US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4341

Prev 1 4339 4340 4341 4342 4343 10093 Next

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.

Lord Tolkien

United States12083 Posts

July 19 2016 23:30 GMT

#86801

On July 20 2016 08:26 Sent. wrote:

Show nested quote +

Please continue, it's much better than talking about Melania Trump's speech

I'd rather talk about something like North Korea's missile tests, or perhaps economic growth in Africa. But alas.

{CC}StealthBlue

United States41117 Posts

July 19 2016 23:32 GMT

#86802

GGTeMpLaR

United States7226 Posts

July 19 2016 23:33 GMT

#86803

On July 20 2016 08:30 Lord Tolkien wrote:

Show nested quote +

I'd rather talk about something like North Korea's missile tests, or perhaps economic growth in Africa. But alas.

I'd actually love to hear you talk about the latter, even though it's completely off-topic.

xDaunt

United States17988 Posts

July 19 2016 23:37 GMT

#86804

On July 20 2016 08:33 GGTeMpLaR wrote:

Show nested quote +

I'd actually love to hear you talk about the latter, even though it's completely off-topic.

It's not completely off-topic given that the projection of Chinese power is a critical component of that discussion.

KwarK

United States43866 Posts

July 19 2016 23:42 GMT

#86805

On July 20 2016 08:22 xDaunt wrote:

Show nested quote +

But it's so boring and meaningless to say that everyone's the same and that no culture is better than any other (not to mention that it's a judgment call in and of itself).

I also think that it is a dangerous line of thinking when it comes to the self-preservation of Western, liberal tradition.

I'm no cultural relativist. Cultures that practice FGM are, in my mind, objectively shitty, for example. I think there are a great many things that the west can be extremely proud of and I have pride in the achievements of my people and nation as a part of that. But that doesn't mean we have to come up with undefinable and meaningless claims to further our achievements. The United States is the first, and only nation, to have put a man on the moon. As far as we know this is the first time any life form anywhere in the entire universe has escaped the gravity well it is born into and traveled to another. And that kind of thing stands on its own. But to take the entire chain of the ascent of man and then take the last half dozen links and say "these links in the chain are the important links as they are the ones attached to all these magnificent achievements" is to fundamentally fail to understand how a chain works.

Hell, consider the same argument as it would exist when applied to evolution. The evolution of speech and the opposable thumb were hugely important for the ascent of man but you wouldn't use those changes to subsequently dismiss the importance of the leap from single cell to multi-cellular organisms. That's what it looks like when you dismiss metallurgy or agriculture.

GGTeMpLaR

United States7226 Posts

July 19 2016 23:46 GMT

#86806

Has Florida already gone?

edit - guess so Paul Ryan is on now

TheTenthDoc

United States9561 Posts

July 19 2016 23:47 GMT

#86807

On July 20 2016 08:26 xDaunt wrote:

Show nested quote +

On July 20 2016 08:20 Simberto wrote:

On July 20 2016 08:16 xDaunt wrote:

On July 20 2016 08:11 Simberto wrote:

On July 20 2016 07:52 xDaunt wrote:

On July 20 2016 07:48 Plansix wrote:

On July 20 2016 07:45 xDaunt wrote:

On July 20 2016 07:43 Plansix wrote:

On July 20 2016 07:38 xDaunt wrote:

On July 20 2016 07:32 Plansix wrote:
Xdaunt: I taught history before I went into law. I have well beyond a rudimentary understanding. You are just wrong by almost every metric.

And second: that specific line, "what other sub group(race) has contributed more to civilization t(han the white race?)" is straight out of a clan meeting. It is white supremacist talking points 101. You many not be familiar because you seem willingly ignorant on the subject, but it is a common argument used by white supremacist. And it is born of knowing every little about history as a whole.

Welp, facts are facts. Given that western culture is largely a creation of the white race (though I'll note that not all whites are part of western culture), and given the relative supremacy of western culture in the historical record, we run into a rather uncomfortable predicament, don't we?

Civilization is larger than just western culture. And the majority of the accomplishments of western cultures are on the foundation of other races discoverys.

Yeah, and we go all the way back to some form of monkey by that logic, which is why it's absurd to place undue emphasis on foundational issues. Sheer cultural dominance is a far better metric.

Most historians don't really care about that metric. But it's works nice for your argument, so I can see how you would like it. And if that was the metric, China wins hands down.

China has never has never had global dominance at any level. And we aren't too far removed (less than 100 years) from when China was little more than a colony to Western powers and countries emulating Western powers (Japan).

So the according to your metrics, it only matter who was the last dominant power. Because they will surely have contributed the most advances in the recent past, and foundations don't matter.

This is patently ridiculous.

China never achieved global dominance. The extent of its power and influence never strayed far beyond its current borders today. The simple fact is that no civilization projected power and influence at a global level like Western civilization did, both in terms of global reach and in terms of sustained influence (you can make a case for Muslims, but even they clearly fall short). That fact, combined with the fact that modern civilization is largely a product of Western civilization makes it very to conclude that Western civilization is the most dominant historically.

Which means your criterium boils down to "Europe was dominant in the phase when global powers became technically possible" At no point before that time was it possible to sustain an empire that large, simply due to logistics and communication speeds.

Of course no other civilisation beforehand was capable of that, it was technologically impossible. And in 200 years, when humanity has spread out further into the solar system, you can argue that any civilization before that point was not important, because they could only ever influence one planet.

I do not think that is a reasonable criterium to measure "contribution to humanity" by.

To be more accurate, my point is that Western culture created the technological developments that, in part, allowed global domination and the current Western-liberal world order. You can't really divorce the technological development from the culture creating it.

I think that point is a lot more sound than what the person speaking at the convention said. Especially in his interviews.

http://www.nbcnews.com/card/rep-steve-king-defends-western-civilization-causes-uproar-n612021

"This 'old, white people' business does get a little tired," King said on MSNBC Monday, hours before the first speaker would take the stage at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland. "I'd ask you to go back through history and figure out, where are these contributions that have been made by these other categories of people that you're talking about — where did any other subgroup of people contribute more to civilization?"

"Than white people?" asked MSNBC's Chris Hayes, slightly stunned.

"Than Western civilization itself," King replied. "It's rooted in Western Europe, Eastern Europe and the Unites States of America and every place where the footprint of Christianity settled the world. That's all of Western civilization."

So as long as you're maintaining a separate point than this gentlemen I think there's a conversation to be had.

{CC}StealthBlue

United States41117 Posts

July 19 2016 23:48 GMT

#86808

{CC}StealthBlue

United States41117 Posts

July 19 2016 23:50 GMT

#86809

Paul Ryan has that 1,000 yard stare...

GGTeMpLaR

United States7226 Posts

July 19 2016 23:50 GMT

#86810

Alaska is PISSED!!

Half the Sky

Germany9029 Posts

July 19 2016 23:50 GMT

#86811

Alaska is requesting a poll vote?

{CC}StealthBlue

United States41117 Posts

July 19 2016 23:51 GMT

#86812

Alaska has rebelled.

Simberto

Germany11798 Posts

July 19 2016 23:52 GMT

#86813

On July 20 2016 08:28 xDaunt wrote:

Show nested quote +

Refusing to engage in the conversation is no different than giving the equivocal answer to the question. You can argue about the value of the inquiry, but that doesn't mean that there isn't an answer.

I am not quite certain what you want to say with this.

Saying that there is no reasonable metric to attribute value to the contributions of different entities, which are also ill defined, is not the same as saying that the contribution of every single of those entities is equal. In fact, to say that they are equal would already require a metric to compare them by.

I do not think that your proposed metric of "time of global domination" is in any way related to the question of "contribution to the human race", thus i reject that one.

Furthermore, i do not think it is a fruitful endeavor to try to find such a metric, as the result will be very volatile in regards to the choice of the metric. I can try to compare an apple to a razor. If my metric is sharpness, the razor is obviously better. If my metric is tastiness, the apple wins. The same is true for this comparison of civilizations that you wish for. If you grant everything derivative to the civilization that discovered the first base principle, the first civilizations are the most important. If you only count the latest iteration, the newest civilizations are the most important.

And even if we found such a metric to agree upon, i still do not think that we have anything gained except another way to compare dick sizes. We should also take a step back and take a look at the original statement, which specifically did not talk about "western civilisation" (until the man corrected himself afterwards), but about "white people" and their contributions. Which i find to be a disgusting thing to talk about, because it specifically groups people into categories according to their skin color, and then decides that the white people are the best of those.

I am still not clear on how any of this has anything to do with a "danger to the self-preservation of liberal, western tradition"

GGTeMpLaR

United States7226 Posts

July 19 2016 23:52 GMT

#86814

THE MUSIC ROFL

Twitchchat makes this so entertaining

{CC}StealthBlue

United States41117 Posts

July 19 2016 23:54 GMT

#86815

They are actually arguing on stage.

{CC}StealthBlue

United States41117 Posts

July 20 2016 00:03 GMT

#86816

TheYango

United States47024 Posts

July 20 2016 00:09 GMT

#86817

On July 20 2016 08:26 xDaunt wrote:
To be more accurate, my point is that Western culture created the technological developments that, in part, allowed global domination and the current Western-liberal world order. You can't really divorce the technological development from the culture creating it.

Which ones? Shipbuilding? Gunpowder? Writing? All of those are "technological developments that, in part, allowed global domination". They aren't sufficient conditions but all were necessary and none of them were invented by Western civilization.