Separating the merits of an idea from the people uttering it is simultaneously one of the most fundamental parts of progressive discourse and one of the most difficult, because we’re afraid that lending credibility to an idea gives credibility to bad agendas it’s associated with
-
-
-
Also I would extend this especially to Marxism, which although it has many flaws, opens up the possibility of a radical anti-capitalist critique which has a lot of merit despite certain extreme agendas it is associated with.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
What if you claim that Amy Schumer is funny? Is that acceptable in any level in any context?
-
Such blasphemies must be met with the guillotine.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
We mustn't forget that with rights come responsibilities. The right to FoS comes IMO with a responsibility to actively listen to, and process objectively what is being spoken, irrespective of source. FoS is only genuinely beneficent when we objectively and actively listen.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yes, you're right, but I don't think anyone thinks social justice is bad. They think "Social Justice" as it is supported by the far left is bad.
-
Many on the right genuinely think that it’s just natural and a person’s or god’s own problem if they suffer injustices
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
That's how the 1% has whittled away civil liberties to their non-existant nature
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Depends on definitions (social justice is a wild one, and can mean almost anything) but as usual, "like." Always nice to see u in my feed. Hope ur well!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.