Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Out voters call everything they don't like "project fear" Watch

    Offline

    18
    (Original post by JordanL_)
    It's quite ironic that whenever someone dares suggest that democracy maybe isn't the ideal system they get completely shut down, called a zealot and have all of their other thoughts dismissed. How utterly ludicrous to suggest that maybe people who aren't qualified to make a decision shouldn't get to make it.
    Calling you a zealot isn't the equivalent of shutting you down. Shutting you down would be if I used some kind of force to suppress your opinion or prevent you from expressing it in a way that matters. I trust that you have enough sense of irony to know where you've heard that before.

    I've dismissed none of your other thoughts. I've simply pointed out the delicious irony in your deriding of those with whom you disagree as 'unemployed xenophobes' and 'horrifyingly stupid.' If I didn't know better, I would say that you're trying to shut them down. You can complain about having your horrifyingly stupid ideas referred to as such when you drop the double standard.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hydeman)
    Calling you a zealot isn't the equivalent of shutting you down. Shutting you down would be if I used some kind of force to suppress your opinion or prevent you from expressing it in a way that matters. I trust that you have enough sense of irony to know where you've heard that before.

    I've dismissed none of your other thoughts. I've simply pointed out the delicious irony in your deriding of those with whom you disagree as 'unemployed xenophobes' and 'horrifyingly stupid.' If I didn't know better, I would say that you're trying to shut them down. You can complain about having your horrifyingly stupid ideas referred to as such when you drop the double standard.
    I just called them stupid, I haven't shut anyone down.

    So you don't think people deserve to be called out for outright lying?
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by JordanL_)
    I just called them stupid, I haven't shut anyone down.
    And I just called you a zealot, and therefore haven't shut you down as you earlier claimed. Hope you've at least inwardly conceded that point even if your pride won't allow you to do so outwardly.

    So you don't think people deserve to be called out for outright lying?
    Where did I say or imply that? Of course people should be called out for lying. But then, deflection is somewhat necessary for you at this point, isn't it?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hydeman)
    And I just called you a zealot, and therefore haven't shut you down as you earlier claimed. Hope you've at least inwardly conceded that point even if your pride won't allow you to do so outwardly.



    Where did I say or imply that? Of course people should be called out for lying. But then, deflection is somewhat necessary for you at this point, isn't it?
    No, I haven't conceded that point. I didn't mean "shut down" as in to physically prevent me from speaking, obviously. You interpreted it that way. What I meant was that you called me a zealot as if it invalidated my points.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Ironically a UKIP broadcast came on the TV as I was reading this through thread. If what I've just witnessed wasn't scaremongering I don't know what is.

    The bit that stood out was their mention of the ECHR stopping criminals being deported. I assume they mean the same ECHR that we'll still be a signatory to if we leave.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by JordanL_)
    No, I haven't conceded that point. I didn't mean "shut down" as in to physically prevent me from speaking, obviously.
    Yes, you meant it in the sense of a gentle, imperceptible coercion, delivered through text on a screen. Of course.

    You interpreted it that way.
    No, I didn't. :rolleyes: Suppressing an opinion or preventing its expression on a student forum doesn't require physical force. Ironically, it's you who interpreted something, and did so incorrectly.

    What I meant was that you called me a zealot as if it invalidated my points.
    No, I didn't. I used it in this sense:

    zeal·ot·ry
    noun
    1. fanatical and uncompromising pursuit of religious, political, or other ideals; fanaticism.
    Hope my use of standard (as opposed to unqualified, personal) definitions isn't too great an offence.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    I'm not sure what A levels, or lack thereof, has to do with Brexit at all...
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by infairverona)
    I'm not sure what A levels, or lack thereof, has to do with Brexit at all...
    The argument seems to be that voting should be restricted to only those people deemed sufficiently qualified, so that's probably what the A Levels remark is about.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hydeman)
    The argument seems to be that voting should be restricted to only those people deemed sufficiently qualified, so that's probably what the A Levels remark is about.
    Yes, I just think it's pretty hilarious because I have good A levels (and degree, halfway through postgrad, etc) and I'm voting Leave. Yet voting Leave by OP's standard would make me 'stupid'. I also have a few older family members who have no A levels at all and are voting Remain...
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by infairverona)
    Yes, I just think it's pretty hilarious because I have good A levels (and degree, halfway through postgrad, etc) and I'm voting Leave. Yet voting Leave by OP's standard would make me 'stupid'. I also have a few older family members who have no A levels at all and are voting Remain...
    Oops, unqualified! There go a few Remain votes... :lol:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hydeman)
    Yes, you meant it in the sense of a gentle, imperceptible coercion, delivered through text on a screen. Of course.



    No, I didn't. :rolleyes: Suppressing an opinion or preventing its expression on a student forum doesn't require physical force. Ironically, it's you who interpreted something, and did so incorrectly.



    No, I didn't. I used it in this sense:

    zeal·ot·ry
    noun
    1. fanatical and uncompromising pursuit of religious, political, or other ideals; fanaticism.
    Hope my use of standard (as opposed to unqualified, personal) definitions isn't too great an offence.
    Fair enough, I misinterpreted. You didn't try to shut me down.

    I don't see how I'm zealous, though. I'll always change my views if given facts to the contrary.


    (Original post by infairverona)
    I'm not sure what A levels, or lack thereof, has to do with Brexit at all...
    If you don't even have A levels, you're probably not qualified or nearly knowledgeable enough to dispute the economic judgement of a professional economic organisation.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JordanL_)


    If you don't even have A levels, you're probably not qualified or nearly knowledgeable enough to dispute the economic judgement of a professional economic organisation.
    I have A levels and a law degree and I'm voting Leave. What do you make of that? And what do you make of my family members who don't have A levels but are voting Remain?

    If someone had A levels in Dance, Drama, and Media Studies, please do explain how that qualifies someone to be considered 'knowledgeable' enough to make a reasoned and considered vote in Brexit?
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by JordanL_)
    I don't see how I'm zealous, though. I'll always change my views if given facts to the contrary.
    But you would deny this opportunity to others. Bearing in mind, of course, that what you consider 'facts' are disputable by any other person, although they wouldn't be in a way that has any influence (i.e. at the ballot box) in your ideal world.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by infairverona)
    I have A levels and a law degree and I'm voting Leave. What do you make of that? And what do you make of my family members who don't have A levels but are voting Remain?

    If someone had A levels in Dance, Drama, and Media Studies, please do explain how that qualifies someone to be considered 'knowledgeable' enough to make a reasoned and considered vote in Brexit?
    I never said having A levels would qualify someone. I said that if you don't even have A levels, you probably aren't qualified. Plenty of people with A levels aren't qualified, myself included. I don't understand what you're trying to prove by picking apart the fine semantic details of a sentence.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JordanL_)
    I never said having A levels would qualify someone. I said that if you don't even have A levels, you probably aren't qualified. Plenty of people with A levels aren't qualified, myself included. I don't understand what you're trying to prove by picking apart the fine semantic details of a sentence.
    It's nothing to do with semantics, I'm just pointing out that your cut off of having A levels as the minimum standard for which someone may be considered qualified to decide is absurd. Having A levels does not make you automatically more knowledgable about Brexit than someone who does not have A levels. Why are GCSEs not enough, and why stop at A levels? Why not a degree, or a postgrad degree? What is it about A levels in particular that you think matters? It makes no sense
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hydeman)
    But you would deny this opportunity to others. Bearing in mind, of course, that what you consider 'facts' are disputable by any other person, although they wouldn't be in a way that has any influence (i.e. at the ballot box) in your ideal world.

    But I was clearly referring to people who dispute facts with nothing other than "I don't want to believe that".

    (Original post by infairverona)
    It's nothing to do with semantics, I'm just pointing out that your cut off of having A levels as the minimum standard for which someone may be considered qualified to decide is absurd. Having A levels does not make you automatically more knowledgable about Brexit than someone who does not have A levels. Why are GCSEs not enough, and why stop at A levels? Why not a degree, or a postgrad degree? What is it about A levels in particular that you think matters? It makes no sense
    No, it's semantics. I've just explicitly said that I never said people with A levels are necessarily qualified.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JordanL_)


    No, it's semantics. I've just explicitly said that I never said people with A levels are necessarily qualified.
    Did you even read what I said? You are saying having A levels is the minimum standard at which someone MAY be considered qualified.

    You have no support for this idiotic claim which is why you keep harping on about semantics. Don't make stupid claims if you can't defend them, I've asked a couple of questions for which you have no answer. If you don't want people taking issue with what you're saying don't post it on a forum.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Because people talk like you.

    I'm probably going to vote in, but people like you are extremely close to persuading me to vote the other way.

    What's the problem with elections and voter apathy in this country? The type of attitude you display.
    If you're really "extremely close" to voting against what you think is the best choice just to spite people like OP then aren't you pretty apathetic yourself?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrsSheldonCooper)
    Since when is knowing that the perpetrators of the sex attacks that come across Europe during the migrant crisis may get German citizenship if we stay in and there's a high chance they'll most probably come here and spread their disgusting culture and medieval religion scaremongering exactly? It's common sense if you want to vote out because of that reason.

    ISIS have been so so vocal about how they're planning to send in jihadis posing as refugees and somehow that's scaremongering?
    If we compromise what we stand for - if we become the slightest bit less compassionate as a country because of what ISIS says - then they have won.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: May 3, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.