Once, I was a liberal. Then I was a conservative. Now, I'm just myself, churning around, trying to keep my balance in this insanity, for myself, and for my children's sake. Thank you for this, and for all you have written. I find it indescribably uplifting to hear the honest thoughts of a thinking, caring individual outside the boundaries of political affiliation.
The problem is, the powers that be really believe everyone is a robot that can be reduced to algorithms in a finite state machine. That's what comes from being psychopathic transhumanist satanists... and that's the best of them.
My thought when reading this post - which has taken me a couple of hours as I couldn't digest it all in one straight read - is that I have no need of all of the stuff I try to take in that I subscribe to. I am thinking - no, feeling - it is time to begin checking email headlines and then letting them go. Much like eating only veggies before going on a full fast. I have three or four people whose posts I will hold close and savor and digest as I work my way through a totally confusing and tumultuous time that holds great promise of personal transformation, if I can only stick with it. Thank-you for being one of my tethers to Light and Love.
btw Tessa you should recycle more of these older pieces - your 2020 output is a goldmine and the first place I look when i need a good link for something important. just as relevant now as it was then.
"Political correctness" is language control. He who controls the language... Be nice, don't be insulting, use this word, not that one. Examples: don't say Black, say Afro-American (and never say Negro or); say Gay, don't say homo or lesbian. Don't say he or she, but whatever pronoun is requested. This is control by changing the language. Confuse and control. This is mind control, Fifth Generation warfare. As always, resist, do not comply. Don't be afraid to say screw you. You were born as an individual, not a group member. You cannot love humanity unless you love yourself (and what your say, think and do). Freedom is not conformity.
Just read this post of your now, don't think I was subscribed at the start of the 'Great Stupidity'...you hit so much 'right on'...predators always pick on the weakest don't they!
There are two kinds of people that start fighting someone of another race/political alignment/economic division. The first type is constantly being attacked, robbed, belittled, accused of harassment, etc. so they justifiably state the facts, a lot of their person problems are caused by the other side, and it is a fact. The second group of people join in, though they don't have any personal experience of the other side doing anything wrong, they are told that it happens, so they decide to retaliate and punish the other side for the problems they have caused their side. However, these are person problems, personal disputes, personal crimes. Everyone of that ethnicity/political view/financial situation has not committed a crime, but they decide to treat them all as if they are all responsible. One example, cops accused of singling out a particular race and dealing with them more aggressively. Another example, people attacking cops in various places because they assume that all cops are responsible for what a few cops have done wrong. Both sides are only partially right. There are lots of examples of people of a certain race committing crimes, and there are a lot of examples of cops misusing their power. You can't judge an entire group of people for the actions of a few people. If a parent abuses their kid, does that make it right to attack the next parent that you see? Of course not. I believe that we should come up with a punishment for people who are saying abusive things. Censoring them isn't the solution, instead, prove them wrong.
If someone says something offensive about all cops because a cop committed a crime, post a link to a video of that police officer being arrested, and then another link to a video where someone explains that his actions were clearly wrong and he received accurate punishment. Whatever you do, don't delete the persons original comment, but make sure that the link to those videos is displayed with a banner that says, "We will allow you to see this comment, but first, you have to watch these 2 videos." Now in the case where the cop didn't get in trouble and someone says something like "cops get away with anything." Post a video from a Judge that explains that the case currently has a court date, both sides will present evidence and it will be determined by a Jury of non-policemen that the policeman is either guilty of a crime, or he acted in self defense in a dangerous situation, but that decision hasn't been properly decided yet. And the decision will not be come to by cops, but by citizens after they have heard testimony and reviewed evidence. Then after watching that video, show them the hateful comment.
Without context people will just assume that they are being improperly censored, and demand their rights. But we can't censor everything we don't like on the Internet, so it would be better to give people the reply to a hateful comment before someone can read the comment. That will give them both sides of the argument and let them come up with their own conclusion based on a reasonable amount of information.
If the comment is too general like "I hate...", then the moderators would ask the person to come up with a specific example, and post a link to a video or article of why they hate that group of people. Then the moderators can add that information to the post. "To read this comment, first watch these two videos, the first one is what this person was talking about in the comment, and the second video is the legal action done because of the crime committed in the first video." It would probably also be a good idea to require them to log in to read the comment with the warning "this comment refers to something not suitable for anyone under the age of 18, please log in and confirm your age before you can read it." After that, then you can show them the 2 videos before letting them see the hate speech.
In the case where there were several cops standing around and one was holding down someone, and after several minutes that person died of asphyxiation. So a Judge who is acquainted with the case should make a video where he explains that a court decision was arrived to and everyone determined to have been breaking the law have been put in prison. The information about their sentence is in the public record, and the location of the public records is obtainable if you go into a police station and ask about how to get a hold of the public records. That way anyone that had a problem with that incident couldn't right say "Cops get away with murder". Because when the moderators asked why he said that, he gave that as an example, and then the moderators contacted a qualified Judge who was willing to make a statement.
You don't have to delete their comment. Show people a video proving that statement to be false, but deleting what people say is like controlling the past. You make it seem like his statement never existed, and it calls into question what other things you are hiding. Are you making comments that prove you wrong disappear? If you aren't hiding anything, then don't delete comments. Show everyone what is happening to correct the situation, or if it has already been corrected, show them that their statement isn't true. If what they say hasn't been corrected yet, and no one is even trying to fix the situation, then if you delete their comment, you are part of the problem. You refuse t even acknowledge that there is a problem, and you are defending the criminal by deleting the comments of people trying to tell everyone that something wrong has happened and the criminal got away with it.
In the case of a kid who points a bb gun at a cop, and he tells the kid to put down the weapon, and then opens fire and kills the kid. You have to show them a Judge who explains that the thing about guns is that they kill people, if the cop didn't tell the person waving around a deadly weapon to put it down, he might kill someone. If the cop was required to walk over to a criminal who appeared to be holding a gun, take it out of their hand, look at it thoroughly to confirm it wasn't just a bb gun, and then tell the person to put it down, the cop would probably be shot several times and the person could go on to shoot a few more people. Any specific cases involving a cop shooting a kid with a gun could also show a video where a kid who was 12 years old brought a gun to school that he painted to look like a plastic water gun and then shot a few people. Ask them what they would do if a kid pointed a plastic water gun at them? Would they be willing to bet their life on it being just a toy gun? Sure, 99.9% of the time it is just a water gun, but 99.9% of the time when a cop says "put down the gun", the criminal actually has a real gun.
We will only solve problems when we have a conversation, censoring people will make them think that we are siding with the person who committed the crime, and it will make other people think that maybe the person was censored because the crime was being covered up. Do you believe that their comment is a real gun? Or is their comment only a water pistol? When you censor people, will they think you are pointing a water gun at at? Or will they mistake it for a real one? Don't just wave around censorship, and please put it down before you hurt someone.
Political correctness is now removed from my life forever.
Men are Men and Women are Women whether any of them have illusions about the sex they were born with. Femail actresses are ACTRESSES - not Actors! Femail cricketers are Batswomen - not 'BATTERS'! It's all utter stupidity to try to placate the fragile WOKE society.
Let's all get back to reality and let the self-marginalised misfits endure the perverse lives they have chosen. Pity is no reason to create a new WOKE language or terminology for anyone or anything!
Let's all get back to reality and promise - The next Scamdemic will be a massive FAIL! We will not comply, nor recognise the stupidity that decimated our nations with Covid insanity.
Bill Gates has already predicted that "The next one will make them pay attention" as though he's 'in the know' about such sinister schemes.
Never again!
Mick from Hooe (UK) Unjabbed and ready to fight dirty!
Once, I was a liberal. Then I was a conservative. Now, I'm just myself, churning around, trying to keep my balance in this insanity, for myself, and for my children's sake. Thank you for this, and for all you have written. I find it indescribably uplifting to hear the honest thoughts of a thinking, caring individual outside the boundaries of political affiliation.
The problem is, the powers that be really believe everyone is a robot that can be reduced to algorithms in a finite state machine. That's what comes from being psychopathic transhumanist satanists... and that's the best of them.
For me, this site is the best thing on the internet. Thank you Tessa.
Love your music, too.
My thought when reading this post - which has taken me a couple of hours as I couldn't digest it all in one straight read - is that I have no need of all of the stuff I try to take in that I subscribe to. I am thinking - no, feeling - it is time to begin checking email headlines and then letting them go. Much like eating only veggies before going on a full fast. I have three or four people whose posts I will hold close and savor and digest as I work my way through a totally confusing and tumultuous time that holds great promise of personal transformation, if I can only stick with it. Thank-you for being one of my tethers to Light and Love.
RESPECT (1967) Aretha Franklin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FOUqQt3Kg0
"just a little-bit, just a little-bit ..."
:-)
that matthew mayhew mea culpa you linked to here is straight out of a soviet show trial! just switch out 'communities of color" for "the heroic class struggle" or "the great leap forward" https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2020/09/29/author-apologizes-inside-higher-ed-article-he-recently-wrote-opinion
btw Tessa you should recycle more of these older pieces - your 2020 output is a goldmine and the first place I look when i need a good link for something important. just as relevant now as it was then.
Good evening Tessa, thank you for re-posting. Yes, very, very relevant & pertinent today 11-27-23.
I admire the content, and your style of writing. I feel I’m getting addicted to your writings. I mean a healthy addiction.
Love your comments, stories, and the way you express yourself! This one is especially gratifying!
"Political correctness" is language control. He who controls the language... Be nice, don't be insulting, use this word, not that one. Examples: don't say Black, say Afro-American (and never say Negro or); say Gay, don't say homo or lesbian. Don't say he or she, but whatever pronoun is requested. This is control by changing the language. Confuse and control. This is mind control, Fifth Generation warfare. As always, resist, do not comply. Don't be afraid to say screw you. You were born as an individual, not a group member. You cannot love humanity unless you love yourself (and what your say, think and do). Freedom is not conformity.
Oh I am soooo on your side, PC is a cancer in our society and I'll do anything to root it out......
Just read this post of your now, don't think I was subscribed at the start of the 'Great Stupidity'...you hit so much 'right on'...predators always pick on the weakest don't they!
There are two kinds of people that start fighting someone of another race/political alignment/economic division. The first type is constantly being attacked, robbed, belittled, accused of harassment, etc. so they justifiably state the facts, a lot of their person problems are caused by the other side, and it is a fact. The second group of people join in, though they don't have any personal experience of the other side doing anything wrong, they are told that it happens, so they decide to retaliate and punish the other side for the problems they have caused their side. However, these are person problems, personal disputes, personal crimes. Everyone of that ethnicity/political view/financial situation has not committed a crime, but they decide to treat them all as if they are all responsible. One example, cops accused of singling out a particular race and dealing with them more aggressively. Another example, people attacking cops in various places because they assume that all cops are responsible for what a few cops have done wrong. Both sides are only partially right. There are lots of examples of people of a certain race committing crimes, and there are a lot of examples of cops misusing their power. You can't judge an entire group of people for the actions of a few people. If a parent abuses their kid, does that make it right to attack the next parent that you see? Of course not. I believe that we should come up with a punishment for people who are saying abusive things. Censoring them isn't the solution, instead, prove them wrong.
If someone says something offensive about all cops because a cop committed a crime, post a link to a video of that police officer being arrested, and then another link to a video where someone explains that his actions were clearly wrong and he received accurate punishment. Whatever you do, don't delete the persons original comment, but make sure that the link to those videos is displayed with a banner that says, "We will allow you to see this comment, but first, you have to watch these 2 videos." Now in the case where the cop didn't get in trouble and someone says something like "cops get away with anything." Post a video from a Judge that explains that the case currently has a court date, both sides will present evidence and it will be determined by a Jury of non-policemen that the policeman is either guilty of a crime, or he acted in self defense in a dangerous situation, but that decision hasn't been properly decided yet. And the decision will not be come to by cops, but by citizens after they have heard testimony and reviewed evidence. Then after watching that video, show them the hateful comment.
Without context people will just assume that they are being improperly censored, and demand their rights. But we can't censor everything we don't like on the Internet, so it would be better to give people the reply to a hateful comment before someone can read the comment. That will give them both sides of the argument and let them come up with their own conclusion based on a reasonable amount of information.
If the comment is too general like "I hate...", then the moderators would ask the person to come up with a specific example, and post a link to a video or article of why they hate that group of people. Then the moderators can add that information to the post. "To read this comment, first watch these two videos, the first one is what this person was talking about in the comment, and the second video is the legal action done because of the crime committed in the first video." It would probably also be a good idea to require them to log in to read the comment with the warning "this comment refers to something not suitable for anyone under the age of 18, please log in and confirm your age before you can read it." After that, then you can show them the 2 videos before letting them see the hate speech.
In the case where there were several cops standing around and one was holding down someone, and after several minutes that person died of asphyxiation. So a Judge who is acquainted with the case should make a video where he explains that a court decision was arrived to and everyone determined to have been breaking the law have been put in prison. The information about their sentence is in the public record, and the location of the public records is obtainable if you go into a police station and ask about how to get a hold of the public records. That way anyone that had a problem with that incident couldn't right say "Cops get away with murder". Because when the moderators asked why he said that, he gave that as an example, and then the moderators contacted a qualified Judge who was willing to make a statement.
You don't have to delete their comment. Show people a video proving that statement to be false, but deleting what people say is like controlling the past. You make it seem like his statement never existed, and it calls into question what other things you are hiding. Are you making comments that prove you wrong disappear? If you aren't hiding anything, then don't delete comments. Show everyone what is happening to correct the situation, or if it has already been corrected, show them that their statement isn't true. If what they say hasn't been corrected yet, and no one is even trying to fix the situation, then if you delete their comment, you are part of the problem. You refuse t even acknowledge that there is a problem, and you are defending the criminal by deleting the comments of people trying to tell everyone that something wrong has happened and the criminal got away with it.
In the case of a kid who points a bb gun at a cop, and he tells the kid to put down the weapon, and then opens fire and kills the kid. You have to show them a Judge who explains that the thing about guns is that they kill people, if the cop didn't tell the person waving around a deadly weapon to put it down, he might kill someone. If the cop was required to walk over to a criminal who appeared to be holding a gun, take it out of their hand, look at it thoroughly to confirm it wasn't just a bb gun, and then tell the person to put it down, the cop would probably be shot several times and the person could go on to shoot a few more people. Any specific cases involving a cop shooting a kid with a gun could also show a video where a kid who was 12 years old brought a gun to school that he painted to look like a plastic water gun and then shot a few people. Ask them what they would do if a kid pointed a plastic water gun at them? Would they be willing to bet their life on it being just a toy gun? Sure, 99.9% of the time it is just a water gun, but 99.9% of the time when a cop says "put down the gun", the criminal actually has a real gun.
We will only solve problems when we have a conversation, censoring people will make them think that we are siding with the person who committed the crime, and it will make other people think that maybe the person was censored because the crime was being covered up. Do you believe that their comment is a real gun? Or is their comment only a water pistol? When you censor people, will they think you are pointing a water gun at at? Or will they mistake it for a real one? Don't just wave around censorship, and please put it down before you hurt someone.
Political correctness is now removed from my life forever.
Men are Men and Women are Women whether any of them have illusions about the sex they were born with. Femail actresses are ACTRESSES - not Actors! Femail cricketers are Batswomen - not 'BATTERS'! It's all utter stupidity to try to placate the fragile WOKE society.
Let's all get back to reality and let the self-marginalised misfits endure the perverse lives they have chosen. Pity is no reason to create a new WOKE language or terminology for anyone or anything!
Let's all get back to reality and promise - The next Scamdemic will be a massive FAIL! We will not comply, nor recognise the stupidity that decimated our nations with Covid insanity.
Bill Gates has already predicted that "The next one will make them pay attention" as though he's 'in the know' about such sinister schemes.
Never again!
Mick from Hooe (UK) Unjabbed and ready to fight dirty!