|
Voyager I posted:Also, you can argue against an explicit statement of FYGM simply by addressing the underlying belief that personal greed is more important than anything else. it's not really a winning argument you can't really show how it's "wrong" to the people who have benefitted because they just don't give a poo poo about other people. quote:I cannot have political debates with these people. Our disagreement is not merely political, but a fundamental divide on what it means to live in a society, how to be a good person, and why any of that matters. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/i-dont-know-how-to-explain-to-you-that-you-should_us_59519811e4b0f078efd98440
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 07:05 |
|
|
Yeah, it's hard to have productive arguments when you disagree about basic facts. No disagreement there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:the republican party as a whole hasn't been "decent" since pre-southern strategy so we're talking fiftyish years. I don't know if that's entirely true. Part of the reason they had to dog-whistle was because many of their own party believed they weren't really racist (instead of today, when many of them are ardently and openly racist) and that the free market was legitimately the better system for all (including the poor). Hatred of the poor for being the poor is recent. There was this notion that they were working in the better interests of the entire nation. Some even genuflected towards experts and issues like global warming were actually considered bipartisan (at one point there was even a conservationist wing in the party). The level of complete fact-free bankruptcy is pretty new, although clearly pinning a date on when it started is pretty difficult. Another small anecdote. My father-in-law is a old-style conservative. He willingly served in Vietnam. He's homophobic, probably sexist/racist and hates the Clintons and the Dems with a passion. In the November election he voted Clinton because he recognized that a career politician will be better for the country and for national security than an incompetent orange hairpiece. He's a dying breed and his brand of sobriety is basically totally unwelcome in the new GOP. That kind of transformation seems relatively recent.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
business hammocks posted:It sucks that the internet has become a tool for recruitment for reactos and our institutions will eventually have to adapt by teaching better methods for critical thinking, but it cuts both ways. I'm in DSA and I have a local chapter now of like 1,000 people and a lot of the college-age ones make and circulate memes and consider that poo poo part of their political education. There didn't used to be a local chapter at all, just like a dozen people and one banner and two flags. The faster we recognize this and use this ourselves, the better. There is no going back.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
Intrinsic Field Marshal posted:The CP shitposters have mainly left 4chan Good to know if true. Wish they had done the same to white supremacists.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
the FBI are white supremacists or at least they were when they were murdering the leaders of the Black Panthers
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
they still are, prior to the election people were referring to the fbi as "trumpland".
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:the FBI are white supremacists LEOs are a serious target for penetration by white supremacists... however, there was a period in the 90's when they were actively focused on infiltrating and destroying white supremacist organizations on their own. The FBI has changed its identity several times over the last five to six decades.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
Since vidcon and perhaps the Laci Green drama, the skeptics are talking about toning down the trolling now that they've been meeting SJWs in person and started having more dialogs between them. For example here's a conversation with Warski, White, and Logan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwNXX2rMOGA Somehow I doubt this will stick.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
The new tactic by twitter pepes seems to be unerring politeness geared toward getting someone to agree that open and honest polite discourse "between both sides" is desirable. No idea where that's coming from.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:Another small anecdote. My father-in-law is a old-style conservative. He willingly served in Vietnam. He's homophobic, probably sexist/racist and hates the Clintons and the Dems with a passion. In the November election he voted Clinton because he recognized that a career politician will be better for the country and for national security than an incompetent orange hairpiece. He's a dying breed and his brand of sobriety is basically totally unwelcome in the new GOP. That kind of transformation seems relatively recent. loving boomers man
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
lol
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
Welp, Contra is going to have a terrible time in his talk with her isn't he.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 21:52
|
|
|
So i guess that clickbait thumbnail to her last video wasn't just clickbait.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
I think divorcing the language of gender from the language of biosex is at the very least defensible and far from Laci's biggest transgressions as of late. I'm not saying it's necessarily realistic or even desirable to do so, just that having terminology for biosex is conducive to casual discussion as well as provisions of healthcare. Some people think male and female carry too much baggage or are simply too imprecise. I think that's completely defensible as well. Her position isn't my own, to be clear, but I think it's an exaggeration to hold this position up as proof of her 'alt-right' creed. I'm more disappointed with how disingenuous Laci is: this whole conversation started with her mocking a diagram that labelled female anatomy as 'non-prostate havers'. She took issue with the fact they didn't just say female. But the diagram was taken from a loving Cosmo article about anal sex- the purpose to explain how it can be/not be pleasurable for someone without a prostate specifically. The magazine was literally just being 'cute' with terminology, not taking a stand. PoizenJam fucked around with this message at 22:09 on Jul 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
business hammocks posted:The new tactic by twitter pepes seems to be unerring politeness geared toward getting someone to agree that open and honest polite discourse "between both sides" is desirable. it's because they know the left is starting to say gently caress civility so they want to look like they're the better side. like that shmorky comic. man was it loving annoying having clinton keep quoting that michelle obama line of "when they go low we go high". how'd that work out for your husband.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 22:08
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:it's because they know the left is starting to say gently caress civility so they want to look like they're the better side. like that shmorky comic. The sad thing is it's probably going to work. At least for moderates, independents, and fence sitters participating in or observing the arguments. See the 'garbage human' backlash for instance. It's bad optics even though she was 100% in the right. I'm glad Hank Green knew better than to side with Sargon.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
JVNO posted:The sad thing is it's probably going to work. At least for moderates, independents, and fence sitters participating in or observing the arguments. I don't think so. Unless you already favor a side, it's easy to look at "mountain of death threats/rape threats/other slurs" vs. "called one person a garbage human" and realize which side is actually hateful.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
JVNO posted:The sad thing is it's probably going to work. At least for moderates, independents, and fence sitters participating in or observing the arguments.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
White men in suits and snazzy haircuts always seem so much more respectable than...other...kinds for some reason I can't pin down and feel uncomfortable exploring. Anyway, that black woman was so rude when asserting her inherent humanity!
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
WampaLord: You're assuming the people I mention have the desire to dig deeper and investigate the context. Plenty simply do not care enough, and if this is the only looking glass through which they see the SJW/Anti conflict, the takeaway may be lovely. Anita's side requires nuance and context to consider- Sargon's complaints not so much. This is a problem the progressives and the left encounter in general; our positions are not as buzzwordy/marketable, and are often very counterintuitive. Even something as simple as counter cyclical spending is difficult to explain, compared to 'the economy sucks, we need to tighten our purse strings!'
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
JVNO posted:WampaLord: You're assuming the people I mention have the desire to dig deeper and investigate the context. Plenty simply do not care enough, and if this is the only looking glass through which they see the SJW/Anti conflict, the takeaway may be lovely. Anita's side requires nuance and context to consider- Sargon's complaints not so much. Anita's side doesn't require that much nuance. "Hey, things are lovely towards women, try making them less lovely."
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 22:26
|
|
|
it's legit super annoying that the people who are objectively correct and morally right have to be the ones who act all adult and polite. it's way more annoying having to deal with moronic shitheads and we actually have valid anger unlike them. like when these troglodytes scream "ad hominem" gently caress you you think women and brown and black people should just shut up everything's cool for them. you are human garbage who don't know jack poo poo and should just shut up and play your lovely video games. Groovelord Neato fucked around with this message at 22:30 on Jul 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 22:26
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Anita's side doesn't require that much nuance. "Hey, things are lovely towards women, try making them less lovely." "I get called retard and human being all the time in my online video games. I just shrug it off. Sounds like complaining to me. Also I have this vague resentment toward women because they can say no to sex, and that Anita just seems so cold. She reminds me of women who glare at me on the subway just for looking. Sargon's just a guy, you know? Where's your sense of humor?"
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
business hammocks posted:"I get called retard and human being all the time in my online video games. I just shrug it off. Sounds like complaining to me. Also I have this vague resentment toward women because they can say no to sex, and that Anita just seems so cold. She reminds me of women who glare at me on the subway just for looking. Sargon's just a guy, you know? Where's your sense of humor?" To me, that's someone who has already picked a side. You're not going to convince anyone who remotely supported GG, for example. They're too far gone. E: VVV Patreon has plenty of lefties on it. WampaLord fucked around with this message at 22:42 on Jul 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
Is there an equivalent of wingnut welfare for the left (conservative response: "welfare" is welfare for the left; alternatively, "tenure")? I've read about half of Zizek's books and have even read some Habermas and Bourdieu and I tried reading "Simulcra and Simulation" before my brain started to fry. I also can fake a British accent, have minimal public speaking skills, and my laptop has a built-in camera. I have opinions to share!
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 22:35
|
|
|
I think it would altogether too easy to fake a youtube rationalist personality. Just ramble on and on and occasionally drop a sick own, comment occasionally on current events and you're golden. You need a british accent or a pleasant contra voice, and you're well set for at least a couple hundred extra.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2017 22:50
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Again, an action that can be easily done without leaving their computers. The pepes aren't a significant force to worry about, the bulk of GOP voters just voted R like they always do, there was not some massive surge of young R voters. I don't know about that. I feel like the rise of Trump has and will continue to have major effects on the youth voting. Gamers, anime fans, and lovely message board trolls seem like ripe demographics to become tomorrow's Republicans.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2017 03:28
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:I don't know about that. I feel like the rise of Trump has and will continue to have major effects on the youth voting. Gamers, anime fans, and lovely message board trolls seem like ripe demographics to become tomorrow's Republicans. If we see a surge of young R voters in 2018 and then again in 2020, you may have a point, but the data we have from 2016 doesn't support this premise. I think even if the entire population of r/The_Donald and /pol voted R, you wouldn't see any appreciable shift in results. These echo chambers amplify the voices of a small minority of alt right weirdos. Basically, stop following Twitter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
Young people did not go for Trump. Old people voted for Trump. White people matter less and less. We'll have to watch the midterms.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2017 03:34
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:If we see a surge of young R voters in 2018 and then again in 2020, you may have a point, but the data we have from 2016 doesn't support this premise. you sure?  got that from one of the first google results for age demographics, and it shows the democratic lead with 18-29 voters dropping each election since 2008
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
Pittsburgh Lambic posted:you sure? That's "preference" not "vote results."
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2017 04:08
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:That's "preference" not "vote results." that's based on exit polls? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2017 04:09
|
|
|
Pittsburgh Lambic posted:that's based on exit polls? So is this (tiny'd because it's big):  Looks like more of them went for Johnson/Stein because they're young and dumb and think a third party vote accomplishes anything.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2017 04:12
|
|
|
and you raise a good point there, even if it does lack the 2008 data point it does leave the question of where young voter trends will go, though, leaves that question to who the democrats bring out in 2020 if they trot out hillary again then, well, lol (unless trump sets off some kind of disaster in the next four years that lets hillary run on a slogan of i-told-you-so)
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2017 04:22
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:So is this (tiny'd because it's big): Yes please vote for our corporatist corrupt candidate that started a civil war in Libya because Qaddafi didn't want to play ball and use the US dollar when trading his oil and wanted to move back to the gold standard Yes please vote for our corporatist corrupt candidate that screwed the actual socialist out of the democratic nomination 
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2017 04:24
|
|
|
Intrinsic Field Marshal posted:Yes please vote for our corporatist corrupt candidate that started a civil war in Libya because Qaddafi didn't want to play ball and use the US dollar when trading his oil and wanted to move back to the gold standard bernie isn't really a socialist, it's just that american politics is hilariously and ridiculously right wing
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2017 04:27
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:bernie isn't really a socialist, it's just that american politics is hilariously and ridiculously right wing Well he is socialist for America
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2017 04:29
|
|
|
Intrinsic Field Marshal posted:Yes please vote for our corporatist corrupt candidate that started a civil war in Libya because Qaddafi didn't want to play ball and use the US dollar when trading his oil and wanted to move back to the gold standard Do you think I'm defending Hillary? I was just pointing out voting trends. And also that third party votes are worthless, short of a situation where a third party candidate is actually polling a competitive amount.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2017 04:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 07:05 |
|
|
WampaLord posted:Do you think I'm defending Hillary? I was just pointing out voting trends. I think its dumb calling people dumb for voting third party
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2017 04:30
|
|