Australian Senator Hit With Egg After Blaming Immigration for Mosque Attacks

[Archaeopteryx]

How does egging people help the situation? I can't imagine it calms anyone down, or makes anyone see the intellectual, moral, and ethical superiority of the person doing the egging. This kind of response is why political discourse is now so toxic and polarised.

Yes, the discourse is so toxic and polarised because some bigot got an egg to the face and not because we allow bigots into our newsrooms and legislative chambers to spout off their bigotry.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

If he's wrong, then point out the holes in his arguments and present a more compelling case. That is civil discourse.

Do you really think that no one, up until this incident, had considered "debunking" the senator by writing at length about his opprobrious views?

 

[Nithavela]

Do you really think that no one, up until this incident, had considered "debunking" the senator by writing at length about his opprobrious views?

Nice to see you back! Has been a while, hasn't it?

 

[Hammster]

I have to admit that this was funny. This was the order of articles on my Google news feed.

 

[Goonie]

I have to admit that this was funny. This was the order of articles on my Google news feed.

View attachment 253077

What was less funny was what happened afterwards. The protester was punched and choke held.

Though to be fair a decade or two back the British deputy pm reacted by punching someone who egged him. Though in that case the egg was hardly deserved.

 

[Nithavela]

What was less funny was what happened afterwards. The protester was punched and choke held.

Though to be fair a decade or two back the British deputy pm reacted by punching someone who egged him. Though in that case the egg was hardly deserved.

I'd say that they are even. One got egged, the other caught a few punches.

I don't fault the senator for reacting with anger at getting an egg to the head.

Overall, this is just a feelgood story. A bit like a rescued kitten.

 

[jkjk]

Egg-related killings are actually quite uncommon outside of africa.

Actually, egg-related killings are probably mostly first world problems.

 

[Nithavela]

Actually, egg-related killings are probably mostly first world problems.

Ah yeah, forgot all about that. Thanks for reminding me.

 

[jkjk]

Do you really think that when a statement is met with outrage, it is an indicator that this statement is correct? What kind of backwards logic is that?

I don't think you understood my point. Or maybe I just don't understand yours. Where did I say that outrage is an indicator that someone's position is correct?

 

[jkjk]

Do you really think that no one, up until this incident, had considered "debunking" the senator by writing at length about his opprobrious views?

And this justifies escalation from words to physical violence how?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

And this justifies escalation from words to physical violence how?

Maybe he should have written some words on the egg?

 

[variant]

I guess the question I have is when did targeting a group of people based on their ethnicity or religion become civil discourse, especially after that group was massacred the previous day? When your discourse precludes the humanity of others, it is anything but civil.

The man was looking to blame the targets of violence for their own murders, an egg cracked lightly in the back of his head is better than he deserves.

 

[Sparagmos]

Australian Senator Hit With Egg After Blaming Immigration for Mosque Attacks


Buy more eggs.

General post: cracking an egg on someone’s head is not violence. It doesn’t even hurt. Is pie-ing someone now violence too? It’s just messy and embarrassing. And guess what? When a vast majority of people share the sentiment, it is quite satisfying.

 

[rambot]

If his words have been so thoroughly debunked, why does he merit so much attention and outrage? Do you not realize that all this is doing is giving him a bigger platform? It's also making a "martyr" of him. Before this happened, hardly anyone outside of Australia knew who he was. Now many people around the world know his name. And many people, right or wrong, agree with at least some of what he is saying. Reciprocal radicalization is a thing.

But hey, if your goal is to increase his platform, then keep on doing what you're doing.

because words like that have a target audience: stupid people. And to some extent, hatefilled people.

I don't think breaking the egg on his head was helpful for anyone. But to pontificate that lending these views credibility and engaging in thouhtfilled debate is the only way to combat them is misguided too. Coming to his conclusions requires a suspension of reason; if someone is behaving irrationally engaging in a rational manner does nothing.

 

[jkjk]

because words like that have a target audience: stupid people. And to some extent, hatefilled people.

I don't think breaking the egg on his head was helpful for anyone. But to pontificate that lending these views credibility and engaging in thouhtfilled debate is the only way to combat them is misguided too. Coming to his conclusions requires a suspension of reason; if someone is behaving irrationally engaging in a rational manner does nothing.

It's easy to write people off and dismiss them as "stupid" and "hate-filled" because then you don't have to face the dark side of your own words, actions, and world views. There's been a lot of "othering" of those on the far right. How has that worked out for you?

You seem to fundamentally misunderstand what I wrote, since I never argued we should lend extremist views credibility. I said refusing to engage those ideas rationally and resorting to violence instead is what lends those voices credibility. I'm sorry that you see that as "pontificating."

 

[Hank77]

You clearly aren't thinking the situation through. Even if you cause no lasting physical injury, hitting an unwilling person in the head in order to harm them is assault.

If he were intending to physically harm him, the kid wouldn't have used an egg. It was meant to insult him.

Any time you strike someone in the head (in this case, while holding an egg), you can potentially concuss them, break their nose, cause lacerations or infection to the face or eyes, cause them to lose their balance and harm themselves while falling, etc. People have been blinded and killed due to eggings.

Not this time, it was on the back of his head, not in the face.

I will submit to you that going full Antifa is not the solution.

If only Antifa only used eggs instead of bats, etc.

Egg is an insult just has having a shoe thrown at you is in the Middle East. Remember when G.W.Bush had the shoe thrown at him. It was an insult.

The Senator turned and smacked the kid who did nothing to defend himself. Then the Senator tried to smack him a second time and the kid put up his arms in front of his face.
I would have thought one smack was enough but the Senator decided he liked smacking this kid and he'd just do it again, showing adult behavior and self-control.

 

[jkjk]

If he were intending to physically harm him, the kid wouldn't have used an egg. It was meant to insult him.

Let's consult Merriam-Webster for the definition of harm.

harm
noun
\ ˈhärm \
Definition of harm
(Entry 1 of 2)

1: physical or mental damage : INJURY
the amount of harm sustained by the boat during the storm
2: MISCHIEF, HURT
I meant you no harm.

harm
verb
harmed; harming; harms
Definition of harm (Entry 2 of 2)
transitive verb
: to damage or injure physically or mentally : to cause harm (see HARM entry 1) to
No animals were harmed in the making of the film.
the national interest … was gravely harmed by this attack

Not this time, it was on the back of his head, not in the face.

If your argument is that it is okay or less dangerous to hit someone in the back of the head rather than the face, you are on really weak ground. Funny that MMA allows hits to the face, for instance, but outlaws hits to the back and top of the head.

As for eyes and nose, what if the senator happened to turn towards the kid as he was in mid-strike? It is reasonable to expect that someone turns towards a noise they hear coming up behind them. The fact that it didn't happen in this case does not excuse the potential harm that the kid could have caused by his pre-meditated actions.

If only Antifa only used eggs instead of bats, etc.

If only antifa respected other people's bodies and didn't touch them at all.

Egg is an insult just has having a shoe thrown at you is in the Middle East. Remember when G.W.Bush had the shoe thrown at him. It was an insult.

I didn't realize that there is a dichotomy between insults and violence and that an action can only be one or the other.

You aren't helping your case by bringing that up either. Both of those actions can both physically hurt the victim and get you killed.

The Senator turned and smacked the kid who did nothing to defend himself. Then the Senator tried to smack him a second time and the kid put up his arms in front of his face.
I would have thought one smack was enough but the Senator decided he liked smacking this kid and he'd just do it again, showing adult behavior and self-control.

The senator was attacked from behind. He was justified in defending himself. Lucky the kid attacked an Australian senator with cameras and security everywhere. Such actions elsewhere to another person would have turned out much worse for that kid. Like this kid in Utah for instance. Or this teen in New York.

 

[Nithavela]

If your argument is that it is okay or less dangerous to hit someone in the back of the head rather than the face, you are on really weak ground. Funny that MMA allows hits to the face, for instance, but outlaws hits to the back and top of the head.

Theyre using eggs in MMA? When will the carnage end?!

 

[rambot]

It's easy to write people off and dismiss them as "stupid" and "hate-filled" because then you don't have to face the dark side of your own words, actions, and world views. There's been a lot of "othering" of those on the far right. How has that worked out for you?

You seem to fundamentally misunderstand what I wrote, since I never argued we should lend extremist views credibility. I said refusing to engage those ideas rationally and resorting to violence instead is what lends those voices credibility. I'm sorry that you see that as "pontificating."

To repeat:

Coming to his conclusions requires a suspension of reason; if someone is behaving irrationally engaging in a rational manner does nothing. "Engaging those ideas rationally" when they are not based on reason, data, or rationality, does nothing either.

 

[Hank77]

As for eyes and nose, what if the senator happened to turn towards the kid as he was in mid-strike? It is reasonable to expect that someone turns towards a noise they hear coming up behind them. The fact that it didn't happen in this case does not excuse the potential harm that the kid could have caused by his pre-meditated actions.

You missed the point. The kid did not intend to cause physical harm, that was the point.

If only antifa respected other people's bodies and didn't touch them at all.

You exaggerations in comparing breaking an egg on someone's head with the violence of Antifa....

I didn't realize that there is a dichotomy between insults and violence and that an action can only be one or the other.

Well there can be. There is the intent to cause physical harm and the intent to insult.

Theyre using eggs in MMA? When will the carnage end?!