NationStates Jolt Archive


I can't remember, is advocating genocide OK?

Republica de Tropico
13-09-2006, 22:45
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=499608
Philosopy
13-09-2006, 22:49
It's not ok to advocate it, but this is 'I would support a genocide' as opposed to 'kill the x,'. In other words, it's a hypothetical, not a command.

I think that makes a difference.
Frisbeeteria
13-09-2006, 22:57
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11677842&postcount=55
Soviestan
14-09-2006, 03:26
I'm not going to argue the decision because frankly its pointless and I'm not a whiner. All I have to add was that I wasn't trying to advocate genocide, I was merely stating that I would accept it if things came to that. I apologise if this wasn't expressed in the thread.
Jocabia
14-09-2006, 04:40
I'm not going to argue the decision because frankly its pointless and I'm not a whiner. All I have to add was that I wasn't trying to advocate genocide, I was merely stating that I would accept it if things came to that. I apologise if this wasn't expressed in the thread.

Well, not exactly -
So if the population crisis gets to the point where what we have is threatened would you support a genocide of Africa? Because I have to be honest, its not pretty but I would.

You said if you felt threatened by overpopulation you would support genocide in Africa. That's not just complacency or ignoring it, but SUPPORT. It quite clearly advocates genocide unless the English word SUPPORT has changed meanings since the last edition of the dictionary. At the end of the post, you said "Those of us in the west need to start producing more children as well." Huh? You would support genocide if the world gets much more populated but white people need to get producing? You would encourage things to come to head by increasing the population and then support a genocide, not quite the same as saying you would accept it if it just happened to happen.
Soviestan
14-09-2006, 05:39
Well, not exactly -


You said if you felt threatened by overpopulation you would support genocide in Africa. That's not just complacency or ignoring it, but SUPPORT. It quite clearly advocates genocide unless the English word SUPPORT has changed meanings since the last edition of the dictionary. At the end of the post, you said "Those of us in the west need to start producing more children as well." Huh? You would support genocide if the world gets much more populated but white people need to get producing? You would encourage things to come to head by increasing the population and then support a genocide, not quite the same as saying you would accept it if it just happened to happen.

I'm not going to have a big discussion about why the west needs to produce more and others less with you in moderation. I was hoping to have such a discussion in general, however the thread was locked. As far as I'm concerned supporting=/= advocating. Supporting just means I would not mind or object if such an event took place. If I were advocating I would have said something like "kill all the Africans". But I didn't
Jocabia
14-09-2006, 13:31
I'm not going to have a big discussion about why the west needs to produce more and others less with you in moderation. I was hoping to have such a discussion in general, however the thread was locked. As far as I'm concerned supporting=/= advocating. Supporting just means I would not mind or object if such an event took place. If I were advocating I would have said something like "kill all the Africans". But I didn't

Support - 2 a (1) : to promote the interests or cause of (2) : to uphold or defend as valid or right : ADVOCATE <supports fair play> (3) : to argue or vote for <supported the motion to lower taxes> b (1) : ASSIST, HELP <bombers supported the ground troops> (2) : to act with (a star actor) (3) : to bid in bridge so as to show support for c : to provide with substantiation : CORROBORATE <support an alibi>

You use clearly falls under use 2a which is a synonym for advocate. Perhaps you should choose your language more carefully. You can have your beliefs, but you said you would advocate genocide if the world got too populated and then suggested that the West produce more children.
Soviestan
14-09-2006, 14:35
Support - 2 a (1) : to promote the interests or cause of (2) : to uphold or defend as valid or right : ADVOCATE <supports fair play> (3) : to argue or vote for <supported the motion to lower taxes> b (1) : ASSIST, HELP <bombers supported the ground troops> (2) : to act with (a star actor) (3) : to bid in bridge so as to show support for c : to provide with substantiation : CORROBORATE <support an alibi>

You use clearly falls under use 2a which is a synonym for advocate.
congrats, you can recite definitions.


You can have your beliefs, but you said you would advocate genocide if the world got too populated and then suggested that the West produce more children.

Yes, of course. This is about survival.
Upper Botswavia
14-09-2006, 15:41
You can have your beliefs, but you said you would advocate genocide if the world got too populated and then suggested that the West produce more children.


Yes, of course. This is about survival.

Having just flatly admitted what you have been trying so ineffectively to deny, might I suggest that you consider stopping this effort to have the last word before you dig yourself deeper into this hole?
Philosopy
14-09-2006, 16:09
Having just flatly admitted what you have been trying so ineffectively to deny, might I suggest that you consider stopping this effort to have the last word before you dig yourself deeper into this hole?
I'd second this, Soviestan. You've had a Mod ruling; trying to reopen the very argument that got your thread closed in General in the first place is likely to be seen as spam.

In all honesty, you've had quite a favourable ruling to a poorly worded OP. Read what Fris actually said:
The implied threat is non-specific enough to not generate a warning for the OP, but it's worthy of a lock. Restart it under premise 1 above if you want to continue this discussion.
Far from being punished for your thoughts, you have been invited to continue the discussion, albeit in a less provocative fashion. Why not take this ruling, go back to General, and start a meaningful debate, within the rules?
Soviestan
14-09-2006, 16:19
I'd second this, Soviestan. You've had a Mod ruling; trying to reopen the very argument that got your thread closed in General in the first place is likely to be seen as spam.
I have actually tried to not reopen this little debate, it was Jobacia who wanted to know why I have the position I have. The only reason why I posted in this thread was to explain why I started the thread that got locked.


Far from being punished for your thoughts, you have been invited to continue the discussion, albeit in a less provocative fashion. Why not take this ruling, go back to General, and start a meaningful debate, within the rules?
Because frankly I'm on thin ice with most the mods given my "colorful" past you could say under another name. So if a thread gets locked its more than enough for me to drop it all together.
Upper Botswavia
14-09-2006, 16:38
I have actually tried to not reopen this little debate, it was Jobacia who wanted to know why I have the position I have. The only reason why I posted in this thread was to explain why I started the thread that got locked.

You did reopen the debate by restating your premise as an excuse. Jocabia merely called you on it.

Because frankly I'm on thin ice with most the mods given my "colorful" past you could say under another name. So if a thread gets locked its more than enough for me to drop it all together.

But you haven't dropped it yet. You continue to justify your position through this thread.
Soviestan
14-09-2006, 16:42
You did reopen the debate by restating your premise as an excuse. Jocabia merely called you on it.

Christ what are you 4? I said my 2cents in my 1st post, I wanted it left at that. There was no reason for Jocabia to bring it up again.

But you haven't dropped it yet. You continue to justify your position through this thread.
stop, just stop.
Upper Botswavia
14-09-2006, 16:50
Christ what are you 4? I said my 2cents in my 1st post, I wanted it left at that. There was no reason for Jocabia to bring it up again.


stop, just stop.

Of course you did. It's called "wanting to get the last word in". And you seem rather irritated that I am not letting you have it.

I am done. This will be all I have to say on the subject... so if you must, you can respond and you will get the last word in. Bear in mind, doing so doesn't make your previous remarks any less wrong.
Soviestan
14-09-2006, 17:08
Of course you did. It's called "wanting to get the last word in". And you seem rather irritated that I am not letting you have it.

I am done. This will be all I have to say on the subject... so if you must, you can respond and you will get the last word in. Bear in mind, doing so doesn't make your previous remarks any less wrong.

Your fucking right I'm irritated, you don't seem to understand the word stop or drop it.btw, its not getting the last word, its explaining.
HotRodia
14-09-2006, 18:24
Continue your discussion of your personal situations and disagreements elsewhere, preferably not on this forum. You have email and telegrams. Use them.