|
VideoTapir posted:Ford gets credit for Apple? Or would it be Carter, since that's when they really took off? Carter  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCOd-qWZB_g&t=617s Content Snipe: Here's an Excerpt from The Oculus Report quote:Because secession is happening. It’s happening all over the world. As the universalism of the Global Luciferian Revolution begins to bite, nationalism is biting back. Examples of nationalist movements abound: Jobbik in Hungary; the Catalonian and Basque separatist movements in Spain; Lega Nord, advocating a Padania independent of Italy; the powerful Flemish and Waloon separatists of Belgium; South Africa’s Volkstaat and Cape Republic advocates; and many more, on every inhabited continent of the world. Here in North America, secessionist and nationalist groups have appeared as well, from Quebec to Puerto Rico, from Hawaii to Vermont, and everywhere in between. Death to Racial Nationalism. Americans Integrate. Mc Do Well fucked around with this message at 18:35 on Dec 27, 2013 |
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 18:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 01:13 |
|
|
FuzzySkinner posted:I also don't understand the whole "WELL X-COUNTRY DID WORSE TO THEIR GAYS! FOCUS ON THEM!/WELL X-PERSON SAID WORSE COMMENTS, AND HE'S A LIEBERAL!". Shouldn't the point be you should hold yourself to a higher standard? Yeah but they try and do it and come up with nothing so
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
ratbert90 posted:Millennials! Even before it was the "cup of shut the gently caress up" macro, this was from a wartime poster -  Further proof that conservatives are physically incapable of separating propaganda from reality Edit: Not to mention the hilarity of what the original poster is encouraging
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
FuzzySkinner posted:I also don't understand the whole "WELL X-COUNTRY DID WORSE TO THEIR GAYS! FOCUS ON THEM!/WELL X-PERSON SAID WORSE COMMENTS, AND HE'S A LIEBERAL!". Shouldn't the point be you should hold yourself to a higher standard? Its literally the argument that children are starving in africa so you goddamned better eat your peas and be happy for them. Its attempting to say that just because they are not the worst, literally the worst, they should be immune to all criticism. They argue that since they are *better* than these crazed people who want to murder gay people (instead choosing to just oppress and ensure they aren't able to find happiness) you should shut the gently caress up and be glad that they aren't crying for all gays to be burned at the stake or some bullshit like that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
The American public should sacrifice while the military industrial complex gets full funding? Poster is working as intended.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 20:10
|
|
|
Edible Hat posted:So, here are the years those companies were founded: IBM was formed in 1911 (As Computing Tabulating Recording Company), but it was a corporate merger so at that point the business had definitely grown beyond the "garage" state. The primary company was the Tabulating Machine Company, founded by Herman Hollerith in 1896. He invented the tabulator while working for the Census between 1884 and 1889. A victory for Grovernomics.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 20:13
|
|
|
.
PUGGERNAUT fucked around with this message at 04:35 on Mar 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 23:14
|
|
|
This is sorta the opposite of this thread's normal purpose, but on the airplane ride home yesterday the middle-aged couple behind me was talking to an elderly man about how "ruined our country has become," how powerful unions are now, and how proud they are of their Financial Advisor son with all the money he's making these days, and eventually the old dude just told them to shut up, that he was and will always be a union man, and that it's people like them that are making us the laughing stock of the developed world. Rock on, fat old teacher man, rock on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 23:19
|
|
|
PUGGERNAUT posted:I cannot have a conversation with my mother in law. I mentioned how lovely the roads in Arkansas were and she said "well that's government for you, taking your money and giving it to people who don't need it and not funding the services that need it." She turns so many conversations into some criticism of our religious or political beliefs and if we try to defend ourselves we're being "rude". That's pretty much what being around my dad has become. It's like he puts effort into being miserable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 23:20
|
|
|
PUGGERNAUT posted:I cannot have a conversation with my mother in law. I mentioned how lovely the roads in Arkansas were and she said "well that's government for you, taking your money and giving it to people who don't need it and not funding the services that need it." She turns so many conversations into some criticism of our religious or political beliefs and if we try to defend ourselves we're being "rude". I have relatives that are this way, and I always have to push back to the point of rudeness just out of sheer spite. I get into lots of trouble for it, but I am not going to let people like that belittle me and my family to my face. The best way to handle it for me has been to continue being "rude" without a care to their poor wittle feewings. Be quick, sharp, and witty when responding to their bullshit, and don't let them make stupid statements without pushing back. For me allowing that kind of stuff to go unpunished was part of the reason they did it in the first place. Stick up for you and yours and they'll think twice before saying stupid poo poo (not always).
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 23:54
|
|
|
Dont worry guys, Phil Robertson isnt really racist for thinking black folks were better off under Jim Crow:quote:I read the GQ article, linked here. There is not one statement to the tune of Mr.Robertson saying blacks lived better under Jim Crow. In fact there is no reference to Jim Crow laws at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 23:56
|
|
|
Sword of Chomsky posted:I have relatives that are this way, and I always have to push back to the point of rudeness just out of sheer spite. I get into lots of trouble for it, but I am not going to let people like that belittle me and my family to my face. The best way to handle it for me has been to continue being "rude" without a care to their poor wittle feewings. Be quick, sharp, and witty when responding to their bullshit, and don't let them make stupid statements without pushing back. For me allowing that kind of stuff to go unpunished was part of the reason they did it in the first place. Stick up for you and yours and they'll think twice before saying stupid poo poo (not always). Seriously, My whole family varies between liberal and full blown communist so its easy for me to talk but if I had to put up with that poo poo I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be silent about it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 23:59
|
|
|
Axetrain posted:Seriously, My whole family varies between liberal and full blown communist so its easy for me to talk but if I had to put up with that poo poo I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be silent about it. Sometimes I think relatives bring up political stuff just to provoke an argument and I don't want to give them the satisfaction - I'd rather just say "okay whatever" and change the subject ASAP. Neither one of us is gonna change the other's mind so what's the point?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 00:07
|
|
|
PUGGERNAUT posted:Sometimes I think relatives bring up political stuff just to provoke an argument and I don't want to give them the satisfaction - I'd rather just say "okay whatever" and change the subject ASAP. Neither one of us is gonna change the other's mind so what's the point? For me it wasn't about winning hearts and minds, it was about not letting the bullshit stand. My family knows that if you say something stupid, bigoted, ignorant, or whatever around me that you will get an earful. I don't care if they agree or not. The point is to stand your ground and not be bulldozed by lovely people with lovely opinions. Not standing up to that poo poo is letting them walk all over you and your beliefs. If you show them that you will allow them to, they will. Give them a good shaming and they will remember that you are not to be disrespected in that manner. You don't have to be a complete dick, but showing a little backbone can really help.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 00:29
|
|
|
.
PUGGERNAUT fucked around with this message at 06:10 on Feb 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 00:40
|
|
|
Welp I'm getting much well-deserved payback for my smug libertarian days when I adamantly refused to acknowledge that white privilege could possibly matter. A guy posts this article, and the discussion has been, well, frustrating. Maybe I'm just doing a bad job of explaining in short Facebook comments: might any of you goons know about an article somewhere that explains this way better than I can? I should warn you before you read the following exchange that I'm the real bigot because I don't think Christians should say how gross gay sex is anymore. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 00:47
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Welp I'm getting much well-deserved payback for my smug libertarian days when I adamantly refused to acknowledge that white privilege could possibly matter. You must tolerate intolerance is basically what he is saying. It is stupid argument, but he doesn't seem to be able to grasp that fact.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 00:58
|
|
|
It is really hard to get people to recognize their privilege, so I wouldn't get your hopes up. I'd start by pointing out that we do have ways of determining what's right and wrong without resorting to religion. For instance, we as a society may observe that the children of incest are more prone to genetic conditions than the children of unrelated parents, or that women in polygamist marriages tend to be ill-treated more often than their monogamous sisters, and decide that preventing that the suffering that polygamy and incest might cause is more important than allowing people the freedom to marry and have children with whomever they choose.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 01:03
|
|
|
There is probably a good argument to be had about how much leverage your employer should have regarding whether or not they can fire you, for example I imagine most people here would be against an employer being able to fire workers for attempting to unionize. With that in mind most of the people who are upset over this are completely fine with companies shitcanning workers for any and all reasons right up until the point where it happens to inconvenience their own personal beliefs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 01:13
|
|
|
It's too late to help in this argument, but raising privilege vocabulary is a really poor way to go in these arguments, even if it's accurate. It's more productive to identify specific examples of the problem in the belief(in this case, the circularity of the tolerance argument) and develop a set of leading questions to force the speaker to contradict themselves. Privilege frameworks, while not without merit, are generally extremely counterproductive in arguments because they 1. are a face attack to your conversation partner that gets them extremely defensive and angry almost immediately, and 2. tend to be vulnerable to cultural relativism and standpoint attacks that will bog down the argument and make you lose credibility with any audience that's not already on your side. If the audience isn't already familiar with the problems of societally ingrained privilege, then when you bring up privilege, it feels like a straight up authority claim to an outside viewer. "I am right about this because of an invisible force that is limiting your ability to understand the issue clearly." On top of that, for individuals invested in right-wing ideologies, privilege is basically a trigger word they've already been taught to identify with "meaningless leftie ivory tower bullshit". For all these reasons, while privilege may be a powerful tool of social criticism, but it's generally useless for actually winning arguments/hearts/minds.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 01:16
|
|
|
Axetrain posted:There is probably a good argument to be had about how much leverage your employer should have regarding whether or not they can fire you, for example I imagine most people here would be against an employer being able to fire workers for attempting to unionize. With that in mind most of the people who are upset over this are completely fine with companies shitcanning workers for any and all reasons right up until the point where it happens to inconvenience their own personal beliefs. The only valid labor rights are my labor rights. It's a very common occurence in modern conservatism to only start caring about something when it happens to them. They then complain as if they are being enslaved while completely ignoring the fact that countless other groups or people have been treated that way in the past. It is no different than when a politician comes out in favor of gay rights after their son or daughter comes out publicly while still completely ignoring any bigotry agsisnt that group that has transpired in the past or will in the future.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 01:18
|
|
|
We're doing the Christmas stuff in my family today and tomorrow so I just had the joy of listening to my very conservative farmer brother in law declare how they have a neighbor with ALS and that the doctors at her hospital refused treatment because Obamacare.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 01:50
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:We're doing the Christmas stuff in my family today and tomorrow so I just had the joy of listening to my very conservative farmer brother in law declare how they have a neighbor with ALS and that the doctors at her hospital refused treatment because Obamacare. Killing the public option was actually pretty genius, because now conservatives can take all the lovely things that insurance companies have been doing forever but which they never cared about before; and suddenly cry all these crocodile tears about the uninsured and blame anything bad that happens on Obama regardless of whether its a legitimate new problem with the ACA or just something that happens all the time anyway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 01:53
|
|
|
My sister invoked death panels without actually using the word but stated that it was a government panel that decided the care level. Also BIL stated that the guy from Duck Dynasty is his hero now and he's glad that "somebody is telling the truth." So, yes, he is a horrible human being. muscles like this! fucked around with this message at 02:14 on Dec 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 01:56
|
|
|
I like how he claims history is irrelevant. That is the only reason such a copout argument would ever work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 02:20
|
|
|
Buzkashi posted:Even before it was the "cup of shut the gently caress up" macro, this was from a wartime poster - I made a thing. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 04:10
|
|
|
pd187 posted:I made a thing. Nice authentic touch in the corner!
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 04:12
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:Nice authentic touch in the corner! Thanks! Sometimes I add too much. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 04:24
|
|
|
I think I might be in the running for the biting tongue around family Christmas award this year. "Oh that's a cute Negro Barbie!" -- Mother-in-law
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 04:40
|
|
|
"Obama should be impeached and thrown in jail for lying to us about Obamacare." -My dad on Christmas Eve "I don't think people should be held responsible for the things they say." -My dad talking about Duck Dynasty today Also my dad claimed that the platinum plan for him had a $10,000 deductible and was $1,000 a month. I pulled up the exchange on my laptop. The highest deductible was $1,000 and was $600 a month for a platinum plan. The $10,000 was the annual out-of-pocket limit. He then claimed that it was still more expensive than what he paid now. Turns out that's because his employer pays a portion of his insurance (something he didn't realize) and without his employer's contribution his insurance would be $800 a month. But premiums are going up! They said so on the news!
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 05:29
|
|
|
Is anyone else noticing a huge overlap between people who defended Rand Paul over saying we don't need the Civil Rights Act because the free market would take care of bigotry and people who are angry as gently caress over the Duck Dynasty suspension, calling it a violation of free speech? Because I just realized this morning that a venn diagram of those two camps for my Facebook friends would essentially just be a single circle and it's pretty loving ironic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 17:10
|
|
|
A Fancy 400 lbs posted:Is anyone else noticing a huge overlap between people who defended Rand Paul over saying we don't need the Civil Rights Act because the free market would take care of bigotry and people who are angry as gently caress over the Duck Dynasty suspension, calling it a violation of free speech? Because I just realized this morning that a venn diagram of those two camps for my Facebook friends would essentially just be a single circle and it's pretty loving ironic. He's back on the show apparently, so I got to smug it up to my "straight white Christians are the true persecuted minority" acquaintance by pointing out that once again half the country rallies around a Christian to defend his bigotry against black and gay people and succeeds in protecting him from consequences, while we still can't get a vote on the ENDA. It feels great to be right  Oh wait..hold on a sec... 
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 17:13
|
|
|
I'm essentially thinking it was a publicity stunt at this point. So they indefinitely suspended him from filming... then lifted it before filming for the new season had even started? That just sounds like a plan to get lots of attention when just releasing a statement saying "We disagree with his views" would've had literally the same exact impact in every way besides grabbing headlines and getting people who wouldn't normally talk about the show to talk about it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 17:20
|
|
|
Random request, but does anyone happen to know of a good general debunking for the "The United States has one of the highest murder rates in the world, but when you remove [random list of cities that just so happen to be populated by URBAN people, by pure coincidence, I'm sure], it ranks fourth from the bottom, even below other countries with gun control!!!!" forward? I got hammered by that at Christmas, and want to at least make a token attempt at a rebuttal. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 17:58
|
|
|
Are you allowed to remove impoverished areas from every country, or just the US?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 17:59
|
|
|
Generic American posted:Random request, but does anyone happen to know of a good general debunking for the "The United States has one of the highest murder rates in the world, but when you remove [random list of cities that just so happen to be populated by URBAN people, by pure coincidence, I'm sure], it ranks fourth from the bottom, even below other countries with gun control!!!!" forward? I got hammered by that at Christmas, and want to at least make a token attempt at a rebuttal. Just looking at the chart on wiki of murder rates, the US having a top murder rate isn't even close to correct. Unless you're only counting "real" (i.e. western) countries. I couldn't do an accurate recounting without knowing the exact cities that are being discussed, but usually these lies are built around discounting the urban murders, but not the urban population. There can be a lot fewer murders in rural areas, but the rate can be deceptively high due low populations. Besides the standard dog whistle, these things are designed to confuse people who don't understand statistics at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 18:08
|
|
|
prom candy posted:Are you allowed to remove impoverished areas from every country, or just the US? Just the U.S. of course. The idea that poverty breed the kind of desperation that leads to crime is not controversial, and doesn't seem to imply that certain groups are inherently criminal. So of course these things are never discussed in that context.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 18:10
|
|
|
prom candy posted:Are you allowed to remove impoverished areas from every country, or just the US?  rkajdi posted:I couldn't do an accurate recounting without knowing the exact cities that are being discussed
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 18:20
|
|
|
I got a really bizarre link from my uncle on Facebook the other day: http://www.amerikanexpose.com/hegel/that website posted:Why is it important for you to understand the subject of the Hegelian Dialectic? Because it is the process by which all change is being accomplished in society today. More importantly, it is the tool that the globalists are utilizing to manipulate the minds of the average American to accept that change, where ordinarily they would refuse it. I'm not ashamed to admit that my only understanding of Hegelian Dialectics comes from talking to Caesar in Fallout: New Vegas. But after reading about it a little bit on Wikipedia, I just don't get why he'd post this. How is it a "tool for the ruling class" when it seems to be more like a hypothetical model for how conflicts get resolved?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 18:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 01:13 |
|
|
Generic American posted:Random request, but does anyone happen to know of a good general debunking for the "The United States has one of the highest murder rates in the world, but when you remove [random list of cities that just so happen to be populated by URBAN people, by pure coincidence, I'm sure], it ranks fourth from the bottom, even below other countries with gun control!!!!" forward? I got hammered by that at Christmas, and want to at least make a token attempt at a rebuttal. Ask them to provide numbers and sources to back them. This came up earlier in the thread: Derek Agony posted:This is so wrong it's farcical. For the US to be 3rd in the world in murder rates it'd need to have 57 murders per 100,000 population, or 180,710 murders a year. Based on the chart on that wikipedia page, the U.S. ranks 103rd highest in murder rates by country. Not 3rd. Basically the numbers are bullshit and you should literally just say so until they admit they haven't looked up the numbers and then tell them they probably shouldn't say things are true that they don't know are actually true. Also 4th from the bottom would put them below Japan just barely, and Japan has pretty strict gun laws last I read about them. They also benefit from being a tightly packed island nation in enforcing those gun laws but I doubt whoever you are talking to on the subject that brought up this argument would have any intention of having a nuanced view of gun control.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 18:57
|
|
