the problem with america today - Page 10

BTW, that site is pretty slanted against the left and I wonder how you can accuse others of being biased.

Not sure who or which site you are talking about, but really, if the information is correct, I don't care what their political leanings happen to be. I am more prone to think I am an independent thinker, after all.

The biases become apparent with the intentional scorn, shaming or humiliation of the subject comment in an emotional and personal attack, by being critical and using subjective based criticisms from one's personal frame of mind. What can one expect is to be the desired result of such a discussion?

@GSD Admin. You said, "... it is morally correct." That leads to another discussion, as to what gives governance or politics, its authority. It will have to be a careful one, though, I think, because we should have a rule to keep that discussion secular, same as we keep church and state separate in our government. Otherwise, it will invite Shtal to ... well, you know what!

Left/liberalism = political correctness = Cultural Marxism, therefore any explanation of Cultural Marxism is going to be 'slanted anti left'.

'They' acknowledged the failure of multiculturalism but to this day are continuining with the destruction of western society;

http://globalcomment.net/articles/view.php?id=165

European leaders condemn multiculturalism for its "utter failure"

In February2011, British Prime Minister David Cameron launched a scathing attack  on 30 years of multiculturalism in Britain warning that it fostered extremism.

Mr Cameron said that public money should not be handed to ethnic groups who did not share British values.

 He called for an end to the 'passive tolerance' of divided communities and said members of all faiths must integrate into wider society and accept core values. His damning verdict came just months after German Chancellor Angela Merkel said that multiculturalism in Germany had failed.

Mrs Merkel said the so-called "multikulti" concept - where people would "live side-by-side" happily - did not work, and immigrants needed to do more to integrate - including learning German.

In her speech in Potsdam Mrs Merkel said that the approach to build a multicultural society “has failed, utterly failed.” – BBC 17 October 2010 The comments come amid rising anti-immigration

 

 

feeling in Germany. The debate first heated up in August of that year  when Thilo Sarrazin, a senior official at Germany's central bank, said that "no immigrant group other than Muslims is so strongly connected with claims on the welfare state and crime". French president Nicolas Sarkozy  joined the European leaders in condemning multiculturalism as a failure He told the French people: 'We have been too concerned about the identity of the person who was arriving and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him.' The president made the declaration in a TV debate  after being asked if the policy of encouraging the religious and cultural differences of immigrants was not working. He told viewers: “My answer is clearly yes, it is a failure.” 'If you come to France, you accept to melt into a single community, which is the national community, and if you do not want to accept that, you cannot be welcome in France. France has some 751 no-go zones. The French government labels them sensitive urban zones. But what they are are dangerous to whites and non-Muslims who enter. Some of the no-go zones function like micro-states, and are governed by sharia law. A leading French intellectual says it means where the police don't go, the firemen don't go and even the doctors and ambulances don't go, except if they have no other choice. He says that these parts of France are in the hands of drug traffickers, gangs and Imams. Muslims block the streets illegally for Friday prayers. French journalist and author, Alexandre Del Valle declares that the situation will lead to civil war Meanwhile the ruling class in Australia happily turn a blind eye to the dangers of multiculturalism. Maybe the ethnic and Muslim vote is so high in Australia that criticism of multiculturalism is past the point of no return. The greatest evil of multiculturalism has been the opening of the floodgates of Muslim immigration into Western countries, thus giving Islam a foothold in these countries, enabling its goal of implementing Sharia law via its “stealth jihad”.

No, the whole site is slanted against the left. Besides give me PC over fascism any day of the week. I would rather we use PC than derogatory/hurtful language. Like calling a woman the C word or a black person the N word. If that lines up with Marxism I guess I know where I would stand. I am sorry you feel your free speech is being infringed on. SMH.

PC = fascism

PC not = to insults

I think most here would object to derogatory/hurtful language. It should be everyone's preference. I don't think that idea is what critical theory and cultural Marxism is wanting to change about Western culture.

I can tell that you aren't understanding the bigger picture, but maybe some time to digest what all this information is trying to explain will give a better perspective. And maybe not, because well, it is a comfortable spot perhaps you are standing on, already. Doing the SMH thing, though, doesn't really help further the discussion, now does it?

You ignored my question, too, I noticed: "What can one expect is to be the desired result of such a discussion?" Hmm? It is related to your head shaking thing, IMHO.
 

Perhaps this article will help clarify what is political correctness ;

http://thetruthwins.com/archives/20-outrageous-examples-that-show-how-political-correctness-is-taking-over-america

The thought police are watching you.  Back in the 1990s, lots of jokes were made about “political correctness”, and almost everybody thought they were really funny.  Unfortunately, very few people are laughing now because political correctness has become a way of life in America.  If you say the “wrong thing” you could lose your job or you could rapidly end up in court.  Every single day, the mainstream media bombards us with subtle messages that make it clear what is “appropriate” and what is “inappropriate”, and most Americans quietly fall in line with this unwritten speech code.  But just because it is not written down somewhere does not mean that it isn’t real.  In fact, this speech code becomes more restrictive and more suffocating with each passing year.  The goal of the “thought Nazis” is to control what people say to one another, because eventually that will shape what most people think and what most people believe.  If you don’t think this is true, just try the following experiment some time.  Go to a public place where a lot of people are gathered and yell out something horribly politically incorrect such as “I love Jesus” and watch people visibly cringe.  The name of “Jesus” has become a curse word in our politically correct society, and we have been trained to have a negative reaction to it in public places.  After that, yell out something politically correct such as “I support gay marriage” and watch what happens.  You will probably get a bunch of smiles and quite a few people may even approach you to express their appreciation for what you just said.  Of course this is going to vary depending on what area of the country you live in, but hopefully you get the idea.  Billions of dollars of media “programming” has changed the definitions of what people consider to be “acceptable” and what people consider to be “not acceptable”.  Political correctness shapes the way that we all communicate with each other every single day, and it is only going to get worse in the years ahead.  Sadly, most people simply have no idea what is happening to them.

The following are 20 outrageous examples that show how political correctness is taking over America…

#1 According to a new Army manual, U.S. soldiers will now be instructed to avoid “any criticism of pedophilia” and to avoid criticizing “anything related to Islam”.  The following is from a recent Judicial Watch article…

The draft leaked to the newspaper offers a list of “taboo conversation topics” that soldiers should avoid, including “making derogatory comments about the Taliban,” “advocating women’s rights,” “any criticism of pedophilia,” “directing any criticism towards Afghans,” “mentioning homosexuality and homosexual conduct” or “anything related to Islam."


 

No one has told me what these Western values are. I think I have an idea of what people mean but I don't think they really know what they are talking about. What I mean is that these values, as expressed today, are not traditional but evolved over time.

Something to consider is that what are being called Western values are actually LIBERAL values. They don't exist because of the right-wing but in spite of it. It was the right which manufactured the lie that liberalism and leftism/communism were the same thing. Why? Because liberals, although against communism, believed that free speech (a liberal value) applied to them as well. Liberalism is not a left-wing philosophy. That's the right-wing trying to discredit liberalism, which it has always opposed.

If you are against liberalism you are against the Constitution and Bill of Rights. "All men are created equal" is the epitome of liberalism. The American Dream and social mobility are liberal values.

Those who equate Marxism and cultural Marxism with liberalism doesn't know much about Marx or liberalism. Marx was against liberalism. Liberalism emphasizes the individual and Marx was against that. The right is also against that as it believes that the individual is defined by his circumstances.

Something to consider is that historically, when a nation's government is taken over by a right or left-wing dictatorship one of the first things they both do is get rid of the liberal voices. That includes artists and writers. It also includes all of those liberal college professors who everyone seems to have a problem with these days. That includes the right and the left.

Now, some will argue that in today's usage, in America, that liberal and leftist are the same thing but that is because the right managed to get people to fall for their lies. Again, the right is against liberalism but they couldn't defeat it on its face, since liberalism is at the heart of our nation, so they instead got people to equate it with communism and the left in order to defeat it without having to actually come up against it.

And that's how the right manages to erode our individual rights.