| Yaki da |
06-08-2016 06:45 AM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ammi
(Post 8888058)
..he wasn't censored though..(if the transcripts are truth and will be shown..)..he was allowed his free speech and he exercised his free speech and he takes responsibility for his free speech as we all do for all of our freedoms to act or to speak etc..but that's as far as his control and his freedoms go though because now others will equally take their freedoms and make decisions about his career, about thoughts toward him and etc etc...
|
He was in a sense. The production team can do what they want, of course (it's their show), but the message is clear... If you say anything that offends the sensibilities of the liberal progressive multiculturalists your career is over. If you say things that offend conservative minded Christians who think Britain has transformed into something they never fought for (and many such people did fight for it) then you are fully embraced, celebrated and promoted.
It's the not the state that goes after people who say the "wrong" thing (though they increasingly will in some instances). It's the pressure the surrounding culture puts on others to refuse employment to people or to just engage in media witch hunts.
Look at what happened to James D. Watson. A Nobel Prize winner. These are some of things he said...
Quote:
Watson did not say in his memoir that race was a factor in his hypothesis of divergence of intellect between geographically isolated populations. The following is a transcript of that part of the interview: 'He says that he is “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really”, and I know that this “hot potato” is going to be difficult to address. His hope is that everyone is equal, but he counters that “people who have to deal with black employees find this not true”. He says that you should not discriminate on the basis of colour, because “there are many people of colour who are very talented, but don’t promote them when they haven’t succeeded at the lower level”. He writes that “there is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically. Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so”'.[95]
|
|
