@newtboy

Oh, absolutely, the video is poorly titled. I'll give you that.

But everything else you wrote is, for lack of a better term, uninformed.

Certainly commercial meat suppliers in first world countries like the U.S. have bowed to the "politically correct" demands of PETA to "humanely" kill animals. Poultry are knocked unconscious (with electric shocks) before having their throats slit while larger animals like cows are killed with a single shot to the head. Concern with how "humanely" the animals are killed is rather comical given the conditions under which most commercial animals are bred and raised, but that's an issue for another thread.

Now, if you think stuff like this video doesn't happen in places like the U.S. I'm gonna guess you don't realize what happens on typical farms where people raise livestock for their dinner table as opposed to commercial sale. People kill animals exactly in this and similar ways--slitting their throats, beheading them with axes, grabbing poultry by the head and breaking their necks, etc. Don't believe me? Check out this thread on how to kill a chicken. What happens in this video happens across first world countries, including the U.S., on a daily basis. Your shock comes from the fact that modern society has insulated you from the killing by hiding it from you.

Now, the people in this video are probably not living in a first world country, and we've already established that even if they were the animal would likely be butchered in a similar way if it is being prepared for personal use as opposed to commercial sale. They're most likely doing it the way it's been done there for hundreds if not thousands of years using the tools available to them to get the job done. Slashing the carotid artery is the fastest and most painless way (compared to other methods) to kill the camel. I can't think of a faster or more painless way other than shooting it in the head (which still risks ricochets and assumes personal gun ownership is legal in the country where this is happening).

Seriously?!?
Did you forget to click sarcasm, or do you deserve my downvote?

EDIT: In case you're serious with "How do you fight political correctness?"... Ignore it.
Keep in mind there's a difference between being non-PC and being a smarmy douchebag, and publicly being a douchebag under the flag of being 'non-PC' doesn't protect you, it just hurts the non-PC 'movement'.

Man, how is this even an issue in this day and age? The PC crowd at the university campuses can do their thing, and the Mac crowd can do theirs.

(Seriously, totalitarian dictatorships are much less dangerous than political correctness, because you can fight totalitarianism but how would you ever fight political correctness? Between myself and Anne Frank, I'm actually the real victim, because she had the chance to fight the nazis, but I don't even get to call people faggots D: )

Sadly, political correctness prevents liberals from pointing out the fact that most of their conservative oponents are stupid lunatics.

Yeah that was quite bad.. I am not a big fan of beeing overly political correct but this looks like a first year student film to me. Very badly written.

Oh, I am blunt, alright. A lot of people dont like that, because actually they feel attacked since they see those people I criticize in themselves or how they support them with their passiveness. Plus I am very good at figuring out people, analyzing them. Thats what I dont keep silent about either.
It was not an ad hominem attack, because I offered facts (which got ignored with an excuse of ad hominem), and I actually tried to explain why they react how they react.
I havent seen anyone deny anything I said about them. And thats the point. I dont care if hes pissed off now. If hes open and objective he will think about what I said, even check those facts for himself and maybe one day will think that I was right all along. Or not, and hes a lost case, and in that case me being friendly towards his ignorance wouldnt have changed anything. I learned that friendliness (PC) only plays into the hands of these people. I know these people because I was like them once and had friends like them, was part of their "society". It buys them time, it makes them look less despicable than they actually are, it makes people ignore whats really going on. I am sick of sugar coating, newspeak. This has brought us to where we are. Its nothing more than lies. Read 1984 for some insight on how horrible this PC and newspeak already is. Smart people predicted all this. But nobody ever listened to them.

You know, I wasnt much different than these guys here once. I didnt want to believe all this stuff, or only partly. I tried to put it out of my mind with excuses like "stupid conspiracy theorists" or "these are just rare exceptions" or "nobody could have ever predicted it" and used mainstream media sources to make myself feel better if someone told me the harsh reality which I didnt want to accept, and yet knew deep in me that he was right.
I learned from those discussions. They werent pretty, but in the end those guys were absolutely 100% right, even though back then I hated them with a passion for telling me that straight to my face with no friendliness at all, because they saw that I supported this shit.
I didnt lose that passion, but I learned a lot from that.
I am disgusted by my former self when I now think back, how I supported this absolute human scum, how I let them use me as a tool, with their PC ways, lies, corruption and shiny things that are just gold coated turds.

I dont owe anyone an apology, who talks absolute bullshit, lies.
I owed those people an apology for what I said when I was like him. When I spewed out massive ignorance towards them, only to protect myself. And I actually apologized to them later, in the cases where I could still find them.

But yeah, its a waste of time. I said what I wanted to say. Trying to discredit everything or parts of what I said just because I wasnt politically correct, making myself a target for these irrelevant rhetorics (actually excuses) is the problem we have. "OMG he called me a bad thing! He must be a bad person! Nothing he says can be true! OMG! YAY! I CAN JUSTIFY IGNORING HIM NOW!" Do you even see the hypocrisy in that, calling my "attacks" ad hominem? Its funny, the term Whataboutism follows pretty much the same logic "OMG, he exposed my hypocrisy, so what do I do now! Oh right I am sure there is some rhetorical crap I can throw at him to discredit him! No... damn... Well then I simply invent it and call it... Whataboutism!! Yeah!" Thats how it was born. Not even I was that way back then. I thought about what those people said, even if they got really mad at me and called me MUCH worse things than I called people here. I never cared about how they said it. I cared about what they said, even though I didnt realize it back then.
So yeah. Accept it or dont. If facts cant penetrate ignorance, nothing can. Sugar coating it wont change a thing. Ignorant people are ignorant. And now I sounded like MJ in South Park. "Thats ignorant".

A few people say logical and reasonable things that should be the solution. But they are few, donthave much power and a lot of those few also are hypocrites, who wouldnt do that if they actually had the power, because they would need to go against political correctness, corruption and other archaic ideologies.

I am starting to believe that we are damned to have neocon and similar people in power, let them dictate our lifes, let them incite wars all the time and keep the population dumb. Look at history. For thousands of years exactly this has been the case. Nothing has changed, even though those guys of course claim it.

Funny that you mention it. (I'm baaaack.)

Notice how the first words from the host are a smug, preemptive remark about the recently departed officer who *ahem* "was by-the-way African American".

Then immediately they show two older black mans to confirm the FauxNews Agenda (you know, like the Gay or Black Agenda but for real)

Black Lives Matter is calling attention to the exact "hypocrisy" you're "pointing out" with your - OMG. BLACK ON BLACK CRIME STATS ARE AN ACTUAL CONCERN OF MINE BUT NOT THE BLACK COMMUNITY FOR SOME REASON - Bullshit.

Because what you'd said before {Republi-tards figured out that being Politically Correct is the only way for them to be politically popular, that is} is something along like lines of..

Black are sub-human and incapable of anything but savagery, so of course they'd killed each other.

So EITHER.. you're feinting concern for Black on Black Crime

OR.. {Ahem. this one} implying that black people are too shitty, stupid and fuck up to even approach the civil Republican Bastion society Right-Wing Talk Radio has sculpted in your mind.

p.s.- I know I'm yellin' at crazy person, guys. And sure.. that makes me crazy too.

But he's just such a relentlessly ignorant c__tbag. .. I mean. FauxNewsTalkRadio.. is.. bag.. of c..stuff

insane, back when I was in highschool there was no cops/guards/etc

We even had a smoking section, and guns could be brought on campus.

For smoking section you just needed a letter from parents that they knew you smoked. and on recess the smokers all hung out there.

To bring gun to school, it was during any hunting season. You had to have note from parents that they know. The gun had to be visible, either gun rack in back window of truck or in passenger seat. Rifles and Shotguns only no pistols.

You had to have your Hunter's Safety Course card, Your Hunting License both on you to give copies at office.

You had to leave your vehicle keys with the front office and submit to random vehicle search of the hunter's vehicles only.

So while everyone could go to their cars at recess, or if you had extra empty elective, some of us juniors would drive up to Hardees before lunch and grab fast food then be back before 4th period started, but the hunters had to leave their keys with front office and they could not retrieve them until end of school.

So much more freedom.

Smoking was banned on campus for students only my 10th grade year, but Teachers had the smoking lounge in building. There was a teacher's lounge on each hall, the back hall F where weight lifting, welding, home ec, and vocational classes were was where the teacher's smoking lounge was. Most students friendly with teachers could sneak in there and smoke anyhow.

crazy times.

I had a 84 Camaro and kept a flare gun under seat my dad owned a boat and had couple extra flare guns. So I had that for some crazy reason thinking if someone attacked me, at point blank range I'd put on a huge firework show


Then there was the stereotypes that were proven right not wrong.

The jocks hung out together, the headbangers/smokers hung out together, the nerds, the band folks like me as my senior year I was drum major
and the blacks stayed together all in separate cliques at lunch and recess and before/after school.

stereotypes even went further.

the only highschool girls with babies (during time I was there I stress) were black girls, they had to build a daycare from the old mechanic shop behind the highschool for them. And even though this was the early 90s in the south, you'd hear over the Intercom every 6 months "All Black female students to gym at this time please" where they'd get lectured on abstinence, or condom use, and std's and such.

the only time rest of the student body went through that was in 10th grade they'd take the boys one day, and girls the next day.

We had a blast though as the guys, the protection/std talk was given by one of the football coaches, and during the talk with the guys and showing various "shock images" of std's on penis on the TV, when he got to the "sex ed" portion, he flipped in a Nina Hartley porn intro where a nude Nina Hartley showed the correct way to place a condom on. haha was hilarious looking back before "political correctness" went out of control.

I loved highschool and college.

Graduated high school in 94, got associates in 96, took year off then got bachelors in computer science in 99.

But 89-94 (our highschool here in the deep south is 8th through 12th) most are 9-12, but not here. It's still 8-12th here. So it's nothing seeing 12th graders dating 8th graders. Freaky yea, but not unusual.


If you got into a fight, if a coach was around he'd let the fight finish, unless it got a bit too over the top then they'd break it up. You didn't get suspended, you lost recess privileges usually 3 days plus the starter of the fight got 10 licks of the paddle in principle office, the other only got 1 to 3, or if person was just dominated and got ass kicked you just got detention.


Kids didn't act up at all most times. And the reason was Corporal Punishment. Not private paddling either.


Once I was having a bad day, me and "highschool" sweetheart were having a bit of a spat. We sat next to each other so we were bickering a bit during class. Teacher had yelled at me to shut up and do the work. I sighed "Leave me the fuck alone"

bad move.

She called me to front of class and I got 5 licks of paddle in front of everyone. They'd stick finger in your belt loop and yank it up tight to put that extra sting on it. Embarrassing as hell! Even female older teachers who didn't paddle hard, it was just too embarrassing to get paddled, so kids behaved.


And of course if you refused paddling which you could but you'd take a zero for the day's work. few of those in a semester and no matter how hard you worked you were flunking that semester.


But the system worked.

It wasn't until they went crazy insane on political correctness, stopping corporal punishment, and putting cops/rent a cops/guards in schools and after the No Child Left Behind was signed into law, they severely dumbed down kids forcing the smartest to learn at the slowest kids pace. Doc's prescribing SSRI's like candy to kids in MASSIVE quantities, that schools in today's culture are crazy.

So much good stuff here. Please unkill this @eric3579.

I've said here before that 99% of the time when someone complains about "PC gone mad", they're a middle-aged straight white dude that can't understand why they can't call people fags, niggers or bitches anymore. And most of them don't even understand they're being a dick. As far as they're concerned they genuinely believe they're just "telling it like it is".

I'm going to let the late, insanely great, Iain Banks have the last word here:

'Political correctness is what right-wing bigots call what everybody else calls being polite ... Like everybody else, I have my own definitions of what is what, and I would never seek to deny that a few stupid people can take a perfectly good idea too far, but I stand by my contention that political correctness is more sinned against than sinning.'

Political Correctness and Censorship he refers to

I never said to rely on Putin or RT solely. I just tried to explain that ignoring him and RT because of stupid reasons like that is not very wise, because the west isnt much better. You have to see all the sides to make a proper judgement.

A, B and C are irrelevant. Ownership is irrelevant because the western media is also "owned" by people with an agenda. But even between those different people there is a common agenda. You can see that in Germanys media right now very well. They are outright lying collectively to the people just to stay politically correct.

Reputation also is irrelevant because objectivity > reputation.

Funding is also irrelevant, as you said yourself. You can see it very well that it doesnt change much where they get their money from. The agenda matters. Also very well observable lately.

Putin first and foremost is a counterweight. He makes the western mistakes more obvious. He also has very good points when defending his own countries actions. Even the homosexual ones, if you ever listened to him on that topic. Yes, as a political leader he is of course manipulating, but he makes much more sense, actually uses facts and doesnt nearly lie as much as any politician I have ever seen.
You of course need to have and acknowledge those facts to realize that. But you made it clear that you arent. Comparing Russias imperialism with Americas shows just how much. Its pretty much clear the USA was involved in that coup detat once again. Now imagine how the USA would have reacted if Russia did that in Canada or Mexico. Or imagine how the USA would react to being completely surrounded by Russian military bases, having decades of history of destabilizing and overthrowing countries and whole regions, breaking and ignoring international law, even threatening the country where the international court sits to never dare to bring one of their before their court and then Russia claiming that the USA is the aggressor.

Actually Russia has long been very passive about the eastern expansion of NATO and they forgave that bleeding out of Russia towards the west in the 90s. Something like that happening at their doorstep actually justifies much MUCH harsher reactions, but they didnt use them. Instead they actually took another (hypocritical) slap in the face rather passively and silently with those sanctions.

Syria... I am surprised you even bring that up, because thats just stupid to use that for your argument. Syria has been a long ally of Russia and they asked for help after the US and NATO started bombing their infrastructure instead of ISIS. The war in Syria is even more obviously an externally funded war, not a civil war, while in the Ukraine you can actually see parts of a civil war, it started like that, because those people didnt want the new government. Also again mostly due to America and their support of other totalitarian regimes in that region.
You should read this:
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/05/31/holes-in-the-neocons-syrian-story/

3 things, I may have mixed them a bit.

1 - past experience specifically with muslim migrants (some may have been refugees) in Europe - overall not great, mostly they consider our social system and political correctness as signs of weakness. They consider themselves superior, the first generation may be grateful for a better life than back home but the second and third generations feel superior to non-muslims (especially jews and atheists, but also christians) and entitled to benefits while hating the secular state. Will the current and future waves accomodate better? This has nothing to do with our imperative to help those in need, it is a practical problem. Also not racist - although I do admit racism and xenophobia are a major problem in many parts of Europe and trouble me very much in my own country. More so than the Vietnamese or Ukrainians or people from the Balkans "these people" organize in clans and tribes and will try to impose their view of the world on us, who organise in tiny families and on facebook. Albanian thugs are well organised but they dont hold the view that everyone else should be an Albanian thug too.

2 - current wave of migrants and refugees - lets assume we are talking only about real Syrians boarding boats in Turkey trying to reach Greek islands and not people from all over north africa trying to reach Italy or anyone else trying to reach the EU (possibly pretending to be Syrian). So we have this exemplary Syrian family which has run away from a war to Turkey. They are safe there, only they have to either stay for a couple of years in a refugee camp before they can try to find work or they have to survive in a grey economy sort of like Mexicans in the USA. They know that if they dont apply for asylum in Turkey and manage to set foot on EU soil they can ask for asylum there and be treated better than in Turkey. So these boat people are actually not running from war to asylum but rather from one asylum to another. They make sure not to stop in Greece or Croatia or Austria or Hungary but head for Germany or Sweden. Mostly I believe they have no idea of political geography but they have mobile phones and friends who have already made the journey and know how to milk the local system. So for purposes of compassion they are refugees and totally need our help but from a clinically economic (yes, materialistic) point of view they are very much migrants. Migrants we feel obliged to help because they are sort of refugees too.

3 - the mass and speed of the exodus means we are stretched to accomodate them and they will later start to passionately hate us because Europe will not be the heaven they expected it to be.
A few thousand refugees every year are no big deal even for a small EU state. Hundreds of thousands will be very difficult to take care of in the entire union. Inviting more is just irresponsible.

The good news is that the real Syrian refugees who make it to Europe will probably be the more resourceful, better educated part of the current wave of incoming people and will be able to take care of themselves fairly quickly by my estimate. Also they are mostly variants of Shia - the less orthodox branch of muslims. I am worried more about future waves than the current one.

Maybe we have messed up a bit but we need to learn from our mistakes, and even Germany is now guarding its borders. It would be better if we were able to guard the Shengen perimeter.
Then if we wanted to save more refugees we could send trains or planes to pick them up in Turkey or Jemen. You know, set up an EU consulate there so they could directly apply for asylum in the EU country of their picking. But we have to make a conscious decision first - how many people from the desolate and failing parts of the world do we want to save over a given time period so that we dont fail ourselves. Are we failing? Ask the jewish families who used to live in Malmo until recently.

Its not just about money. Integrating Muslim refugees (well mostly migrants) has proved to be difficult bordering on impossible in Europe. Ghettos, antisemitism, sectarian violence, attempts to impose islamic law on communities etc.

Nonetheless if a refugee asks for asylum in any EU country he will be given asylum in that country. Migrants are different, but since we do not have much of a mechanism for sending them back where they came from... not so very different.

Now some of these migrants and refugees that want to live in Germany and Sweden are supposed to be distributed by "quotas" among the other EU countries, how is that supposed to work in practice?

Dont get me wrong, we have hundreds of thousands of recently (within say 20 years) migrated foreigners in our country, but none of them are bitching about what I eat and drink, how often I pray or what my wife wears to the beach. So no big deal.

As long as these people get asylum and then get evaluated before getting citizenship and there is a limited number of citizenships available over a given period of time everything might yet work out fine.

It will not work out fine just by inertia and political correctness..

I would rather have one crazy polish fascist than a thousand people claiming to be syrian refugees come to my doorstep. I could deal with maybe five at most.

Your video, South Park - Political Correctness Bro, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.