What is tolerance?

[Immanuel Can]

You made the claim that "perverted" books were being read to school children, and it surprises me that such a thing could be the case, so I am asking for the names of the books you have condemned as being perverted so that I can see for myself. Please, just tell me the book titles.

I've pointed out the videos to you. You won't find a shortage of them. If you care, you'll check. But I'm not going down the rabbit-trail of whether this book or that book is among them. That's not an argument I'm interested in having with you. It's for you to decide.

I've decided.

But as for you, what's your cutoff point? What sort of material would you consider appropriate to keep from children? Or is there none that you would consider deserving of keeping from them?

[Immanuel Can]

Because there can be no reasons provided to support them. They're matters of taste, not of reason.

Nobody thus needs to agree. And no line of reasoning or argument can be produced by the subjectivist complainer to induce another person to believe that he/she is obligated to share that personal complaint of opinion. If they do, they do; if they don't, they don't. But nobody is a better or worse person if they don't, and nothing objective can be pulled into the conversation to tip the balance to either side.

And there, the matter ends. The subjectivist has no more to offer. That's why subjectivism is mere moral-nihilism-for-cowards. They're cowards because they don't have the courage to go all the way with moral nihilism, but their lack of any objective basis means they really can't justify any claim to morality, and their supposed "morality" is no more than the preening valorization of their own personal tastes...and nobody should be impressed by that.

Of course there are reasons to support subjective opinions. Why wouldn't there be?

Easy. Because they're subjective.

You can list all kinds of personal motivations you may choose to have; but lacking the common ground of inter-personally-demanding reasons, you can't tell anybody else why they should or shouldn't make the same choice. Maybe they like your motivations, and maybe they don't share them: there's no meta-ethical way of adjudicating that they owe you to agree.

And if you do have some reason that another person is morally-obligated to believe and accept, then it's an objectivist argument, and as a subjectivist, you have no justification in claiming it can even exist.

[Harbal]

You made the claim that "perverted" books were being read to school children, and it surprises me that such a thing could be the case, so I am asking for the names of the books you have condemned as being perverted so that I can see for myself. Please, just tell me the book titles.

I've pointed out the videos to you. You won't find a shortage of them. If you care, you'll check. But I'm not going down the rabbit-trail of whether this book or that book is among them. That's not an argument I'm interested in having with you. It's for you to decide.

I've decided.

Well I don't care all that much, so I won't check the videos. I'm not really interested in the opinions of a few hysterical parents who I don't even know, I am interested in a particular assertion made by you. The thing that caught my interest was your comment, " We're talking about the "educators," particularly in Florida, who have been grooming children in public schools with perverted books." That is quite an accusation, and I don't know what came over me, but I decided to investigate it, so I would like to start by establishing that the books you are referring to are, indeed, "perverted". Now if you would just give me the titles of the books you have judged to be perverted, I can proceed with my investigation.

But as for you, what's your cutoff point? What sort of material would you consider appropriate to keep from children? Or is there none that you would consider deserving of keeping from them?

If it were my job to decide what is suitable reading material for children, I would make my decision after I had examined the material, not before.

[Immanuel Can]

Well I don't care all that much, so I won't check the videos.

Yep. I knew it.

But as for you, what's your cutoff point? What sort of material would you consider appropriate to keep from children? Or is there none that you would consider deserving of keeping from them?

If it were my job to decide what is suitable reading material for children, I would make my decision after I had examined the material, not before.

What would your criteria be?

[Harbal]

Well I don't care all that much, so I won't check the videos.

Yep. I knew it.

And I knew you wouldn't be able to back up your allegations about "perverted" books.

If it were my job to decide what is suitable reading material for children, I would make my decision after I had examined the material, not before.

What would your criteria be?

How do I know? I would like to think that the people who are responsible for making such decisions are suitably qualified, but like you, I am not suitably qualified.

[Gary Childress]

The world would certainly be a very differnet place.
America would have had to abandon slavery much sooner.
Trade banned 1809, and ownership anywhere in the empire 1834 .(I think I have the dates right). There would either have been no Civil War or it would have started earlier and ended much sooner, with the combined efforts of the North and the rest of the British.

Speaking of Canada there is yet another aspect of American history which Americans seem to have the wrong stick about and that is the war of 1812.
(ask an american and they think they won it. But its typical that people's own histories are often taught as lies - I've met AMericans who think they won the Vietnam war - I am not joking)

...And gives further reason why Canada stayed Loyal so long.
The war of 1812 was one of the USAs earlier attemts at colonisation. However they bugled it in a couple of ways.
Walker is going to love this....
When the US expeditionary force entered Canada they missed a massive opportunity to recruit the majority Americans that had already settled there. Instead of operating like a mature responsible army of occupation they went on a rampage of rape and destruction. This resulted in inflaming the local Americans so much that they joined up with the British forces to resist the American invaders..

The advnace pretty much ended when a small band of Candaians and AMericans blew up an arms dump and despite being much smaller in number sent the AMerican force running with their tails between their legs.

Some time after the British paid a visit to Wasington to burn down the Whitehouse and left. This ended the war.
It would have gone som much worse for AMericans if the Britiish did not have Napoloen to defeat in Europe.

But some Americans spin this as a victory! LOL

Had there been no independent America from 1939 to 1945, would the British have defeated Germany on the "Western Front"? Would Russia have defeated Germany on its own and been in control of much of Europe by 1945?

When you ask one of these fantasy alterntive history question you would have to state what were the actual differences in events that meant that the USA never happened. When you answer that question it pretty much establishes a cascade of other changes.

I have no doubt that if Britain had kept what would have become the USA there would have been so many other changes as a consequence. I doubt that the French Revolution would have happened when and how it did. Without the intellectual intercourse between the young USA and the French revolutioaries things would have been very different. Napoleon would not have taken the opportiunities given, since things would have been different. There is no telling if there would have been a colloection of other people to fill the voids. For example Thomas Payne who used to have a few beers in a pub I myslef have been drunk in several times in Lewes Sussex, would not have found himself in American and France spreading his "sedition". Franklyn would never have lived in England as US ambassador. How many other changes. Without the atmosphere of revolution mmayne Payne would have ended up a drunken customs officer growling at passers by from his chair in 179 HIGH STREET LEWES what is now known as "The RIghts of Man2 tapas house.
By the time the 20thC dawned German - British relations would have been utterly different such that the world wars would not have happened as they did.

Very true. Change a few things and that possibly cascades into a landslide of different changes.

[Sculptor]

Had there been no independent America from 1939 to 1945, would the British have defeated Germany on the "Western Front"? Would Russia have defeated Germany on its own and been in control of much of Europe by 1945?

When you ask one of these fantasy alterntive history question you would have to state what were the actual differences in events that meant that the USA never happened. When you answer that question it pretty much establishes a cascade of other changes.

I have no doubt that if Britain had kept what would have become the USA there would have been so many other changes as a consequence. I doubt that the French Revolution would have happened when and how it did. Without the intellectual intercourse between the young USA and the French revolutioaries things would have been very different. Napoleon would not have taken the opportiunities given, since things would have been different. There is no telling if there would have been a colloection of other people to fill the voids. For example Thomas Payne who used to have a few beers in a pub I myslef have been drunk in several times in Lewes Sussex, would not have found himself in American and France spreading his "sedition". Franklyn would never have lived in England as US ambassador. How many other changes. Without the atmosphere of revolution mmayne Payne would have ended up a drunken customs officer growling at passers by from his chair in 179 HIGH STREET LEWES what is now known as "The RIghts of Man2 tapas house.
By the time the 20thC dawned German - British relations would have been utterly different such that the world wars would not have happened as they did.

Very true. Change a few things and that possibly cascades into a landslide of different changes.

Can be a fun game.
I read a book where someone went back in time to stop Hitler being born by placing something in the water of his Mum's home.
When he returns to modern England it is a German Colony. Seems a more powerful leader emerged from WW1 to fill the gap Hitler left open.

[Immanuel Can]

Well I don't care all that much, so I won't check the videos.

Yep. I knew it.

And I knew you wouldn't be able to back up your allegations about "perverted" books.

And yet, I did...and you couldn't be bothered even to go and look. You said so, yourself.

What would your criteria be?

How do I know?

Who else would? They're your criteria.

But I get why you won't answer. It's very simple: we're not arguing over the principle of choosing some books to be age appropriate and some not. Because even a pedophile groomer knows that some are, and some are not...which is why he so often does his work behind the scenes, if he can, and does not let parents and normal adults know what he's trying to do.

All you and I are questioning is which sorts of materials should be allowed to children. At least I have criteria for deciding that; you want me to think you have none...and aren't troubled by it?

[Harbal]

Yep. I knew it.

And I knew you wouldn't be able to back up your allegations about "perverted" books.

And yet, I did...and you couldn't be bothered even to go and look. You said so, yourself.

You said: " We're talking about the "educators," particularly in Florida, who have been grooming children in public schools with perverted books", those were your words, and all I am asking is that you take responsibility for them. In order to be able to make such a claim about books, you surely know which books you are referring to, and exactly what they contain, so I don't understand why you will not name them. What's the problem?

What would your criteria be?

How do I know?

Who else would? They're your criteria.

What criteria? I never said I had criteria for determining what is suitable for children to read.

But I get why you won't answer. It's very simple: we're not arguing over the principle of choosing some books to be age appropriate and some not.

That is actually correct; we are not arguing about that. This is solely about a claim that you made concerning certain books, and nothing more. I find it hard to believe that school authorities would knowingly make books that deserve to be described as "perverted" accessible to the children in their care, and that is why I have been asking you for information that would enable me to establish the truth of the matter. The truth, or otherwise, of your claim is my only interest here.

Because even a pedophile groomer knows that some are, and some are not...which is why he so often does his work behind the scenes, if he can, and does not let parents and normal adults know what he's trying to do.

You forgot to make reference to "the Left"; it's not like you to miss an opportunity.

All you and I are questioning is which sorts of materials should be allowed to children. At least I have criteria for deciding that; you want me to think you have none...and aren't troubled by it?

I don't want you to think anything, and I am not questioning which sorts of materials should be allowed to children, I am questioning a specific comment you made about "perverted" books.

[Alexiev]

What is ironic is that Zinn book is the "opposiing view" to the bullshit the deep state are peddling.
It remains a fact that the cause of the Boston Tea Party was that the British were selling TAX FREE tea.

Yes, I know. Just like the "facts" Trump supporters accept. You believe only those "facts" which conform to your prejudices. Conspiracy theorists and Trump supporters do the same, The vast majority of historians disagree.

[Alexiev]

Have you ever been here? Have you ever lived here? If not, how do you even know?

I was in India and Thailand this year. But I also know some things I have not witnessed personally. Reading helps.

[godelian]

I was in India and Thailand this year. But I also know some things I have not witnessed personally. Reading helps.

Child support is a western invention that does not get enforced anywhere else in the world. You won't find it in Africa, SE Asia, the Middle East. In fact, it did not exist in the West before 20th century either. Same for division of the husband's assets and alimony, i.e. division of his future income.

That is why you can trivially avoid these things by moving outside the West.

If the government incentivizes the wife to leave the marriage with cash and prizes, then this is obviously what she will sooner or later do. Anybody with even just half a brain can see that this practice will end up destroying the nuclear family and therefore society itself.

On the one hand, I am perfectly fine for the West to keep on doing that. It is obviously their problem and no longer mine. However, on the other hand, I do not want the West to export this practice to SE Asia, because now I live here. Not every society in the world needs to be destroyed!

[Immanuel Can]

And I knew you wouldn't be able to back up your allegations about "perverted" books.

And yet, I did...and you couldn't be bothered even to go and look. You said so, yourself.

You said: " We're talking about the "educators," particularly in Florida, who have been grooming children in public schools with perverted books", those were your words, and all I am asking is that you take responsibility for them.

Look it up. The videos are there. Don't be lazy. Find out for yourself. You aren't obligated to have my standards. But if you have any, I'd like to know what they are.

But I get why you won't answer. It's very simple: we're not arguing over the principle of choosing some books to be age appropriate and some not.

That is actually correct; we are not arguing about that.

Right. So you agree that there are some things children should not be exposed to. So now, I want you to tell me what you think this is. Give me an example of one thing you would NOT allow children to be exposed to.

[Walker]

Question: What is the purpose of the Motion Picture Association film rating system?

[Harbal]

And yet, I did...and you couldn't be bothered even to go and look. You said so, yourself.

You said: " We're talking about the "educators," particularly in Florida, who have been grooming children in public schools with perverted books", those were your words, and all I am asking is that you take responsibility for them.

Look it up. The videos are there. Don't be lazy. Find out for yourself.

I'm trying to find out for myself, but you won't give me the information I need in order to be able to do it. You are the only person who knows specifically which books you were referring to. I don't mind that you won't/can't tell me the names of the books, because it means that I've made my point without having to go to the trouble of tracking them down and reading what's in them.

That is actually correct; we are not arguing about that.

Right. So you agree that there are some things children should not be exposed to. So now, I want you to tell me what you think this is. Give me an example of one thing you would NOT allow children to be exposed to.

I don't think children should be taught religion.