1559
1560

OPINIONSnowden, in a tweet asking about censorious SJW's: An individual trying to limit speech at universities is interested in neither university nor justice. (twitter.com)

Meowsticgoesnya0018-1877-0794 3DS Friend code, remember to give me yours が 投稿

全 186 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]YESmovement 81ポイント82ポイント  (9子コメント)

Noticed #FullMcIntosh RT'd another Snowden tweet: https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/653708727502151680

If you want to protect your rights, you've got to protect the rights of others. Social justice is common sense.

Wonder when he'll RT this one??? ;)

[–]BeardRex 48ポイント49ポイント  (1子コメント)

The first sentence doesn't only apply to social justice. It actually applies to protecting the rights of your political counterparts.

[–]YESmovement 26ポイント27ポイント  (0子コメント)

Especially their right to speak, even if it involves calling women liars or saying they suck.

[–]Limon_Lime37k + 48k Knight Commander - Order of the GET 37ポイント38ポイント  (2子コメント)

That doesn't seem like he means that the form of social justice the SJWs use is right. I think he means that real social justice is common sense.

[–]YESmovement 16ポイント17ポイント  (0子コメント)

Of course it doesn't, only silly Joshy is thinking that.

[–]staytaytay 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

Agreed. Using SJ as a weapon to achieve other aims is not anything like SJ.

[–]TRUMPCENA 16ポイント17ポイント  (0子コメント)

McIntosh doesn't realize Snowden is advocating for supporting your opponents to preserve your own right to speak. It's hilarious.

[–]md1957 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I wouldn't be surprised if Ol' McIntosh starts dissing him for that. Then again, ideologues and professionals like him are rather found of exploiting Snowden and his actions for their own ends.

[–]LILwhut 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Honestly that's not SJW. SJW's don't want to protect the rights of others, only themselves and minorities/women.

[–]I3ut 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

As well as the right to those you disagree with having a public forum to state their view! Protect that right. Celebrate that.

[–]codeGrit 142ポイント143ポイント  (16子コメント)

That whole thread is so sad. It's all a variation of "But hate speech is bad!" followed by reasons why people like Based Mom shouldn't be allowed to speak.

What kind of state does your mind have to be in to think C.H. Sommers spits out hate speech?

[–]NixonForBreadsident 27ポイント28ポイント  (1子コメント)

What kind of state does your mind have to be in to think C.H. Sommers spits out hate speech?

Her sweet and calm demeanour probably reminds SJW's of their own level headed mothers whos rational explanations and understanding of the world led them to rebel from their upper-middle class pampered lifestyle.

Not, you know, much of a rebellion with their parents taking them to get their hair dyed and paying their rent, but they think it's rebelling.

[–]md1957 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

In a sense, she reminds them of what a sane feminism aspired to be. A sane feminism that they've helped silence with their megaphones.

[–]EdwinaBackinbowl 14ポイント15ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's all a variation of "But hate speech is bad!"

"Hate" and "Harassment" seem to be awfully broad terms nowadays. Isn't that a stroke of luck?

"We're not against free speech, just hate speech and harassment! BTW, everything you say and think is Hate and Harassment."

[–]Meowsticgoesnya0018-1877-0794 3DS Friend code, remember to give me yours[S] 60ポイント61ポイント  (7子コメント)

Besides most hate speech comes from the poor and uneducated. People who don't really understand the science behind gender and race and LGBT issues and stuff.

Anyone who wants to censor these people's free speech are targeting the free speech of the uneducated solely due to them being born poor and not being able to understand science well. If a poor dude thinks that black people are the issue because he grew up with racist parents and teachers, isn't it unfair to just call him a horrible person? Most anyone (there are rare exceptions though) would end up horribly racist due to that.

And yeah, then you have to consider what is hate speech in the first place. I don't think Sommers is hate speech, I think "Niggers should die" and "Kill all men" and stuff like that is, while those people may think "Kill all men" is a healthy expression but think Sommers is hate speech.

Just take a look at Russia's "gay propaganda" laws for why controlling speech and expression is a bad thing.

[–]faijeya 35ポイント36ポイント  (2子コメント)

Russian "gay propaganda" laws are an interesting illustration of all of this.

First, the federal law is of the "think of the children variety". I.e. it regards the minors.

Second, the regional laws (passed only in some subjects of the federation, and with different wording) allow the higher-ups to wash their hands: "Well, forcing them to change their mind would be undemocratic, you know?"

Third, these laws are red herring. The real thing is the 282nd article, for extremism and hate speech. It is routinely used.

So, why've you heard only about the gay propaganda laws? 282nd was installed in 90s, by liberal darlings wanting to ensure that the democracy is when only the right people have right to speak. So, criticizing it in media is out of question.

Well, now the unchangeable opposition makes feeble rallies about the changeability of the regime and routinely gets hammered by the same law their predecessors installed.

And that's exactly why controlling speech and expression is a bad thing. It inevitably will bite you too.

EDIT: I was somewhat off, 282nd was introduced in 2002, but by human right watchers.

[–]HipFlask83 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

That is very interesting. Do you have some liks and sources? I would like to read up on that!

[–]md1957 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

So much this. And it's incredibly ironic how some try to pass it off as "democratic."

[–]SeveredHeadofOrpheusFeminists lost the TERF war 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

People who don't really understand the science behind gender and race and LGBT issues and stuff.

I hate to tell you this, but the various "studies" departments that actually look at this stuff usually don't understand the science either.

[–]reversememe 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

The same state of mind that thinks SJW is a derogatory term for "feminist".

[–]Xzal 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

Eh its one of their tar brushes same with the whole "All Ethic focused people are Gootergabers" or "gamers are cishet missoupists".

SJWs are currently the masters of the strawman > projection playbook.

Edit; I did a letter.

[–]xternal7narrative push --force 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

When a thread goes bad it chills you, chills you to the bone...

[–]Cross_of_CoronadoSEA LIONING! BAM! 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'd only have four numbers for your to explain this.

[–]Roywocket 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I prefer to bring up Ayaan Hirsi Ali instead.

No disrespect to Sommers, but it is simply an easier fight to pick. The progressive rags have for a while being fighting a losing battle trying to make Ayaan Hirsi toxic. You quite simply make the "She is a hateful evil person stick" on her during the circumstance.

[–]SKELETORQUEMADA 59ポイント60ポイント  (3子コメント)

And then there's Andy Bechtel trying to diss Snowden by tying him to GamerGate.

[–]cheekybeeboo 28ポイント29ポイント  (0子コメント)

Haha holy shitballs... Snowden makes a totally innocuous comment about freedom of speech and this butthurt asshole does the typical Twitter douche move: "Unfollow!" Straight outta South Park.

[–]LividGGPartisan 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes. This man leaked secrets from the united states government so secret it made it clear that agents of the government routinely lied to the US congress.

But what's going to sink him - what's going to ruin him - is tying him to gamergate.

...

Honestly - tying snowden to anybody at this point doesn't make him look worse - it'll make whatever he's tied to look better.

[–]Logan_MacTwitter.com/Logan_910 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Gone...

[–]Wolphoenix 162ポイント163ポイント  (58子コメント)

Huehuehue

Quick! Someone link him the UNW report on "cyberviolence" and how the UN needs to increase surveillance of the internet! Then ask him what he thinks.

[–]BeardRex 85ポイント86ポイント  (1子コメント)

"I don't care if you exposed the Government's illegal domestic spying to the American public, your tweet is sexist and ostracizing" by Chris Plante

[–]Dranosh -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

I thought of the wrong Chris plante when I read that I thought the Chris plante show guy,

[–]MIGuy470 41ポイント42ポイント  (55子コメント)

I doubt he'd be very surprised. But then again, he's a former spy, he knows the UN has no teeth. Its a failed attempt at a World Government rooted in the immediate aftermath of the second world war. Its irrelevant, especially when such paragons of human rights like Saudi Arabia, South Africa, China and Russia are on the Human Rights Council.

[–]JonnyVegas22 25ポイント26ポイント  (52子コメント)

Are you saying Snowden was a spy? Is "CIA employee" now automatically "spy?" I thought he was just a computer analyst.

[–]NixonForBreadsident 17ポイント18ポイント  (1子コメント)

Is "CIA employee" now automatically "spy?"

I guarantee you that every CIA employee who isn't actually a spy will tell people they are a spy who works for the CIA.

[–]Simon_of_Belmonts 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

And every spy will tell you they are not a spy

[–]MIGuy470 13ポイント14ポイント  (1子コメント)

He had a diplomatic passport and worked under official cover, he wasn't non-official cover (or "illegal") and didn't work as a case officer so technically no, he wasn't a "spy" but its semantics if you ask me. He very well may have collected information to submit to an analyst as a secondary responsibility, maybe not.

[–]BigTool [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It really isn't semantics. Lot's of folks working for numerous agencies can get black "diplomat" or red "official" passports. You can even get either or both of those as a simple IT guy working for different agencies at US embassies or REOs. All those passports really do is get you immunity, allow you to not be searched at foreign airports, etc.

[–]SupremeReader 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

rooted in the immediate aftermath of the second world war.

Rooted in the second world war itself. It was the official name for the Allies since 1943.

[–]MIGuy470 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

True, but I was referring to the United Nations organization which came into being in 1945. The term goes back to '43 though, you're correct on that.

[–]interfacestillweird 24ポイント25ポイント  (2子コメント)

First comment:

@Snowden Even when it's hate speech? Are you familiar with the term SJW? (Hint: it's a derogatory way of saying "humorless feminist".)

Watch out, guys, they know our secret. We never criticize any of those funny feminists.

[–]Consider_Gravitas 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

I mean... I think pretty much all of the "famous" (be it internet famous or actual famous) feminists gg seems to regard with respect can also crack a joke. LiannaK, Sommers, Shoe...

[–]Supreme_Euphoria 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

But they're all internal soggynist MRAs!!!!111oneeleventy /s

No really, Sommers was called a MRA once.

[–]BSexclusionzone 17ポイント18ポイント  (1子コメント)

Unsurprisingly, SJWs reply with "but I hate some people with a passion for very good reasons!" and "We should be able to have a campus free of bigots (and it is up to me to decide who is a bigot)".

[–]cortex112 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

"good", "bigot"

That's why I hate subjective words.

[–]cawlmecrazy 40ポイント41ポイント  (11子コメント)

Jesus fuck.

Morton salt is about to go out of business.

snowden pls

[–]gekkozorz 13ポイント14ポイント  (0子コメント)

Look at the other tweets in that thread. It's begun already.

"B-but what about muh hate speech?"

Yes, when your side makes out all criticisms from your detractors to be "hate speech," it should most assuredly be allowed.

[–]godlikeGadgetry 16ポイント17ポイント  (8子コメント)

Fuck that, Salt mines will become extinct.

[–]ggburner23 11ポイント12ポイント  (6子コメント)

Hehe they're already turning on him! This is so stupid.

[–]godlikeGadgetry 6ポイント7ポイント  (5子コメント)

I know, it's crazy! continues to eat popcorn

...Want some?

[–]TheMasterOdric 3ポイント4ポイント  (4子コメント)

don't ask stupid questions and pass the corn already!

[–]Solace1 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

I bring the beer

[–]TheMasterOdric 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

I've been described as such, "you go through beer like a fish goes through water". So I hope you bring a lot of beer.

[–]Solace1 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

Belgian beer.
It might be a bit long for me to come if you life in the states, though

[–]TheMasterOdric 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Ha! For European beer I'll gladly fly out there, better then the stuff we have in North America by miles.

[–]xternal7narrative push --force 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think Twittler is due to be renamed to Salzburg.

[–]Dapperdan814 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

No wonder these people are so toxic. Too much sodium in the blood.

[–]JymSorgee 24ポイント25ポイント  (1子コメント)

The SJW replies. My blood pressure cannot handle that much salt

[–]TheMasterOdric 13ポイント14ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's like none of them understand what the hell freedom of speech means.

[–]rottingchrist 49ポイント50ポイント  (8子コメント)

SJWs quite dislike snowden. Something to do with white privileged techbro speaking against oppressed PoC president.

[–]YetAnotherCommenter 15ポイント16ポイント  (4子コメント)

Something to do with white privileged techbro speaking against oppressed PoC president.

And also because SJWs are Progressives and Progressives believe in a powerful, interventionist State. Snowden's revelations, however, caused an upsurge in anti-Statist sentiment, thus damaging the Progressive political project.

In addition, Snowden himself is a gun owner and I think his sympathies are more Libertarian than Progressive (the same is true of Julian Assange, whom they also hate).

[–]AMannerings 9ポイント10ポイント  (1子コメント)

Just read a post on Ghazi that indicates that they rather like Mr Snowden because he is 'Pro-SJ'. They also like Chelsea Manning (for obv reasons) and Aaron Swartz but dislike Julian Assange because he 'IS A RAPIST 4 REEL' and apparently Wikileaks panders to 'Gators'.

[–]RoboLegGamingWishes for flair. Perhaps some day... 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well, wikipedia hate them, they have a [page about being unaffiliated]

[–]CountVonVague -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

eh, most of the progressive-leaning people i know are generally anti-statists

[–]YetAnotherCommenter -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

That means they're Left-Liberals (or Liberal Leftists), not Progressives.

[–]anonveggy 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

I would really like to see some sources on that. People who know the context of gamergate acting crazy about snowden adressing it isn't = all sjws dislike snowden

[–]rottingchrist 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I saw in some SRS threads a long time ago, around the time he was still relatively big news. Before gamergate. Of course, it wasn't stated in such plain terms. But, you and anyone else is free to disbelieve if you like.

[–]md1957 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's imporant to remember that whatever one's views are on Snowden, he's seen by SJWs and Progressives as a useful idiot platform with which to megaphone their agenda, before throwing him to the wolves once they're done.

Something that McIntosh so demonstrates. And also what Greenwald milks under pretensions of fighting online surveillance (even while slandering free speech).

[–]qwertygue 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

I feel like Zoidberg was right when he said sometimes people don't know what freedom is like until they've experienced what it's like to have it taken away.

[–]HighVoltLowWatt 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

Heres a gem from his twitter feed:

And always, always, always have a backup plan for leaderless resistance. Spontaneous organization is the hardest for adversaries to counter.

[–]Newbdesigner 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Freedom Boner at full mast.

[–]Meowsticgoesnya0018-1877-0794 3DS Friend code, remember to give me yours[S] 36ポイント37ポイント  (17子コメント)

Don't let the SJW's take claim for the words of social justice and equality! They misuse the terms!

[–]Alzael 22ポイント23ポイント  (16子コメント)

No they don't.They use them just fine.It's just that the terms can be used in anyway that you want.

"Equality" for instance, is entirely dependent upon the criteria that you are measuring.That's why everyone says they want equality,but everyone has a different idea of it.That's why the KKK,Stalinists,Nazis, etc say that they want equality too. They do.They're just using different metrics and criteria.

That's what happens when you rely on meaningless bullshit terms like "social justice" and "equality".There is nothing that the SJW's do that is not entirely in line with the idea of social justice.You just don't like their version of it.But that does not mean they misuse the terms.It means the ideas of social justice are fundamentally shitty ideas.

[–]hasapoint 20ポイント21ポイント  (10子コメント)

The biggest difference between most SJW types and most people here on KiA is the definition of equality. Social Justice is all about equality of outcome, where individual achievements shouldn't matter in the end state. Most people, including most GG-ers, believe in equality of opportunity, where everyone gets a level playing field and the results they get are dependent on their skills and efforts.

[–]Dal_Gren 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes, this. Equality if opportunity? Yes! That laws and justice is applies equally regardless of <inherent characteristic>? Yes!

[–]Alzael 4ポイント5ポイント  (8子コメント)

One is just as meaningless as the other.

Equality of opportunity is still going to be dependent upon the way that you're measuring things.And is just as untenable.

What you really mean to say,it seems, is that everyone should have the freedom to pursue whatever they want to the best of their abilities.That's different from equality of opportunity however.A kid from the poor side of the streets who grew up in a broken home will never have the same opportunities to be president as the Ivy League trust fund kid who's parents bought his way into the best schools.

You can give both the freedom to try to the best that they are able,but you can't equalize their opportunities in life.And it's just as bigoted and tyrannical to try.

[–]hasapoint 6ポイント7ポイント  (6子コメント)

Equality of opportunity means there are no legal or structural barriers in the way of success. If you can only own land as a member of a certain class, that's inherently unequal. Ideally, schools and other early-life institutions would set everyone up equally to where at 18, all that mattered would be your choices. Obviously, it's impossible, but it's a noble goal.

[–]JonnyVegas22 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

That is how modern conservatism defines freedom and equality, i.e. Everyone is born free. That is not how modern liberal ideology sees it they believe that not everyone is born equal and there needs to be controls in place to even the playing field. Believe the first, Republican, believe the second, Democrat.

[–]Alzael 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

Obviously, it's impossible, but it's a noble goal.

Yeah.So is every other supremacist ideology. National Socialism was a noble goal too,on paper.

Feminism has a noble goal,on paper.So is the KKK's ideology,if all you're looking at is what they claim they want. But the devil is always in the details.

See here's what you're missing in what you just said.The only way to ever achieve the goal that you stated would be if you could exert control over everything.That's what you would have to do in order to create an equal society.You would have to control all of the possible variables.

Now obviously you can't do that in any realistic sense,but you still have to exert control over peoples lives if you even want to try and come close.Because it will only work if everyone goes along with it and has the exact same standards.

This is one of the things that started things going to hell in Russia.The farmers were all supposed to grow and farm equally,but some produced more than the others.Those farmers were then accused of violating the laws that were promoting equality and we're taken away.But those farmers had actually been feeding their less well-off neighbours who hadn't grown as much.The end result being starvation once they had gotten rid of the better farmers.

This is why "equality" is always the clarion call of a supremacist group.Because that's how it starts.It always starts with wanting to make things equal,usually for noble reasons. But because the term is vague and because there is no possibility of actually achieving it there is no end point.You just keep finding new inequalities and trying to fix them with more rules and control. Which is why it will always be tyrannical.Because it can't exist alongside giving people freedom.

[–]hasapoint 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I appreciate the effort but I feel you've gotten back to opportunity/outcome. There's a huge difference between an equal start and an equal finish. An equal start is, to me, as a utilitarian libertarian, a necessity to promote growth in society, the nation, and humanity. Equality of outcome is 999/1000 cutting down the successful in favor of the failure.

[–]SupremeReader 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

That wasn't quite what happened. The "kulaks" were those resisting collectivisation, that is giving up their lands and joining collective farms (kolkhoz) as employed state workers. The starvation was to punish the kulaks by exterminating their populations in selected hunger zones from which there was no escape due to internal passport system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXrqGlgufCA is an excellent lecture on it.

[–]faijeya -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Obviously, it's impossible, but it's a noble goal.

That's some pretty fucked up thinking. If it's impossible, it can't be a noble goal.

If there is no pass/fail criteria, your path will be long enough for the each and every best intention to be warped into a hideous mess.

Everything has an expiration date, ideals included. Declaring any goal noble enough to pursue it endlessly will turn you into a zealot. GamerGate Warrior, okay.jpg.

[–]image_linker_bot 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

okay.jpg

Feedback welcome at /r/image_linker_bot | Disable with "ignore me" via reply or PM

[–]dingoperson2 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I agree that equality of opportunity will depend on how you measure things - and that it has some inherent problems. But I don't think it is as meaningless as equality of outcomes at all.

Equality of opportunity even has an inherent contradiction - if you have equality of opportunity but not outcome, then different outcomes will result. And in the case of good outcomes accruing to some parents, we cannot reasonably block parents from using their outcome for the benefit of their child. So as soon as you have unequal outcomes, and freedom for someone to e.g. hire a tutor for their child, unequal opportunity exists.

And you're struggling with the concept of genes and "inherent" behavior and "free will". If Adam spends all day studying and Bob spends all day messing around, what part of that is due to their free will and choice, and what is due to chance and circumstance?

So that's the devil's advocate - it's not a clear concept at all.

But equality of opportunity isn't a binary concept. It's a matter of degree.

So provided the caveat that it's uncertain exactly to what degree some people "choose" not to take opportunities given to them, like schooling, I think it's possible to create more equal opportunities by raising the bar in the services provided.

For example, if everyone receives well-written study material, then it's less important that some may pay for slightly better material, because the difference is in any case small.

[–]ineedanacct 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

Social justice is the view that everyone deserves equal economic, political and social rights and opportunities.

That's the "official" google response to the query "social justice." That's what most of us are for. The SJW perversion is the Orwellian word game shit.

The KKK and Nazis didn't want equality at all, they specifically killed people they viewed as "lesser." I'm going to assume you're some alt-right loon.

[–]Alzael 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's the "official" google response to the query "social justice."

Which in no way refutes what I said.

The SJW perversion is the Orwellian word game shit.

How so?

The KKK and Nazis didn't want equality at all, they specifically killed people they viewed as "lesser."

They exactly did that.The Nazi and KKK believe that the Jews control the world and have advantages over others (or rather them).Thus they sought to fix such things.The end result of that was the Holocaust. Yes,they thought the Jews were lesser eventually.But they still felt that the Jews were in a more privileged position than them.They got to that position by being more duplicitous and deceiving the world into supporting and helping them.

I'm going to assume you're some alt-right loon.

I'm going to assume you have no knowledge of history, racism, supremacist groups, or ideology in general.

[–]Dal_Gren 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Sounds like you may referring to some groups that will change the meaning of words to fit their narrative.

[–]Alzael 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

They aren't changing the meaning of the words.The words are so vague that they can be used for whatever you want.

That's how religions like Islam,Feminism,Social Justice, etc work. They mean whatever the person using them wants them to mean and give the person a blank check to justify whatever they want.That's the problem with religious thinking,it justifies everything equally.

[–]ApplicableSongLyricWe provide... leverage. 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I still stand that the entire concept of Social Justice is cancer and at its core racist, ableist and sexist.

It bases half-hearted arguments and assistance based on what you're born as rather than the ideas you espouse and the mind you possess.

[–]TweetPoster 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

@Snowden:

2015-10-13 00:11:37 UTC

An individual trying to limit speech at universities is interested in neither university nor justice. twitter.com

[Mistake?] [Suggestion] [FAQ] [Code] [Issues]

[–]Millenia0 6ポイント7ポイント  (5子コメント)

Wow and now we're weaponizing Snowden? Damn, we've gone far.

[–]Consider_Gravitas 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Terrorist group with base on Mars, using cyberviolence and weponized charities as well as american ex-spies.

Guys, do we live in a comic or what? hail hydra

[–]anonveggy -2ポイント-1ポイント  (3子コメント)

What does that even mean?

[–]BinarySudoku52k Knight - Order of the GET 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

First we weaponized charity, now Snowden

[–]anonveggy -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Ah now I get what hes referring to

[–]Solace1 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's a joke

[–]enemyfallout 5ポイント6ポイント  (2子コメント)

A lot of salt about the term SJW in those tweets.

I’ve said this before but I remembered SWJ being used with pride but then the SJWs realised that everyone hates their guts and that the term SJW could be used to easily describe a lot of shitty behaviour so now the SJWs say that you are oppressing them when you say it or some shit.

We could use a few links with the recent history of the term SJW so when these lunatics claim harassment because of people using the term SJW then we can then point to them and say “Here you are full of shit, SJW is not a GG invention.”, that would be easier than having this argument every few weeks.

[–]newprince 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Lots of salt over SJW, but it's totally fine to call people fuckboys. Cuz that's punching up, or something.

[–]DangerouslyGoneAlone 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

When GG first started our constant cries of SJW made many in the anti camp self-proclaim as SJWs to attempt to reclaim a derogatory term. That has failed, so the term is bad again now. :D

[–]iandmlne 6ポイント7ポイント  (3子コメント)

snowden hasn't been murdered yet?

[–]PooOnYoureFoot 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

CIA most likely can't find him, or he's under heavy protection.

[–]Solace1 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

The CIA knows where he is, but 'extrading' him would be a mistake. USA have enough problem with Russia (hint : Syria) to risk such a direct violation of Russia's sovereignty

[–]Patq911 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I thought he was in moscow.

[–]Canuck117 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

inb4 /r/shitredditsays

[–]Dec3ptor [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Is this where all the sjw's hide now days

[–]spatchboIslamophobic misogynerd terrorist 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Hey AGG, ZQ, AS, BWU, and the rest of you. You're completely irrelevant because you feel that people shut be shut down and taken away from expressing themselves. I hope you guys like the rest of your lives filled with people mocking you for your lunacies.

Snowden is pointing out the main point about why we are AMERICANS. We have freedoms. Be that you think you can intimidate people not to have those freedoms. You become more like the enemy of the state than you do as the heroine saving the day.

Sad sad, progressives. Never understand how they alienate the rest of the liberal demographic. I'm glad I'm a terrorist. I'm glad I'm a misogynist. I also am glad that I don't really give a fuck about you people. Ya wanna know why? Because I have a job and a life outside of this keyboard. Something that seems to be surely lacking in your lives. I don't feel bad for you, I just laugh and keep playing these damn video games.

The cucks are running wild brotha!

[–]letumblrfaec[🍰] 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Have fun going through the users that favorited the posts crying about "SJW" being used. There's a few doozies to take note of.

[–]usul1628 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Oh boy, the FSB agent running the Snowden account must be having a great time with this

[–]GOU_NoMoreMrNiceGuy 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

nice. was on his side before. glad he's on mine.

[–]criticalJenn 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

In the end it comes down to this: if we actually want what is socially just, we don't need fanatics, warriors or brigading dickheads, but we need educated people with backed-up opinions and a sense for reasonable dimensions to their application.

We need thinkers and people with empathy, not a codex of evil. If we just go on demonizing everything forever, we'll never get anywhere that is actually "socially just".

[–]KarzanGilgrikssonCited by Based Bokhari 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

God dammit, Snowden. Don't make me like you.

[–]morzinbo 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Uh oh...quick! nobody tell greenwald!

[–]dan4daniel 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I just can't understand these people that think that words can actually do you harm.

[–]Skragzilla 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

If they wanna give us Snowden, fine. We've already got Assange, may as well have them both.

[–]Shower_Handel 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Scissorhands here is right but first reply completely misses what he's saying.

[–]theHangedGod 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

This isn't even an opinion

[–]da_wicked_witch 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

Hmm, yet, he seems to side with the SJW's?? Perhaps they've gotten to him as well...

Snowden, in a tweet about social justice: "If you want to protect your rights, you've got to protect the rights of others. Social justice is common sense."

https://twitter.com/snowden/status/653724738280386561

[–]BaddoSpirito 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

He's talking about what social justice really means. Not what SJW lunatics pretend it means.

[–]RSGV7 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Get rid of "social," keep the "justice." "Social Justice" as a term is too loaded these days.

[–]Wulfgar_RIP 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Now we know that he is traitor and terrorist. Only bad people oppose SJWs

[–]JTVega 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I would rename them to S.U.I Social Useful idiots.

[–]abacabbmk 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Those responses are hilarious. Someone who actually matters in the world just shit all over SJWs in one glorious sentence.

[–]VusterJones [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

SJWs and a lot of other feminist types have a very not so narrow view of what constitutes "racism, sexism, homophobia, antisemitism, islamophobia, and other forms of discrimination". Anything critical of them or what they believe is assumed to bigoted. Hell even using incorrect pronouns or saying hi to someone on the street would fall within that in the eyes of some of them. Colleges don't exist to tell you what you want to hear, they are there to make you think and see things differently. You don't have to accept what others are saying and you can totally ignore it, but the entire point is to expose you to different viewpoints. Even if said points are "wrong" by some standards it is still academically advantage to understand how others use their reason to come to different conclusions and to come up with ideas that are different from your own. Now this doesn't mean we have to allow the Westboro Baptist Church to speak at a school, but having controversial speakers is good for the conversation.

[–]Noodle36 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The replies are a nightmare. "No I don't think you understand. These people are saying things I don't want them to say." How did we get here, where so many people are literally incapable of understanding the basics of the free speech compromise?

[–]Akihirohowlett 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Equality and free speech doesn't protect or or people and things you like, it protects people and things that you don't like.

[–]LogicalDebater 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

To be fair this also applies to Julie Bindel. We can't champion this as a win without literal radfems doing the same.

[–]DangerouslyGoneAlone 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Radical feminists deserve the right to speak and get ignored like everyone else.