What I do is think too much

[Asmodean]

I don't agree, I posit the purpose of propoganda is to make people think a certain way.  That pic itself seems propaganda-ish to me.

I don't know the full context of the quote, but read as-is, it provides an inaccurate and overly-simplistic view of what propaganda is. It can be aimed at the moral coward and the moral crusader alike. It can be aimed at the critical thinker and the "mindless cons00mer." It's ideology, attempting to assimilate the hesitant and the unwilling, an opinion, attempring to claim support beyond the depth of said support. It's a leader, rallying his nation to an unpopular war. It's information control and curation - a tool for thought manipulation - not an excuse not to think.

[Icarus]

https://imgur.com/gallery/D94CU19

[Asmodean]

Heh... If only! Or rather, perhaps back in a more "civilized age."

People these days (Always, I suspect, but let's let any doubt serve the good old marble guy) use slander in lieu of debate, I find.

- So why didn't you discuss your positions?
- Because he's an -ist and a -phobe and let me tell you exactly what's in his head.

<current-year debate concluded>

[Tom62]

Sounds very familiar. Another one I hear quite often nowadays is "You are not allowed to have an opinion because you are a white straight old man".

[billy rubin]

ive never heard thst one over here

[Tank]

Sounds very familiar. Another one I hear quite often nowadays is "You are not allowed to have an opinion because you are a white straight old man".

Well I've never heard that. And I'd ignore it anyway.

[Recusant]

You would have heard a variation on what Tom62 is referring to if you'd spent time at the (long gone and not much lamented) Atheism+ forum. It's silly: a more militant version of the social justice principle of listening to and learning from the oppressed--refraining from attempting to speak for them as well as refraining from adopting a defensive stance in reaction to their narratives.

It's meant to counter a tendency to attempt to dominate conversation in regard to particular topics, usually involving social justice. It's natural that said "white straight old men" often resent being told that their perspective is not really valued. Again, I consider it silly despite understanding where it's coming from. 

[The Magic Pudding..]

I grew up being critical of my culture, there was, is plenty to be critical about.
Exultation in ones culture was passe, a practice from the dark old days.
The Muslims did great things when Europe was dark, China invented everything, we're crap.
I think that can be taken too far, what is the alternative enlightened civilisation?

I heard a Muslim women (in Dubai, maybe) delivering a lecture on the Western patriarchy.
Hey we're getting gradually better, how goes it there?

[billy rubin]

ive been out in the wilderness a long time, apparently?

im unaware of a lot of this standardized villainy . . .

i dont encounter criticism for being white, old, or straight. sometimes people i know well criticise me for beng old and male, but when i ask them to elaborate they dont have anything credible to offer.

i once took a personality test that professed to identify my socio-political leanings . . .

my score was more radically leftist than my young opinionated daughters, which i found quite amusing, although they did not

wait theres a goatsucker calling outside. gotta go

[Recusant]

To the zealous of any persuasion it really doesn't matter what your political alignment is, if you question their dogma. It's not like they're more immune to bigotry than any other human.

It really was interesting watching the hijinks at Atheism+. While some found it amusing I considered it a worthwhile example of what lengths people will go to, to avoid despair, and the way that people can end up mirroring that which they so vehemently oppose. It didn't shake my support for social justice--I already knew that some who believe in it are rigid and doctrinaire, either unwilling or incapable of stooping to mere reason.

[Asmodean]

Sounds very familiar. Another one I hear quite often nowadays is "You are not allowed to have an opinion because you are a white straight old man".

Well I've never heard that. And I'd ignore it anyway.

Recusant provided some good insights, but there are a few more pennies to throw in for good measure. Mostly (though probably further from "always" than you'd expect) the above quote can be seen as hyperbolic in its wording.

The idea in certain social/political circles is that (And I shall be as charitable as I can here - too charitable by far, probably, but I assume "some good people.") minority voices need to be boosted for their interests to be addressed. The way of achieving it quite often involves silencing, down-playing or otherwise diminishing someone else's voice.

Some take it a step further and claim that due to the hierarchy of oppression being supposedly topped by the ever-loathesome huwhite, middle-aged man, his is the opinion which should be weighted the least in any relevant deliberations. The "woke movements" are pretty filled with that. It helps little that "the debate" may result in a "bubble of ideology" taking action against its ideologiccal opponents outside the scope of the dispute. That's a bit convoluted, so a reasonably common example is people trying to get someone fired from their job over their opinion on a certain topic - regardless of whether that opinion has any effect on their professional performance. That's Cancel Culture, and it is built almost entirely on slander and almost not at all on debate.

Personally, I find the very premise distasteful. Everyone is in a minority of one - the middle-aged white guy included.