I'm not sure you can ever give these morality knights a real wake-up call. A person that runs on emotion will, more often than not, reject logic when it does not satisfy that emotion.

They're going to have to actually want to see the truth before they will be able to see the truth.

Quote from: Töqi on February 28, 2017, 02:08:55 PM

Quote

PDP isn't a hateful sexist racist fascist bigot

Legitimately asking if you believe propagating the message "kill all Jews" is not an act of bigotry simply because it was meant to somehow be a joke, because it seems that those defending PDP would be more intellectually honest if they just admitted that something can be bigoted and in poor taste, but also an attempt at humor.

Quote

Is an act of bigotry defined by the propagation of a bigoted message or is it defined by the belief in that message?

There's an internal and external component. Belief in a bigoted message is internal, and expression of a bigoted message is external; they're mutually exclusive but often coincident. Felix may not be a bigot or hate Jews, but that doesn't nullify the effect of his actions.

And in regards to that 'propagation', Is Felix somehow promoting the message, "kill all Jews," if he does not believe in it?

Yes, obviously. His belief has nothing to do with how it's received by others. If you say to me, "I don't like you", whether or not you mean it I process that statement as an expression of your distaste for me. A Jewish (or otherwise reasonable, empathetic) person sees Felix's prank message of "kill all Jews" and likely interprets it as an offensive statement. Now the average PDP fan probably sees it and says something like, "that's not very nice but he surely doesn't mean what he said", and gives him the benefit of the doubt because he's a nice, likable, popular guy. But that doesn't really excuse any behavior.

Is it truly intellectually dishonest if someone does not define bigotry as showing a bigoted message to people, but rather they define it as actually believing in that message?

Yes, it truly is intellectually dishonest to redefine terms in one's favor to suit an argument.

Quote from: Töqi on February 28, 2017, 02:38:28 PM

Quote

Is it truly intellectually dishonest if someone does not define bigotry as showing a bigoted message to people, but rather they define it as actually believing in that message?

Yes, it truly is intellectually dishonest to redefine terms in one's favor to suit an argument.

I see where you're coming from with your answers to my other questions but this I absolutely cannot agree with. Bigotry is not an inherent phenomenon, it is subjective in nature and is defined according to the perspective of those that conceive it. We have generally defined it as we do with everything else for the sake of clarity and convenience in our society, but the nuance of bigotry is still subject to our own individual interpretations. I do not believe that someone who defines bigotry as requiring an actual belief in bigoted ideology to be interpreting that nuance outside of the bounds of reason and thus I don't think it's intellectually dishonest to judge an act according to that individual interpretation.

On one hand you identify bigotry as subjective to the offended party but on the other you state bigotry requires an actual belief.  Mental gymnastics abound. So when PDP paid some guys to hold a sign saying "kill all Jews" and then made a video about it, did he not believe that the sheer ridiculousness and offensiveness of the message was the punchline, like a poorly delivered rendition of the aristocrats joke? I'm really struggling to understand why his beliefs matter over his actions. The joke isn't funny if the message isn't inherently controversial. If he had paid two Indians to hold a sign saying "peanut butter sandwich", would any of this have happened? Obviously not. He clearly understood the inflammatory, and yes, bigoted nature of the joke.

My personal view of the situation is that the joke was a bigoted joke, but that shock humor should absolutely be allowed as I am an advocate of free speech, and that people should not conflate shock humor as evidence for an actual belief in bigoted ideology. There is noting wrong with criticizing his insensitivity to those that might be offended by his shock humor, but one should not try to paint a false narrative about who Felix is and what he really believes in as that is truly intellectually dishonest.

We're in complete agreement, then. As far as I've seen, nobody, including any journalists, have insisted he's a bigot, racist, or nazi sympathizer. Of course shock humor should be legal, but free speech includes the ability (and sometimes the responsibility) to criticize a public figure for making stupid and inflammatory statements.

It is not an act of hate. The intent is not there, if someone fails to see the lack of intent the fault lies with them. However, I would be more than willing to change my stance if Ben Fritz comes out and admits he himself is propagating hate with his jokes which are just as bad on his twitter channel. Why should certain individuals be allowed to get away with the same offense? There is a hypocrisy that no wants to talk about because it would destroy their own stance and absolve PDP of any responsibility.

Quote from: Töqi on February 28, 2017, 02:08:55 PM

Legitimately asking if you believe propagating the message "kill all Jews" is not an act of hate or bigotry simply because it was meant to somehow be a joke,

I have no idea who you're talking about, but it's awfully hypocritical to apply standards to one but not the other. You're clearly biased by your appreciation for Felix.

He criticized Felix for his offensive jokes stating it normalizes hatred against Jews.

Where? That isn't in the WSJ article.

What do people find when going through Ben Fritz's Twitter page? Two cubic fucktons of Holocaust jokes and saying it's okay to make racial jokes about black people.

Or, 3 jokes over the past 7 years, out of 20,000 tweets. And two of them aren't even jokes:
-One about Jews being adept at frying, after going to a Chanukkah party. Jews serve lots of fried food during that holiday to symbolize holy oil. It's not a anti-semitic joke, just a mildly humorous observation about Jewish customs.
-"my hard on is purely for Nazis" in response to a tweet suggesting he watch Man in the High Castle because of its twist on history. Okay?
-Paraphrase, 'jokes about black people are funny'. Okay?

It's incredibly hypocritical that you and the people trying to defend PDP (who has stated several times that it was offensive and wrong) by inflating other examples of offensive humor by public figures -- ya know, the same thing you're condemning? And that's not even taking into account that the WSJ article doesn't condemn Felix as a racist or anything of the sort, it just reported on the video. At least Fritz's tweets are jokes. PDP's prank is so unfunny that it was misconstrued as genuine anti-semitism.

Ben says Felix is a hero of Stormfront because their banner said it was PDP's #1 fan site

Where? Also, I don't really care about Fritz or any of the drama. Literally all I've argued is that the joke was 1) fucking stupid and childish, as well as an act of bigotry despite Felix clearly not being much of a bigot at all & 2) the apology video in the OP is insincere and infantile. Maybe Ben Fritz is a bigoted asshole too; that doesn't mean Felix is or isn't.

We're condemning the fact that Felix is supposedly held to a higher standard despite the fact that his content is pure shitposting. You're the one who said in the other thread that Felix's apology and claim about his own JOKE (and only an absolute idiot would think it wasn't a joke) is half-assed. I guess third time's the charm on apologizing? He can say he's sorry and still show the bullshit stacking against him.

And what reason does the WSJ have to bring up PDP's behavior a month after he posted that video? They were clearly after him, there's no other reason to bring it up. Also it's incredibly asinine to say Felix's joke can be taken at face value because it's "poor" yet it's a "legitimate" joke to make a comment on throwing Jews in a frying pan. That's a complete crock of shit; Felix's videos have been nothing but shit posts for almost a year now, anyone who is claiming his joke could be taken as serious is either incredibly stupid or is completely dishonest.

I'm not being hypocritical, it's perfectly okay to make racial jokes, they're fucking funny. But if you're going to make racial jokes, you shouldn't go out of your way to get someone in trouble for also doing it.

It's incredibly hypocritical that you and the people trying to defend PDP (who has stated several times that it was offensive and wrong) by inflating other examples of offensive humor by public figures -- ya know, the same thing you're condemning?

Quote from: Ian on March 01, 2017, 01:14:20 PM

yet it's a "legitimate" joke to make a comment on throwing Jews in a frying pan.

When did this ever happen?

Quote

-One about Jews being adept at frying, after going to a Chanukkah party. Jews serve lots of fried food during that holiday to symbolize holy oil. It's not a anti-semitic joke, just a mildly humorous observation about Jewish customs.

Oh fucking please, as if I'm going to believe that when he says making jokes about black people is okay.

Quote

held to a higher standard

Higher standard than whom? You keep framing it like the WSJ was out to get him. They reported a few paragraphs on the prank, and he repeatedly refused to comment. If you agree that the joke was stupid and childish, and that his apology was insincere and infantile, then I don't even know what you're arguing about. Go watch hbomberguy's video.#Invalid YouTube Link#

Everyone else? They cherry picked parts of videos out of context and sent them to Disney BEFORE going to him for comment. There was absolutely no reason for them to do so. What could they have possibly gained from doing this other than making a clickbait article behind two paywalls? They went after him because they have waning money and power and they wanted to bring down someone above them.

...Is it not okay to make jokes about black people?

When that same individual gets people released for the same reason and then refuses to comment on their own? It's incredibly dishonest.

Any source for the claim that they asked Disney to comment prior to asking Felix? Not that you've responded to any of my requests for sources of your accusations, nor that it even really matters.

How about Felix himself?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTCDfE_sKnM

Start at 3:35.

Because it's vital fuel to a fire. There is nothing wrong with making politically incorrect jokes, you see it everywhere. You see it in comics, you see it on TV, you see your friends making them, the only people who aren't allowed to make those jokes are politicians, Felix isn't a politician though, he's a guy who makes funny videos on the internet, he has absolutely every right to make politically incorrect jokes and make money off it.

Silencing Felix is setting a precedent that certain jokes can't be made, which is absolute bullshit; it's thought policing. The WSJ may not have any ill will in bringing him down (I don't believe that, but just maybe) but it gives the idiots like in the video I posted in the OP justification to start a censorship war. It's not only hypocritical because "It's only okay when X people do it" but it can turn into not even having to be offensive, it can be something that one simple doesn't like.

"PDP still doesn't get it" "The limits of Lol JK" one can not deny that the media is trying push a narrative that he believed this and try to defended himself with a "It's just a prank bro" when that is not the case. It was a REAL joke and they're trying to say "Well I didn't find it funny so it must be sincere" which is completely unfair. Is the person making the joke not allowed to defend the context? Just because a good number of people say they didn't find it funny doesn't mean it's still not a joke (especially considering a exponential amount of other people did find it funny).

He is a comedian that has been doing this for years, it's completely ludicrous to say him making a racial joke like this would be anything other than that. "Some people will agree with it!" So fucking what? We have been making jokes about Nazis since the war ended, it does more of a disservice to those beliefs than it does strengthen them, because everyone knows it's a joke as is Nazism. And that's such a weak argument anyways, that just mean every comedian that makes racial jokes are bad because some people will agree with those jokes as well.

Ian, why are you so heated over this topic?

It's clear you're not willing to discuss this reasonably and I don't intend to antagonize you with more responses.

C'mon ffs don't cop out like this, I was enjoying reading this discussion. Ian is heated but he's said nothing ludicrous or particularly unreasonable.

There does seem to be a different standard being applied to Felix by the media here. I've yet to see a barrage of negative articles attacking Matt Stone and Trey Parker, Seth McFarlane, or any other comedian for their shock humor. I'm sure there's been some random article or two about them but nothing of this intensity.

Turk, you are not antagonizing, Cindy is antagonizing, Dazarobbo was antagonizing, Verb tries to be antagonizing (but he's grown on me shockingly). I'm sorry if I came off as flamey but I fundamentally don't think it's fair that Felix should be punished for the actions of people that do the same thing he does, even if that may not be the intent of those individuals.

Felix is still making millions of dollars off Youtube, he doesn't care too much, but what frightens me is the possibility of this happening to someone that makes end meat off doing this. It's the potential damage that's worrying.