Does THR suppress dissent?


PDA






Khornet
May 9, 2003, 12:50 PM
I was thinking how we haven't seen much of Malone lately, and was going to ask for him, when I remembered someone's remark on another thread recently, to the effect that anything less than rock-ribbed conservatism isn't tolerated here. Fella said that those who don't toe the line get tired of being bashed, and just leave.

I thought that was a crock of guano, and still do. Seems to me that here you can't get away with mere assertions, and anything anyone says can be (and usually is) challenged. But maybe some others feel differently. Any thoughts, or did you guys already quit?

If you enjoyed reading about "Does THR suppress dissent?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
SkunkApe
May 9, 2003, 12:59 PM
Although I agree with most THR members on most issues, I've been pretty outpsoken here on my disagreement with the United States' invasion of Iraq, and with associated propaganda campaign.

With very few exceptions, the THR members who disagree with me have responded to my position in a polite and respectful manner.

I'm still here.

Also, no one seems to holding a grudge about my nudist prank.

This is a good place.

cobb
May 9, 2003, 01:03 PM
Also, no one seems to holding a grudge about my nudist prank.



:what: That was a joke?:what:

Derek Zeanah
May 9, 2003, 01:03 PM
I'd say it's a crock. ;)

Lord knows I have a history of making some unpopular statements here on THR, and while the "average political stance" on THR is probably mainstream-conservative, there's still room for debate.

As far as I've seen, anyone is allowed to make any statement on THR, and it's tolerated. You might not get any supporting follow-ups, but it's allowed.



1.) All topics and posts must be related to firearms or civil liberties issues.
2.) Multiple user registrations are prohibited.
3.) As a family-friendly board, we ask that you keep your language clean. If you wouldn't say it in front of your dear old Grandma, you probably don't want to say it here.
4.) Spamming, trolling, flaming, and personal attacks are prohibited. You can disagree with other members, even vehemently, but it must be done in a well-mannered form. Attack the argument, not the arguer.
5.) We cannot provide a comprehensive list of "Things Not To Say".Posts that are contrary to the above policies, or to the mission of The High Road, may be edited or deleted at our sole discretion. Membership may be revoked if such a step is deemed necessary by us. We're a private venture enabled by an all-volunteer staff. Please treat this venue as a polite discussion in a friend's home and respect the wishes of the hosts.

The things that are not allowed are those that fall into the category of "the poster is being a butthead." Things like attacking other members qualify, as do attacking the religious views of others, or advocating something illegal (<cough> Smith Act <cough>), or generally behaving in a way that would give a visitor to the site a bad image of gun owners and responsible gun ownership. People who continue posting messages that aren't in line with what's allowed here are invited to leave. Sometimes they are allowed back, if it looks like they understand what they were doing wrong and agree to stop.

I don't think that's extreme.

Note that posters here have a lot more leeway than they did on The Firing Line.

(Disclaimer: I'm not a moderator.)

CZ-75
May 9, 2003, 01:08 PM
To some extent. However, I'm only opposed to "official" intolerance of dissent, of which there doesn't seem to be too much of from the moderators. This isn't a DU.com, where we talk out our a**es about tolerance, then shut down their thread and ban them first time they say something we don't like.

Malone may have left, and I don't miss him, but he was free to remain and not forced out by the "management." Frankly, if you don't want people to react critically to your ideas, don't go where people have been on the receiving end of people espousing similar ideas.

Left-wing tripe isn't going to wash with most gun owners, even if you are pro 2nd, because they know the agenda behind that philosophy and realize that support for that philosophy is aiding and abetting their eventual loss of rights. Furthermore, other leftist ideas, like govt. regulation of everything under the sun, increasing taxation to pay for govt. expansion and income redistribution to the non-productive, and collectivism are also an anethema to most folks here.

Drjones
May 9, 2003, 01:10 PM
I do not think so.












Stop looking over my shoulder, Oleg!!!


;)

Boats
May 9, 2003, 01:15 PM
To some of the libertarians here, I am just slightly to the right of Karl Marx himself.:D

Seriously, if one is going to be "somewhat contrarian" to the "mainstream" on any forum about anything, a thick skin is required.

You don't see agricola running away forever do you?

OF
May 9, 2003, 01:46 PM
I have found that people often confuse argument and debate with having their right to free speech infringed. It drives me nuts. I especially love it when people spout off and then try to cover their butts by saying 'hey man, that's just my opinion and I'm entitled to my opinion!'

Yup. And I'm entitled to whack you upside the head for being a moron.

Get over it.

Now take someone like Ag. Ag has cojones and the courage of his convictions. He hasn't been run off the boards, far from it. When he's not around, everyone wonders where he went and waits for his return. He gets lambasted everytime he opens his mouth, but that's to be expected. The membership here is overwhelmingly more conservative than Ag. If he didn't like it, he's free to leave. Yet he stays and is welcome to for as long as he likes. Same goes for everyone.

As for 'agreeing' with the membership being a requirement to hang out here, it's obviously not. But don't expect everyone to hold hands and say 'oh, we disagree but isn't that what makes life grand?'

If you don't want to discuss, don't open your yap on a discussion board. Duh.

- Gabe

Skunkabilly
May 9, 2003, 01:50 PM
Between Twoblink's anti-Beretta and anti-Canon rhetoric, if this were my board, he'd be loooong gone :D

grampster
May 9, 2003, 02:04 PM
Personally I like to see other opinions. When someone puts something out there that I think is without merit, I am forced to think about why I feel that way. That is a good thing. If I choose to, I can debate that opinion. Sometimes when I do that, I reveal myself for the moron I am at times. I did that recently when I forgot to re read a post and got the story twisted up in my mind and made a foolish comment.
Reading differing opinions will also reinforce the correctness of ones own opinion. It is refreshing to see someone take a position that I disagree with and bury themselves deeper with flawed reasoning.
From time to time, I even modify my beliefs when I see a reasoned back and forth by a group of folks that, even tho I don't know them, have come to value the opinion and facts they bring to the discussion.

THR is a wonderful forum for discussion and learning because at the drop of the hat one can observe or join in with a weighty or frivolous conversation. Ya can't just do that anyplace else.

grampster

Mike Irwin
May 9, 2003, 02:05 PM
Suppression of dissent is MUCH different than someone not having the testicular fortitude to go into, and stay in, the proverbial lion's den.

A prime example of someone who does have that capacity is Agricola.

No, I don't like his stance on some issues. In fact, I think he's flat out wrong.

I'm certain he feels the same way about some of us.

But have we repressed his dissenting view? I think not. He's free to make his arguments as long as they abide by the stated forum rules, just as we're free to make our counter arguments as long as they abide by the same rules.

Agricola gets high marks from me for his ability to carry on a point-counterpoint discussion.

No matter how wrong he is. :D

Oleg Volk
May 9, 2003, 02:19 PM
I heard from Malone very recently by email -- he wasn't complaining of oppression at that time. Our friend Manny Goldstein is also well and has been seen on THR recently.

SkunkApe, what was that about the opposition to the war? We've always been at war with Eurasia, don't you know...


:evil:


Edited because everyone knows we've always been at war with Eurasia and no one else.
:evil:

agricola
May 9, 2003, 02:22 PM
bah a pox on you ;)

If anything the most annoying thing being from an opposing standpoint is having people new to the debate ask for answers that have already been given before - it harms the flow of the debate.

Leatherneck
May 9, 2003, 03:12 PM
I think some of the more liberal posters in the past have deserved the criticism they got...rapidly and from multiple THR members...by failing to defend logically and by veering off-topic when challenged. Agricola doesn't do that.

Logic analysis coupled with conservative values can seem really oppressive to some libs.

TC
TFL Survivor

Croyance
May 9, 2003, 03:24 PM
I would say that this board is more libertarian than conservative, though a liberal may say otherwise.
The fact that other members respond to a posting is not repression. Kicking out members or deleting posts that go against the beliefs of the moderators is repression.

Feanaro
May 9, 2003, 03:35 PM
THR has never, as far as I know, suppressed liberals. They might be blasted by some THR members but no one has to leave unless they break the rules.

Drjones
May 9, 2003, 04:31 PM
Just like with the Bimbo Chix and all the other celebrity pundits:

Everyone has the right to free speech.

No one has a right to freedom from consequence for their words.

If you say something here and someone smacks you with facts, and if that bothers you, that is YOUR problem, not anyone else's, and is sure as heck is anything BUT an infringement on your freedom of speech.

Preacherman
May 9, 2003, 06:00 PM
Little do you know that I'm noting every thread and forwarding it to the Inquisition... Torquemada, Torquemada, wherefore art thou Torquemada?

:evil: :D :neener:

Gray Peterson
May 9, 2003, 06:17 PM
I was thinking how we haven't seen much of Malone lately, and was going to ask for him, when I remembered someone's remark on another thread recently, to the effect that anything less than rock-ribbed conservatism isn't tolerated here. Fella said that those who don't toe the line get tired of being bashed, and just leave.

Oh horsecrap. :)


See sig below. :D

DRC
May 9, 2003, 06:21 PM
I use to be a moderator on a board where the original premise was to allow open conversation on a variety of subjects. Debate was allowed and arguement was allowed as long as it did not get out of hand and we mods were incharge of making sure things did not go that far. It was great, but the Admin was "moderate" (read-liberal) in his views and would pander from time to time. As time went on and the mods became less relied upon, since the admin worked the board exclusively through his sponsors after being uprooted fro his job, the board became a liberal meca and still is for the most part.

Dissent on that board is not tolerated at all. I had the admin take me off as a mod and left it to the rest of them. If politics comes up and it even looks like it might possibly get out of hand the thread is deleted (most of the time by the admin) We use to have to go look in the recycle bin every time we signed on just to see what else had been pulled then spent most of our time arguing with the admin about his reasons for pulling a thread or post. It was bad.

This board allows things that I never thought it would. Nothing out of hand mind you but there are some threads where information has been given that would have been pulled in a heartbeat on the other board just because "it sounded like it was getting personal." I've seen very little personal attack on this board but have seen some threads get heated because of posters convictions but that's fine and THR seems to feel the same way.

I also use to frequent another board that catered to those that had been around for a while. If you were new to the board and had a different opinion or idea about something that went against something the core group said, you were attacked personally on the board and through e-mail and removed from the threads. It was pathetic. Several folks on that board even called the mods and admins on the appearence of favoritism toward long time posters and they admitted it was true and even said it would continue to be that way. That's when I left there as well.

This board is tolerant of idea exchanges and debate which is rare. That's not to say that everyone agrees on everything but most find no problem with disagreeing and defending their position in a fair and adult manner, which is unfortunately rare.

I think I'll stick around for a while.

DRC

sm
May 9, 2003, 06:27 PM
Preacher: cha ching something for the coffers my friend ;)

Dissent: I like what gramster posted...in fact I've been taking more note of your posts.

Actually I've always been referred to as a rebel by some family, co-workers...because I don't see eye to eye with them.

It's nice to be around like-minded folks. I find such folks here at THR. I have learned and will continue to do so. people here can back up and cite sources. I appeciate that. Granted it may re-enforce why I agree, or disagree. Then again I have found myself re-thinking and soul searching my views.

It is also interesting to note cited sources, to get a feel of why one feels the way they do. Enviromnent, family values, religion,politics, economics.

We have members brought up in anti-families for example,many changed to pro-gun because of quality discussions ( civil, cited sources, ...)thats just part of what THR is here for.

Hkmp5sd
May 9, 2003, 07:53 PM
I think that instead of dissent being suppressed, it's primarily that few members are in disagreement on the various controversial topics. There are probably 200:1 in this category. When someone voices a drastically different point of view, he is going to get a bunch of posts against that position and maybe only one or two in favor.

People tend to want to associate with people that agree with them. So the dissenters either dig in an fight like Agricola does or they simple don't bother to frequent the forum and go elsewhere. Unfortunately, these threads tend to deteriorate into a name calling free-for-all and get locked. The dissenter then believes it was locked because of his different viewpoint when it was actually locked due to violation of the forum rules.

For an example, go to one of the anti-gun or democrat boards and voice your opinion (if you can find one that doesn't kick you out automatically). Even though your opinion is obviously the correct one (since everyone here is always right :) ), banging your head against the wall gets old fast.

mons meg
May 9, 2003, 07:56 PM
Hey, we allow BOTH kinds of music here...

Country AND Western!


:)

Intune
May 9, 2003, 09:17 PM
Just send them all to the Ministry of Love! 4 is 5. Just read that book again last week Oleg. Still resonates with me, maybe more now than ever. Makes one think, hmmm.









:scrutiny:

Ryder
May 9, 2003, 09:33 PM
Left wing this...
Right wing that....
Libertarian... Blah blah blah

What about us anarchists???? :evil:

SodaPop
May 9, 2003, 09:42 PM
anything less than rock-ribbed conservatism isn't tolerated here.


NOT!

Mizzoutiger
May 9, 2003, 10:03 PM
If those people with contradictory politics can't handle the criticism of their ideology, perhaps they should re-assess their values.

What kind of politics do you really expect on a gun forum anyway?

QuarterBoreGunner
May 9, 2003, 10:13 PM
And for of the reasons stated so eloquently by the previous poster, is why I’ve enjoyed THR so much in the short time I’ve been on.

Zombies, giant bugs behind clocks, invading aliens/chupacabras and the never-ending saga of Skunkabilly to attain ‘consummate carbonfiberousity’.

But also some of the most literate and well thought out examples of critical thinking I’ve ever seen on line. I still post (rarely these days) on Plastic.com and MetaFilter.com, but find myself posting more and more on THR; why? Well it’s not ALL about the guns and 2A topics but that’s a lot of it.

And I suppose the general sense of congeniality and respect; I’ve yet to see any poster flamed beyond some good-natured ribbing. Yes we may disagree on some things, but we can do so in an intelligent manner.

There is no ‘party line’ to toe other than to keep the posts on topic, and I like that.

You’ve seen my picture in threads; what you didn’t see was the earrings in both ears, the various other body piercings, all the black leather and the collection of odd music.

Am I a freak? Why yes… a gun freak.

gburner
May 9, 2003, 10:35 PM
I have learned more from Agricola and Malone than I have learned from more like minded posters. Though I vehemently disagree with much of their points of view, I relish their input.
Otherwise its like preachin' to the choir.


PS...if Skunky put charcoal in his metamucil, could he get more carbon fibre??????? :D

amprecon
May 9, 2003, 10:39 PM
Disagreement and dissent is the natural order of mankind. That's why communist congregate together and capitalists congregate together.

People like classes and classifications, order, security in being surrounded by others with the same ideals.

America probably has more classes and classifications of people than any other people on earth, but have learned to tolerate the differences.

However, when one group takes it upon themselves to force-feed to their community their "ideal" society, it's mostly utterly rejected. It's up to the communities to decide which direction their communities take socially.

Where the "minorities", as I will call them, go to the courts and win and force their socialistic ideals upon their community is when it will most certainly breed hate and discontent.

So, in short, speak your mind, 'cause I wanna know where to put ya'. :scrutiny:

MeekandMild
May 9, 2003, 10:41 PM
I think thats just a rumor. If anyone was to get thrown off the board it would be me as I'm much more irritating than any sissified, government-aid-sucking liberal! Sometime I'm even more irritating than our Queen-loving, antifreedom pommie, agricola. (Hugs and kisses, Aggie! I've got a good movie pick for you, from the time when Welshmen still knew how to shoot, "Zulu" by Stanley Baker, starring Michael Caine.)

Seriously, what do they suppress? Off topic posts #1, posts which can be misconstrued as defamatory #2 and posts which are defamatory #3. Which does make my heart sad because I used to love the flame wars on alt.talk.guns

bad_dad_brad
May 9, 2003, 11:08 PM
Better worded as "Do some THR members suppress dissent?"

Yes they do.

I stopped regularly posting in the General Discussion and Legal and Political forums. You can't debate with an irrational person, and so I will stick with the subject of guns, thank you.

Too many folks on this board, who think, if you have a less than the right of Attilla the Hun ideas, brand you as a bleeding heart liberal. Who needs that? Not me.

God help a free thinking person that tries to make a point in these two afor mentioned forums. He or she get's shouted down with stupid little red faced animated cussing and flaming gifs. Yawn.

CZ-75
May 9, 2003, 11:44 PM
Too many folks on this board, who think, if you have a less than the right of Attilla the Hun ideas, brand you as a bleeding heart liberal. Who needs that? Not me.


If you can't defend those beliefs, then you made the right choice. :rolleyes:

Byron Quick
May 9, 2003, 11:51 PM
Huh, I don't post much on General Discussion or Legal and Political but conservative? Moi?

Personally, I don't see much difference between conservatives and liberals. They both want government to control my life...they just have real big food fights about the relative degree of control in various areas. YAWN.

But if I was going to suppress dissent, I'd be as likely to suppress conservatives as liberals for conservatives don't agree with me either:D

Malone LaVeigh
May 10, 2003, 12:34 AM
Malone may have left, and I don't miss him,Well, that's a good enough reason to stick my head in here every now and then...

Gee, I come over here to see if anyone's talking about the latest school shooting, and some folks are talking about me! I'm all choked up.

For the record, I have never felt the slightest bit supressed by the moderators on this forum. If anything, they have been a bit more tolerant of me than some others around here, and I expressed my gratitude to Preacherman and Oleg recently. I suppose it might be their version of affirmative action.

Actually, I used my own blowhard challenge that I'd stop posting here to give myself an excuse to get a life for a while. Seriously, I came here (TFL, actually) looking for technical information and got sucked in to the political discussion. It's been my experience over most of my life that people on the dissident political left are by far the most concerned with human rights and against government repression. I'm talking specifically about this country. Our labels of left and right don't really fit other countries, so don't bother with talking about various Stalinists, etc.

Being a gun lover since an early age, I also am aware how gun rights are a source of a lot of stupid repressive statutes in this country. Being disillusioned with traditional leftist positions, I thought I might find some kindred souls here. I also wanted to show some of the more doctrinaire right-wingers here that someone hailing from the political left might actually care about rights.

Anyway, this war thing has pretty much convinced me I've been wasting my time. I've seen that certain hard core libertarians may question authority, but most of the posters here do nothing to dispell the stereotype of the authoritarian right-winger. It's too bad, but I'm not going to waste much more of my time fighting it.

I'm convinced that when this government, in whichever of it's two guises, decides to crack down on our remaining freedoms, most of the "gun nuts" I've interacted with will NOT be among those I'll look to for allies.

Intune
May 10, 2003, 12:40 AM
I just have such a hard time putting labels on people. Left, Right, Lib, Conserv, hippy, straight, Goth. I am very Lib on some issues and very Conserv on others. Wanna see?

Death pen-yes

Abortion- 1st trimester yes after that, no

Seal Borders tight deport every ill found, apply legally, welcome.

Drugs-yes all. DUI-type test for drivers, not on job. What u do at home...

Prostitution-yes. Red light district only, checked by doc, no streetwalkers, no pimps. They earn it they keep it

Welfare-6 months or turn down 4 jobs offered you're out.

English is the common language. Stop making "allowances" for those who refuse to learn it.

Gun permits-none. You commit an intentional crime with a gun, severe penalty.

Flat tax- 15% if you make more than 15k annually. No exemptions or deductions.

Did I leave anything out? Other than being labeled certifiable... :eek:

Byron Quick
May 10, 2003, 01:27 AM
It's been my experience over most of my life that people on the dissident political left are by far the most concerned with human rights and against government repression.

They pick and choose, Malone. Which rights. Which governments are doing the repression.

I don't know how old you are, but before the demise of the Soviet Union, you durn well could not find an American leftist who would admit to knowing about Katyn Forest, the Gulags, or Stalin's crimes. And they darn well didn't criticize the Soviet Union or the rest of the communist camp about anything...would'nt have been demonstrating progressive thinking, don't cha know?

Your claim that I quoted-when compared with the body count racked up by the Left-is quite frankly nauseating.

Now you can make the claim that American leftists haven't killed anyone. Well, they've never had the chance. Give it to them-see what happens.

One thing's sure--they never broke ranks with the leftists that were doing the killing. Defended the butchers right down the line, they did. Claimed it was nothing but McCarthyism tactics being used in an attempt to besmirch the glories of socialism.

Drjones
May 10, 2003, 05:47 AM
Malone:

I understand totally what you are saying, and agree to some extent.

HOWEVER, the only example from my life that I can draw upon is my professor. (If you haven't read about him yet, I can give you the threads.)

He is anti-war and a total leftist.

He also mentioned in class one day how groups like the KKK should NOT have freedom of speech. :banghead:


Sorry Malone, but there goes your hypothesis in my eyes, as far as the experience I've had.

Furthermore, Malone: You claim that "people on the dissident political left are by far the most concerned with human rights and against government repression."

How do you explain the vehement anti-gun, anti-capitalism, socialistic/communistic agenda of almost all leftists? :scrutiny:

Drjones
May 10, 2003, 05:50 AM
They pick and choose, Malone. Which rights. Which governments are doing the repression.



Yep.


I am disappointed that so many people are so eager to pigeonhole others into "left" and "right" etc., etc., ad nauseum.


Heck, even I'm guilty. :(

c_yeager
May 10, 2003, 07:37 AM
Personally i have never noticed that this board SUPPRESSES opposing view points. Now some of the members of this board are not particularly tolerant of opposing views. And i have noticed that the moderators are more tolerant of criticism in one direction versus another but, thats to be expected. I have opinions that may not jive with that of the majority of this board. If i dont feel like debating them then i simply dont post them. Its as simple as that. I seriously doubt that the administration of this board would go as far as to ban users or delete threads because of opposing view points. It is there that the line is drawn for me. As long is it isnt crossed i see no problem at all with how this place is run. We are playing in someone elses sandbox here. Its up to them to set the rules. All i ask is that they follow the same rules that the rest of us do. And so far they have.

TheeBadOne
May 10, 2003, 07:58 AM
The moderators on this board are top notch and deserve much of the credit for THR for being what it is.
I've also noticed far less LEO bashing than was on TFL (less white noise to tune out). :cool:

NonServiam
May 10, 2003, 09:50 AM
Suppressing dissent? Nah, not even suppressing confusion ...

As in how confused us foreigners are about americans deciding to label each other "liberals" and "conservatives" and insisting on that they are not exactly alike :neener: Confuses me all the time. You all seem pretty conservative to me ... If you want to witness some _real_ leftist politics, I welcome you to Norway, where you can even come to the shooting range and meet some. They aren't quite right in the head, but other than that, they're pretty nice folks. Doing my best not to let them run the country, though.

I'll even introduce to some shooting, gun-owning pacifists too, I'm not if this critter exists in your neck of the wood :uhoh: . Weird and exotic specie, but as nice as they come.

Nah, THR is a pretty tolerant place. I like it alot. Wish there were a bit more of us foreigners, though. Might help you to get a more differentiated view of the outside world. I know at least that my changing view of americans is largely due to TFL and THR. Turns out, you're not like the guests on Ricky Lake at all! :what: Who would have thought that?

Oleg Volk
May 10, 2003, 10:03 AM
To paraphrase Heinlein, some people wish to impose their views on others and some don't. I consider myself closer to the second category, as my impositions on others are limited to the requirement that no one kill or subjugate another person except in self-defense, and that non-lethal externalities of behavior be actionable in court.

Unfortunately, as with every gun law, my requirements depend greatly on the definitions of terms (i.e. is abortion murder, is smoking outside but near another an externality, is a contract with a minor legal?) That takes us back to where we started.

MicroBalrog
May 10, 2003, 11:01 AM
As I point out then and again, I'm a proud, bleeding-heart liberal.

The only difference between me and Liberman is that I say we should close down ATF, sell their equipment to the citizenry and spend the resulting surplus cash on welfare programs. Seriously.

Nobody has suppressed me here yet.

agricola
May 10, 2003, 11:13 AM
I think its important to note that there is a finite limit to the patience of the mods on what is a private facility here and so some "suppression of dissent" could occur - though this is only really likely to be used by some troll as a specious excuse for his boot.

CZ-75
May 10, 2003, 03:58 PM
I've also noticed far less LEO bashing than was on TFL (less white noise to tune out).

Or valid criticism.

Anyway, this war thing has pretty much convinced me I've been wasting my time. I've seen that certain hard core libertarians may question authority, but most of the posters here do nothing to dispell the stereotype of the authoritarian right-winger. It's too bad, but I'm not going to waste much more of my time fighting it.

Yeah, that's right. It'll be okay with us when Bush jr. decides to sign the renewed AWB. :rolleyes:

Or take away Habeus Corpus rights even further with Patriot II. :rolleyes:

Or extend the wiretapping authority that Klinton and Reno asked for and Ashcroft got. :rolleyes:

About the only real difference between the left and right is how much money I get to keep and the things I can spend it on.

Please keep up the self-righteous assertions about the left and how much they care. Byron Quick has admirably pointed out the shortcomings of this line of thinking, but let me add that the "left"-leaning Stalin racked up a higher body count than the "right"-leaning Hitler. Mao killed around 30 million, if estimates are correct. Pol Pot killed 2 million. As things stand, the "left" has more than double the body count of the "right."

As to the left-in-this-country's guilt in the attrocities committed by their ideological fellow travelers overseas, the records that have come from the former USSR have proven the link between that country and the left in this country; McCarthy was right and Alger Hiss, among many others, was a communist agent. Pretty good indication they were blind and ignorant or just didn't care what was being done in the name of the proletariat.

The latest question is where do ANSWER and the World Worker's Party get their money?

WyldOne
May 11, 2003, 12:17 AM
Um, I'm some sort of lefty-ish type person, and I don't feel suppressed, repressed, or anything like that here.

On the contrary, I know full well that the staff and a lot of members will stick up for my right to argue whatever I want to (whether they stick up for my arguments, is a different question entirely ;)). And yeah, I've gotten bent out of shape before, but I get over it.

I just don't come here as much anymore 'cuz I'm so busy lately. :(

Mizzoutiger
May 11, 2003, 12:43 AM
Right, left; it's all relative. It's just one big spectrum, baby!

Zundfolge
May 11, 2003, 02:16 AM
The only things I've seen the Mods here suppress are off topic threads and the occasional "is it time to shoot the bastards yet?" thread (not sure I agree 100% with the suppression of the latter, but I do understand that we don't want this place to be someplace the antis can come and sample sound-bites to further their cause and claiming that we're all dangerous armed loonies).

Overall this place isn't an ultra-conservative stronghold. I see more honest disagreement with the conservative Republican establishment then many other gun forums.

roscoe
May 11, 2003, 04:55 AM
Another lefty here. I don't see any real suppression of liberal values, but there is certainly the assumption by quite a few posters that everyone is a conservative. I see a lot of "liberals are scumsucking, parasitic, anti-American . . . . " type comments. That kind of stuff that is normally not worth responding to, but it certainly does not raise the discussion to a higher level.

And I have also been the object of a few ad hominem arguments. But I think it is worth the occasional rabid dog bite to remind conservatives that all their assumptions are not always right.

Incidentally, it seems to me that a person for whom gun rights is the paramount political concern would be encouraging liberals into the fold. Plenty of liberals are on the fence with regard to guns, and they just need a little encouragement.

Byron Quick
May 11, 2003, 08:44 AM
roscoe,

Plenty of liberals are on the fence with regard to guns, and they just need a little encouragement.

I don't think you've really thought this through from the conservative viewpoint. Liberals? With guns. Consider the potential for this to convert conservatives to gun control...first it's liberals with guns, next it will be socialists with guns. When there's enough of them armed, they'll show their true color and declare the International...:uhoh:


It's a slippery slope and the domino effect all rolled into one.

On the other hand, if enough liberals bought guns, it could lead to the demise of the Republican Party...once Upchuck Schumer switched parties.

After all, conservatives and liberals are so similar that all types of nauseous alliances are possible in the right circumstances.


:D :D :D

Khornet
May 11, 2003, 10:34 AM
how's the new job?

I too came here for technical info, and found myself staying. And the forum I visit most is Legal & Political. I learn a lot. I also love a good debate, so here I am.

MeekandMild
May 11, 2003, 10:55 AM
Revisiting this thread, despite my impression they overdo some aspects of P.C. I do think that the mods do an admirable job of suppressing lines of discussion which would lead to advocacy of illegal and violent activities.

For instance, every now and then someone pops in wanting to know how to convert his M-1 carbine to an M-2 without paying the proper taxes and filling out the proper forms. Such discussion is purged in short order. You don't see very many users with siglines linking to porn sites nor do you see Klan recruiting like you do on some other gun sites.

This is as it should be. If there is an error I would rather it be in the direction of a little bit too quick on the delete button than a little too slow. I have had my feuds with some of the moderators but on the whole they do keep order.

Coronach
May 11, 2003, 12:59 PM
I stayed out of this one for a while, due to the potentially chilling effect of a Moderator responding on a thread about the Board quashing dissent. To say the least, it could be counterproductive. :)

Anyway, I think THR tries to keep the discussion as open as possible when the discussion is on-topic. On-topic is defined as dealing with guns and civil liberty issues. Off-topic issues are usually closed, and this is by design- we don't want to spend all of our time moderating a general discussion forum, and having to make policies that address posts on, say, religion, homosexuality, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, etc. Religion is a tough one because, lets face it, there is a strong religious component to the War on Terror, and the War on Terror has a massive impact on civil liberty issues. So...you have to let the nose of the camel under the tent flap, but there is quite a lot of hands-on modding to prevent the rest of the camel from following as well.

Thats my (unofficial) take on it. Do, continue.

Mike

Malone LaVeigh
May 11, 2003, 02:02 PM
Byron Quick:I don't know how old you are, but before the demise of the Soviet Union, you durn well could not find an American leftist who would admit to knowing about Katyn Forest, the Gulags, or Stalin's crimes. And they darn well didn't criticize the Soviet Union or the rest of the communist camp about anything...would'nt have been demonstrating progressive thinking, don't cha know?I don't want to go too far off topic, but let's just say I'm older than most posters on these boards. If I make it that long, I'll pass the big 5-0 in August.

Let's just say our experiences are very different. There was plenty of criticism of Stalinism among the left in the US, not too much before and during WWII, but a lot afterward, especially in the 60s. That's what the "New Left" was all about. I don't expect someone who wasn't close to the left in those days to know that. It's not a nuance you would have picked up from the mainstream media.

Drjones:I understand totally what you are saying, and agree to some extent.

HOWEVER, the only example from my life that I can draw upon is my professor. (If you haven't read about him yet, I can give you the threads.)

He is anti-war and a total leftist.Then I suggest you get a bigger sample.

I'm not here to defend the left. I meant to express that I have spent a lot of my life in alignment with a lot of leftist causes, but I am every bit as skeptical of leftist ideology as I am of rightist ideology. There are some true jerks on the left, and sometimes it seems most of them have made their way into academia.

Take comfort. School lasts a finite time period. After which you can probably look forward to working for a right-wing jerk.

I am disappointed that so many people are so eager to pigeonhole others into "left" and "right" etc., etc., ad nauseum.I'm continually disappointed at how many people seem to live up to the stereotypes.

But you're right, of course. When questioned in any depth, very few really fit ideologically into either side.

About the only real difference between the left and right is how much money I get to keep and the things I can spend it on.No, the difference between left and right is whether your money goes to the government or to big business.

roscoe: Incidentally, it seems to me that a person for whom gun rights is the paramount political concern would be encouraging liberals into the fold. Plenty of liberals are on the fence with regard to guns, and they just need a little encouragement.First, let me say we owe the right a lot in keeping the fight going for all these years. Like most leftists, I didn't really consider this a very important issue for many years. It still doesn't quite rank up there with the environment or civil rights for me. But if we're ever going to regain some of the lost ground on this issue, the movement has got to expand beyond the usual suspects. I don't mean any disrespect by that; you just don't win something like this without a broad coalition.

Which brings us back to the subject of the thread. The fact that there is very little suppression of dissent around here means we have a tool for building such a coalition.

Welcome back, Malone

how's the new job? Thanks, Khornet. The new job has me very busy and spending many hours in commute mode. Yes, I'm (temporarily, I hope) breaking all of my environmental ethics.

Well, I'm off to the Whole Earth Festival (http://wef.ucdavis.edu/) to pick up a tie-dye shirt and spend the rest of the day lying out in the sun listening to Utah Phillips, Baba Ram Das and a lot of good music...

Art Eatman
May 12, 2003, 11:47 AM
Ah, to back up 20 years and be almost 50! Youth! It's a pity it's wasted on the young!

Well, back to my Hank Williams CD...

:D, Art

Khornet
May 12, 2003, 12:48 PM
but my original question wasn't whether the moderators suppress dissent....it was whether the MEMBERS were intolerant of dissent. I still say no.

And Malone, I'm older than you, and you should listen to your elders. Forget Baba Ram Das. Timothy Leary's dead-didn't you hear that from the Moody Blues? Listen to Doc Watson, Guy Van Duser, Joe Pass, John Williams, Charlie Byrd, Laurindo Almeida. That'll put you right, brother.

Drjones
May 12, 2003, 01:22 PM
So...you have to let the nose of the camel under the tent flap, but there is quite a lot of hands-on modding to prevent the rest of the camel from following as well.


I just got the strangest and most vivid mental image of you, Runt, Oleg and Tam wrestling a Camel. :D :D :D :D

LOL!

Drjones
May 12, 2003, 01:27 PM
Then I suggest you get a bigger sample.

You took me out of context, Malone.

I went on to say this about my professor: He also mentioned in class one day how groups like the KKK should NOT have freedom of speech.

Please don't tell me you think I'm extrapolating his actions onto a whole group!

Regardless, I DO think his behavior is TYPICAL of the left, based on OTHER examples.

One that comes to mind is the video available for download from www.protestwarrior.com

It shows them at a San Fran protest, and documents quite clearly many, many protestors and even people who worked there, telling them "go away" and "this is our protest" among many other things.

2dogs
May 12, 2003, 03:03 PM
There was plenty of criticism of Stalinism among the left in the US, not too much before and during WWII, but a lot afterward, especially in the 60s

This would account for all of the movies from Hollywood that document the atrocities and genocide perpetrated by Communist regimes.

Let's see- Ah, uh, um........well can't think of the others- damn getting old.:rolleyes:


("Note that La-La Land cranks out countless movies exposing Hitler's evils, but the mass murderers Stalin, Mao, Castro, etc., always get a pass. "The Killing Fields" is about the only major Hollywood production revealing all the horrors of communism, though "The Deer Hunter" did manage to make "Hanoi" Jane Fonda fly into a hissy fit." Source: Newsmax)


But hey, Malone, good to see you back- no, really.:)

If you enjoyed reading about "Does THR suppress dissent?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!