Germany Thread: KEIN FASCHISMUS LEUDE BIDDE

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Germany Thread: KEIN FASCHISMUS LEUDE BIDDE

«‹›2045 »

Nenonen: Oct 22, 2009; Mulla on aina kolkyt donaa taskussa

Lunar Suite posted:

Ich trinke nicht.

Do you know who else didn't drink? That's right, Trump

# ? Dec 20, 2016 17:10

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 8, 2024 10:33

Simply Simon: Nov 6, 2010; 📡scanning🛰️ for good game 🎮design🦔🦔🦔

I seriously doubt you can rationally choose to hate "the right way", because hate, by definition, is an irrational emotion. I'm not taking any moral high ground here, like saying I don't hate things or whatever, but one should accept that they do not, in fact, have control over their feelings. What you can definitely do is react to the way you feel, and I judge people by these reactions.
Fear of change, for example, is natural and excusable, but we should be strong enough to overcome it, to suppress it or to channel it into inspiration for guiding inevitable changes into a direction we want, not let the fear overtake us and go into full-blown panic.

The same is true for hatred. It's normal to hate individuals, but it's your choice to tone it down to a level you're comfortable with, or do something to redirect the hate (for example fight for them to never get into power [again]), or let it escalate and call for the death of yes, humans, on an internet forum. It should be clear how I judge these reactions.

Fyi: I'm not currently doing anything, my solution is fatalism (can't do much anyway so why bother getting too upset) and optimism (things will change for the better) paired with stubbornness (and if they won't, I'll make them, somehow).

# ? Dec 20, 2016 17:13

Randler: Jan 3, 2013; ACER ET VEHEMENS BONAVIS

I am curious what your definition of hate is. Because I cannot really see hate being irrational by necessity.

# ? Dec 20, 2016 18:21

TROIKA CURES GREEK: Jun 30, 2015; by R. Guyovich

Hatred isn't by definition irrational, and in general rationality and objectivity are super handwavey concepts anyway.

# ? Dec 20, 2016 18:33

System Metternich: Feb 28, 2010; But what did he mean by that?

I don't think that hating someone or something necessarily constitutes a moral failure, but that more often than not hatred is psychologically unhealthy and, when directed towards people, even dangerous. This depends on how you define “hate“, of course.

e: this is a really good discussion by the way, and even the shitposts were funny, good show everyone!

System Metternich fucked around with this message at 18:45 on Dec 20, 2016

# ? Dec 20, 2016 18:41

Libluini: May 18, 2012; I gravitated towards the Greens, eventually even joining the party itself.

The Linke is a party I grudgingly accept exists, but I've learned enough about DDR-history I can't bring myself to trust a party that was once the SED, a party leading the corrupt state apparatus ...; Grimey Drawer

botany posted:

i don't think emotions carry moral value at all actually. i think actions do.

Emotions come first, though. Emotions induce actions. No one actually rationally decides to act, people only ever use rational thought to justify themselves after the fact. So therefore emotions really do carry moral value. Just maybe a bit less than actually acting on your violent impulses.

# ? Dec 20, 2016 18:47

GaussianCopula: Jun 5, 2011; Jews fleeing the Holocaust are not in any way comparable to North Africans, who don't flee genocide but want to enjoy the social welfare systems of Northern Europe.

Hatred is a very powerful tool to unite a group of individuals.

# ? Dec 20, 2016 18:51

Torrannor: Apr 27, 2013; ---FAGNER---
TEAM-MATE

The Bundesanwaltschaft just released a statement that the Pakistani guy is not the terrorist.

# ? Dec 20, 2016 19:05

Nenonen: Oct 22, 2009; Mulla on aina kolkyt donaa taskussa

Torrannor posted:

The Bundesanwaltschaft just released a statement that the Pakistani guy is not the terrorist.

I hope the guy who stalked him from the Christmas market and called cops to catch him gets awarded a medal. Made of poo poo. So much police time wasted following a red herring while the killer is on loose...

# ? Dec 20, 2016 19:34

botany: Apr 27, 2013; by Lowtax

Libluini posted:

Emotions come first, though. Emotions induce actions. No one actually rationally decides to act, people only ever use rational thought to justify themselves after the fact. So therefore emotions really do carry moral value. Just maybe a bit less than actually acting on your violent impulses.

The bolded bit doesn't follow. Emotions can be the reason for an action, that doesn't by itself mean that the reason rather than the action carries moral value. Of course, at the end of the day there's no fact of the matter to these questions, we're just telling stories about how value judgments come to pass. I just happen to like my story more than yours.

# ? Dec 20, 2016 19:37

Simply Simon: Nov 6, 2010; 📡scanning🛰️ for good game 🎮design🦔🦔🦔

Randler posted:

I am curious what your definition of hate is. Because I cannot really see hate being irrational by necessity.

Well, I cannot quite grasp the idea of a "rational hatred". What would that be, the response to your kid getting murdered by someone? I'd say the hatred you feel against the murderer is a logical consequence, a completely natural thing and nothing to condemn, but it's still irrational. In fact, it makes you irrational. If you were purely rational, your only response would be "well, my kid is dead now and that's not something I can change, so I guess I should make sure to get that guy locked up so he doesn't murder any more kids". Or something. Even caring about other kids might be irrational if you think (and only think) far enough.

Of course, that would also be completely un-human of you, we need reason and emotion to make us what we are. But I do see them as complete opposites.

# ? Dec 20, 2016 20:46

Cingulate: Oct 23, 2012; by Fluffdaddy

botany posted:

i think this whole determinism debate is fraught with category mistakes and unclear concepts, but we should probably take it to PMs if you're interested in debating that further.

It seems to me thread consensus is this is an interesting topic to discuss, right?

# ? Dec 20, 2016 21:01

Libluini: May 18, 2012; I gravitated towards the Greens, eventually even joining the party itself.

The Linke is a party I grudgingly accept exists, but I've learned enough about DDR-history I can't bring myself to trust a party that was once the SED, a party leading the corrupt state apparatus ...; Grimey Drawer

botany posted:

The bolded bit doesn't follow. Emotions can be the reason for an action, that doesn't by itself mean that the reason rather than the action carries moral value. Of course, at the end of the day there's no fact of the matter to these questions, we're just telling stories about how value judgments come to pass. I just happen to like my story more than yours.

It follows because without emotions, there would be no action. So how can emotions not carry moral value?

# ? Dec 20, 2016 21:03

Cingulate: Oct 23, 2012; by Fluffdaddy

Simply Simon posted:

I seriously doubt you can rationally choose to hate "the right way", because hate, by definition, is an irrational emotion. I'm not taking any moral high ground here, like saying I don't hate things or whatever, but one should accept that they do not, in fact, have control over their feelings.

I can perfectly well control my feelings, including my hatred. For example, I could now watch anti-islamic propaganda, read up accounts by women attacked during Cologne's NYE celebrations, suicide bomb attack survivors, ISIS propaganda, and islamists laughing at their victims. If I did that for a while, I'd get pretty depressed, but I'd also probably feel hatred. Alternatively, I could read buddhist literature, meditate, and constantly remind myself that we are all just the unlucky products of our genes and our environments, that I too might have done terrible things had I been born into Nazi Germany or a Palestinian camp*, and then I would probably feel much less hatred.
Now preexisting hatred might make it harder to chose the latter option, but there is a perfectly clear causal chain between a person's actions and a person's hatred here.

* Not trying to say these two are perfect analogies, just that they both tend to make young people do violent things

# ? Dec 20, 2016 21:27

botany: Apr 27, 2013; by Lowtax

Cingulate posted:

It seems to me thread consensus is this is an interesting topic to discuss, right?

It is interesting but a complete derail, since it has nothing to do with German politics or news. If you want you can start a thread here or in the academics/philosophy subforum, but I don't think it fits here. The discussion is too huge and too complicated to be done with in a page or two.

Libluini posted:

It follows because without emotions, there would be no action. So how can emotions not carry moral value?

Arson depends on matches (or other fire starting equipment), doesn't mean that matches are immoral. The main problem I see is this: emotions / intentions are opaque, meaning if I want to know what you're feeling I have very little to go on outside of what you're telling me about your feelings. That makes value attributions obviously difficult. You might counter and say that people perform their emotions, i.e. they cry out when they feel pain or shout when they are angry. But crying / shouting are actions, not emotions. It seems to me that actions are the only thing that you can use to influence the world, and that they are the only things I can be reasonably sure about, so I prefer to think about moral judgments in terms of actions rather than emotions. This has several pragmatic benefits as well, i.e. I don't have to care whether deep down inside you truly hate black people, I only have to check whether your actions systematically negatively impact them to call you a racist.

# ? Dec 20, 2016 23:29

Libluini: May 18, 2012; I gravitated towards the Greens, eventually even joining the party itself.

The Linke is a party I grudgingly accept exists, but I've learned enough about DDR-history I can't bring myself to trust a party that was once the SED, a party leading the corrupt state apparatus ...; Grimey Drawer

botany posted:

It is interesting but a complete derail, since it has nothing to do with German politics or news. If you want you can start a thread here or in the academics/philosophy subforum, but I don't think it fits here. The discussion is too huge and too complicated to be done with in a page or two.

Arson depends on matches (or other fire starting equipment), doesn't mean that matches are immoral. The main problem I see is this: emotions / intentions are opaque, meaning if I want to know what you're feeling I have very little to go on outside of what you're telling me about your feelings. That makes value attributions obviously difficult. You might counter and say that people perform their emotions, i.e. they cry out when they feel pain or shout when they are angry. But crying / shouting are actions, not emotions. It seems to me that actions are the only thing that you can use to influence the world, and that they are the only things I can be reasonably sure about, so I prefer to think about moral judgments in terms of actions rather than emotions. This has several pragmatic benefits as well, i.e. I don't have to care whether deep down inside you truly hate black people, I only have to check whether your actions systematically negatively impact them to call you a racist.

Well, you could jack needles into people and try to find out what level of drugs produced by our glands matches what kind of emotional state, but I think most people wouldn't like that. There's also some work done with mapping brain activity to certain states. Though a lot of this is just guessing games mixed with really simple stuff like "if your brain stops producing drug A, you will feel depressed".

But just because all that stuff is hard to measure, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I know this is more like philosophy at this point, so I suggest we drop this derail before we both start out researching stuff to bombard each other with sources. :v:

Edit:

quote:

Arson depends on matches (or other fire starting equipment), doesn't mean that matches are immoral.

This part is invalid. Emotions are not actual physical objects separate from our bodies, they are states induced by our bodies. But sure, they have a lot less moral relevance than the actions they trigger. Just not zero.

Libluini fucked around with this message at 23:58 on Dec 20, 2016

# ? Dec 20, 2016 23:52

botany: Apr 27, 2013; by Lowtax

Libluini posted:

Well, you could jack needles into people and try to find out what level of drugs produced by our glands matches what kind of emotional state, but I think most people wouldn't like that. There's also some work done with mapping brain activity to certain states. Though a lot of this is just guessing games mixed with really simple stuff like "if your brain stops producing drug A, you will feel depressed".

But just because all that stuff is hard to measure, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I know this is more like philosophy at this point, so I suggest we drop this derail before we both start out researching stuff to bombard each other with sources.

Yeah, sorry about that, haha. I actually work in academic philosophy, so this stuff sometimes just creeps in. Generally I try to keep it down :shobon:

# ? Dec 20, 2016 23:56

Mithaldu: Sep 25, 2007; Let's cuddle.

I don't care to discuss all of this on a, well, high-falutin' level.

All i know is:

1. It is great and super useful for one's own mental health to recognize when something is entirely outside of one's control, and to be able to accept it as how the world is.
2. It is very very valuable to be able to understand and empathize with the most horrid of people, just to have the tools at hand when they might be willing to listen.
3. It is necessary to understand that sometimes people are beyond words, even if you completely understand the sordid path that made them and feel sorry for them.

# ? Dec 21, 2016 00:22

Lunar Suite: Jun 5, 2011; If you love a flower which happens to be on a star, it is sweet at night to gaze at the sky. All the stars are a riot of flowers.

So I heard the suspect has been released and I'd likely innocent?

# ? Dec 21, 2016 00:27

GABA ghoul: Oct 29, 2011

Lunar Suite posted:

So I heard the suspect has been released and I'd likely innocent?

Yeah, the Pakistani turned out to be a red herring and had nothing to do with the attack.

Police is now saying that there is a possibility that the attacker might still be out there, whatever the gently caress that means. Maybe they are also investigating the possibility that trucks have become self-aware and are trying to kill all humans?

# ? Dec 21, 2016 00:33

Mithaldu: Sep 25, 2007; Let's cuddle.

You didn't link to your source, so i can only guess, but my guess is if they said something roughly like what you said, they meant "in berlin".

# ? Dec 21, 2016 00:38

aphid_licker: Jan 7, 2009

Haunted truck killing its driver and going on a murder spree would be a pretty :2016: scenario...

# ? Dec 21, 2016 00:56

Majorian: Jul 1, 2009

aphid_licker posted:

Haunted truck killing its driver and going on a murder spree would be a pretty :2016: scenario...

If you haven't seen "Maximum Overdrive," boy, are you in for a treat!

# ? Dec 21, 2016 01:07

Mithaldu: Sep 25, 2007; Let's cuddle.

Die unsäglichen Reaktionen der AfD heute sind unglaublich vorhersehbar. Poggenburg hat richtig Spaß auf Twitter.

# ? Dec 21, 2016 10:24

aphid_licker: Jan 7, 2009

Es ist ihr Gesch�ftsmodell / zentraler Bestandteil ihres Weltbilds. Klar holen sie da das Maximum raus / besch�ftigt sie das. Anschl�ge sind f�r die AfD was Schmelzrunter f�r Gr�ne sind.

# ? Dec 21, 2016 10:38

Sheik Yerbouti: Apr 14, 2009; You can't always write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say, so sometimes you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whipped cream.

Die CSU ist auch fleißig mit dabei.

# ? Dec 21, 2016 10:43

System Metternich: Feb 28, 2010; But what did he mean by that?

Welp, apparently it was a Tunisian and they're looking for him throughout the country now.

Otoh they only “know“ this because they found his asylum papers underneath the driver's seat, which sounds skeevy as hell to me. Why would the attacker even carry his papers with him? This is either the IS demonstrating that they managed to get one of their own into Germany as a refugee or someone trying to deflect the blame by putting in stolen papers as a red herring imo. Probably the former though :smith:

# ? Dec 21, 2016 11:55

Perestroika: Apr 8, 2010

System Metternich posted:

Welp, apparently it was a Tunisian and they're looking for him throughout the country now.

Otoh they only “know“ this because they found his asylum papers underneath the driver's seat, which sounds skeevy as hell to me. Why would the attacker even carry his papers with him? This is either the IS demonstrating that they managed to get one of their own into Germany as a refugee or someone trying to deflect the blame by putting in stolen papers as a red herring imo. Probably the former though

Yeah, didn't a similar thing happen with the Paris attacks, where a fake refugee-status passport was planted very conspicuously by the attackers?

# ? Dec 21, 2016 12:06

GaussianCopula: Jun 5, 2011; Jews fleeing the Holocaust are not in any way comparable to North Africans, who don't flee genocide but want to enjoy the social welfare systems of Northern Europe.

System Metternich posted:

Welp, apparently it was a Tunisian and they're looking for him throughout the country now.

Otoh they only “know“ this because they found his asylum papers underneath the driver's seat, which sounds skeevy as hell to me. Why would the attacker even carry his papers with him? This is either the IS demonstrating that they managed to get one of their own into Germany as a refugee or someone trying to deflect the blame by putting in stolen papers as a red herring imo. Probably the former though

This "ISIS only sends their agents as refugees to demonstrate that they can get into Germany as refugees even though they have better options" argument is very unconvinced. First of all, there is the question whether this guy was even explicitly sent by ISIS or if he radicalized once he was in Germany. Second, we don't know whether he was actually handled by ISIS or just followed their call to action. Third, you just assume that the papers were placed there on purpose to be found, there are multiple reasons why he might have had them with him (e.g. to show them to police if he were to be controlled before taking over the truck).

But sure, it's all an ISIS plan to anti refugee sentiments, which absolutely relies on those papers being found.

Perestroika posted:

Yeah, didn't a similar thing happen with the Paris attacks, where a fake refugee-status passport was planted very conspicuously by the attackers?

In Paris a fake passport was found, but this passport was not faked to look like a refugee, but to be used to get to France by a terrorist posing as refugee. That's an important difference.

GaussianCopula fucked around with this message at 12:14 on Dec 21, 2016

# ? Dec 21, 2016 12:11

Nenonen: Oct 22, 2009; Mulla on aina kolkyt donaa taskussa

System Metternich posted:

Welp, apparently it was a Tunisian and they're looking for him throughout the country now.

Otoh they only “know“ this because they found his asylum papers underneath the driver's seat, which sounds skeevy as hell to me. Why would the attacker even carry his papers with him? This is either the IS demonstrating that they managed to get one of their own into Germany as a refugee or someone trying to deflect the blame by putting in stolen papers as a red herring imo. Probably the former though

Or maybe just an honest mistake, things didn't go as planned and he panicked. Maybe he carried papers in case police came asking questions while he was looking for a Polish truck to hijack. He didn't expect to get away alive, but then after the crash lost his nerve and escaped, leaving some belongings to the truck. That would seem like a more natural explanation.

Or maybe the truck hit a Tunisian asylum seeker who was selling christmas trees and by some massive fluke his wallet flew through the broken windshield and slipped under the driver's seat...

But yeah, theories are theories, let's hope the person is found soon whoever he really is.

# ? Dec 21, 2016 12:18

Mithaldu: Sep 25, 2007; Let's cuddle.

GaussianCopula posted:

it's all an ISIS plan to anti refugee sentiments

While the facets you talk about are sensible, this interpretation of what he said is straight-up idiotic and not remotely what he said. Stop being such a dumb poo poo.

# ? Dec 21, 2016 12:19

Smirr: Jun 28, 2012

What I find puzzling is why they held the first guy for almost a day when they had this Tunisian guy's document. Unless it took them that long to find the document.

Btw I can't stop thinking about the Polish truck driver either. Apparently he might even have been alive during the attack and grabbed the steering wheel, and been shot only at the very end. Jesus loving Christ

# ? Dec 21, 2016 12:35

Flayer: Sep 13, 2003; by Fluffdaddy; Buglord

I would suppose then that the Polish driver was being held hostage and forced to drive to the location and once he got there and realised the intent tried to fight back and was unfortunately killed. Driving a big truck like that requires a certain level of skill which the assailant may not have had.

Can't think of any other reason the Polish driver would have been alive and in the truck during the attack.

I'm not exactly confident in anything the German police have to say at this point though, considering it apparently took them this long to look under the drivers seat. Another super obvious clue might become apparent at any time eg the asylum papers being fake or something.

# ? Dec 21, 2016 13:00

GABA ghoul: Oct 29, 2011

There is a disturbing lack of afd kotze in this thread

# ? Dec 21, 2016 13:24

Nenonen: Oct 22, 2009; Mulla on aina kolkyt donaa taskussa

Flayer posted:

I would suppose then that the Polish driver was being held hostage and forced to drive to the location and once he got there and realised the intent tried to fight back and was unfortunately killed. Driving a big truck like that requires a certain level of skill which the assailant may not have had.

Can't think of any other reason the Polish driver would have been alive and in the truck during the attack.

I'm not exactly confident in anything the German police have to say at this point though, considering it apparently took them this long to look under the drivers seat. Another super obvious clue might become apparent at any time eg the asylum papers being fake or something.

The Polish man wasn't alive during the attack. He was found shot in the passenger seat, I don't know if you have ever tried to move a dead 120kg trucker body around in a truck cabin but I can tell you it ain't easy. Someone would surely have noticed if it had happened near the market.

We also don't know when the police found the papers. All we know is that they released the information today. Here's some factors to consider:

- looking through a cramped truck cabin for evidence is a slow job because only one man will fit in from either side, and any fiber or stain could be evidence and after a crash there'd also be lots of debris to sort through - it isn't like searching for lost car keys under your sofa

- once the papers were found the police still had to check if the name and photo are authentic (there's news that he was using "at least two" false identities)

- once the name was determined there's still the possibility that the police didn't want to immediately release it to the public to not alert the terrorist

# ? Dec 21, 2016 13:31

Smirr: Jun 28, 2012

One hot take I've seen in the comments sections about the papers is that they were deliberately planted there, because it was a false flag attack, orchestrated by... you guessed it, Russia.

# ? Dec 21, 2016 13:38

Nenonen: Oct 22, 2009; Mulla on aina kolkyt donaa taskussa

Smirr posted:

One hot take I've seen in the comments sections about the papers is that they were deliberately planted there, because it was a false flag attack, orchestrated by... you guessed it, Russia.

It was Putin's retaliation to the NATO false flag attack against Russian ambassador

# ? Dec 21, 2016 13:41