I wouldn't be surprised at all if this Thread got Censored,
and the person that might do it can't provide any argument as to
why or how they might justify their actions

As some one who has probably been censored more than most on this site, you must not have read AAC's constitution, or as it's better known "Terms of Service". Don't know how many times over the years I've seen the words, "this isn't a democracy" applied here. And they are well within their rights.

You don't have to like it, anymore than you don't have to post here.

 

Not only do private organizations have the right to censor, but very often they also have the responsibility to do so.

 

There's no such thing as a "responsibility" to Censor other People.
Responsibility must obviously include someone to be responsible to.
So, who's well being, or life, or property, is dependent upon
this "responsible" person Censoring others ?
Absolutely no one.

There most definitely is such a thing as "Cognitive-Dissonance" though.
This can very basically be defined as
repeatedly making up excuses for doing something that a person knows is wrong.
Wrong is defined, in this case, as doing something to someone else,
that they would not like if it were done to them.

Because,,,,Reasons.

This is also exactly how People who have been
Brainwashed act when they do, or say, something for no apparent reason.
They can't explain why they did it,
and they get mad, and even combative,
if you question them as to why they did that particular thing.
And, if they do it on a semi-regular basis,
they will insist upon rules that will allow themselves to
continue to do the same actions without being questioned about it.

Because,,,,Reasons.
.
.
.

 

I see that I have some ignored content. It’s my right to ignore posts that waste my time.

I’m certain that it’s ########, because I recently put him on my ignore list. There comes a point where value given is dwarved by bullsh*t given.

<<omitted… Not going to give in to temptation to start a p*ssing contest>> <<it is tempting>>

 

This ia an essay I wrote about 10 years ago which connects to part of this discussion: https://yaakov.me/anonymity.html

I think another force involved in this, which allows seemingly new levels of interpersonal conflict is a breakdown of consenus concerning social norms. You can call it “rudeness” but I fear that people who are persistently and shockingly rude don’t even have a foundation in “politeness” that would make their behavior rude. Instead they believe that ”truth” is their shield, and by “telling the truth” any sort of behavior is justified.

This, I believe, in turn, is an outcome of Dunning-Kruger fueled arrogance and the above mentioned effect of fringy Internet communities providing echo chambers which create and reinforce pockets of antisocial thinking and provide mutual reinforcement for the idea that it is justified by a “deeper morality” than the “sheep” understand. This is, of course, quite ironic.

 

and by “telling the truth” any sort of behavior is justified.

nowadays they like to call it "saying it as it is" ... which is a pathetic excuse for justifying their being boorish, vulgar, aggressive and rude.

 

This ia an essay I wrote about 10 years ago which connects to part of this discussion: https://yaakov.me/anonymity.html

I think another force involved in this, which allows seemingly new levels of interpersonal conflict is a breakdown of consenus concerning social norms. You can call it “rudeness” but I fear that people who are persistently and shockingly rude don’t even have a foundation in “politeness” that would make their behavior rude. Instead they believe that ”truth” is their shield, and by “telling the truth” any sort of behavior is justified.

This, I believe, in turn, is an outcome of Dunning-Kruger fueled arrogance and the above mentioned effect of fringy Internet communities providing echo chambers which create and reinforce pockets of antisocial thinking and provide mutual reinforcement for the idea that it is justified by a “deeper morality” than the “sheep” understand. This is, of course, quite ironic.

Excellent observations!!
I would like to add another "twist" to this .........

That "twist" would be the factor of the individuals "Conscience".

It might be argued that some percentage of the population has no Conscience,
it would certainly appear that way in many instances,
however, I don't think that this viewpoint creates a clear picture.

Many people have such an unconfrontably guilty Conscience that they
must, (in their estimation), "put on a front",
which, (of course), they feel they are not responsible for.
This prevents, (in their estimation), their transgressions from "being found-out",
the consequences of which would be worse than Death.

This "front" or "alternate identity" basically appears to take on a life of its own.
You are no longer talking to the "real person",
you are, in this scenario, talking to a fake Robot,
with zero-Ethics, zero-Empathy, and zero-Conscientiousness.

When You have the concept of this sort of situation,
as a possible model of the "personality" you are trying to communicate with,
it can sometimes save You a lot of confusion and wasted time.

Most often times, People that have fallen into this trap basically have "no Life",
and therefore try to gain some sort of semblance of a Life by living vicariously "on-line",
where no one will ever find-out who or what they really are.

This Guilty-Conscience, and the machinations that go along with it,
can be un-done, or repaired.
"Something can be done about it"

The first step is to find a way to be valuable to others.
When You find a way to help,
that is repeatedly proven to be valuable to other individuals
by way of those individuals expression of appreciation,
then do all You can to produce more of those same results.
Produce more value than You would ever expect to receive in return.
Do this in earnest, and you will be forgiven by others, (for being Human),
which may make it possible to forgive yourself.

Only people who are basically "good" have a Conscience.
Evil people have no Conscience.
Robots have no Conscience.
.
.
.

 

The breakdown of social norms is not just the "fringes". The divisionnis actively promoted. Think of all the special interest groups and the rising hierarchy of "priveledges"? It is no longer about looking at an individual, it is about tallying up your "privedge" and "disadvantages" and then deciding where each will stack up on the ladder.

I see a lot of empty posturing in real life also as many have no real understanding of WHO they are as individuals and are scrambling to find identity somewhere. And there are so many choices...

 

hi just'
Considering the breakdown of social norms, looking back over the short history of 'civilised' mankind, I would say we have never had a social norm.

All thru time we have had a structured , layered hierarchy, the 'haves and have nots'.

Sadly this is the way it has to be for humanity to function, survive and thrive as a group.

Every human I have met, has his/her agenda, which they consider should be the social norm.

E

 

"" The division is actively promoted. ""
Yepp,
nice to find someone who is brave enough to state what is obvious to many.
Be careful though, You might get labeled as
a Radical-Right-Wing "Conspiracy-Theorist".
BTW, that label was coined by the Clowns In America,
you can probably guess what it was designed to be used for.

"" I would say we have never had a social norm. ""
I agree completely.
The entire concept of a "Social-Norm" is to gain control over fearful or insecure People.
A "Social-Norm" "thing" is an effort to make People worry about
whether or not they are "sufficiently-right" in their conduct and speech to
"have the Right" to act indignant, or "offended",
when someone questions their actions.
Hilarious to think that any one would actually fall for this,
but at the same time, very sad.
It's Primary-School Peer-Pressure for grown-ups,
only it originates from nefarious unseen sources,
and is intended for control of the masses.
.
.
.

 

Deep thoughts, Yaakov.
Derp thoughts indeed.

 

This post made me think of where concept of ethics and morality stand now as people are able to do things without facing any punishment...

I do choose to believe best in people. For most, "agenda" is survival. Unfortunately though our society has evolved to reward those individuals whose agenda is manipulation for their own gain. This probably happened because it favored group as a whole in terms of reproductive sucess (need slaves), but there are better ways to achieve same goal (through cooperation).