Alex Kurtzman Gets New Deal With CBS, Will Expand 'Star Trek' TV

[CorporalCaptain]

Maybe it would be, but that's not what I did. That I say there _are_ radicals on both sides doesn't mean they are the same, equal, or equally radical, dangerous or obnoxious.

You did more than that. You accused @Locutus of Bored of siding with radicals, because he declared himself to be on one side of the "both sides." That's literally in the posts that I quoted. Requoted (underlining mine):

Wow, that's a lot of condescension. What does "wrong side of history" even mean? And why you would want to side with the opposite group of radicals is a mystery. How about we stick to something more moderate and useful, instead, mmkay?

Why does everything, everywhere on the internet have to devolve into discussions about identity politics nowadays?

That's information YOU added, presumably because you can't see more nuance than that.

I didn't make you type what you typed.

 

[Belz...]

You did more than that. You accused @Locutus of Bored of siding with radicals, because he declared himself to be on one side of the "both sides." That's literally in the posts that I quoted.

No, not because he declared himself on one side. That's absolutely not in the posts you quoted. I called him a radical because he uses the words, ideology and tactics of left-wing radicals.

Also, none of this proves your claim that I called both sides "equal".

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I called him a radical because he uses the words, ideology and tactics of left-wing radicals.

Calling anti-bigotry radical is truly pathetic.

Also, none of this proves your claim that I called both sides "equal".

Getting you to post that you agree really isn't the goal.

 

[Belz...]

Calling anti-bigotry radical is truly pathetic.

I repeat: I called him a radical because he uses the words, ideology and tactics of left-wing radicals. Not because he is anti-bigotry. You can't reshape reality by pretending that I said something that I didn't, especially on a forum that records what I actually wrote. Why would you do that? Why would you so blatantly lie about what I said?

Getting you to post that you agree really isn't the goal.

Cap, your previous post was completely unrelated to your earlier claim. Nowhere have I said or implied that both sides are "equal". I don't know or care if they are. I do care that both the far-right and far-left and wrong and possibly dangerous.

 

[dahj]

I repeat: I called him a radical because he uses the words, ideology and tactics of left-wing radicals.

The what now?

 

[Mudd]

I called him a radical because he uses the words, ideology and tactics of left-wing radical.

Uh huh...quote an example.

 

[Belz...]

Ok, he said the other guy was on the "wrong side of history". That's a strong indicator, right there. People who use that phrase are generally convinced that their ideology will be vindicated by history. A thousand-reach Reich, if you will. Not a particularily moderate stance to adopt.

The main thing about SJWs is that they don't understand nuance. They think that, if you disagree with them on any point of their pet issue, it means you're entirely opposed to everything they believe in, rather than just that one point. Like all extremists they're all about ideological purity, which is why they splinter so easily into subgroups. The irony of it is, they're bigots just like the alt-right they try to combat. But irony being another form of nuance, they don't get that either.

 

[Refuge]

Must we?? I don't want to read left-wing radical quotes.

 

[Belz...]

Thing is, I don't want to read right-wing bile, either, but right now I'm being thrown into the same vat as them.

 

[Refuge]

Thing is, I don't want to read right-wing bile, either, but right now I'm being thrown into the same vat as them.

Fair enough. So how are you liking Discovery??

 

[Belz...]

Fair enough. So how are you liking Discovery??

It started out rather poorly but picked up quite nicely in the middle of the season. I despised Burnham in the first few episodes mainly because she was a crap officer but somehow everybody was singing her praises, but she's redeemed herself as things went along. All in all I'd say it's the most solid first season of a Trek show since TOS, so pretty good.

If CBS noted the problems in the show and are trying to resolve them, we could be looking at a pretty decent series.

 

[Refuge]

It started out rather poorly but picked up quite nicely in the middle of the season. I despised Burnham in the first few episodes mainly because she was a crap officer but somehow everybody was singing her praises, but she's redeemed herself as things went along. All in all I'd say it's the most solid first season of a Trek show since TOS, so pretty good.

If CBS noted the problems in the show and are trying to resolve them, we could be looking at a pretty decent series.

I personally have struggled to embrace aspects of the show but my fanship for Trek has kept me hanging on in there. I like having Trek to watch . I'm going to try harder not to be too critical.

 

[Belz...]

Yeah I went ahead and purchased the Enterprise DVDs again just to have more Trek to watch.

 

[Refuge]

Yeah I went ahead and purchased the Enterprise DVDs again just to have more Trek to watch.

Well... you know I hadn't see Enterprise first time out. Someone here encouraged me to give it a go and I'm really enjoying seeing new (for me) Trek.

 

[dahj]

Thing is, I don't want to read right-wing bile, either

And yet you say nothing when that kind of bile is spewed all over here, but only when that right-wing bile is called out you start labeling people as left-wing radicals and comparing them to Nazis for saying that racism and sexism are on the wrong side of history.

Might wanna do some self-reflecting there...

 

[Trekkin]

Ok, he said the other guy was on the "wrong side of history". That's a strong indicator, right there. People who use that phrase are generally convinced that their ideology will be vindicated by history.

Okay, two things:

1. An alternative is, that said position are already on the wrong side of history. No ones presuming they’re going to be left behind, they are behind.

2. In what fucking world is that ‘radical’? People literally use the term to describe Vanilla Ice and beehive haird-os. The sort with mini chicken coops in them.

A thousand-reach Reich, if you will. Not a particularily moderate stance to adopt.

1. Godwinned.

2. Claiming people are behaving like those historically on the ‘wrong side’ of history, is presumptive and bad. Except when I do it.

3. And no. For anyone with even the vaguest clue about the Third Reich, not like that.

 

[Belz...]

And yet you say nothing when that kind of bile is spewed all over here, but only when that right-wing bile is called out you start labeling people as left-wing radicals and comparing them to Nazis for saying that racism and sexism are on the wrong side of history.

Might wanna do some self-reflecting there...

Do you seriously expect me to react to stuff in threads I don't even participate in?

And I can add you to the list of posters who will lie to defend their ideology. The bolded above isn't what I said, but you know that. You just don't care.

 

[Belz...]

1. An alternative is, that said position are already on the wrong side of history. No ones presuming they’re going to be left behind, they are behind.

Regardless, moderates don't use that phrase.

1. Godwinned.

Deliberately. I don't need you to tell me what I just did. The point, which I hoped you'd get, is that taking ideas too far can make them dangerous no matter what "side" of the political spectrum you're on.

 

[dahj]

Do you seriously expect me to react to stuff in threads I don't even participate in?

You are participating in this one.

And I can add you to the list of posters who will lie to defend their ideology.

Thanks, two more lies and I'm getting my 'Meritorious Ideologist Comrade' badge.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

A thousand-reach Reich, if you will.

There's the Godwin, a declaration that people opposed to bigotry are like Nazis.

Never mind the fact that calling into question the idea that opposition to bigotry is on the right side of history admits the tenability of the idea that expressions of bigotry are on the right side of history.

Keep going, you're on a roll!