|
Oh also I finally paid my dues and am now an official member of the DSA Put me in the OP for MA!
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 04:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 10:53 |
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Oh also I finally paid my dues and am now an official member of the DSA Welcome! I am also a paid member since last summer, which is also the last time it rained in Texas.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 04:41
|
|
|
Fuckit put me in the OP for Oklahoma
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
jarofpiss posted:anime is reformist, counterrevolutionary, and is absolutely haram
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 05:42
|
|
|
a story in 3 acts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWVw64lTwYY https://twitter.com/JonathanCohn/status/829849652719677440 https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/829813449165250563
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 05:49
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:Just go, no courage necessary. I'm about as antisocial as they get and it was a great experience. the only courage you need is the courage necessary to drive into downtown San Bernardino at night it's really bad, guys But you should go. Me and another guy instantly bonded over Chapo Trap House and a really nice lady brought mac and cheese
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 06:04
|
|
|
oh put me in the OP for DC also
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 06:09
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Nerds are victimized because they're lovely people. Being a "nerd" only started being cool, because nerds have a ludicrously high disposable income and they develop identities around their consumption.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 06:10
|
|
|
just got around to paying dues today along with buying re7 for pc, put me up for CA 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 06:37
|
|
|
rudatron posted:that's a really stupid thing to say dude, in general the people doing the victimizing were way more likely to be nazis i mean there's a very small kernel of truth to it, in that what actually defines nerds is alienation and really narrow interests, which produces young people who are often angry and whose limited experiences can lead to a pretty myopic view of politics and the world. this is a easy pool for any political movement promising change to recruit from. the answer to that is not "gently caress nerds" though, it's "goddamn well get there before the fascists do"
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 06:56
|
|
|
rudatron posted:that's a really stupid thing to say dude, in general the people doing the victimizing were way more likely to be nazis The braces & laces crowd has a way bigger target group than that. Tuxedo Catfish posted:the answer to that is not "gently caress nerds" though, it's "goddamn well get there before the fascists do" I never said that anybody should dunk a nerd in the trash can or anything, unless they're Nazis. They are certainly not good people though, and there are reasons why they get picked on. Pener Kropoopkin has issued a correction as of 07:02 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 06:57
|
|
|
What got me more was the excusing of the victimizers, because in reality, that group is a very small minority, and the reason they target nerds, is because they know no one will defend them. They enjoy the process of abusing others, and they target the vulnerable because they know they can get away with it. By saying that nerds deserve victimization, you're elevating abusive assholes to warriors of justice or whatever, and that's just not the case.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 07:03
|
|
|
CSPAM Hates Nerds
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 07:11
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:I never said that anybody should dunk a nerd in the trash can or anything, unless they're Nazis. They are certainly not good people though, and there are reasons why they get picked on. they get picked on for the same reason as everyone else, which is "because children are half-socialized at best." it has nothing to do with their moral caliber, which is unremarkable, because "narrow interests" and "being alienated" have no bearing on goodness or badness. basically: rudatron posted:What got me more was the excusing of the victimizers, because in reality, that group is a very small minority, and the reason they target nerds, is because they know no one will defend them. They enjoy the process of abusing others, and they target the vulnerable because they know they can get away with it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 07:12
|
|
|
most "nerds" by the conventional definition are functional these days what you really are looking for are people who are alienated because they were taught a regressive set of values where things like companionship and affection are owed to them for no reason, or raised by parents who believe beating the poo poo out of their kid is a fine punishment for spilling some milk on the floor, among other colorful ways you can gently caress up a child's mental and emotional development. and these people aren't conventional "nerds" for the most part also why is everyone not picking up their orders, this is the DSA thread
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 07:15
|
|
|
Bushiz posted:Which one of these is you jarofpiss sorry didnt check the threads. if you were facing the front i was in the front right corner in a black jacket. the interim chair is my old lady
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 07:19
|
|
|
come to the happy hour next week and ask people if they have stairs in their house until you find me
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 07:21
|
|
|
Bushiz posted:Which one of these is you jarofpiss Make a new thread for how nerds suck
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 07:26
|
|
|
rudatron posted:What got me more was the excusing of the victimizers, because in reality, that group is a very small minority, and the reason they target nerds, is because they know no one will defend them. They enjoy the process of abusing others, and they target the vulnerable because they know they can get away with it. Deserve ain't got nothin to do with it. Tuxedo Catfish posted:they get picked on for the same reason as everyone else, which is "because children are half-socialized at best." Buddy if you think this sort of thing stops at adulthood, you're going to be in for a huge shock. This also isn't a strictly moral issue. There's a weird assumption here that the threshold is at functionality, but even functional individuals can have toxic views and politics. In this case we're talking about a group of people who overwhelmingly skew towards the libertarian or authoritarian Right of the political spectrum, and who would rather absorb themselves in fantasies than deal with the harsh and immediate concerns of reality. Granted, this applies to a vast swathe of people besides nerds, and none of them are good people either. Granted, I'm coming at this from the position that anybody who isn't at least a socialist is not a good person. I don't care if they're charming individuals, or good parents, or charitable, or whatever other qualities you think comprise a good person - because so were a lot of aristocrats, or slave masters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 07:26
|
|
|
bump_fn posted:Make a new thread for how nerds suck
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 07:27
|
|
|
we counted 74 people tonight at the meeting so it was well attended. kept it short and tight which was good. then a handful of us went to dinner with two old guard from dsa and cpusa and they shouted at each other across the table about chile and the ussr and who carreeessss
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 07:31
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Granted, I'm coming at this from the position that anybody who isn't at least a socialist is not a good person. I don't care if they're charming individuals, or good parents, or charitable, or whatever other qualities you think comprise a good person - because so were a lot of aristocrats, or slave masters. Yeah, that's nuts. Not least because you're not talking about the equivalent of aristocrats, you're talking about the equivalent of peasants, even before you get to whether morality should be defined exclusively in terms of political ideology, and even before you get to whether reality backs up your generalizations.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 07:33
|
|
|
jarofpiss posted:we counted 74 people tonight at the meeting so it was well attended. kept it short and tight which was good. then a handful of us went to dinner with two old guard from dsa and cpusa and they shouted at each other across the table about chile and the ussr and who carreeessss Should have told them that conversation belongs in the dustbin of history.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 07:33
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Should have told them that conversation belongs in the dustbin of history. one of the young people sitting across from me yelled "who gives a poo poo" and it owned lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 07:34
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:Yeah, that's nuts. Not least because you're not talking about the equivalent of aristocrats, you're talking about the equivalent of peasants, even before you get to whether morality should be defined exclusively in terms of political ideology, and even before you get to whether reality backs up your generalizations. There hasn't been an equivalent for peasantry since the sharecropping system was phased out (yes, I am aware that there are a few people in the United States who are still sharecroppers). We live under a completely different economic structure, but there are a lot of people out there who would compare first world workers to a "labor aristocracy" which relative to workers in the third world does make a lot of sense - and is only becoming less relevant because the compact between labor and management has almost completely eroded. Peasants couldn't vote, but we do, and Americans vote overwhelmingly for reactionary politics at home and imperialism abroad. The ones who do vote, anyway. I never implied that morality is defined exclusively in ideological terms either, although I'm hard pressed to see how somebody whose ideology involves mass murder and ethnic cleansing could somehow be a moral person. Perhaps that's just my political bias speaking.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 07:41
|
|
|
By saying "there are reasons", then giving a whole bunch of justifications, toy are in fact talking about deserts. Also, nerds don't lean right or libertarian, that's just the Internet talking. Like what type essentially proposing is the 'just world hypothesis', that people who are victimized deserve it, because the world is just. The reality is that victimization doesn't occur because it should , but because it can, and that applies to every kind of victimization. Like, okay, think this over. Do you think the people doing the victimization lean right, or left, politically?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 07:46
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:I never implied that morality is defined exclusively in ideological terms either, although I'm hard pressed to see how somebody whose ideology involves mass murder and ethnic cleansing could somehow be a moral person. Perhaps that's just my political bias speaking. Your average American's ideology does not involve mass murder and ethnic cleansing. That's not to say it doesn't involve retributive justice, petty tribalism, and a really warped sense of what "work ethic" means, none of which are good things, or that our susceptibilities to fear, selfishness, and ignorance aren't profoundly exploited.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 07:58
|
|
|
rudatron posted:By saying "there are reasons", then giving a whole bunch of justifications, toy are in fact talking about deserts. You're assuming that I'm saying it's right to bully people because they're bad, when I'm not. Never said anything of the such. I'm not trying to justify anything. I'm not proposing any kind of just world hypothesis either. Justice is a much more complicated issue than an individual motivation. In a truly just world there wouldn't be any victims, but that's just not the case. People who victimize others don't lean one way or the other politically. It could be anybody for any reason. Tuxedo Catfish posted:Your average American's ideology does not involve mass murder and ethnic cleansing. Ethnic cleansing maybe not. I keep thinking about Nazis while trying to avoid those comparisons, but that's where the conversation keeps steering back towards. It's certainly hard to believe that the average American gives much of a good drat about all of the mass death that follows in our wake as an imperial power projecting force abroad. Pener Kropoopkin has issued a correction as of 08:05 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 08:01
|
|
|
is it still ethnic cleansing if stop at ghettos rather than full-on death camps
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 08:19
|
|
|
deadgoon posted:is it still ethnic cleansing if stop at ghettos rather than full-on death camps Hypothetically you wouldn't even have to kill anyone to perform an ethnic cleansing, you just have to dispossess people and force them out of your country. And there's a Hell of a lot of people who would like to throw every single Muslim out of the United States. Not a majority by a long shot, but the sentiments are there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 08:25
|
|
|
Pk, I think I've derailed enough, but one thing I want you to notice was your opening sentence: they are victimized because they are terrible people. That is literally a justification, even if you refuse to recognize it as such. Think that one over. deadgoon posted:is it still ethnic cleansing if stop at ghettos rather than full-on death camps rudatron has issued a correction as of 08:29 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 08:26
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Ethnic cleansing maybe not. I keep thinking about Nazis while trying to avoid those comparisons, but that's where the conversation keeps steering back towards. It's certainly hard to believe that the average American gives much of a good drat about all of the mass death that follows in our wake as an imperial power projecting force abroad. I don't care if you steer the conversation to nazis, it's relevant if we're talking about collective responsibility for a nation-state's actions. That said, the reality of voting in American elections is that most of the time the most moral option in that context is to vote for the imperialist who's going to do the least harm. Plenty of people can't stomach it and don't vote or protest vote, which is probably worse from a utilitarian standpoint but doesn't indicate support either. Vastly more don't ask the questions you want them to ask out of ignorance, because our education system is awful. American popular support for foreign intervention is ambivalent at best and becoming more so over time. Anecdotally, I'm surrounded by people who feel trapped between bad choices, which probably has something to do with the rehabilitation of socialism in the public eye despite decades of deliberate fearmongering and misinformation. This isn't a country that turned itself over to a fascist strongman happily or with overwhelming support -- it's a country where an undemocratic system imposed a fascist strongman on us despite his losing the popular election and despite even a significant minority of Republicans being repulsed by him and not turning out. And it's a country that is presently kicking, screaming, and biting every step of the way, as it should be. Tuxedo Catfish has issued a correction as of 08:31 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 08:29
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:just got around to paying dues today along with buying re7 for pc, put me up for CA GlyphGryph posted:Oh also I finally paid my dues and am now an official member of the DSA XBenedict posted:Welcome! Dreddout posted:Fuckit put me in the OP for Oklahoma WhiskeyJuvenile posted:oh put me in the OP for DC also Stinky_Pete posted:Hey, glad to see this thread! SSJ_naruto_2003 posted:Being in Alabama isn't fun. Im probably one of 5 dsa members in the state Added to the op.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 08:32
|
|
|
An 18 y.o girl in my intermediate college spanish saw my DSA button and told me I was woke, I gave her a flyer and two other people around us asked for one too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 08:35
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:I don't care if you steer the conversation to nazis, it's relevant if we're talking about collective responsibility for a nation-state's actions. As of now, it's a country that's kicking, screaming, and biting every step of the way in favor of a different form of imperialism and the unchallenged power of capital. Saying that it's more moral to vote for a less harmful imperialist is just flat out wrong, because there are more than two choices on the vast majority of presidential ballots. Voting for an imperialist because you think no other alternative can win isn't a moralism, it's a fatalism. There's certainly a utilitarian calculus going on here, but it's also possible to get that calculus wrong. You're sacrificing your individual agency in regards to making a moral choice, in favor of making a utilitarian choice based on inherited assumptions. The only exception to this is if you live in a state like Oklahoma, where the standards for ballot access are so high that they only ever have two choices or a rich Independent as well. Besides, the Democratic electorate had their chance to elect a far less harmful imperialist (who would have won), but they elected the more aggressive warmongering candidate anyway. It's not very convincing at all that American voters care about foreign policy one way or the other. How far are you willing to take this line of reasoning? If the DSA starts running its own candidates on a separate ticket, are you still going to vote for Democrats even knowing that their policies are toxic to people at home and abroad? There has to come a point where you're willing to actively resist a system you admit is inherently immoral. The DSA can try to get its candidates nominated to positions in the Democratic party, but what if you're shut out? What then? Keep voting for the Democrats because you think the DSA might lose?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 08:56
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:How far are you willing to take this line of reasoning? If the DSA starts running its own candidates on a separate ticket, are you still going to vote for Democrats even knowing that their policies are toxic to people at home and abroad? There has to come a point where you're willing to actively resist a system you admit is inherently immoral. The DSA can try to get its candidates nominated to positions in the Democratic party, but what if you're shut out? What then? Keep voting for the Democrats because you think the DSA might lose? Well, I don't intend for voting to be the beginning and end of my political life, for starters. That said, yeah, I would vote Democrat until I saw evidence that it was possible to supplant the party entirely. Eight years ago I would have preferred Stewart Alexander to Obama, but I didn't vote for him, because without a critical mass of support all it would have done would be to increase the likelihood of a Republican victory, which would have been more destructive both for friends and family here and for people I've never met around the world.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 09:03
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:As of now, it's a country that's kicking, screaming, and biting every step of the way in favor of a different form of imperialism and the unchallenged power of capital. The DSA is not a political party. The DSA is not a political party. The DSA is not a political party.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 09:15
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:Well, I don't intend for voting to be the beginning and end of my political life, for starters. The system is designed to count electoral performance as a threshold of access. If you're only ever willing to not vote Democrat until you're sure of the possibility of supplanting it then you'll be waiting forever. At some point you have to be willing to eat a big loss to create a space for a truly transformative politics. Liberal and left leaning voters weren't willing to take any kind of risk this last year, and they lost big anyway because the opposition was far more motivated. That's what I mean about the utilitarian calculus being wrong.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 09:29
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:The system is designed to count electoral performance as a threshold of access. If you're only ever willing to not vote Democrat until you're sure of the possibility of supplanting it then you'll be waiting forever. At some point you have to be willing to eat a big loss to create a space for a truly transformative politics. Liberal and left leaning voters weren't willing to take any kind of risk this last year, and they lost big anyway because the opposition was far more motivated. That's what I mean about the utilitarian calculus being wrong. Kind of looks like we're getting that anyways.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 09:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 10:53 |
|
|
Did I hear about the DSA Slack from this thread? I still haven't got my invite  Help Im a snowflake and I need other snowflakes to stick to. ...and together we will become a blizzard 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 14:28
|
|
