2016 U.S. Presidential Elections: The Circus Is In Full Swing

[Antoine de Saint-Exupéry]

it seems to me far more reactionary to, out of a misplaced sense of national pride or other such nonsense, make so great an effort to deny basic history and dismiss the ongoing suffering of millions. efforts by which such suffering is exacerbated and invited to occur again in future.

opposing such bull**** is, to my mind, rather less objectionable than perpetuating or platforming it. self loathing doesn't factor into it remotely, preventing harm is a sufficient motivator entirely in itself.

edit: and yes i did ninja edit to more adequately express my reasoning in that earlier post, probably while you were writing. terco is not merely advocating for whitewashing and denial, he is doing those things, intentionally. that's the whole beef here.

 

[Nega-Brutus]

Maybe the disconnect here is that some people derive some sort of fulfillment or pride from national identities (which are charachterized by their history), whereas other people don't. The people that don't can more liberally, or are more inclined to, to look down on history. Whereas people that like their history would celebrate it. A person looking down on it will seem like an odd-ball to the person that celebrates it. A person that celebrates it could seem like a odd-ball to the person that looks down on it. From there on they just misread and mischarachterize each other.

Maybe very simplified.

 

[Vermillion_Hawk]

it seems to me far more reactionary to, out of a misplaced sense of national pride or other such nonsense, make so great an effort to deny basic history and dismiss the ongoing suffering of millions. efforts by which such suffering is exacerbated and invited to occur again in future.

opposing such bull**** is, to my mind, rather less objectionable than perpetuating or platforming it. self loathing doesn't factor into it remotely, preventing harm is a sufficient motivator entirely in itself.

edit: and yes i did ninja edit to more adequately express my reasoning in that earlier post, probably while you were writing. terco is not merely advocating for whitewashing and denial, he is doing those things, intentionally. that's the whole beef here.

I haven't looked at Terco's posts thus far so I can't be certain whether or not "basic history" has been denied, but I'll leave it up to him to tell me whether or not he's denying "basic history".

Ah yes, "preventing harm". I have enough experience with the slacktivist type in the history departments around here. It has become very fashionable to be anti-colonialist around here, in part because it's the prevailing trend, but I find a lot of the people who adopt these attitudes do so because it is always easier to destroy than to create, and these people tend to not be very good at creating. It is always easier to dismiss someone as a hack rather than actually address what they are saying.

These people are very intent on things like acknowledging they reside on specific treaty lands in their e-mail signatures and using slogans from various conflicts and using the proper Indigenous names for things, and I welcome a good bit of it because I've learned things from these efforts, not being a historian of Indigenous North America. I take issue with these people claiming that they are "preventing harm" and "dismantling colonialism" and all sort of other things because it all just comes off as very ingenuine when the debate almost always centres around boondoggles like that and not around enacting real change, because that is a conversation a good few of them are not capable of and the rest do not want to have, often because this would be detrimental to their position of power.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

[...]


that you believe that merely shows you still neither understand what genocide is nor what the issue with your deleted message was. also that you did not finish reading the post you quoted.

to repeat, the issue with your message was the denial of the genocide. the genocide which happened. it was not censorship, and i am not sorry. get over it.

[...]it seems to me far more reactionary to, out of a misplaced sense of national pride or other such nonsense, make so great an effort to deny basic history and dismiss the ongoing suffering of millions. efforts by which such suffering is exacerbated and invited to occur again in future.

And once again another biased interpretation by addressing me with that paternalistic arrogance of the first message (when you addressed me as "smart ass" remember?). Your problem is that the way you interpret "genocide" clashes directly with the data I have provided, nothing further from historiographical studies within a framework of universal plausibility. Basic history, you say... it is funny.

You want to make it seem that I wrote something so controversial, something so highly objectionable that not even Goebbels himself would dare to postulate it.

Bad moderator.

 

[Antoine de Saint-Exupéry]

but I'll leave it up to him to tell me whether or not he's denying "basic history".

this seems impressively shortsighted. then again, you did apparently come into an argument without reading it to drop your opinion, so perhaps i shouldn't be surprised.

i have no need to personally address diamond here and now, as he has been debunked to death in a dozen books and a million posts elsewhere, feel free to go look. i do not care.

And once again another biased interpretation by addressing me with that paternalistic arrogance of the first message (when you addressed me as "smart ass" remember?).

i called you a smartass because you were being a smartass in making silly assumptions about what i know and do not know and embarrassing yourself in the process.

Your problem is that the way you interpret "genocide" clashes directly with the data I have provided, nothing further from historiographical studies within a framework of universal plausibility. Basic history, you say... it is funny.

that is not correct.

You want to make it seem that I wrote something so controversial, something so highly objectionable that not even Goebbels himself would dare to postulate it.

you do like your strawmen. i said you denied a genocide. göbbels is responsible for committing one. not sure the comparison you're making is favourable to you.

Bad moderator.

bad user. now behave.

 

[Vermillion_Hawk]

this seems impressively shortsighted. then again, you did apparently come into an argument without reading it to drop your opinion, so perhaps i shouldn't be surprised.

i have no need to personally address diamond here and now, as he has been debunked to death in a dozen books and a million posts elsewhere, feel free to go look. i do not care.

What I have read is more along the lines of what Rams said just earlier, that there is a fundamental misunderstanding here. None of it thus far indicates to me that Terco is some genocide denier, or that he's said anything that warrants less than a civil conversation.

Apparently you do care because you're very intent on preventing harm. I'm not asking you even to address Diamond, I'm just asking for a response to my own post.

 

[Antoine de Saint-Exupéry]

then read again, and perhaps this time while bearing in mind the context that part of it was a post overt enough in its denial to get deleted by taleworlds moderators.

i responded to your post, just not the tiresome diamondposting, because diamond is a hack not worth discussing.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

What I have read is more along the lines of what Rams said just earlier, that there is a fundamental misunderstanding here. None of it thus far indicates to me that Terco is some genocide denier, or that he's said anything that warrants less than a civil conversation.

Apparently you do care because you're very intent on preventing harm. I'm not asking you even to address Diamond, I'm just asking for a response to my own post.

It seems to me that Monty has an ego bigger than the Great Pyramid of Cholula; he knows he's overdone it but doesn't want to admit it.

Socrates said, Four characteristics correspond to a judge: to listen courteously, to answer wisely, to weigh prudently and to decide impartially.
This moderator has none of them.

 

[Vermillion_Hawk]

then read again, and perhaps this time while bearing in mind the context that part of it was a post overt enough in its denial to get deleted by taleworlds moderators.

i responded to your post, just not the tiresome diamondposting, because diamond is a hack not worth discussing.

Was there another moderator's input there? Because I'm familiar with your criteria of what constitutes a deletable post.

And I find this interesting because on one hand, I know definitively of a couple of respected historians who like his book for what it is, and on the other hand I have your opinion. But alas, you don't care enough, and that's fine, because that part of the conversation wasn't really directed at you anyways, I can dismiss your dismissal for what it is.

 

[Antoine de Saint-Exupéry]

if i had overdone it the decision would have long since been overturned. if it were up to me, i would have been far harsher (he didn't even catch a mute, like.. come on), but it is not, and i am in fact capable of differentiating between my own beliefs and the enforcement of taleworlds rules. i know this is a surprise to both of you but i am not in fact some rabid culture warrior.

so no, terco, i did not overdo it, and no, vermillion, you are not familiar with my criteria.

 

[Vermillion_Hawk]

I don't think you're a rabid culture warrior, but I do know that, in most cases, moderation staff above the front line are more likely to err on the side of caution. So whatever Terco said, I don't trust your assessment of its content.

 

[Captured Joe]

It seems to me that Monty has an ego bigger than the Great Pyramid of Cholula

Impossible, since it's the biggest and greatest thing ever!

 

[Antoine de Saint-Exupéry]

I don't think you're a rabid culture warrior, but I do know that, in most cases, moderation staff above the front line are more likely to err on the side of caution. So whatever Terco said, I don't trust your assessment of its content.

again, in response to his complaints, the decision was not overturned. don't trust me, trust the process^tm

 

[Terco_Viejo]

The process™? You have blatantly prevaricated. What's next, installing little machines that dispense penalties for violation of the verbal morality statute?

 

[Cpt. Nemo]

Monty's deletion was in according to our rules and the forum's history with genocide, as in we tolerate a lot about such topics but straight up denial usually isn't allowed. We are currently discussing some of the finer points of what should be able to be moderated and what shouldn't, but so far Monty did what he should. Even if we change what is acceptable, he was still doing his job like he was supposed to at the time.

Also yeah terco's deleted post was just genocide denial, in my opinion anyway, which again isn't tolerated here. Downplaying, debating how bad it was, etc is allowed, but Terco's post denied the Spanish did anything wrong at all, seriously.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

Okay, I'll stop insisting. This has gone on long enough.
---
Edit: If Forum Rules is The process™

 

[Antoine de Saint-Exupéry]

the process^tm is a lighthearted way of referring to the different tiers of moderators discussing events.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

the process^tm is a lighthearted way of referring to the different tiers of moderators discussing events.

Do you know this guy? What do you think of his interpretation of the word?

Anyone with a dictionary. Genocide requires an organised attempt to eliminate or displace a people on ethnic or racial grounds. Indiscriminate killing is by definition not genocide.

[...]

Tell me please exactly in the Forum Rules link in which statment I have committed my fault.

 

[Antoine de Saint-Exupéry]

a) that post is ten years old. don't be obtuse.
b)

Okay, I'll stop insisting. This has gone on long enough.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

Nah, please just a litle more ?