Yeah, Cracked, I think it's ridiculous how some people Get Mad at Abstract Concepts but Punish Individuals because We Like Outrage and Revenge More Than We Like Facts because There's No Motivation to Be Right.
thatindianguy wrote:No Tess it's not bad. It 's super hypocritical of Cracked but it's not a bad article in and of it self. It accurately points out why Internet 'Justice' campaigns suck.
NathanLoiselle wrote:I can't find the Cracked article. Is it because Cracked hates Canadians? Is that a thing that I have to do now? Hate myself?
Tesseracts wrote:I don't like how everyone acts like this is a phenomenon exclusive to the internet. People got fired and harassed for stupid reasons way before Twitter.
Marcuse wrote:I feel like the title should be "5 reasons people prefer revenge over justice". I think it's time we stop treating the internet as some weird imaginary world where the rules of social interaction don't apply. It's that kind of attitude that leads people to think they can act badly in the first place (even if it doesn't absolve them of individual responsibility). So let's just recognise that people are like people are, even if it's behind a mask, they're still the same human beings.
As to preferring revenge to justice, that's so common as to be ubiquitous. I don't know why it's necessary to apply the "internet" qualifier to it.
ShuaiGuy wrote:I dunno Esteban, right-wingers already do that. It's just becoming more publicized that left-wingers are doing it too. If you're gay and working for a boss who's actively campaigning to keep you from getting married wouldn't that make the job super shitty? I think the focus should be on bosses who are not inclusive, but I can understand the reasoning for firing someone for having political opinions (like if someone was pro-khmer rouge... BET YOU THOUGHT I WAS GONNA SAY NAZIS, DIDN'T YOU!?), obviously that's an extreme opinion, but that person probably shouldn't be running your company.
I think it's tricky, because politics is similar to religion, and firing people for politics is dodgy. BUT if they're politics are non-inclusive (and nobody bring up people are intolerant of intolerance or I WILL find you and I WILL punch you in your genitals), then that's problematic for the work environment.
EstebanColberto wrote:I only skimmed it, but I knew what they were talking about. I mainly clicked on it to read the comments section. Something happened in recent news that really bugged me about these social justice mobs.
http://reason.com/blog/2014/04/06/does- ... ver-prop-8
The CEO of Mozilla was removed due to it being made public that he donated money to prop 8 to oppose gay marriage. He wasn't even being incredibly vocal about his support of his position from what I can tell. What sparked the outrage was that he listed the fact that he made the donation on his dating profile. Could you imagine the righteous indignation these same people would have if a bunch of religious zealots managed to get Tim Cook fired from Apple?
What if this had been someone you knew at work? It's easy to get fired up about CEOs cause we don't think of people in positions of power to be the same as us, but what if if a co-worker you knew who was very religious and against gay marriage, but was usually really respectful and never called anyone a faggot had his picture taken at an anti-gay marriage rally and posted on someone's Facebook page and then got fired? Would that be right? Would you have someone fired just cause he had a different opinion?
I'm pro-gay marriage and this angered the shit out of me. To hell with this!
Crimson847 wrote:Would you feel the same way if he was, say, outed as a member of the KKK? Or more directly, if he'd donated to a group that's working to ban interracial marriage?
Arkyle wrote:So in essence you are entitled to discriminate against anyone who doesn't agree with you, but heaven help me if I disagree with you. While I may not agree with what they're doing, as long as they are within the bounds of the law, why should it cost them their job?
The biggest calling card as support for homosexuality is the underpinning of tolerance. This treatment smacks of "agree with me, or else". That's not tolerance, that hardline fundamentalism.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests