JK Rowling Backlash

[Captain Crimson]

Nah, the cause is the exact same in both instances: self-important conservatives refuse to accept science and blame the Other for their problems in order to enrich themselves, rather than accepting that society has to take steps to help everyone lest everyone suffer.

We have a system of co-operations. It's called Capitalism, it works great. Best system to raise people out of poverty in the history of the world.

You trying to get a standup show on netflix?

You trying to get 100+ million people killed by supporting Socialism?

IMOO, I feel as if blaming socialism for the actions of corrupt leaders is perhaps a bit of a convenient scapegoat, same way the Nazis become a convenient political shield from those who want to commit the same actions, hence why Godwin's Law is a thing. Especially since socialism has many definitions. Don't get me wrong. I'm not a socialist, nor a Russian defender, yet neither am I a die-hard capitalist. I'm just pointing this out.

[Riedquat]

IMOO, I feel as if blaming socialism for the actions of corrupt leaders is perhaps a bit of a convenient scapegoat, same way the Nazis become a convenient political shield from those who want to commit the same actions, hence why Godwin's Law is a thing. Especially since socialism has many definitions. Don't get me wrong. I'm not a socialist, nor a Russian defender, yet neither am I a die-hard capitalist. I'm just pointing this out.

Godwin's Law is merely an observation (that arguments tend to end up with comparisons to the Nazis) rather than any statement of the validity of an argument. The Nazis are just a handy frame of reference in a discussion, of something that everyone (hopefully!) agrees is wrong. Using extremes in arguments is a useful tool when the point needs to be made that all the various positions are just points somewhere along a continuum, rather than there being an absolute, logically provable right and wrong side.

Where it goes wrong is when people attempt to tar by association ("The Nazis wore shoes, so anyone who wears shoes is fascist scum!")

[Captain Crimson]

IMOO, I feel as if blaming socialism for the actions of corrupt leaders is perhaps a bit of a convenient scapegoat, same way the Nazis become a convenient political shield from those who want to commit the same actions, hence why Godwin's Law is a thing. Especially since socialism has many definitions. Don't get me wrong. I'm not a socialist, nor a Russian defender, yet neither am I a die-hard capitalist. I'm just pointing this out.

Godwin's Law is merely an observation (that arguments tend to end up with comparisons to the Nazis) rather than any statement of the validity of an argument. The Nazis are just a handy frame of reference in a discussion, of something that everyone (hopefully!) agrees is wrong. Using extremes in arguments is a useful tool when the point needs to be made that all the various positions are just points somewhere along a continuum, rather than there being an absolute, logically provable right and wrong side.

Where it goes wrong is when people attempt to tar by association ("The Nazis wore shoes, so anyone who wears shoes is fascist scum!")

What I was specifically referring to was the psychological disorder termed as projection. Even the Nazis themselves went by this philosophy, to accuse the other side of what you're guilty of. Though I object to nothing you said, because I agree with it. I merely believe it is all too easy to look back into history with a critical eye and judge the issues back then with the benefit of hindsight. Not so easy to do for the trouble you are facing at the present. And to realize you're no different than all the people back then, whether they were good or evil. NOT that killing millions of innocent people is right, mind you, and I'd never defend state corruption and abuse to that level. But any attempts at understanding has to at least try and put yourself in the place of your enemy. And I find very few people want to do so. We live in an age where all information of human society is literally at your fingertips, and no one wants to put in the work to do a little bit of research. It's very telling.

[Riedquat]

I completely agree with you. Whether it's my observation or simply my bias (I seem to be significantly out of kilter on various opinions with most others!) I do find people are very poor at empathy (not to be confused with sympathy).

[Captain Crimson]

I completely agree with you. Whether it's my observation or simply my bias (I seem to be significantly out of kilter on various opinions with most others!) I do find people are very poor at empathy (not to be confused with sympathy).

Interesting. How would you define either of those? I also admit I perhaps have a hard time expressing myself. So please elaborate!

[Jonathan101]

Sympathy is about caring about other people.

Empathy is about understanding them.

You can care about someone without understanding them, and you can understand someone without caring about them.

There are multiple different types of Empathy- Cognitive Empathy, Emotional Empathy, Physical Empathy, Experiential Empathy, Intuitive Empathy etc

Some people are better at empathy than others, but there are multiple definitions of both empathy and sympathy floating around because people either lack knowledge of the subject or have their own definitions, or because they naturally prefer one form of empathy over the other.

Also, everyone uses projection, almost all the time. There are different kinds of projection as well- Positive, Negative and Neutral, as well as phenomenon like Projective Introjection (where you project onto someone so much they actually take it into themselves or act your projections out). Now does projection mean you are incorrect- in fact, it is easier to project onto someone when they appear to possess the traits we will put onto them.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

https://news.avclub.com/j-k-rowling-tweets-praise-for-stephen-king-deletes-it-1844206440?rev=1593461365648
Yeah not much gray area there for Rowling it seems.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Pretty unsurprising.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Pretty unsurprising.

Given events as outlined in this thread, I'd have to agree.

[clearspira]

I don't think you can get two greater (living) giants of literature than JK Rowling and Stephen King. Watching them duke it out is like Ali vs Frazier. (Maybe JRR Martin I guess, but I propose that in order to be considered the greatest, you have to actually finish your greatest series before you die for reasons other than being a lazy old man.)

Got to say though, I think Stephen King is going to stand the test of time better than she will. She will always be known as the woman who wrote the bestselling book of the 21st century, but she has royally f-ked her reputation as of late. And the funny thing is that it wasn't so long ago that she was the woke darling. Black Hermione anyone?