@misslovelymess
War involves killing.
Criminal intent resulting in a death is murder.
I think "killing" and "murder" are slightly different and might have different ethical positions.

If a society was OK with murder, I don't think it could scale very much.

There is a concept of "natural law" where these ethics are addressed. This is probably where the evolutionary instinct is influencing our society's ethics and, ultimately, its definition of Integrity.

A Robot is serving drinks for journalists at the Beijing Olympics.

@mcfate
<phew!>

I think "bigotry" is associated with close-minded 'philistines'.

It might be too loaded of a term to get across my point.

For instance, if a "liberal" were to say "All conservatives are X", would I be able to safely call them a bigot in 2022?

Calling them a "groupist" might provide a runway for a more productive argument.

@mcfate
...and...
I want to ensure you that I'm not trying to defend any antisemitism committed by anyone. If you read that into my response, I'm sorry.

@mcfate
She clearly an ignoramus. I'm not debating that. I was putting a finer point on it because it applies to other groups that are abused.

She can bitch all she wants, and it will merely attract more viewers. People love train wrecks. I actually care very little about this and would rather back out of this rabbit hole.

What I'm more interested in is how do we become more civil and sophisticated in our collective understanding of each other. Media is a means.

@mcfate
The business model is to generate viewers.

There are many ways to achieve this. One is to encourage the performers to be a provocateur. If is a civil discussion it doesn't attract viewers.

At the extreme end of that axis is offensive and socially-unacceptable conduct that scares away sponsors.

The business model requires that they stay somewhere in a moderate zone.

But, the point I was trying to make is that this got so much press that it will ultimately benefit the show.

@mcfate
That's giving her too much credit.
And, I don't believe in conspiracies that are subtle, like threading the needle between truculence and a hate-crime.

@mcfate
Actually, this issue has aligned itself perfectly with the business model of ANY TV show: get viewers.

The Whoopie issue showed up on the PBS Newshour! They never get into lurid news stories. This can only increase viewership.

@mcfate
Well, I'll at least keep thinking about how to! :-)

Story-telling is probably a better way to teach morality.

@mcfate
But isn't that the business model of those shows? Run off their mouths and create drama?
Run off too far and you get suspended for a few weeks.

What would be better is to unpack it so that society becomes more sophisticated on the topic. Maybe then we'll find ways of teaching the benefits and importance of morality - at scale.

@WhoopassGirl
Ah, and that is a recent insight for me: You cannot have a successful argument (or start one) without first asking for a moral position on the topic. Anything can be argued for successfully (even murder or slavery), but not if the moral question is first asked.

Rationality without morality leads to atrocity. Fox News uses this every day to sucker its audience.

@Lindy @LadyZurk
I'm surprised you answered "no" on the first question.
IMO, Trump lacked integrity. He's an overt liar. But a vast portion (almost 1/2) of the society voted for him. They constructed a sufficient belief system to look past his lies and lack of integrity in order to follow and support him.

Am I thinking this through correctly?

@mcfate
At the core of Whoopie's fault is that she's weighting the overt indicator more than the underlying belief construct: Because Jews are often average Caucasian-looking they cannot be the target of racism.

The trigger/indicator is not the issue. It's the underlying belief construct. And, that extends far beyond race. Anything that can be construed as a tribe is a label that can be used.

@damselfly59 @mcfate
What if the bigotry is reversed and it's all about me and my tribe?
Only-Me-ism?
Same mindset.
Jingoist have this mindset, and we're seeing a lot of it in the US.

@mcfate
Then why don't we hear that word used more often?

The Whoopie Goldberg incident initiated this thought. At first I had to understand it Jews were, in face, a Race. That didn't take long, but I did have questions at first.
Then I realized that the term "Race" was irrelevant to the topic. It was Bigotry or Groupism. "Race" was just an attribute of Bigotry in order to create "Racism". That mindset allows many other non-race, unjust actions to be justified.

@Lindy @LadyZurk

Can a society trust a leader who is without Integrity?

Can a leader lead a society that lacks integrity?

@WhoopassGirl
Looks like the main question needs to be taken at two different levels: 1) Person-to-person, and 2) Person-to-Society. Most societies develop into a moderately justice-motivated culture. Otherwise they couldn't scale. I'm currently more interested in understanding the Person-to-Society question. Ultimately: What is a Good Person? What is a Bad Person?

I think we need to know that answer in order to know how to support democracy itself.

@misslovelymess
But, without fundamental values there wouldn't be the Law.
Is it possible that the Law is merely an average of the culture's values? Or, is there still something fundamental about integrity, morality and, ultimately, the Law? Can any culture ever justify murder and survive?

@LadyZurk
So, Trust is built by Integrity?
Can you still trust a person who is without integrity?

@WhoopassGirl
Is Integrity always decoupled from ethics?