Kellie-Jay Keen (AKA Posie Parker) appreciation thread

Yes I didn't see it as snide.

The accusation is clearly being aimed to undermine the event which detracts a lot from the very important and horrific content that was included. There's no clear reasoning behind it thus far.

Rufus, I would genuinely appreciate it clearly spelt out how the speaker was antisemitic

Same, I'm not trying to be snide or asking a gotcha question. I don't understand

Suggestions, I've been through all your posts (tky mn premium) and at times you've used arguments that the speaker at the event who has now just been labelled a "hitlerite" actually used in her speech to make points around how propaganda works.

From what I can tell your original point was around there being too many people with one point of view on this thread.

Rufus, I would genuinely appreciate it clearly spelt out how the speaker was antisemitic (when she was clearly illustrating how dangerous it is to repeat the lies propaganda uses.)

To you???

Seriously?

Nah mate you're OK.

How is it anti semitic?

So are we now saying anyone who wants to publicly speak is Hitler? Because the act of wanting to speak is just like being a Nazi?

I am genuinely lost, if the process of comparing things to the rise of nazism is nazism then is comparing the rise of nazism, literally nazism which makes those that accuse KJK of being a Nazi, them being themselves, a Nazi?

Of course you will. Just responding to your previous comment

I'll contribute to this thread on my own terms, thanks.

Excellent, glad to hear you have nothing further to add to this thread.

It's really wearying trying to say the same thing over and over again. I explicitly responded to an individual point made by another poster. The issues I raised speak to general themes around argumentation, reason, rhetoric, free speech.

You seem to think you are entitled to some further point from me about KJK. Let me put this clearly to you: you aren't.

Haha!! It's exactly exactly like that.

It also reminds me of kids giving you the finger while pretending to rub their nose. Along with the faux condescension, that every parent in history has witnessed.

I think it's quite funny that artix and suggestions are doing exactly the same thing as the woman did in her speech - comparing their opponents' tactics to fascism. And yet, for some reason, it makes her antisemitic, but not them.

And ELO now. I'm reminded of this Monty Python bit:

No she's not. Repeating a falsehood doesn't make it any less false. HTH.

And people responded to you. Asking you what point you were making in relation to KJK based on your observations about persuasive bad arguments and so on.

Only last week I compared her to Rotha Lintorn-Orman here and was shouted down. Today it turns out she is providing a platform for Hiterlite antisemites at her 'rallies'.

I hope you guys will listen up more in future.

I'm not really sure what the problem is. I responded explicitly to a point made by another poster, that's a fairly usual trend on threads, no?

It is sparple.

100%

No Warrior.

I find the posts to be rather jumbled in thinking and definitely controlling 'free speech' in the way we have seen the seemingly unlimited extremist trans activists seeking to frame 'free speech'.

It is just more of the usual 'look at that squirrel' distractive techniques that we constantly see while misrepresenting what has happened, and using words that reasonable but are not accurately describing what happened.

It is sparple.

Am I the only one finding suggestions suggestions to sound rather like only 'right think' speakers aloud?

Free speech as long as it's this speech?

That's how authoritarianism develops and paves the way for dictators?

Suggestionsplease1, is this the example you gave to illustrate your pov?

TheClogLady
No platforming is a tool OF fascism, not a way to defeat fascism.

I’m anti all forms of authoritarianism, personally.

Bad arguments/opinions are defeated by better arguments/opinions.

///////////

Suggestionsplease1:

That's pretty simplistic isn't it?

Persuasive and powerful speakers can convince others to abominable actions with their rhetoric in the right circumstances; we are all pretty dumb really. And we can all shift values in the right contexts, and subsequently perceive and justify our new values as reasonable.

I am sure Hitler for eg. had very persuasive arguments for the majority population he wanted to appeal to. I am sure many said he had great, necessary ideas to address the perceived problems of that time. Probably not the Jewish & minority populations that his rhetoric was targeted against, however.

Their point never waivers, does it?

If they only once ever actually addressed the issue, they might not look like the jealous losers mentioned by a PP

Or they can be annoying and lame.

Certainly a lot of that around.

That's right. People can be persuasive and charismatic. Or they can be annoying and lame.

What's your point? That KJK should shut up because you don't like what she's saying and she's saying it really well?

And what is the conclusion in relation to KJK that you draw from your thoughts on this? That she should shut up?

My point is very clear and directly in response to the point made by the poster I quoted.

I think it is too simplistic to state that bad arguments are always defeated by better arguments. What is an appealing / reasonable and 'good' argument to one person is not an appealing / reasonable or good argument to another. What is an appealing / reasonable or 'good' argument can also shift to the same person over time.

Persuasive abilities also have dimensions to them that go beyond pure reason, often appealing to emotions that people have, eg. Fears.

And that's before you even consider the individual charisma of the speaker.

And I gave an example to illustrate my view.