• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mandalorean Actor dropped because MAGA

Checkerboard Strangler said:
I never said anything about purges.
Did you need for me to repeat what I said?

Saying that being a Republican today is like being Jewish during the Holocaust is literally BEGGING to be forced to experience what that was really like.
Click to expand...
Not what she said what so ever.
 
Taylor said:
She didn't compare anything to the holocaust.
Click to expand...
She did, she siad Conservatives are treated like Jews in Nazi Germany. Basically she compared it with the Holocaust. If there is no mass murder going on it's not comparable with what Nazi Germany did. Period. That was crossing the line.
 
joluoto said:
Oh ha ha. But for real, her being rehired a couple of months from now is not completely impossible.
Click to expand...

This presumes she takes the job.
 
joluoto said:
She did, she siad Conservatives are treated like Jews in Nazi Germany.
Click to expand...
Yes she did. She compared the treatment of conservatives on social media to how Jews were treated early on.

“Jews were beaten in the streets, not by Nazi soldiers but by their neighbors…. even by children.”

The actor continued to say, “Because history is edited, most people today don’t realize that to get to the point where Nazi soldiers could easily round up thousands of Jews, the government first made their own neighbors hate them simply for being Jews. How is that any different from hating someone for their political views?”

joluoto said:
Basically she compared it with the Holocaust. If there is no mass murder going on it's not comparable with what Nazi Germany did. Period. That was crossing the line.
Click to expand...
No, she did not. The Holocaust was not one big indivisible block. It evolved slowly, step by step. If we ignore the warning signs in the early stages because nobody has been shipped off to concentration camps yet, we won't stop it from happening again.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
We're entering a dangerous time.

She voiced an opinion, not an opinion that I agree with, but still just an opinion... and she got "cancelled". The just reeks of the "Thought Police" out on patrol.
Click to expand...

You do know that people got black listed from all of society just a few decades ago for being supportive of communism right?
 
cpgrad08 said:
Not what she said what so ever.
Click to expand...

"Gina Carano" said:
“Jews were beaten in the streets, not by Nazi soldiers but by their neighbors…even by children. Because history is edited, most people today don’t realize that to get to the point where Nazi soldiers could easily round up thousands of Jews, the government first made their own neighbors hate them simply for being Jews. How is that any different from hating someone for their political views.”
Click to expand...

How many hairs would you like to split?
And while we're at it, the last four years of Trump rhetoric have amounted to a copy/paste of the Rwanda playbook, so if we're going to talk about "their own neighbors hat[ing] them simply for being Jews" then let's talk about Trumpers hating half the country for simply not worshipping Trump, or for simply being Democrats, just as the Hutu were made to hate the Tutsis.

So not only were Carano's "talking points" pure projection, they ARE in fact a comparison to the Holocaust.
Nazi soldiers didn't round up millions of Jews to take them to Disney World, they took them to the ovens.
It's exactly what she was referring to, one hundred percent.

So once again, if an idiot is going to run around playing the victim and using Holocaust rhetoric, it would be more than appropriate to make them experience the real thing for a week or so.
 
Questerr said:
You do know that people got black listed from all of society just a few decades ago for being supportive of communism right?
Click to expand...
Yes. That was wrong too. You'd think we would have learned from that.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
So not only were Carano's "talking points" pure projection, they ARE in fact a comparison to the Holocaust.
Nazi soldiers didn't round up millions of Jews to take them to Disney World, they took them to the ovens.
It's exactly what she was referring to, one hundred percent.
Click to expand...
Yet again, this time with emphasis:
...most people today don’t realize that to get to the point where Nazi soldiers could easily round up thousands of Jews, the government first made their own neighbors hate them simply for being Jews. How is that any different from hating someone for their political views.”

I don't know how the difference between CLEARLY and explicitly talking about how this sort of thing begins is indistinguishable from talking about how it might end, but a lot of people seem to have trouble with it.
 
Free speech as a principle, giving great lattitude to what can be said, not just as a legal matter, is a long fought-for accomplishment of modern times... And this should not go unmentioned...Speech CAN be deeply offensive and wrong and infuriating BUT it is free speech and so many people throughout the ages fought tirelessly, so that there would be free speech and not that powerful, unelected people could decide to penalise you for your opinions, no matter how dumb that opinion is...

Is what she said insensitive, dumb and junvenile? Sure...No question...Just read a book on the horrors of the holocaust if you do not know...

BUT, secondly, giving great lattitude as to what can be said is ALSO so important cos not everything is as clearly dumb, insensitive and wrong as what she said is, in MY opinion...Heck, the whole forum is filled with people who find stuff offensive others do not and vica versa...People have different standards and your opposition is not immediatly evil for finding different things offensive than you... (Obviously there is also stuff that is widley viewed as terrible such as calls for violence wich crosses a line as I will mention) THAT is among the main reasons speech must be as free as possible... Otherwise everybody would have to be in constant fear over all they say, wether left, right, religious, atheist ect., if they don't wanna be out of work and unable to participate in society according to ever different personal opinions...

Should your christian boss fire you over your disdain for his religion? The right wing boss for your belief in in the climate crisis? Have you thoght this through? THAT is the world you want? You don't like somebodys opinion and hence you want that person to LOSE their livelyhoods? Just subjective calls? How heartless could you be?

And you do not change peoples minds by cancelling them, but TALKING to them... I am sure everybody has said dumb stuff they regret...But if you cancel anyone over those you achive precisely NOTHING but them feeling even more vindicated an
But it amazes me to no end that some people just go: "It's the decision of the company! They have every right!" As if everybody does not know that... Close to everybody knows that...

What people have a problem with is this idea that this is the standard that we have some arbitrary lines and that companys should just be able to fire anybody they please based on speech they do not like. And also that there should be much greater latittude, 'cos otherwise you would have to fire everybody, as explained earlier, cos nobody has not said some dumb shit in the past somebody found offensive.

(BTW: Do you know who agrees with me on this? CENK UYGUR from TYT... Is he a right winger now too? Come the heck on...)

OF COURSE, there has to be a line somewhere... Like Taylor Greene calling for murder. Calls for violence are a big, big line to cross...

Hitchens made a great speech on free speech once (in what looked like the Hogwarts dining room) where he meticulessly explained how somebodies not only has the right to speak, but also by canceling and not engaging you make yourself a prisoner of your own bias and mind and also ability to push back and deny yourself the right to hear something and be challenged (the sign of the ironic as opposed to the literal mind)...

A free society, in my view, must give great lattitue as to what can be said WITHOUT fear of reprimands... And to just say: Let's not, as a society, or many societies, figure out where that line is but instead let corporations just decide on a whim and SUBJECTIVE, personal opinion fire people seems utterly insane to me... What kind of world, but a regressive almost medieval one would that be? Haven't we, as societies, precisely strived for creating standards that are NOT just based on some whims of private persons or KINGS but, as much as possible, univeral laws AND also principles...And because it is so hard to come up with lines (though, as mentioned, we HAVE to come up with lines, like saying calls for violence are NOT permissable) the lattitude MUST be as great as possible... (Cenk agrees)
 
I think a lot of people also forget that principles are also a thing. And one of them should be the most reprimand-free world from opinions others dislike cos a free, democratic society must tolerate deeply infuriating opinions for free exchange to happen and to actually achieve shit and move society forwards (Darwins theory of evolution was deeply offensive to most religious people at the time for example) And not only because in a lot of stuff there might be (emphazis on "might be") a cornel of truth (you never know until you HEAR somebody out) but also because otherwise you would let anybody decide one a whim what is acceptable and what isn't and that usually involves powerful people whos personal opinions are not gonna be the same.

I am sure a lot of lefties did not like Glenn Beck for example, fireing Tomi Lahren over her Pro-Choice comments... I ASK you: Do you really think anybody should jut decide willy nilly what is acceptable and what isn't? Who makes the standarts? WHO would YOU trust to be so incredibly wise and brilliant to know that?
 
Lutherf said:
She's obviously a right winger and therefore deserves prison rather than a career. People that aren't woke shouldn't be allowed to exist in society.

Did I get that right?
Click to expand...

Why do you think conservatives should be imprisoned?
 
george48 said:
I think a lot of people also forget that principles are also a thing. And one of them should be the most reprimand-free world from opinions others dislike cos a free, democratic society must tolerate deeply infuriating opinions for free exchange to happen and to actually achieve shit and move society forwards (Darwins theory of evolution was deeply offensive to most religious people at the time for example) And not only because in a lot of stuff there might be (emphazis on "might be") a cornel of truth (you never know until you HEAR somebody out) but also because otherwise you would let anybody decide one a whim what is acceptable and what isn't and that usually involves powerful people whos personal opinions are not gonna be the same.

I am sure a lot of lefties did not like Glenn Beck for example, fireing Tomi Lahren over her Pro-Choice comments... I ASK you: Do you really think anybody should jut decide willy nilly what is acceptable and what isn't? Who makes the standarts? WHO would YOU trust to be so incredibly wise and brilliant to know that?
Click to expand...

Absolutely no part of freedom of speech means I have to keep my mouth shut about what you say.

Why do you demand I stay silent?
 
Antiwar said:
I think I'm more interested in discussing things that are more important and that people usually haven't already thought about.
Click to expand...
Then why are you in this thread since what I posted applies to aspects of this thread?
 
george48 said:
I think a lot of people also forget that principles are also a thing. And one of them should be the most reprimand-free world from opinions others dislike cos a free, democratic society must tolerate deeply infuriating opinions for free exchange to happen and to actually achieve shit and move society forwards (Darwins theory of evolution was deeply offensive to most religious people at the time for example) And not only because in a lot of stuff there might be (emphazis on "might be") a cornel of truth (you never know until you HEAR somebody out) but also because otherwise you would let anybody decide one a whim what is acceptable and what isn't and that usually involves powerful people whos personal opinions are not gonna be the same.

I am sure a lot of lefties did not like Glenn Beck for example, fireing Tomi Lahren over her Pro-Choice comments... I ASK you: Do you really think anybody should jut decide willy nilly what is acceptable and what isn't? Who makes the standarts? WHO would YOU trust to be so incredibly wise and brilliant to know that?
Click to expand...
Which lefties cared about Beck firing someone for ProChoice comments? Pretty sure if Beck was able to fire her, then that means she was under private employment. Probably better for her not to work for Glenn Beck anyway.
 
natman said:
Yes she did. She compared the treatment of conservatives on social media to how Jews were treated early on.

“Jews were beaten in the streets, not by Nazi soldiers but by their neighbors…. even by children.”

The actor continued to say, “Because history is edited, most people today don’t realize that to get to the point where Nazi soldiers could easily round up thousands of Jews, the government first made their own neighbors hate them simply for being Jews. How is that any different from hating someone for their political views?”


No, she did not. The Holocaust was not one big indivisible block. It evolved slowly, step by step. If we ignore the warning signs in the early stages because nobody has been shipped off to concentration camps yet, we won't stop it from happening again.
Click to expand...
And her employer (along with others) felt it was very wrong to do that, so she got fired.
 
george48 said:
I think a lot of people also forget that principles are also a thing. And one of them should be the most reprimand-free world from opinions others dislike cos a free, democratic society must tolerate deeply infuriating opinions for free exchange to happen and to actually achieve shit and move society forwards (Darwins theory of evolution was deeply offensive to most religious people at the time for example) And not only because in a lot of stuff there might be (emphazis on "might be") a cornel of truth (you never know until you HEAR somebody out) but also because otherwise you would let anybody decide one a whim what is acceptable and what isn't and that usually involves powerful people whos personal opinions are not gonna be the same.

I am sure a lot of lefties did not like Glenn Beck for example, fireing Tomi Lahren over her Pro-Choice comments... I ASK you: Do you really think anybody should jut decide willy nilly what is acceptable and what isn't? Who makes the standarts? WHO would YOU trust to be so incredibly wise and brilliant to know that?
Click to expand...
I had no idea that Beck fired Lahren to begin with
 
Taylor said:
Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively had to get remarried because the woke crowd was so upset that the site of their first wedding had been a plantation over 150 years ago.
Click to expand...
i'm a civil war buff, i've visited that plantation, whether we like it or not, slavery happened, it is a part of our history.....the home itself is beautiful, as is the land it sits on...the former slave quarters are now education centers , describing how the slaves lived...
 
Questerr said:
You do know that people got black listed from all of society just a few decades ago for being supportive of communism right?
Click to expand...
When you consider the number of people that have died as a direct result of communism, you do realize how stupid it is to use that as a a point of reference, right?
 
Jack Fabulous said:
When you consider the number of people that have died as a direct result of communism, you do realize how stupid it is to use that as a a point of reference, right?
Click to expand...

How many people have died as a result of white supremacy or anti-LGBTQ bigotry? What’s the threshold of an “okay amount of deaths”?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom