President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[Bo Diddley]

This discussion struck a nerve with me. I have experienced trauma through verbal communication (with accompanying body language). I understand the desire to define violence narrowly, but I am trying to decide if I'm ready to accept it.

[Jeff Lebowski]

This discussion struck a nerve with me. I have experienced trauma through verbal communication (with accompanying body language). I understand the desire to define violence narrowly, but I am trying to decide if I'm ready to accept it.

It is not a desire to "define violence narrowly". It is a desire for the word to mean exactly what it has always meant. A desire for it not to be hijacked in a way that would lead to very bad outcomes.

[beefytee]

It is not a desire to "define violence narrowly". It is a desire for the word to mean exactly what it has always meant. A desire for it not to be hijacked in a way that would lead to very bad outcomes.

Well according to the dictionary it has already been hijacked.

VIOLENT Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster

4a
: notably forceful, furious, or vehement
a violent argument
a violent denunciation

[frank ryan]

Well according to the dictionary it has already been hijacked.

VIOLENT Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster

This is not some new or particularly controversial terminology.

If we are being so literal, you can't literally "cool," rhetoric because words aren't physical objects.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Well according to the dictionary it has already been hijacked.

VIOLENT Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster

That is an adjective. We are talking about a specific usage for a noun.

[Jeff Lebowski]

This is not some new or particularly controversial terminology.

If we are being so literal, you can't literally "cool," rhetoric because words aren't physical objects.

Oh brother.

And that is funny if you think this particular usage is not controversial.

[Maximus]

trump adding 100k fee to h1b. cool the president can just add fees whenever

[wally]

I cited the article in the Harvard news source and a link to the published research.

Maybe it is too simple a declaration, but then so is: "words are not violence."

Agreed. It is a dangerous idea. I disagree it is misleading. I agree there are actors that have acted as you suggest, and now they are having to reckon with their rhetoric. It is a slippery slope that we are not just witnessing from afar—we are on the slope and well into the slide.

I understand it smells like activist rhetoric. Again, current events are a reckoning. Again, maybe it is too simple a declaration, but then so is: "words are not violence." There is much more nuance and understanding required.

Yes, I brought it up because it is relevant to current events. More understanding is required. No where have I suggested what I have written offers justification for assassination. Charlie Kirk's murder is unfathomable. I am still struggling to process what occurred. There is no justification and seemingly no sense in it all. I am not a psychologist of any kind. I do enjoy reading research, derivative of my own research which focused heavily on the impact of strong emotion. I deal with a large number of young people daily struggling with their identity and sense of self. I have learned to be very thoughtful with my words, not out of fear of repercussions, but simply because I don't want to do harm—which at this point in time almost seems impossible.

Let me be more direct: if words can be violence (with some nuance) what should the government do about it?

[Copelius]

Let me be more direct: if words can be violence (with some nuance) what should the government do about it?

Nothing. The point of the 1st amendment is to ensure that the government does nothing in infringe upon life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness. Even if that that pursuit of happiness leads some to be real assholes by using words that cause others trauma. If the FCC's pressure had anything to do with Kimmel being fired, highly likely, Kimmel should back his truck up to the treasury.

[frank ryan]

Oh brother.

And that is funny if you think this particular usage is not controversial.

Why is it ridiculous if I disagree with you? You are pretty inflexible

[falafel]

https://www.npr.org/2017/10/27/56030...rvative-groups

if it’s BS, then it’s odd the IRS would apologize for doing something they didn’t do

Government agencies are well-known for issuing apologies for any wrongdoing.

[falafel]

Guns kill people. Diseases also kill people. Therefore diseases are guns.

Same logic.

Dude, these kind of false equivalences are below you!

[tooblue]

Nothing. The point of the 1st amendment is to ensure that the government does nothing in infringe upon life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness. Even if that that pursuit of happiness leads some to be real assholes by using words that cause others trauma. If the FCC's pressure had anything to do with Kimmel being fired, highly likely, Kimmel should back his truck up to the treasury.

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trum...kimmel-2132463

Donald Trump Says Late Night Shows Aren't Allowed to Mock Him

"All they do is hit Trump," he told reporters on Air Force One Thursday on the return trip from a state visit to the U.K. "They're licensed. They're not allowed to do that."

The current government is doing something—unprecedented and un American.

[frank ryan]

I have seen some MAGA influencers condemn Trump's bullying of Kimmel. Even Ted fucking Cruz. I found that encouraging.

Dictators hate satire. It's one of the most important tools societies have at their disposal.

[Maximus]

Embedded Tweet

bend the knee