Racist thread

[ThejoyofNC]

There is a thread running in AIBU where people are being openly and freely racist. You've already deleted several posts on there so you're aware of it. Why are you allowing it to run?

Also why do you allow racism against travellers on here?

So, @PhilippaGeorgiou . To clarify, the many dozens of posts on this thread that appeared on my screen did not in fact appear on my reply to you on MN.
I obviously share more than the average 2% 🥴
I’ll get my pelt …

Leaping in. Can’t be arsed to reprise the thread.
Guessing you mean Gordon Boroen?

Well, she was 🤷‍♀️

So why don’t the good ones in that community call out the bad ones.

Boroen?! 🤯
Brown! Damn those (increasingly obvious, it appears) Neanderthal genes.
Or maybe predictive text? Know which I prefer.

🤣

The censorship I am referring to is the chilling effect that has been evident in so many places up and down the country. The topic I am referring to is the impact of gender ideology which has impacted thousands of women. But that’s a topic for another board.

What gender ideology and this thread have in common however is the demand to censor debate, even when it’s uncomfortable. Surely we have seen how damaging this is? When thoughts and behaviours go unexamined, hatred and misunderstandings can thrive. By censoring something doesn’t mean that thoughts magically disappear - instead they find a way to connect elsewhere - think of incels, reform, white supremacists etc… and how they have grown and become stronger.

Who is included in this ‘ours’?
I think I probably have different views from yours - indeed views in opposition. I suspect the same is true in every racial and social group. Deciding that all people of one race/religion/culture share the same views which are in some way a threat to your own is where it becomes racist.

Do you ask that of all communities?

Free speech is absolutely not about being given a free pass for just talking about what you perceive as bigotry. Free speech means the right to express your thoughts, opinions, and beliefs without fear of government punishment. It doesn’t mean you can say anything without consequences—especially if it’s harmful, threatening, or breaks the law. It’s about protecting open debate.

This is a thread about racism, mate.

The issue I am seeing again and again here is the idea that it’s reform voters etc who bang on about free speech. It’s not. I believe in free speech exactly as you’ve quoted, however in real life and further supported by law this then becomes more complex when we are considering the protected characteristic of the right to a belief.

Even though I may disagree with things a reform voter may say… this doesn’t mean I want to censor it. Instead I want to understand what’s behind it. What’s driving it. I believe if this can be reciprocated then things can evolve to a more respected mutual understanding. Whilst I may not agree with someone I respect the fact that they have a right to their opinion, just like I do.

i am also aware I am talking about this removed from what was and would be considered racist, however I do believe that we find ourselves in a situation where the word has become so weaponised it instead breeds more divide and less actual dialogue.

I've given you information on prejudice and racism as defined by the UN, so we're not talking about what I perceive as bigotry, we're talking about well defined racism.

Western values include tolerance and that doesn't mean tolerance for racism. You insinuated that it's not possible for you to discuss issues without being racist and we have free speech therefore that's your right.

I'm sure you're aware that disinformation, inflammatory language and racism can cause harm. The riots last year were fueled by racist and inflammatory language and people tried to burn the occupants of hotels alive. That kind of language is harmful, sows division and makes people feel unsafe.

I know that but as I pointed out - there is a common ground… the lower threshold for when someone demands something to be deleted because they have deemed it racist, instead of enquiring why someone feels that way.

The reasons for the riots last year are complex and far exceed the brief explanation you have given. They were decades in the making. People were angry, they are still angry.

She expressed an opinion about open door immigration,

Mr Brown apologised for his comment

I think by allowing people to debate issues rationally, you can educate yourself. I’ve been on posts where I’ve been adamant about a certain perspective, but by the end I’ve started to understand the opposition’s stance. By censoring certain topics, people are never going to hear both sides, as it’s all shrouded in secrecy and misconceptions. Obviously you’re going to get very extreme views, from the very left, to the very right, but you can choose to ignore those views if you don’t agree with them.

And the anger has been fuelled by lies and mis/disinformation.

I don’t want anyone to be able to persuade others to be racist thoigh. Especially not by telling them lies to make them scared and angry.

The riots were fueled by decades of inflammatory language and racism. In fact, people were imprisoned for inciting racial hatred. Are you suggesting the riots weren't racist?

Surely it must be possible for people with even quite extreme views to be able to express them without being racist?

If not, then that says a lot about those people.

Indeed. Both statements correct.

Well, he would, wouldn’t he? Mid-campaign.

No she complained about Eastern European immigrants. She said:

"You can't say anything about the immigrants because you're saying that you're … but all these eastern European what are coming in, where are they flocking from?"

Of course Brown apologised. He had to.

So I've emailed Gordon Brown a screenshot of @MyDeftHedgehog post at the bottom of page 2 along with a link to the page on the basis it is untrue and probably libellous. Tbh I'm absolutely fed up with stupid people and sites publishing untruths about people and events and refusing to take them down when it's pointed out they are lies and expecting to get away with it.

But most people aren’t going to be persuaded by random people on a discussion site to become racist. Equally nor are people going to have quite often valid concerns dismissed due to potential accusations of racism. There has to be a meeting of minds somewhere in the middle, where maybe both sides can appreciate where the other person is coming from. That only works of course if people listen to each other and don’t hold extreme views. I’ve seen some really good discussions on MN on contentious subjects, so it can be done.

Racism is an extreme view, so you admit yourself what you hope will happen can’t happen.