|
Also I cited Lyndon Baines "Jumbo dick" Johnson as a favorite, so it's pretty clear I wasn't considering "most perfectly moral" as part of the equation.
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 22:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 08:43 |
|
|
stone cold posted:endorsing marcos= rounding up Japanese Americans and putting them in camps Supporting a brutal, oppressive dictatorial regime and their human rights violations >= supporting the unethical internment of Japanese-Americans But I forgot FDR personally rounded up the Japs by hand and threw them in camps. Am I being trolled?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:Supporting a brutal, oppressive dictatorial regime and their human rights violations >= supporting the unethical internment of Japanese-Americans Wait how do the real world impacts of Chavez's endorsement outweigh FDR's executive orders on internment? One is a statement of support the other is the federal government implementing an unconstitutional plan to deprive their own citizens of property, free will and civil rights. They seem categorically different. Edit: you seem confused, FDR did personally order the creation of internment camps: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_9066
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 22:48
|
|
|
>= is a programming term meaning "greater than OR equal." Some people might consider it a greater human rights violation and therefore worse to support it than actually ordering and administrating something that wasn't, y'know, systematically murdering people. But others might consider them equally heinous.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 22:51
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:Supporting a brutal, oppressive dictatorial regime and their human rights violations >= supporting the unethical internment of Japanese-Americans Chavez personally tortured Ninoy, Pepe, and the other 4000 pinoys, my mistake, you're totally right.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 22:54
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:>= is a programming term meaning "greater than OR equal." Some people might consider it a greater human rights violation and therefore worse to support it than actually ordering and administrating something that wasn't, y'know, systematically murdering people. But others might consider them equally heinous. Right and I'm asking you how on earth you, in your posts, equate a show of support for a bad dude with ordering your troops to literally round up your citizens to deprive them of rights and property. Someone endorsing Stalin isn't as bad as actually rounding your own citizens into camps.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
stone cold posted:Chavez personally tortured Ninoy, Pepe, and the other 4000 pinoys, my mistake, you're totally right. Yep, I'm definitely being trolled Trabisnikof posted:Right and I'm asking you how on earth you, in your posts, equate a show of support for a bad dude with ordering your troops to literally round up your citizens to deprive them of rights and property. I don't really believe in lesser evils. What's bad is bad. You could argue all day on what justifies what or what's "acceptable," or you could just not do bad things.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 23:00
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:Yep, I'm definitely being trolled So are all leaders equally bad in your book? Since bad is bad and I can't imagine anyone who never ever did or supported a bad thing. Like according to your logic Obama and Hilter are equally bad. Maybe they should have just not done bad things?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 23:03
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:Yep, I'm definitely being trolled I'll make sure to let all the Japanese Americans know that their forced imprisonment was as bad as the time Cesar Chavez took a serious misstep in trying to reach out to Pinoy Americans. Thanks for the help!
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 23:04
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:So are all leaders equally bad in your book? Since bad is bad and I can't imagine anyone who never ever did or supported a bad thing. That's the whole point. You can appreciate a politician for the good they did or the upstanding ideas they had, like FDR's New Deal or Chavez's unionization, without endorsing the bad they did, like violating the civil rights of your own citizens or vocally supporting a violent regime. An adult is capable of seeing the good without accepting the bad.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 23:05
|
|
|
Also Obama ordered drone strikes that directly led to the bombing deaths and maiming of innocent civilians, soooo
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:That's the whole point. You can appreciate a politician for the good they did or the upstanding ideas they had, like FDR's New Deal or Chavez's unionization, without endorsing the bad they did, like violating the civil rights of your own citizens or vocally supporting a violent regime. An adult is capable of seeing the good without accepting the bad. "Adults see the world in black and white."  So you don't like anybody, ever, got it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 23:09
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:Also Obama ordered drone strikes that directly led to the bombing deaths and maiming of innocent civilians, soooo Right and to most people, that's not as bad as the holocaust
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 23:11
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Right and to most people, that's not as bad as the holocaust Godwin's Law aside, I'm pretty sure Trump directly said at one point that the stuff he's said and done wasn't as bad as the Nazis, so it was ok. Do you want to be like Trump? More seriously it's really disingenuous to word this like I think the Holocaust wasn't that bad because I wouldn't approve of either it or the drone strikes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 23:14
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:Godwin's Law aside, I'm pretty sure Trump directly said at one point that the stuff he's said and done wasn't as bad as the Nazis, so it was ok. Do you want to be like Trump? You seem to have a rather minimumalist conceptualization of morality if you can't comprehend how one action can be worse than another without either action being good. I can confidently say that the holocaust was worse than the Obama drone program and still say the Obama drone program was bad. That makes sense within my moral framework and doesn't imply that I condone the drone program either. Or to bring it back to California, we can argue about if Prop 13 or 3-strikes is worse while thinking both are bad.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
.
sincx fucked around with this message at 05:49 on Mar 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 23:58
|
|
|
.
sincx fucked around with this message at 05:49 on Mar 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:You seem to have a rather minimumalist conceptualization of morality if you can't comprehend how one action can be worse than another without either action being good. I'm perfectly capable of conceptualizing one thing as morally worse than another. I simply refuse to engage in the Ethical Olympics that are derailing this thread. "Bad things are bad, don't do them," is a very simple moral philosophy and it's difficult to misstep if you follow it, unless you're put in a complex situation with a lot of power, or a trolley problem. Which is why I don't understand why you're having such a difficult time grasping it. Stonecold is trying to bait me into an argument over whether Chavez's endorsement of a violent regime is better than FDR's violations of the civil rights of his own citizens, and it's therefore acceptable to like the former and not the latter. I refuse to be dragged into it. I assume that he/she has some personal connection to descendants of Japanese-American internees since that poster doesn't have a history of trolling in the thread. The victims of the Marcos dictatorship and their descendants might see it differently. It's perfectly fine to like FDR or Chavez or Obama in spite of the bad things that they did, you yourself agree with this. Congratulations to Shdbob for derailing the thread without even trying, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 00:03
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:I'm perfectly capable of conceptualizing one thing as morally worse than another. I simply refuse to engage in the Ethical Olympics that are derailing this thread. "Bad things are bad, don't do them," is a very simple moral philosophy and it's difficult to misstep if you follow it, unless you're put in a complex situation with a lot of power, or a trolley problem. Lol actually I just have compassion for Japanese Americans though I have Pinoy relatives. I didn't realize you had to be related to people to figure out when things are bad, though that sure explains a lot of white tears over reparations.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
Also, equating Cesar Chavez directly with Marcos is really loving disgusting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
the day i find out that Huell Howser had a sick poo fetish is the day i leave this godforsaken republic
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
sincx posted:Why? Because it just might happen? We'd totally kick the Brotherhood of Steel's and Caesar's Legion's rear end TBH.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:the day i find out that Huell Howser had a sick poo fetish is the day i leave this godforsaken republic FYI you can watch every episode of California's Gold here: https://blogs.chapman.edu/huell-howser-archives/ There's even a map so you can see what he covered in your town.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 02:28
|
|
|
The Wiggly Wizard posted:FYI you can watch every episode of California's Gold here: drat you for giving me a reason to want to go to Cypress!
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 03:04
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:Congratulations to Shdbob for derailing the thread without even trying, though. FTFY. My answers are: International: Zhou Enlai National: FDR (repeat) There is no real peer there, despite some less-than-stellar choices. However, I'm surprised no one has thrown out the obvious MLK/Malcolm X options. I'm clearly more on one side or the other but really? California: Chavez (repeat) but offering a non-repeat Huey P. Newton though I also appreciate the martyrdom of Harvey Milk
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 04:50
|
|
|
sincx posted:There are goons in Lamorinda? We are everywhere friend. What part of The Whitest Land do you reside in? Re figure chat, surprised no one mentioned Hiram Johnson. Complicated but interesting guy. How good is Tony Villa? None of the other candidates for governor really excite me. I really don't like Chiang, and Newsome Is eh. Fill Baptismal fucked around with this message at 11:15 on Jan 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 11:12
|
|
|
This thread sucks. You guys suck (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 04:11
|
|
|
.
sincx fucked around with this message at 05:49 on Mar 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 04:40
|
|
|
To be fair it looks like they got shot down pretty drat fast
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 06:31
|
|
|
At least those two old fucks are getting dogpiled by people saying "We're exercising our 1A... What's unamerican about that?? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 06:33
|
|
|
Just wonna say I'm super proud of everyone who showed up at UCD tonight, the anti-milo protesters swooped in a stopped any violence really quick and kept everything peaceful if rowdy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 09:15
|
|
|
If Trump can become president, surely Peter Thiel can become governor. (Yeah right)
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 08:32
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:If Trump can become president, surely Peter Thiel can become governor. (Yeah right) I doubt that Thiel has any care about politics, as it just seems that he just wants to bribe the right person to allow the legalization of him using child slaves as organ and blood donation so that he can attempt to live forever because in his own mind he is a Randian GOD OF MAN.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
Newsom would probably salivate at the thought of running against someone like Thiel.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
I can't wait for republicans to blame CA's rejection of Thiel on the evil liberals hating the gays (who the republicans love very much, forever and ever, as always).
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
Newsom is salivating over running against Thiel the same way that Hillary was over Trump. Newsom suffers from the same "I hate him, but he's inevitable" images that Hillary did. Thiel is more than willing to follow the same "I'll shake things up" path that Trump followed with added libertarianism to attract the college educated white vote. Add in the fact gubernatorial elections are off-year and you have a very real chance of him winning.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
Rah! posted:I can't wait for republicans to blame CA's rejection of Thiel on the evil liberals hating the gays (who the republicans love very much, forever and ever, as always). There will eventually be a generation of gay people who don't remember stonewall or reagans vindictive neglect of aids or the GOP or the fight against marriage. They'll just be dual income no kids couples with no interest in supporting public services.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 21:15
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:If Trump can become president, surely Peter Thiel can become governor. (Yeah right) Arnold Schwarzenegger suggests he possibly could become Governor.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
Weembles posted:with added libertarianism to attract the college* educated white vote. All libertarians are either followers of a less than sane clown posse or truly insane.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 13:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 08:43 |
|
|
revolther posted:All libertarians are either followers of a less than sane clown posse or truly insane. I wish this were true, but going by the number of otherwise sane people I know who think "regulations" are the cause of all the state's problems, I think it's a bigger problem than that. There are a lot of people in the state who are otherwise Republican but are just held back by the race/drugs/gender/homophobia/jesus parts of the party. A Silicon Valley libertarian would be their ideal candidate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 17:06
|
|