Registered On: September 7, 2015
The nature of the internet is divisive, as is this forum at times. IA was confrontational in how he has worded himself here, especially regarding Laurence Fox, which drew ire.
I think it would have been advisable to tone down the rhetoric on a public forum, but I am not going to lose sleep over someone being called a bad term for political beliefs. I think Fox is a pillock and reserve my right to form negative opinions on people I disagree with. Unlike ethnicity, sexuality, biological sex and class political belief is not an inherent or easily controllable trait. Beliefs, no matter their persuasion (religious or political) should not be protected. Having negative opinions should be allowed without consequence. The alternative is to silence such opinion, which seems rather politically correct to me. Of course this shouldn’t stray into abuse and I do get the concerns over people feeling intimidated. However, I don’t think they should be intimidated by Fox being so derided.
The far right and far left deserve scorn, they both routinely deny genocide and atrocity and sow division among others. I am not going to feel bad about holding negative views towards them, nor others. Some beliefs can be damaging to a country, not everyone can get along. I would rather have a free country where we can freely express disdain towards others than one where we have to tread on eggshells not to offend beliefs. We are going to the latter these days, and not just among the left. The right don’t want to face mockery either. Nor do I want to stop people being negative towards my views. If they think I am a berk, fine, that’s their view (though don’t expect me to be cordial in return).
While what IA said could be seen as rude, harsh and unfair towards others it is not in the same category of racism where people are treated unfairly because of a trait, not a controllable.