|
|
# ? May 11, 2024 15:04 |
|
Would a sources and citations thread/post help? I know I'm always hunting for that citation I saw someone use that one time...
|
# ? Oct 18, 2011 19:43 |
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Would a sources and citations thread/post help? I know I'm always hunting for that citation I saw someone use that one time... Yes, please. I don't want this to be a simple "tell me what to think/say" thread: we should be helping each other debate more effectively. Both because it's important to discuss the issues from a supported position and because we could all be better at engaging with people who disagree with us. Given the diversity of knowledge bases in D&D, including "looking for an article I read" posts in this thread would be great, too. Note: this isn't meant to be a groupthink thread. Like I mentioned in my request for help, we each have some understanding of what arguments will work better than others with the person we're debating. This should serve as a resource and document base we can all check into and help each other out with, if we want.
|
# ? Oct 18, 2011 19:54 |
|
At least once every 10 or so pages in the Freep, Political Cartoons, Glenn Beck, and other 'Look At These Dumbass Conservatives' threads, someone will ponder over the conservative mindset, and at least one person will point out Prof. Bob Altemeyer's The Authoritarians, a free ebook/textbook on the phenomenon of Right-Wing Authoritarianism. The book, and two additional postscripts on the 2008 election and the rise of the Tea Party, are available free from his website at the University of Manitoba: http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/ The book is a fascinating read, relatively short, and well-cited with studies the author and his colleagues have done over the last 20 or so years. From the website: quote:OK, what’s this book about? It’s about what’s happened to the American government lately. It’s about the disastrous decisions that government has made. It’s about the corruption that rotted the Congress. It’s about how traditional conservatism has nearly been destroyed by authoritarianism. It’s about how the “Religious Right” teamed up with amoral authoritarian leaders to push its un-democratic agenda onto the country. It’s about the United States standing at the crossroads as the next federal election approaches. Sometimes I feel like we should have the book in a stickied thread (along with Umberto Eco's quote on fascists holding conflicting beliefs about the power of their enemies) at the top of D&D because it gets referred to so often. The last chapter of Altmeyer's book is entitled 'What's to Be Done' - it depressingly explains why debate with individual RWA's is often futile, but suggests some broad political and societal steps that can be taken to stifle RWA on a national level. But Rocks Hurt Head fucked around with this message at 20:20 on Oct 18, 2011 |
# ? Oct 18, 2011 20:16 |
|
Honestly though, never use that book in a debate, its patronizing as poo poo and its not going to change any minds. I like that book, but just watch what you do with it.
|
# ? Oct 18, 2011 20:20 |
|
Oh, right, totally. Don't try to dangle the book in front of someone you're trying to debate with. In fact, right in the book there's a passage at the end: quote:Maybe the solution is right in front of our noses. How about having authoritarians read this book? I mentioned in chapter 1 that when high RWAs learn about right-wing authoritarianism, and the many undesirable things it correlates with such as prejudice, they frequently wish they were less authoritarian. The book isn't a tool to be used in a debate, it's about understanding the people you're debating better, and why they're not responding to things like simple logic and reason.
|
# ? Oct 18, 2011 20:24 |
|
Sorry if I'm derailing this thread already, but you shouldn't even use it for that. Amateur social science is NOT helpful for understanding what another person is saying. Sociology cannot and should not be applied that way. If you do apply it that way, you're just inflating your own ego. Edit: Well, it can be helpful, but it can just as easily really screw you up.
|
# ? Oct 18, 2011 20:28 |
|
Perfect thread! I'm wondering if anyones written about the intersection of 'personal responsibility'* and Jesus. Specifically the appeal to a higher authority whenever something goes wrong and ones own personal responsibility regarding said event. I'm trying to come up with a cohesive way of stating this without resorting to loaded language. *The conservative view of personal responsibility, "shouldn't have gotten addicted to drugs loser!"
|
# ? Oct 18, 2011 20:43 |
|
Morphix posted:Perfect thread! Matthrew 35:21-46 31 "When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on the throne of his glory. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, 33 and he will put the sheep at his right hand and the goats at the left. 34 Then the king will say to those at his right hand, 'Come, you that are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; 35 for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.' 37 Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry and gave you food, or thirsty and gave you something to drink? 38 And when was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you, or naked and gave you clothing? 39 And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you?' 40 And the king will answer them, 'Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.' 41 Then he will say to those at his left hand, 'You that are accursed, depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; 42 for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not give me clothing, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.' 44 Then they also will answer, 'Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not take care of you?' 45 Then he will answer them, 'Truly I tell you, just as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.' 46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
|
# ? Oct 18, 2011 21:00 |
What I'm really looking for is a professional, authoritative explanation of a theory I saw someone expound in brief in a thread on this forum recently. Basically, it was an argument about how the high cost of education loans, health care, and wall street financial charges, were due to what was essentially a "toll booth" effect; that certain parties were gatekeepers that could monopolize entry into the economy at large, and that by virtue of their position they were able to extract huge value from the economy in zero or negative-sum transactions, much like the robber barons of the Rhine in ancient germany. It was a great persuasive argument that was really useful for explaining a lot of things, such as (for example) why the OWS folks don't hate Steve Jobs but do hate Lloyd Blankfein. I'd like a clear, professional, non polemic, jargon-free explanation of that theory that I can show to facebook friends without looking like a maoist third worldist. For example, the phrase "rentier capitalism" shouldn't show up in it, ideally -- for the people I'd like to show this to, anything that makes them twig to the fact that I'm selling far-left socialist theory will be counterproductive. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Oct 18, 2011 |
|
# ? Oct 18, 2011 21:07 |
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I'd like a clear, professional, non polemic explanation of that theory that I can show to facebook friends without looking like a maoist third worldist. I'm doing a Let's Read which focuses on the theory of monopoly capitalism and transnational corporations. It doesn't exactly say 'destroy easy entry into markets' but it shows why firms would act to make entry as difficult as possible and maximise profits.
|
# ? Oct 18, 2011 21:20 |
|
pawsplay posted:Matthrew 35:21-46 I'm seriously going to try to memorize this, thanks. What a wonderful little passage.
|
# ? Oct 18, 2011 21:36 |
|
Morphix posted:I'm seriously going to try to memorize this, thanks. What a wonderful little passage. The key sentence in that passage wasn't bolded, but it is when Jesus opens with the phrase he closes with: "Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me." (My emphasis). It's supposed to be the sensmorale, rather than the damnation part and the part about Jesus suffering.
|
# ? Oct 18, 2011 21:44 |
|
But Rocks Hurt Head posted:At least once every 10 or so pages in the Freep, Political Cartoons, Glenn Beck, and other 'Look At These Dumbass Conservatives' threads, someone will ponder over the conservative mindset, and at least one person will point out Prof. Bob Altemeyer's The Authoritarians, a free ebook/textbook on the phenomenon of Right-Wing Authoritarianism. Holy poo poo, it's like the rosetta stone for conservatives!
|
# ? Oct 18, 2011 22:19 |
|
Here are some much larger documents I had laying around. Study - US spends twice as much on health care than the UK and has worse health outcomes 62% of bankruptcies in the US caused by medical bills, 75% of those had health insurance Gul Banana's old OP for the thread "Why UHC is unambiguously necessary for America" in D&D Historically, US economy is much better off under Democratic presidents than Republican Firearms and violence: interpreting the connection. PDF download
|
# ? Oct 18, 2011 23:17 |
|
Always a good read.. The paranoid style in american politics http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/conspiracy_theory/the_paranoid_mentality/the_paranoid_style.html e: fixed. LIEbrals are breaking my links duck monster fucked around with this message at 07:59 on Oct 19, 2011 |
# ? Oct 19, 2011 00:28 |
|
Your link is missing an "ml" at the end of it, duck monster. In case anyone can't figure that out themselves and gives up after clicking it.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 02:59 |
|
This is a fascinating thread, that bible quote alone for me is amazing. If anyone is a web designer and wouldn't mind cooking up some sort of easy to navigate website that has this info, I'll pay for the hosting/design. Anyone interested shoot me an email at szmytkowski@gmail.com 100% serious.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 03:08 |
|
I'll contribute for free. Caveat: I do .NET / ASP.NET MVC
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 03:24 |
|
Huragok posted:I'll contribute for free. Caveat: I do .NET / ASP.NET MVC I don't know what this means, but if you have the time and an idea on some sort of mechanism for others to add links, update stuff. I don't want it to become overloaded with a bunch of poo poo people have to wade through. But it would also be useful to get updated with new info once in a while. If you have some ideas, shoot me an email. I think it could be a useful resource.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 04:06 |
|
This thread is a good idea, I hope requests are okay One of the bigger arguments out there is the theory that the housing bubble was the result of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac and 'government intrusion' in general as opposed to Wall Street deregulation. I seem to recall there was a very good article that debunked it in a systematic fashion that I found from here, but I don't recall a lot more than that (and it was awhile ago). I can find a bunch of smaller articles and even repositories of smaller articles (like from Media Matters), but I could've sworn there was a more focused 'this is why this is wrong' article. If anyone had this it would be a good addition.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 04:39 |
|
internaut posted:Average football game has 11 minutes of play (more time devoted to crowd shots or cheerleaders) Just fyi, per that link a football game has cheerleaders for 0.45% of the time they have "football action" (three seconds as opposed to 11 minutes) so that description is a little off.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 04:58 |
|
But Rocks Hurt Head posted:(along with Umberto Eco's quote on fascists holding conflicting beliefs about the power of their enemies) Anybody have this lying around? I think someone mentioned that it's in Ur-Fascism, but I can't seem to find the exact quote right now.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 05:00 |
|
Lester Shy posted:Anybody have this lying around? I think someone mentioned that it's in Ur-Fascism, but I can't seem to find the exact quote right now. It's a short essay you can find the full version on google, it should be the first result for ur-fascism. Here's the quote: Followers must feel humiliated by the ostentatious wealth and force of their enemies. When I was a boy I was taught to think of Englishmen as the five-meal people. They ate more frequently than the poor but sober Italians. Jews are rich and help each other through a secret web of mutual assistance. However, the followers must be convinced that they can overwhelm the enemies. Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak. Fascist governments are condemned to lose wars because they are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the force of the enemy.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 05:20 |
|
evilweasel posted:Just fyi, per that link a football game has cheerleaders for 0.45% of the time they have "football action" (three seconds as opposed to 11 minutes) so that description is a little off. Yeah I was way off for that one. I also confused "crowd shots" with "standing around". Standing around takes up 58.5% of the time, gameplay takes up 9.4% and crowd shots only 0.9% of the time.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 05:29 |
|
The Landstander posted:This thread is a good idea, I hope requests are okay Yes, please, I had requests in mind when I started the thread. I could still use some help with a response to my question in the OP.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 05:47 |
|
Way back when we tried to make a wiki of this sort of thing in LF, but you know, LF, so that didn't work at all. This was kind of the idea though, a repository for all the informative kind of poo poo that gets posted but not everyone keeps up with. One stop argument shop.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 05:52 |
|
The Landstander posted:This thread is a good idea, I hope requests are okay All the Devils Are Here is supposed to be a very thorough and accurate reporting and analysis of what happened, though I haven't read the book, but I've seen interviews with the authors about the book. This should be a great resource for the topic, but it's probably going to take much longer to answer your specific questions than the article to which you are alluding.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 07:21 |
|
I'm talking with some people on the internet about education, and someone asked about Charter Schools, and aside from laying out some basic points about why privatized education is a terrible idea, The Myth of Charter Schools is something I always cite, just because it's incredibly well laid out and takes something quite a few people have seen (Waiting for Superman) and puts the argument in the context of that movie. On this same line, I thought I saw a headline earlier today about how teacher unions are actually beneficial to education, but I lost it, and I couldn't find it via Google. Anyone else see/save that?
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 07:22 |
|
Yoshifan823 posted:I'm talking with some people on the internet about education, and someone asked about Charter Schools, and aside from laying out some basic points about why privatized education is a terrible idea, The Myth of Charter Schools is something I always cite, just because it's incredibly well laid out and takes something quite a few people have seen (Waiting for Superman) and puts the argument in the context of that movie. poo poo, don't let Arkane know you mentioned that, Seriouspost: That's my go-to article for talking to people about charter schools.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 07:39 |
|
Yoshifan823 posted:I'm talking with some people on the internet about education, and someone asked about Charter Schools, and aside from laying out some basic points about why privatized education is a terrible idea, The Myth of Charter Schools is something I always cite, just because it's incredibly well laid out and takes something quite a few people have seen (Waiting for Superman) and puts the argument in the context of that movie. There's one on that subject in internaut's huge List O' Links back near the beginning of the page.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 07:43 |
|
ReidRansom posted:Way back when we tried to make a wiki of this sort of thing in LF, but you know, LF, so that didn't work at all. This was kind of the idea though, a repository for all the informative kind of poo poo that gets posted but not everyone keeps up with. One stop argument shop. I don't see the odds of a D&D wiki escaping a similar fate once outside the swing range of the mod banhammer. Goons and lurkers get kind of douchey once the threat of bans and probations disapear. We'd make a terrible anarchist community, alas.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 08:01 |
|
A wiki with semi-restricted membership might work. At least that way the archival duties can be spread among several non-lovely posters.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 10:54 |
|
I'd just set up a Quora/StackOverflow style deal and stick to questions and linked sources. Wikis are great, but a tiny summary and a source would be a great way to avoid the wiki problem of people arguing about phrasing and many people not wanting to learn how to edit a wiki or take the time to do it. There are a number of wordpress themes that are Q&A based, but maybe there's a specifically good app for this.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 13:40 |
|
pawsplay posted:Matthrew 35:21-46 Seriously, thank you greatly for the exact quote. I cannot fathom how many voters believe that we need Biblical logic for our laws concerning homosexuality, which is merely one (maybe 2) mentions, yet completely ignore the many blatant socialist messages of altruism. How in the hell can Conservapedia minds skew this passage? They somehow miraculously managed to contort "Rich into heaven is harder than camel through a needle's eye" into "The poor suck and are lazy".
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 14:34 |
|
ReindeerF posted:I'd just set up a Quora/StackOverflow style deal and stick to questions and linked sources. Wikis are great, but a tiny summary and a source would be a great way to avoid the wiki problem of people arguing about phrasing and many people not wanting to learn how to edit a wiki or take the time to do it. There are a number of wordpress themes that are Q&A based, but maybe there's a specifically good app for this. This is a great idea but I'd be for a moderated wiki as well. If this thread ever reaches 100 pages as it would need to it would be a nightmare to find things in it.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 15:28 |
|
ReidRansom posted:Way back when we tried to make a wiki of this sort of thing in LF, but you know, LF, so that didn't work at all. This was kind of the idea though, a repository for all the informative kind of poo poo that gets posted but not everyone keeps up with. One stop argument shop. A wiki is a bad idea because it's going to be nothing but trying to win the wiki. I.e. edit wars over "Israel is a modern Third Reich" vs "Israel is the lone democratic nation in a sea of monsters" and the like, or trying to fill it with "This position is wrong, see:" and the like.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 15:44 |
|
|
# ? May 11, 2024 15:04 |
internaut posted:Firearms and violence: interpreting the connection. PDF download Not to bog this thread down in issue debates, but are people still talking about gun control? I thought the general consensus on this forum was that gun control was a red-herring issue that simply wasn't worth talking about, given the political cost & the fact that it's like the only civil rights issue the Republicans can still legitimately claim to be on the constitutional side of.
|
|
# ? Oct 19, 2011 15:50 |