EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 10063
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
| ||
|
Sermokala
United States13735 Posts
On March 15 2018 05:12 ShoCkeyy wrote: Not US Politics, but I saw the video of DJT saying he was going to speak with TM about the Russian involvement in the UK. Well now the UK expels 23 diplomats: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43402506 Now I'm assuming TM told DJT that Russia did in fact us chemical weapons in the UK, but I haven't seen any response from the WH still? Has anybody else? Tillerson condemned the attack and was fired for it. Theres your response. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15391 Posts
A girl on my Facebook called people out for saying Hawking did everything he did "despite his disability". She said people should be paying attention to the fact that he did everything he did despite being *discriminated against* for having a disability and that people should focus on how that discrimination still exists. I just sat there in awe. I bet his discrimination was way worse than being paraplegic, right? Any paraplegic can redefine modern physics. Well, they can, so long as there is no discrimination!!! Good fucking god. She's a very special breed of liberal, but Christ. Sometimes they think of stuff I would never even imagine as satire. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22670 Posts
On March 15 2018 05:44 Mohdoo wrote: lol sometimes I feel like people spiral into being so liberal they forgot what they were even on about at first. A girl on my Facebook called people out for saying Hawking did everything he did "despite his disability". She said people should be paying attention to the fact that he did everything he did despite being *discriminated against* for having a disability and that people should focus on how that discrimination still exists. I just sat there in awe. I bet his discrimination was way worse than being paraplegic, right? Any paraplegic can redefine modern physics. Well, they can, so long as there is no discrimination!!! Good fucking god. She's a very special breed of liberal, but Christ. Sometimes they think of stuff I would never even imagine as satire. I mean I think she has a pretty important point. There's still a lot of discrimination of people with issues like Hawking where people presume they are cognitively disabled too and talk to them like children and so on. IIRC he credited his disability for being a critical part of how he was able to see things the way he did. So when someone says 'despite his disability' they are dismissing his view (that he likely wouldn't have achieved what he did without it), and feeding the idea that physical disabilities are automatically intellectual disabilities, and failing to recognize a society that loses a Hawking to disability discrimination is failing it's members (which we undoubtedly are). Hawking didn't see his disability as an impediment to his achievements and it's kinda rude/arrogant for people to insist he was wrong. + Show Spoiler + *waits for someone to call Hawking a overhyped hack* | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15391 Posts
On March 15 2018 05:59 GreenHorizons wrote: I mean I think she has a pretty important point. There's still a lot of discrimination of people with issues like Hawking where people presume they are cognitively disabled too and talk to them like children and so on. IIRC he credited his disability for being a critical part of how he was able to see things the way he did. So when someone says 'despite his disability' they are dismissing his view (that he likely wouldn't have achieved what he did without it), and feeding the idea that physical disabilities are automatically intellectual disabilities, and failing to recognize a society that loses a Hawking to disability discrimination is failing it's members (which we undoubtedly are). Hawking didn't see his disability as an impediment to his achievements and it's kinda rude/arrogant for people to insist he was wrong. And that's why he is so amazing. Not everyone is able to redefine physics as a paraplegic. The views he held despite his disability are inspiring. Not everyone is so determined or forceful. He handled his disability in a way very few people with his disability do. Turning a weakness into a strength is itself overcoming a weakness. He did so in a way very unique to him. And the thing is, once he published his first big work, his disability meant nothing to his success. In physics/math in particular, discrimination is almost meaningless if you're smart enough. Mediocre minority scientists suffer a lot, but the truly gifted always rise to the top without any issue. Im talking true geniuses, not just really good scientists. Curie is another example. When you're THAT amazing, nothing gets in your way. So in many ways, Hawking was in a unique situation where his disability didn't lead to much discrimination at all. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8925 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15391 Posts
On March 15 2018 06:08 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: Didn't Hawking start his achievements before the disability took over? I'm pretty sure he was a genius before being confined to a wheelchair and computer enabled speech machine. Yeah, he was already on the map I think. I don't know well enough to say, but he could have been a pile of goop and he'd still.be where he is today so long as he still has his thoights. Physics and math are uniquely level when it comes to creme rising to the top. Networking and funding are significantly less crucial when compared with chemistry and biology. One of my smartest professors never even went to college. He completely self taught himself and has made extremely notable contributions to his field. He was hired without a degree because he's totally insane. Also, self teaching past the point of professor is still nothing compared to Hawking. I think a lot of people don't understand how notable his contributions were. Hawking was a complete wrecking ball. Even among the great, he is very distinguished. That's why the whole discrimination thing doesn't really apply as much. When you're the tip of the iceberg, nothing stops you. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On March 15 2018 06:08 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: Didn't Hawking start his achievements before the disability took over? I'm pretty sure he was a genius before being confined to a wheelchair and computer enabled speech machine. That is my understanding. The compelling part of his story is how he continued his work through the disability. | ||
|
Leporello
United States2845 Posts
On March 15 2018 03:15 GreenHorizons wrote: Thankfully no one is advocating not participating here. We're talking about participating in a party that doesn't want corporate shills in it and doesn't let them stay when discovered. Democrats don't want to be in that party. Don't make it about political relevance. It's a moral choice and Democrats are making theirs. Unless the argument is that there isn't enough people to build a party of people that don't want to have corporate(/Russian for you Russiagaters) shills in it and don't accept them when found. I would disagree with that entirely. There is no party that has a "corporate ban" in it. You have a party that generally supports progressive ideas, but needs pushing in that direction. And then you have the Republicans. I don't know what Green Party is anymore, except for stuff like this: So, no thanks. If you want corporations and higher-incomes to pay a fairer-share, then you need to "caucus" with the Democrats. But the primaries and party-elections aren't always going to go your way. The only way that things like healthcare and education will improve is to successfully elect people who can work with a majority of Congress. It's not a perfect system, but it is reality. Even if you succeeded in electing a devout Socialist, you're still going to be passing and voting on Democrat and Republican legislation. This is what I don't get about the "Bernie or Bust" thing. You're basically saying the only interest you have in your political party is in getting your candidate elected, "or else", like you forgot the whole point of a political-party is the fact that a single government rep in any office is incapable of doing anything. Ideological-success is driven by numbers, not by virtue. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22670 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10596 Posts
and... his disease for sure helped with his impact/arrival in pop culture. He was jus extraordinary all around. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15391 Posts
On March 15 2018 06:16 GreenHorizons wrote: I think you missed the point in that life exists outside of physics and math contributions. The argument I was pointing and laughing at was stated to be in relation to working in academia. She said people should focus on what he overcame in academia. Lol | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22670 Posts
On March 15 2018 06:19 Mohdoo wrote: The argument I was pointing and laughing at was stated to be in relation to working in academia. She said people should focus on what he overcame in academia. Lol you left that out until now. In that case he still faced quite a bit of discrimination but it's a bit of a different discussion. On March 15 2018 06:16 Leporello wrote: There is no party that has a "corporate ban" in it. You have a party that generally supports progressive ideas, but needs pushing in that direction. And then you have the Republicans. I don't know what Green Party is anymore, except for stuff like this: https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/974022562601689088 So, no thanks. If you want corporations and higher-incomes to pay a fairer-share, then you need to "caucus" with the Democrats. But the primaries and party-elections aren't always going to go your way. The only way that things like healthcare and education will improve is to successfully elect people who can work with a majority of Congress. It's not a perfect system, but it is reality. Even if you succeeded in electing a devout Socialist, you're still going to be passing and voting on Democrat and Republican legislation. This is what I don't get about the "Bernie or Bust" thing. You're basically saying the only interest you have in your political party is in getting your candidate elected, "or else", like you forgot the whole point of a political-party is the fact that a single government rep in any office is incapable of doing anything. Ideological-success is driven by numbers, not by virtue. I see Trump being accused of being a Russian plant, Democrats supporting his nominees, and you saying you have no choice but to caucus with those helping Trump manifest the Kremlin's wishes. I can't imagine what it's like inside that worldview. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On March 15 2018 06:23 GreenHorizons wrote: I see Trump being accused of being a Russian plant, Democrats supporting his nominees, and you saying you have no choice but to caucus with those helping Trump manifest the Kremlin's wishes. I can't imagine what it's like inside that worldview. This forum has helped me see how it works. You’ve had helpful bickering (from the left) to expose it. The most fun height that was recently reached was when one actually said you were just mad about having been duped by Russian propaganda. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
We thought we were free of him, but John Bolton has returned and is meeting with the Tweeter and Chief. He could be national security adviser, which does not require senate confirmation. The Yes Men line up to kiss the ring and be given their piece of power. | ||
|
IyMoon
United States1249 Posts
On March 15 2018 06:53 Plansix wrote: https://twitter.com/VanityFair/status/973991549599133706 We thought we were free of him, but John Bolton has returned and is meeting with the Tweeter and Chief. He could be national security adviser, which does not require senate confirmation. The Yes Men line up to kiss the ring and be given their piece of power. Wont happen, he has a shitty mustache... I would like to say that is a joke but isn't that the reason he was not in the admin in the first place | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
| ||
|
IyMoon
United States1249 Posts
On March 15 2018 07:39 Danglars wrote: https://twitter.com/nbcnews/status/974010333416378369 Good on Trump, little late but better late than never | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21336 Posts
On March 15 2018 07:48 IyMoon wrote: Good on Trump, little late but better late than never I assume Danglars point is that this means Tillerson wasn't fired over condemning Russia. Personally I will wait for actions instead of words before congratulating Trump (or anyone else for that matter) on acting against a chemical weapon attack by Russia on a foreign nations soil. | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
| ||
| ||
