Michael Knowles demands a retraction, and gets it.

[ThatRobGuy]

While I'm not a fan of the DailyCaller in general, they were the only one who touched on this one, so unfortunately I have to link them here:

Liberal News Site Walks Back Claim That CPAC Speaker Wants To ‘Eradicate’ Trans People

Liberal news outlet The Daily Beast walked back its initial headline claiming Michael Knowles wants the

dailycaller.com

Michael Knowles made a speech at CPAC (a speech that I disagree with on a number of points), but I was more disappointed to see left-leaning outlets take the low road and put words in his mouth that he didn't say.

Afterwards, left-wing activists attacked Rolling Stone and the Daily Beast for bowing “to right wing pressure.”

To which he responded:

Makes me wonder if he chose his words specifically to cast a "bait" in the water, and they took it, or if these outlets would've made up falsehoods no matter what he said.

I'm a staunch believer in the premise that in most cases (with very few exceptions) "good ideas don't require force" and "good ideas don't need to cheat in order to win the marketplace of ideas". If a particular side has to lie in order to try to get people to turn against their political opponents, that's the sign of a weak position.

 

[Bradskii]

While I'm not a fan of the DailyCaller in general, they were the only one who touched on this one, so unfortunately I have to link them here:

Liberal News Site Walks Back Claim That CPAC Speaker Wants To ‘Eradicate’ Trans People

Liberal news outlet The Daily Beast walked back its initial headline claiming Michael Knowles wants the

dailycaller.com

Michael Knowles made a speech at CPAC (a speech that I disagree with on a number of points), but I was more disappointed to see left-leaning outlets take the low road and put words in his mouth that he didn't say.

View attachment 328775

View attachment 328776


View attachment 328777

Afterwards, left-wing activists attacked Rolling Stone and the Daily Beast for bowing “to right wing pressure.”

To which he responded:
View attachment 328778


Makes me wonder if he chose his words specifically to cast a "bait" in the water, and they took it, or if these outlets would've made up falsehoods no matter what he said.

I'm a staunch believer in the premise that in most cases (with very few exceptions) "good ideas don't require force" and "good ideas don't need to cheat in order to win the marketplace of ideas". If a particular side has to lie in order to try to get people to turn against their political opponents, that's the sign of a weak position.

If he'd have said that Judaism must be eradicated, then there would have been justified outrage. What if he said that homosexuality must be eradicated? What he said was idiotic. The headlines were an opportunity for him to play the outrage card himself and detract from his moronic comments. The guy defines himself by those comments.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

I’m not saying this guy wants to see all transgender people killed in a genocide. I’m just saying if he did want that, using the language he is using would be a good way to prime the public to move in that direction.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I’m not saying this guy wants to see all transgender people killed in a genocide. I’m just saying if he did want that, using the language he is using would be a good way to prime the public to move in that direction.

"isms" typically refer to an ideology.

So for instance, if someone were to say "Trumpism must be eradicated" or "communism/socialism/capitalism must be eradicated", would the immediate assumption be that it's calling for the genocide of people who fell into those ideological buckets?

 

[ozso]

Something like "The agenda of the Transgender Community needs to be eradicated" would have been far less ambiguous and more appropriate.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

"isms" typically refer to an ideology.

So for instance, if someone were to say "Trumpism must be eradicated" or "communism/socialism/capitalism must be eradicated", would the immediate assumption be that it's calling for the genocide of people who fell into those ideological buckets?

Transgender isn’t an ideology. Would you be so flippant about his comments if he said he wanted to see Judaism eradicated? What if someone said they wanted to see Christianity eradicated?

 

[ozso]

Transgender isn’t an ideology. Would you be so flippant about his comments if he said he wanted to see Judaism eradicated? What if someone said they wanted to see Christianity eradicated?

Most don't say the former because it's antisemitic. But plenty say the latter all the time with great impunity.

 

[durangodawood]

I definitely have sympathy for people who get the misimpression, which the speaker corrected, that he thought being transgender should be eradicated - with the implications that would follow if you think some people simple are naturally transgender.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

Most don't say the former because it's antisemitic. But plenty say the latter all the time with great impunity.

Do you have examples of this happening? And I don’t mean on the fringes. I want mainstream examples. Knowles said this at the same conference that multiple presidential candidates spoke at including the current front runner for a major political party.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Transgender isn’t an ideology. Would you be so flippant about his comments if he said he wanted to see Judaism eradicated? What if someone said they wanted to see Christianity eradicated?

note, the '-ism' missing from the end of the word.

I've typically heard it referred to as "modern gender theory", but I have heard people use the -ism form of the word you used to describe the same set of ideas.

So, in your opinion, the idea that gender and sex are separate, and that the former is something that's just a construct and people can change between the two with fluidity (or that's it's a spectrum that a person can occupy different parts of based on how their feeling), would you see that as an ideological position/theory? Or would you see it as something else?


To you other part, I'm not a fan of religion so I would have no issues with someone attacking the "isms" (Pretty sure both Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris have made entire careers out of it)...it's when someone suggests attacking the actual people that it's a problem.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

note, the '-ism' missing from the end of the word.

I've typically heard it referred to as "modern gender theory", but I have heard people use the -ism form of the word you used to describe the same set of ideas.

So, in your opinion, the idea that gender and sex are separate, and that the former is something that's just a construct and people can change between the two with fluidity (or that's it's a spectrum that a person can occupy different parts of based on how their feeling), would you see that as an ideological position/theory? Or would you see it as something else?

Is someone is transitioning from male to female an ideological position?

If he said he wanted to eradicate atheism, how would you feel?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Is someone is transitioning from male to female an ideological position?

The position of whether or not that can even being a thing that's possible, combined with whether or society should build policy around the premise is the ideological position.

If he said he wanted to eradicate atheism, how would you feel?

He can say it all he wants (heck, knowing him, he probably has), however, atheism represents and non-affirmative position so there's really nothing to eradicate. Modern gender theory posits a series of affirmative positions...many of which have externalities with regards to things everyone else has to comply with.

 

[rjs330]

Transgender isn’t an ideology. Would you be so flippant about his comments if he said he wanted to see Judaism eradicated? What if someone said they wanted to see Christianity eradicated?

Why did you leave off the "ism"? No being transgender is not an ideology. It's a feeling.

However transgenderism is an ideology. And that ideology needs to be eradicated before it harms more children.

 

[rjs330]

Is someone is transitioning from male to female an ideological position?

If he said he wanted to eradicate atheism, how would you feel?

Believing that that's actually possible and teaching children it is possible is an ideology. Forcing people to support and affirm such a thing is an ideology or face discipline is an ideology. Forcing girls to undress and shower with men is part of the ideology. Making women compete with men in sports is part of that ideology.

Someone actually thinking they are a male in a females body is not an ideology.

 

[Bradskii]

Believing that that's actually possible and teaching children it is possible is an ideology. Forcing people to support and affirm such a thing is an ideology or face discipline is an ideology. Forcing girls to undress and shower with men is part of the ideology. Making women compete with men in sports is part of that ideology.

Someone actually thinking they are a male in a females body is not an ideology.

What if the guy had said 'Shower facilites and toilets for transgender people at whatever stage they are at are a problem that needs to be addressed. Transgenderism in sport is a problem that needs to be addressed. The age at which young people can transgender needs to be addressed. Both sides of this 'ideology' need to sit down and discuss this like adults and work through the problems that each side has with it. A lot of people need help and we need to be prepared to give it'.

Some polite applause? A few nodding heads. A lot of disgruntled people wondering why this 'appeasement' to the liberal, Marxist right is being proposed? Or did he think that 'Transgenderism must be eradicated!' would fire up the crowd and made him look like a man of decision. A man who stood for something. A leader.

This is just me, but he came across as a fool and it looked exactly like he was playing politics and treating a complex problem like it was a simple black and white decision to make. It was nothing more then 'Dems bad, GOP good.' It was simplistic, thoughtless and naive. Bumper sticker politics. But hey, I'll give him this - he knew his audience. Why aim high when they don't expect it and would find the problems too hard to deal with anyway?

Just like Fox, really. Tell people what they want to hear and they won't need to spend precious time thinking about the problem. They'll keep coming back for more. And that's all that counts really. Treat your audience like morons and they'll follow you wherever you go. Please collect your pitchforks at the door and don't light the torches until you're outside. Health and safety don't you know...

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

Believing that that's actually possible and teaching children it is possible is an ideology. Forcing people to support and affirm such a thing is an ideology or face discipline is an ideology. Forcing girls to undress and shower with men is part of the ideology. Making women compete with men in sports is part of that ideology.

Someone actually thinking they are a male in a females body is not an ideology.

And if I say “No” I will not give up that ideology, what are they going to do? How do they eradicate the ideology of people refuse to give it up. Are they going to admit their attempt at eradicating the ideology failed? That’s their only choice…









Unless they eradicate the people with ideology they don’t like.

It’s a real short step from wanting to eradicate ideas to wanting to eradicate people. That’s why that language needs to be immediately called out every time it occurs.

 

[durangodawood]

If transgenderism is eradicated, what happens to the transgender people?

 

[Ana the Ist]

While I'm not a fan of the DailyCaller in general, they were the only one who touched on this one, so unfortunately I have to link them here:

Liberal News Site Walks Back Claim That CPAC Speaker Wants To ‘Eradicate’ Trans People

Liberal news outlet The Daily Beast walked back its initial headline claiming Michael Knowles wants the

dailycaller.com

Michael Knowles made a speech at CPAC (a speech that I disagree with on a number of points), but I was more disappointed to see left-leaning outlets take the low road and put words in his mouth that he didn't say.

View attachment 328775

View attachment 328776


View attachment 328777

Afterwards, left-wing activists attacked Rolling Stone and the Daily Beast for bowing “to right wing pressure.”

To which he responded:
View attachment 328778


Makes me wonder if he chose his words specifically to cast a "bait" in the water, and they took it, or if these outlets would've made up falsehoods no matter what he said.

I'm a staunch believer in the premise that in most cases (with very few exceptions) "good ideas don't require force" and "good ideas don't need to cheat in order to win the marketplace of ideas". If a particular side has to lie in order to try to get people to turn against their political opponents, that's the sign of a weak position.

That's embarrassing....getting caught mid-lie with threats of lawsuits and needing to retract them. It's a sorry state of affairs.

 

[Ana the Ist]

And if I say “No” I will not give up that ideology, what are they going to do? How do they eradicate the ideology of people refuse to give it up. Are they going to admit their attempt at eradicating the ideology failed? That’s their only choice…

I have a hard time taking this seriously unless you're against all forms of cancelation and wouldn't push any ideological indoctrination.

Unless they eradicate the people with ideology they don’t like.

It’s a real short step from wanting to eradicate ideas to wanting to eradicate people. That’s why that language needs to be immediately called out every time it occurs.

Well sadly, some people have adopted the language of silencing political opponents and views they find distasteful.


But you are correct, it's a short step from one to the other.

 

[Ana the Ist]

What if the guy had said 'Shower facilites and toilets for transgender people at whatever stage they are at are a problem that needs to be addressed. Transgenderism in sport is a problem that needs to be addressed. The age at which young people can transgender needs to be addressed. Both sides of this 'ideology' need to sit down and discuss this like adults and work through the problems that each side has with it. A lot of people need help and we need to be prepared to give it'.

Some polite applause? A few nodding heads. A lot of disgruntled people wondering why this 'appeasement' to the liberal, Marxist right is being proposed? Or did he think that 'Transgenderism must be eradicated!' would fire up the crowd and made him look like a man of decision. A man who stood for something. A leader.

This is just me, but he came across as a fool and it looked exactly like he was playing politics and treating a complex problem like it was a simple black and white decision to make. It was nothing more then 'Dems bad, GOP good.' It was simplistic, thoughtless and naive. Bumper sticker politics. But hey, I'll give him this - he knew his audience. Why aim high when they don't expect it and would find the problems too hard to deal with anyway?

Just like Fox, really. Tell people what they want to hear and they won't need to spend precious time thinking about the problem. They'll keep coming back for more. And that's all that counts really. Treat your audience like morons and they'll follow you wherever you go. Please collect your pitchforks at the door and don't light the torches until you're outside. Health and safety don't you know...

Honestly....Given how hard trans activists attempt to silence, slander, and deplatform anyone who disagrees with them.

And I can't think of a single trans person canceled for the same by the non trans community....

Your fainting spell where you cry out "who will defend the poor trans people!" Is pretty hilarious lol.