they don’t contribute anything to the sum of humanity.
should we resume enslaving them again? 
Depends on the context.
Look at the West. Africans are superior to whites when it comes to music, fashion, and spirituality.
Whites are better when it comes to operating in a materialist economy, politics, etc.
Each race has it’s strengths. I would say Africans are inferior. I would say whites are inferior. Just depends.
ilikenamitha,
You’ve got a real problem when your sense of morality is that “anything goes.” For one, it makes you hypocritical and inconsistent when you attack any government, nation, or group of people who stand up for the good treatment of children, the bullied, people with Asperger’s, women, and different races and ethnicities. You removed yourself from all possible lines of attack when you clarified your position to be that “any moral system is acceptable” and “society can hold any beliefs it wants.” After that, why should anyone care if you feel fine about hitting women, or treating children badly, or enslaving Africans? You’ve said anything goes, so sticking up for women, children, and Africans are all perfectly legitimate positions, too. You’ve denied yourself any rational basis to attack these positions.
Second, you’re clearly outnumbered in your views on acceptable treatment and respect for other people. Not just here on ILP, but in real life. You must know that your views would garner you very negative responses in real life, that is if anyone took you seriously in the first place. In this case, I am glad for the tyranny of the majority that does not tolerate the views of people like you, who have little to no capacity of care or empathy for others. If you do care about other people, even if just a few, you might try to develop those feelings further because you’re alive today on a planet where 7 billion other people live as well. It’s a strange and inauspicious sign when you appear not understand why bullying draws negative opinion and thus formal and informal social penalty. No, you cannot in principle treat women, children, Africans, or people with Asperger’s like shit. No amount of theoretical wankering will justify it. Morality isn’t ever truly justified, it is felt. And you’re outnumbered by an ocean. Whatever inferiorities you see in other people, be sure to know that yours are no small defects either. You might want some protection from those who would treat you like utter shit because of them.
cheers,
fuse
Either you are having some sort of odd memory blank, or you’re the least knowledgeable person on these boards.
Try thinking if you can bring in to your mind any recent successful politicians of African descent. I’m sure that there’s this one guy you’ve probably heard of…
It depends. Most on this forum believe that anything goes. It’s the modern moral paradigm.
Africans are inferior overall. Look at their countries relative to the West.
And this is what bothers me about the ILP moderation - being a racist idiot is fine, swearing at someone in a place called The Rant House can get you banned…
No, they don’t. And No, it isn’t.
What statik said.
I sympathize, but maybe there’s something to that. We could just ban everyone who has abhorrent social views, but that would limit what might actually be useful discourse on social issues. I’m not saying every time one of these anti-social and morally callous people shows up making a million topics we need to pay attention and let them have run of the place. And of course choosing not to ban someone is not an endorsement or acceptance of that person’s views. But it does mean that what are at first glance heinous views will not be automatically censored or ignored. So why are swearing and ad hominem the more bannable offenses here? Because when they are the main content of a post, or repeated posts, it kills discourse, and discourse is the main function of this site.
I don’t think we should ban these cretins, but I also don’t think we should ban anyone for swearing.
I would argue there is a distinction between quantity and quality of discourse and there is a different relative impact on each from swearing and ad homs. I do not believe anything I’ve done has ever lowered the quality of discourse on the site, though I have said a few things that shut a few people up, you know?
I think on numerous occasions you’ve lowered the quality of discourse. You’re particularly volatile. I’d rather speak to a calm and polite racist than an insulting guy with mostly normal beliefs.
Yeah, I know. It’s always up to the discretion of the mods. I have nothing against you SIATD, but I wouldn’t fault a mod for banning someone who was repeatedly ad hom-ing and was already warned.
Link to one.
And as many have noted, the angrier I get the more logical I become, hence that’s good for the quality of discussion.
If there’s one thing my beliefs aren’t it is ‘mostly normal’. Even amongst my peers I’m considered a strangeling.
OK, though I will add the caveat that on at least two occasions I was banned for telling someone to ‘fuck off’ or something similar, which is not ad hom, or for simply insulting someone, which is not ad hom. Ad Hominem refers to a specific logical fallacy that, I’m afraid to say, the moderators here do not have a fine grasp of, at least not in my experience. So regardless of the rightness or wrongness of any given decision, I imagine you agree that if someone is to be banned that the person banning them at least understands the terms they offer as their reason.
But, having successfully diverted this thread off its opening, moronic topic I think I’ll leave it there for tonight.
I don’t keep a notebook of your transgressions. I’m not that into you.
You said “I don’t think I’ve EVER lowered the quality of discourse”
(non-verbatim, emphasis mine)
I think it’s pretty safe to say that pretty much anyone who’s posted here above 1,000 times has lowered the quality of discourse at least once or twice.
I’m no exception, and someone as angry as you certainly isn’t.
So sorry the toilet sign must have fallen of the door, excuse me I am leaving, do carry on.
Oh God yeah they are, don’t make me come and spank you all. It goes like this:
Chinese>Jews>European ethnicity or part there of> Indo ethnic > Negroids> your mum
I’m not joking, racially I wake up every day and make my morning prayers towards China, and I’ve adopted a Jew to vicariously experience his superiority.
So you can’t even name one example? That’s rather pathetic.
What you think is irrelevant in the total absence of evidence. Your argument is pathetic, and is lowering the quality of discourse in this thread, even though it started out pretty low.
As I explained, I get angry in a way that raises the quality of discourse by not letting people just get away with bullshit arguments (like you, above). Not that I’m angry - I knew this would be your response. I’ll point you back to this the next time you turn up in a thread with the sole aim of denigrating me.
Have you taken a poll? How did you determine this? It seems to me nearly everyone takes specific stands on moral issues and hence precisely do not fit this description.
What would pointing back here prove? Just pointing to another thread that you degraded? Get over yourself. Sometimes you say stuff that doesn’t add value, it’s not a horrible indictment, it’s just a fact of reality for everyone. Most people can live with the fact that sometimes they lower the quality of discourse. You seem to take it really personally.