bath while the Joker runs rampant through this thread attacking most posters and Black Lieutenant, the joker's right hand, continues to successfully confuse moderators and posters alike what debate and discussion is while gaining support for propaganda--poorly disguised--but encouraged by indiscriminate minds. *pours chili oil in Batman's bath water* *mutters* That should heat things up.

*applauds*

Observant as always, Danny.

*waits for Batman*