|
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. |
On July 20 2017 06:48 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2017 06:46 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 04:40 KwarK wrote:On July 20 2017 04:32 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 03:47 Plansix wrote:
I visited the very flat state of Ohio this weekend and saw some of my very liberal friends there. They are all professors at Ohio State. We got into a bunch of discussions about politics and what we agree and disagree with. Several of them are from academic family backgrounds, while my wife and I are firmly from blue collar families(less so me, but my family all worked in our tiny factory). On the internet, people would consider that to be an echo chamber of people that agree, since we are all liberal. But that couldn’t be farther from the truth, since we all had very different viewpoints on educational, labor, regulation and pretty much everything else. And the view points were even broader when we visited my wife’s remaining family. But I know how everyone in that group voted during the election.
The left and right dynamic is a trap that will make you miss out on really understanding people’s political views and ideas.
If that's the only place you sound out your political views, you're living in an echo chamber. It doesn't refer to the self-evaluated size and scope of the disagreements, but rather to how many big picture ideas and understandings of the world are taken for granted ("very liberal" usually refers to a broad set). I absolutely know many insulated Californian liberals that were appalled anyone would vote for Trump, but would also bristle at being called an echo chamber--because they disagree with incrementalism, education, corporate taxation, and foreign affairs. Then they all get out and haven't talked to a single Trump voter about politics seriously and go off on the racism/sexism/stupidity diatribes just as before. So it really sounds like echo chamber is "close to the truth" instead of "couldn't be farther from the truth" The conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist is not from lack of exposure to Trump voters. It's from the opposite. I'm a little happy that people like you arrive at the conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist. He had a hair less than half the country vote for him, but the line you take is that exposure to their views just confirms that this is a huge constituency. Which means what you call racist and sexist is overly broad (common among thread liberals) or you're incapable of fair judgement (the other side isn't just wrong, they're racist sexist bigoted scumbags). It's a useful link to why liberals are so hated and actually bring it on themselves from their own unforced actions. the number of voters doesn't really say much about the assertion though, if a belief can't be bad by virtue of half of a nation holding it we'd all be living in a utopia
Half the country is racist and sexist rates a little bit behind NASA faked the moon landings and the patriarchy is the most sinister force in the world today ... for me. It gives a good approximation of their progressive views on race and sex in America. Clinton got 66mil Trump 63mil, but you know those 63mil had a ton of irrational woman and black haters don't you know. It's actually a good sense of the gap America must bridge if we're to remain a united nation for much longer.
|
8 years ago half the country was against gay marriage.
Why is it so impossible for 30% (just picking a number) to be racist?
|
Speaking of different groups within a wider political movement, I would just like to restate how disgusted I have become with the "Conservative Media" arm of the republican/conservative party. I'm talking about people like Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, Jesse Watters, Greg Gutfeld, Rush Limbaugh, Lou Dobbs, Mark Levin, Michael Savage, etc. Fox News and big national radio people, essentially.
Not a single one of them has admitted that there is anything wrong with the Russian connection, or that Trump and the current Republican congress are dysfunctional, or that anything is wrong in government currently at all. The narrative is that we are #WINNING and the only problem is evil obstructionist Dems out to sabotage everything Trump. Keep in mind that one of these people's main arguments for electing Trump in the first place was that we could hold his feet to the fire if he reneged on his promises. He's accomplished nothing legislatively in 6 months, he's facing a growing scandal of potentially "unpresidented" proportions, and he's reneged on immigration, his signature campaign issue. What do the people I've named above say about all this? "EVIL DEMONCRATS ARE ATTACKING CHEETO JESUS" I can only conclude that these media personalities are in it for the money and nothing else, despite holding themselves up hypocritically as the representatives of a party of personal responsibility.
I find myself aligned with people on the right like McMullin, Rick Wilson, Max Boot. Check out Max Boot vs Tucker Carlson for an entertaining debate.
|
The voters rights act was gutted and a bunch of states rushed to pass over ID laws and change their voting rules. NC is almost to the point were they are just going to deny democrat voting districts funding to run polling places. I will take the argument that some voters had no idea how bad Trump and his good old boy Sessions were going to be for relations in this country. But there is a section of voters that just don't give a shit as long as they might get a higher paying job. Racism is often just not giving a shit. It is indifference, not direct action.
TheLordofAwesome: Did you see Tucker's rant against gypsies coming to the US? It was some 1936 German shit, straight up. I had to watch it twice just to make sure it was real.
|
United States42367 Posts
Danglars is most likely using a definition of racist that precludes anyone not currently wearing a hood. It would be absurd to think that there are 60 million active Klan members in America wearing hoods at this moment. It helps him not notice that his party is filled with racists.
|
On July 20 2017 07:08 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2017 06:48 Nyxisto wrote:On July 20 2017 06:46 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 04:40 KwarK wrote:On July 20 2017 04:32 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 03:47 Plansix wrote:
I visited the very flat state of Ohio this weekend and saw some of my very liberal friends there. They are all professors at Ohio State. We got into a bunch of discussions about politics and what we agree and disagree with. Several of them are from academic family backgrounds, while my wife and I are firmly from blue collar families(less so me, but my family all worked in our tiny factory). On the internet, people would consider that to be an echo chamber of people that agree, since we are all liberal. But that couldn’t be farther from the truth, since we all had very different viewpoints on educational, labor, regulation and pretty much everything else. And the view points were even broader when we visited my wife’s remaining family. But I know how everyone in that group voted during the election.
The left and right dynamic is a trap that will make you miss out on really understanding people’s political views and ideas.
If that's the only place you sound out your political views, you're living in an echo chamber. It doesn't refer to the self-evaluated size and scope of the disagreements, but rather to how many big picture ideas and understandings of the world are taken for granted ("very liberal" usually refers to a broad set). I absolutely know many insulated Californian liberals that were appalled anyone would vote for Trump, but would also bristle at being called an echo chamber--because they disagree with incrementalism, education, corporate taxation, and foreign affairs. Then they all get out and haven't talked to a single Trump voter about politics seriously and go off on the racism/sexism/stupidity diatribes just as before. So it really sounds like echo chamber is "close to the truth" instead of "couldn't be farther from the truth" The conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist is not from lack of exposure to Trump voters. It's from the opposite. I'm a little happy that people like you arrive at the conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist. He had a hair less than half the country vote for him, but the line you take is that exposure to their views just confirms that this is a huge constituency. Which means what you call racist and sexist is overly broad (common among thread liberals) or you're incapable of fair judgement (the other side isn't just wrong, they're racist sexist bigoted scumbags). It's a useful link to why liberals are so hated and actually bring it on themselves from their own unforced actions. the number of voters doesn't really say much about the assertion though, if a belief can't be bad by virtue of half of a nation holding it we'd all be living in a utopia Half the country is racist and sexist rates a little bit behind NASA faked the moon landings and the patriarchy is the most sinister force in the world today ... for me. It gives a good approximation of their progressive views on race and sex in America. Clinton got 66mil Trump 63mil, but you know those 63mil had a ton of irrational woman and black haters don't you know. It's actually a good sense of the gap America must bridge if we're to remain a united nation for much longer.
Democrat polticians have so overplayed the race card on political opponents who were obviously not racist, that the term racist has lost all its power. Which is a real shame in a way, because then real actual racists get a free pass, because no one believes the accusation anymore. I don't think identity politics is the way to go for the Democrats, practically because being the Party who cried Racist doesn't work forever, and fundamentally it's morally wrong.
|
On July 20 2017 07:22 Plansix wrote:
The voters rights act was gutted and a bunch of states rushed to pass over ID laws and change their voting rules. NC is almost to the point were they are just going to deny democrat voting districts funding to run polling places. I will take the argument that some voters had no idea how bad Trump and his good old boy Sessions were going to be for relations in this country. But there is a section of voters that just don't give a shit as long as they might get a higher paying job. Racism is often just not giving a shit. It is indifference, not direct action.
TheLordofAwesome: Did you see Tucker's rant against gypsies coming to the US? It was some 1936 German shit, straight up. I had to watch it twice just to make sure it was real.
Haven't seen it but I'll look up what he said, got to go now though.
|
On July 20 2017 07:23 KwarK wrote:
Danglars is most likely using a definition of racist that precludes anyone not currently wearing a hood. It would be absurd to think that there are 60 million active Klan members in America wearing hoods at this moment. It helps him not notice that his party is filled with racists.
I once side that we could show him a modern day KKK member burning a cross on the White House(Obama era) lawn and he would want to know if it was an act or the person was just being ironic.
LoA: It is sort of amazingly awful. He talks about gypsies cutting the heads of chickens in the street.
|
On July 20 2017 07:08 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2017 06:48 Nyxisto wrote:On July 20 2017 06:46 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 04:40 KwarK wrote:On July 20 2017 04:32 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 03:47 Plansix wrote:
I visited the very flat state of Ohio this weekend and saw some of my very liberal friends there. They are all professors at Ohio State. We got into a bunch of discussions about politics and what we agree and disagree with. Several of them are from academic family backgrounds, while my wife and I are firmly from blue collar families(less so me, but my family all worked in our tiny factory). On the internet, people would consider that to be an echo chamber of people that agree, since we are all liberal. But that couldn’t be farther from the truth, since we all had very different viewpoints on educational, labor, regulation and pretty much everything else. And the view points were even broader when we visited my wife’s remaining family. But I know how everyone in that group voted during the election.
The left and right dynamic is a trap that will make you miss out on really understanding people’s political views and ideas.
If that's the only place you sound out your political views, you're living in an echo chamber. It doesn't refer to the self-evaluated size and scope of the disagreements, but rather to how many big picture ideas and understandings of the world are taken for granted ("very liberal" usually refers to a broad set). I absolutely know many insulated Californian liberals that were appalled anyone would vote for Trump, but would also bristle at being called an echo chamber--because they disagree with incrementalism, education, corporate taxation, and foreign affairs. Then they all get out and haven't talked to a single Trump voter about politics seriously and go off on the racism/sexism/stupidity diatribes just as before. So it really sounds like echo chamber is "close to the truth" instead of "couldn't be farther from the truth" The conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist is not from lack of exposure to Trump voters. It's from the opposite. I'm a little happy that people like you arrive at the conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist. He had a hair less than half the country vote for him, but the line you take is that exposure to their views just confirms that this is a huge constituency. Which means what you call racist and sexist is overly broad (common among thread liberals) or you're incapable of fair judgement (the other side isn't just wrong, they're racist sexist bigoted scumbags). It's a useful link to why liberals are so hated and actually bring it on themselves from their own unforced actions. the number of voters doesn't really say much about the assertion though, if a belief can't be bad by virtue of half of a nation holding it we'd all be living in a utopia Half the country is racist and sexist rates a little bit behind NASA faked the moon landings and the patriarchy is the most sinister force in the world today ... for me. It gives a good approximation of their progressive views on race and sex in America. Clinton got 66mil Trump 63mil, but you know those 63mil had a ton of irrational woman and black haters don't you know. It's actually a good sense of the gap America must bridge if we're to remain a united nation for much longer.
I don't see this as an issue of 'progressiveness' really. The low rate of women in congress (20% just about the same level as Keyna) and the discussions about the legality of abortion stand out as issues that have long been resolved even in second world countries. I would have trouble calling the US unambiguously secular.
I don't know whether the words "racist" or "sexist" as delineations are useful but culturally there is apparently a huge group of, especially religiously motivated reactionary stuff going on.
|
United States42367 Posts
On July 20 2017 07:24 TheLordofAwesome wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2017 07:08 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 06:48 Nyxisto wrote:On July 20 2017 06:46 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 04:40 KwarK wrote:On July 20 2017 04:32 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 03:47 Plansix wrote:
I visited the very flat state of Ohio this weekend and saw some of my very liberal friends there. They are all professors at Ohio State. We got into a bunch of discussions about politics and what we agree and disagree with. Several of them are from academic family backgrounds, while my wife and I are firmly from blue collar families(less so me, but my family all worked in our tiny factory). On the internet, people would consider that to be an echo chamber of people that agree, since we are all liberal. But that couldn’t be farther from the truth, since we all had very different viewpoints on educational, labor, regulation and pretty much everything else. And the view points were even broader when we visited my wife’s remaining family. But I know how everyone in that group voted during the election.
The left and right dynamic is a trap that will make you miss out on really understanding people’s political views and ideas.
If that's the only place you sound out your political views, you're living in an echo chamber. It doesn't refer to the self-evaluated size and scope of the disagreements, but rather to how many big picture ideas and understandings of the world are taken for granted ("very liberal" usually refers to a broad set). I absolutely know many insulated Californian liberals that were appalled anyone would vote for Trump, but would also bristle at being called an echo chamber--because they disagree with incrementalism, education, corporate taxation, and foreign affairs. Then they all get out and haven't talked to a single Trump voter about politics seriously and go off on the racism/sexism/stupidity diatribes just as before. So it really sounds like echo chamber is "close to the truth" instead of "couldn't be farther from the truth" The conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist is not from lack of exposure to Trump voters. It's from the opposite. I'm a little happy that people like you arrive at the conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist. He had a hair less than half the country vote for him, but the line you take is that exposure to their views just confirms that this is a huge constituency. Which means what you call racist and sexist is overly broad (common among thread liberals) or you're incapable of fair judgement (the other side isn't just wrong, they're racist sexist bigoted scumbags). It's a useful link to why liberals are so hated and actually bring it on themselves from their own unforced actions. the number of voters doesn't really say much about the assertion though, if a belief can't be bad by virtue of half of a nation holding it we'd all be living in a utopia Half the country is racist and sexist rates a little bit behind NASA faked the moon landings and the patriarchy is the most sinister force in the world today ... for me. It gives a good approximation of their progressive views on race and sex in America. Clinton got 66mil Trump 63mil, but you know those 63mil had a ton of irrational woman and black haters don't you know. It's actually a good sense of the gap America must bridge if we're to remain a united nation for much longer. Democrat polticians have so overplayed the race card on political opponents who were obviously not racist, that the term racist has lost all its power. Which is a real shame in a way, because then real actual racists get a free pass, because no one believes the accusation anymore. I don't think identity politics is the way to go for the Democrats, practically because being the Party who cried Racist doesn't work forever, and fundamentally it's morally wrong.
I honestly think the identity politics thing is far stronger with the Republicans than anyone else. They have put all their chips on "white Christian male" and are insisting that they're the only hope for a restoration of the privileged days of the 50s where men were men, women were obedient, blacks weren't so uppity and gays knew better than to leave the closet.
Republicanism is currently ideologically indistinguishable from this deplorable, fundamentally racist and sexist, delusional concept of a lost utopia that never was. It's not about lower taxes, fiscal responsibility, liberty, deregulation or anything else. The party message has lost all coherence, today it's nothing but masturbatory identity politics. That's why the #winning thing is so strong with them. All they really want is to know that blacks have been put back in their place and that the position of rich white men will always be safe in America. It doesn't matter what is done with the victory, the policies aren't important, all that matters is that the forces of "progress" are defeated.
|
On July 20 2017 06:51 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2017 06:40 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 04:38 Plansix wrote:On July 20 2017 04:32 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 03:47 Plansix wrote:
I visited the very flat state of Ohio this weekend and saw some of my very liberal friends there. They are all professors at Ohio State. We got into a bunch of discussions about politics and what we agree and disagree with. Several of them are from academic family backgrounds, while my wife and I are firmly from blue collar families(less so me, but my family all worked in our tiny factory). On the internet, people would consider that to be an echo chamber of people that agree, since we are all liberal. But that couldn’t be farther from the truth, since we all had very different viewpoints on educational, labor, regulation and pretty much everything else. And the view points were even broader when we visited my wife’s remaining family. But I know how everyone in that group voted during the election.
The left and right dynamic is a trap that will make you miss out on really understanding people’s political views and ideas.
If that's the only place you sound out your political views, you're living in an echo chamber. It doesn't refer to the self-evaluated size and scope of the disagreements, but rather to how many big picture ideas and understandings of the world are taken for granted ("very liberal" usually refers to a broad set). I absolutely know many insulated Californian liberals that were appalled anyone would vote for Trump, but would also bristle at being called an echo chamber--because they disagree with incrementalism, education, corporate taxation, and foreign affairs. Then they all get out and haven't talked to a single Trump voter about politics seriously and go off on the racism/sexism/stupidity diatribes just as before. So it really sounds like echo chamber is "close to the truth" instead of "couldn't be farther from the truth" Yes, in 37 years on this earth, all my political opinions were formed and are still formed by talking to those 4 people only. That is it, no others. I live in a self imposed echo chamber to assure my purity of thought. It is sort of impressive how you so completely missed the entire point of that post. One more try. You self-evaluate the size of disagreement on your views to declare you and yours not part of the echo chamber. It's myopic to think you're a good observer and judge of how many differing viewpoints you're allowing to see the light of day. Due to the amount of time it took you to respond, I have to assume you didn’t read that careful. The post was part of a larger discussion about political polarization, left vs right and how those label are artificial. My post was highlighting that there were differences between three groups of liberals and we all brought something to the table to discuss. You mistakenly believe that there is nothing to be gained from this “echo chamber” as you call it. This could not be more incorrect or short sighted. Discussions with people you agree with on many subjects can help you better understand your own viewpoints and others. The belief that these “echo chambers” are worthless is common on the internet, and only fierce debate with “the other side” is meritorious. So I am not surprised you are critical of these discussions and my review of them. It also fits into your ongoing performance as the peek of the self critical conservative that tells all the liberals how misguided they are. And to quote my wife’s 10 year old god daughter, “Worry about yourself”, when it comes to self critique.
I never said there was nothing to be gained. Read it again. I take issue with denying the very essence of an echo chamber that you described rather perfectly. Furthermore, I'm perfectly willing to allow you hear all kinds of right wing opinions in other venues--even here in the minority of voices.
|
On July 20 2017 07:22 Plansix wrote:
But there is a section of voters that just don't give a shit as long as they might get a higher paying job. Racism is often just not giving a shit. It is indifference, not direct action.
So by your logic, anyone who supports Trump (doesn't include me btw) is necessarily racist? What does racist even mean at that point?
On July 20 2017 07:23 KwarK wrote:
Danglars is most likely using a definition of racist that precludes anyone not currently wearing a hood. It would be absurd to think that there are 60 million active Klan members in America wearing hoods at this moment. It helps him not notice that his party is filled with racists.
I don't see how making silly claims like the Republican party is "filled with racists" does anything except exacerbate partisan tensions and act as useless diatribe. What are you even basing this off of?
Republicanism is currently ideologically indistinguishable from this deplorable, fundamentally racist and sexist, delusional concept of a lost utopia that never was. It's not about lower taxes, fiscal responsibility, liberty, deregulation or anything else. The party message has lost all coherence, today it's nothing but masturbatory identity politics. That's why the #winning thing is so strong with them. All they really want is to know that blacks have been put back in their place and that the position of rich white men will always be safe in America. It doesn't matter what is done with the victory, the policies aren't important, all that matters is that the forces of "progress" are defeated.
This is a strong candidate for "Over-Generalization of the Year" award, which is ironic considering we're talking about race relations. Not to mention it's incorrect, as the only thing that all Republicans do agree on is lowering taxes. Which you said doesn't matter to the party at all.
You literally just completely pretended the moderate Republican faction that shot down the healthcare bill doesn't exist.
The Trump/Bannon nationalist/populist wing is only a third of the party. If the party was actually unified behind them (as you're implying), they would have passed a bunch of racist legislation and anti-immigration legislation by now. But they haven't even tried because the first orders of business were healthcare and taxes (i.e., nothing to do with identity politics).
The other reason is because the party simply doesn't have the votes to pass racist and anti-immigration bills. Weird for a party that supposedly is nothing but a bunch of racist white dudes try to keep everyone else out, huh?
|
On July 20 2017 07:34 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2017 07:24 TheLordofAwesome wrote:On July 20 2017 07:08 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 06:48 Nyxisto wrote:On July 20 2017 06:46 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 04:40 KwarK wrote:On July 20 2017 04:32 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 03:47 Plansix wrote:
I visited the very flat state of Ohio this weekend and saw some of my very liberal friends there. They are all professors at Ohio State. We got into a bunch of discussions about politics and what we agree and disagree with. Several of them are from academic family backgrounds, while my wife and I are firmly from blue collar families(less so me, but my family all worked in our tiny factory). On the internet, people would consider that to be an echo chamber of people that agree, since we are all liberal. But that couldn’t be farther from the truth, since we all had very different viewpoints on educational, labor, regulation and pretty much everything else. And the view points were even broader when we visited my wife’s remaining family. But I know how everyone in that group voted during the election.
The left and right dynamic is a trap that will make you miss out on really understanding people’s political views and ideas.
If that's the only place you sound out your political views, you're living in an echo chamber. It doesn't refer to the self-evaluated size and scope of the disagreements, but rather to how many big picture ideas and understandings of the world are taken for granted ("very liberal" usually refers to a broad set). I absolutely know many insulated Californian liberals that were appalled anyone would vote for Trump, but would also bristle at being called an echo chamber--because they disagree with incrementalism, education, corporate taxation, and foreign affairs. Then they all get out and haven't talked to a single Trump voter about politics seriously and go off on the racism/sexism/stupidity diatribes just as before. So it really sounds like echo chamber is "close to the truth" instead of "couldn't be farther from the truth" The conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist is not from lack of exposure to Trump voters. It's from the opposite. I'm a little happy that people like you arrive at the conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist. He had a hair less than half the country vote for him, but the line you take is that exposure to their views just confirms that this is a huge constituency. Which means what you call racist and sexist is overly broad (common among thread liberals) or you're incapable of fair judgement (the other side isn't just wrong, they're racist sexist bigoted scumbags). It's a useful link to why liberals are so hated and actually bring it on themselves from their own unforced actions. the number of voters doesn't really say much about the assertion though, if a belief can't be bad by virtue of half of a nation holding it we'd all be living in a utopia Half the country is racist and sexist rates a little bit behind NASA faked the moon landings and the patriarchy is the most sinister force in the world today ... for me. It gives a good approximation of their progressive views on race and sex in America. Clinton got 66mil Trump 63mil, but you know those 63mil had a ton of irrational woman and black haters don't you know. It's actually a good sense of the gap America must bridge if we're to remain a united nation for much longer. Democrat polticians have so overplayed the race card on political opponents who were obviously not racist, that the term racist has lost all its power. Which is a real shame in a way, because then real actual racists get a free pass, because no one believes the accusation anymore. I don't think identity politics is the way to go for the Democrats, practically because being the Party who cried Racist doesn't work forever, and fundamentally it's morally wrong. I honestly think the identity politics thing is far stronger with the Republicans than anyone else. They have put all their chips on "white Christian male" and are insisting that they're the only hope for a restoration of the privileged days of the 50s where men were men, women were obedient, blacks weren't so uppity and gays knew better than to leave the closet. Republicanism is currently ideologically indistinguishable from this deplorable, fundamentally racist and sexist, delusional concept of a lost utopia that never was. It's not about lower taxes, fiscal responsibility, liberty, deregulation or anything else. The party message has lost all coherence, today it's nothing but masturbatory identity politics. That's why the #winning thing is so strong with them. All they really want is to know that blacks have been put back in their place and that the position of rich white men will always be safe in America. It doesn't matter what is done with the victory, the policies aren't important, all that matters is that the forces of "progress" are defeated.
I for one wish women were obedient and blacks weren't so uppity. The gall to imagine they can be President and have success. Women demanding fair wages for the same amount of work! The nerve! We need those progressive values of the 50s back! (find the hyperbole and sarcasm)
|
On July 20 2017 07:24 TheLordofAwesome wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2017 07:08 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 06:48 Nyxisto wrote:On July 20 2017 06:46 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 04:40 KwarK wrote:On July 20 2017 04:32 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 03:47 Plansix wrote:
I visited the very flat state of Ohio this weekend and saw some of my very liberal friends there. They are all professors at Ohio State. We got into a bunch of discussions about politics and what we agree and disagree with. Several of them are from academic family backgrounds, while my wife and I are firmly from blue collar families(less so me, but my family all worked in our tiny factory). On the internet, people would consider that to be an echo chamber of people that agree, since we are all liberal. But that couldn’t be farther from the truth, since we all had very different viewpoints on educational, labor, regulation and pretty much everything else. And the view points were even broader when we visited my wife’s remaining family. But I know how everyone in that group voted during the election.
The left and right dynamic is a trap that will make you miss out on really understanding people’s political views and ideas.
If that's the only place you sound out your political views, you're living in an echo chamber. It doesn't refer to the self-evaluated size and scope of the disagreements, but rather to how many big picture ideas and understandings of the world are taken for granted ("very liberal" usually refers to a broad set). I absolutely know many insulated Californian liberals that were appalled anyone would vote for Trump, but would also bristle at being called an echo chamber--because they disagree with incrementalism, education, corporate taxation, and foreign affairs. Then they all get out and haven't talked to a single Trump voter about politics seriously and go off on the racism/sexism/stupidity diatribes just as before. So it really sounds like echo chamber is "close to the truth" instead of "couldn't be farther from the truth" The conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist is not from lack of exposure to Trump voters. It's from the opposite. I'm a little happy that people like you arrive at the conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist. He had a hair less than half the country vote for him, but the line you take is that exposure to their views just confirms that this is a huge constituency. Which means what you call racist and sexist is overly broad (common among thread liberals) or you're incapable of fair judgement (the other side isn't just wrong, they're racist sexist bigoted scumbags). It's a useful link to why liberals are so hated and actually bring it on themselves from their own unforced actions. the number of voters doesn't really say much about the assertion though, if a belief can't be bad by virtue of half of a nation holding it we'd all be living in a utopia Half the country is racist and sexist rates a little bit behind NASA faked the moon landings and the patriarchy is the most sinister force in the world today ... for me. It gives a good approximation of their progressive views on race and sex in America. Clinton got 66mil Trump 63mil, but you know those 63mil had a ton of irrational woman and black haters don't you know. It's actually a good sense of the gap America must bridge if we're to remain a united nation for much longer. Democrat polticians have so overplayed the race card on political opponents who were obviously not racist, that the term racist has lost all its power. Which is a real shame in a way, because then real actual racists get a free pass, because no one believes the accusation anymore. I don't think identity politics is the way to go for the Democrats, practically because being the Party who cried Racist doesn't work forever, and fundamentally it's morally wrong.
That's exactly my view. Trump was partly a reaction to overplaying the oppression setup, and of course everyone doubled down afterwards because it was a rough election for Dems and they're still lost for a message.
|
On July 20 2017 07:44 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2017 07:24 TheLordofAwesome wrote:On July 20 2017 07:08 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 06:48 Nyxisto wrote:On July 20 2017 06:46 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 04:40 KwarK wrote:On July 20 2017 04:32 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 03:47 Plansix wrote:
I visited the very flat state of Ohio this weekend and saw some of my very liberal friends there. They are all professors at Ohio State. We got into a bunch of discussions about politics and what we agree and disagree with. Several of them are from academic family backgrounds, while my wife and I are firmly from blue collar families(less so me, but my family all worked in our tiny factory). On the internet, people would consider that to be an echo chamber of people that agree, since we are all liberal. But that couldn’t be farther from the truth, since we all had very different viewpoints on educational, labor, regulation and pretty much everything else. And the view points were even broader when we visited my wife’s remaining family. But I know how everyone in that group voted during the election.
The left and right dynamic is a trap that will make you miss out on really understanding people’s political views and ideas.
If that's the only place you sound out your political views, you're living in an echo chamber. It doesn't refer to the self-evaluated size and scope of the disagreements, but rather to how many big picture ideas and understandings of the world are taken for granted ("very liberal" usually refers to a broad set). I absolutely know many insulated Californian liberals that were appalled anyone would vote for Trump, but would also bristle at being called an echo chamber--because they disagree with incrementalism, education, corporate taxation, and foreign affairs. Then they all get out and haven't talked to a single Trump voter about politics seriously and go off on the racism/sexism/stupidity diatribes just as before. So it really sounds like echo chamber is "close to the truth" instead of "couldn't be farther from the truth" The conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist is not from lack of exposure to Trump voters. It's from the opposite. I'm a little happy that people like you arrive at the conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist. He had a hair less than half the country vote for him, but the line you take is that exposure to their views just confirms that this is a huge constituency. Which means what you call racist and sexist is overly broad (common among thread liberals) or you're incapable of fair judgement (the other side isn't just wrong, they're racist sexist bigoted scumbags). It's a useful link to why liberals are so hated and actually bring it on themselves from their own unforced actions. the number of voters doesn't really say much about the assertion though, if a belief can't be bad by virtue of half of a nation holding it we'd all be living in a utopia Half the country is racist and sexist rates a little bit behind NASA faked the moon landings and the patriarchy is the most sinister force in the world today ... for me. It gives a good approximation of their progressive views on race and sex in America. Clinton got 66mil Trump 63mil, but you know those 63mil had a ton of irrational woman and black haters don't you know. It's actually a good sense of the gap America must bridge if we're to remain a united nation for much longer. Democrat polticians have so overplayed the race card on political opponents who were obviously not racist, that the term racist has lost all its power. Which is a real shame in a way, because then real actual racists get a free pass, because no one believes the accusation anymore. I don't think identity politics is the way to go for the Democrats, practically because being the Party who cried Racist doesn't work forever, and fundamentally it's morally wrong. That's exactly my view. Trump was partly a reaction to overplaying the oppression setup, and of course everyone doubled down afterwards because it was a rough election for Dems and they're still lost for a message.
What would be your message for Democrats?
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On July 20 2017 07:46 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2017 07:44 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 07:24 TheLordofAwesome wrote:On July 20 2017 07:08 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 06:48 Nyxisto wrote:On July 20 2017 06:46 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 04:40 KwarK wrote:On July 20 2017 04:32 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 03:47 Plansix wrote:
I visited the very flat state of Ohio this weekend and saw some of my very liberal friends there. They are all professors at Ohio State. We got into a bunch of discussions about politics and what we agree and disagree with. Several of them are from academic family backgrounds, while my wife and I are firmly from blue collar families(less so me, but my family all worked in our tiny factory). On the internet, people would consider that to be an echo chamber of people that agree, since we are all liberal. But that couldn’t be farther from the truth, since we all had very different viewpoints on educational, labor, regulation and pretty much everything else. And the view points were even broader when we visited my wife’s remaining family. But I know how everyone in that group voted during the election.
The left and right dynamic is a trap that will make you miss out on really understanding people’s political views and ideas.
If that's the only place you sound out your political views, you're living in an echo chamber. It doesn't refer to the self-evaluated size and scope of the disagreements, but rather to how many big picture ideas and understandings of the world are taken for granted ("very liberal" usually refers to a broad set). I absolutely know many insulated Californian liberals that were appalled anyone would vote for Trump, but would also bristle at being called an echo chamber--because they disagree with incrementalism, education, corporate taxation, and foreign affairs. Then they all get out and haven't talked to a single Trump voter about politics seriously and go off on the racism/sexism/stupidity diatribes just as before. So it really sounds like echo chamber is "close to the truth" instead of "couldn't be farther from the truth" The conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist is not from lack of exposure to Trump voters. It's from the opposite. I'm a little happy that people like you arrive at the conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist. He had a hair less than half the country vote for him, but the line you take is that exposure to their views just confirms that this is a huge constituency. Which means what you call racist and sexist is overly broad (common among thread liberals) or you're incapable of fair judgement (the other side isn't just wrong, they're racist sexist bigoted scumbags). It's a useful link to why liberals are so hated and actually bring it on themselves from their own unforced actions. the number of voters doesn't really say much about the assertion though, if a belief can't be bad by virtue of half of a nation holding it we'd all be living in a utopia Half the country is racist and sexist rates a little bit behind NASA faked the moon landings and the patriarchy is the most sinister force in the world today ... for me. It gives a good approximation of their progressive views on race and sex in America. Clinton got 66mil Trump 63mil, but you know those 63mil had a ton of irrational woman and black haters don't you know. It's actually a good sense of the gap America must bridge if we're to remain a united nation for much longer. Democrat polticians have so overplayed the race card on political opponents who were obviously not racist, that the term racist has lost all its power. Which is a real shame in a way, because then real actual racists get a free pass, because no one believes the accusation anymore. I don't think identity politics is the way to go for the Democrats, practically because being the Party who cried Racist doesn't work forever, and fundamentally it's morally wrong. That's exactly my view. Trump was partly a reaction to overplaying the oppression setup, and of course everyone doubled down afterwards because it was a rough election for Dems and they're still lost for a message. What would be your message for Democrats?
Issues, issues, issues!
Everyone already knows how bad Trump is, we are just short of an alternative.
|
On July 20 2017 07:29 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2017 07:08 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 06:48 Nyxisto wrote:On July 20 2017 06:46 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 04:40 KwarK wrote:On July 20 2017 04:32 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 03:47 Plansix wrote:
I visited the very flat state of Ohio this weekend and saw some of my very liberal friends there. They are all professors at Ohio State. We got into a bunch of discussions about politics and what we agree and disagree with. Several of them are from academic family backgrounds, while my wife and I are firmly from blue collar families(less so me, but my family all worked in our tiny factory). On the internet, people would consider that to be an echo chamber of people that agree, since we are all liberal. But that couldn’t be farther from the truth, since we all had very different viewpoints on educational, labor, regulation and pretty much everything else. And the view points were even broader when we visited my wife’s remaining family. But I know how everyone in that group voted during the election.
The left and right dynamic is a trap that will make you miss out on really understanding people’s political views and ideas.
If that's the only place you sound out your political views, you're living in an echo chamber. It doesn't refer to the self-evaluated size and scope of the disagreements, but rather to how many big picture ideas and understandings of the world are taken for granted ("very liberal" usually refers to a broad set). I absolutely know many insulated Californian liberals that were appalled anyone would vote for Trump, but would also bristle at being called an echo chamber--because they disagree with incrementalism, education, corporate taxation, and foreign affairs. Then they all get out and haven't talked to a single Trump voter about politics seriously and go off on the racism/sexism/stupidity diatribes just as before. So it really sounds like echo chamber is "close to the truth" instead of "couldn't be farther from the truth" The conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist is not from lack of exposure to Trump voters. It's from the opposite. I'm a little happy that people like you arrive at the conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist. He had a hair less than half the country vote for him, but the line you take is that exposure to their views just confirms that this is a huge constituency. Which means what you call racist and sexist is overly broad (common among thread liberals) or you're incapable of fair judgement (the other side isn't just wrong, they're racist sexist bigoted scumbags). It's a useful link to why liberals are so hated and actually bring it on themselves from their own unforced actions. the number of voters doesn't really say much about the assertion though, if a belief can't be bad by virtue of half of a nation holding it we'd all be living in a utopia Half the country is racist and sexist rates a little bit behind NASA faked the moon landings and the patriarchy is the most sinister force in the world today ... for me. It gives a good approximation of their progressive views on race and sex in America. Clinton got 66mil Trump 63mil, but you know those 63mil had a ton of irrational woman and black haters don't you know. It's actually a good sense of the gap America must bridge if we're to remain a united nation for much longer. I don't see this as an issue of 'progressiveness' really. The low rate of women in congress (20% just about the same level as Keyna) and the discussions about the legality of abortion stand out as issues that have long been resolved even in second world countries. I would have trouble calling the US unambiguously secular. I don't know whether the words "racist" or "sexist" as delineations are useful but culturally there is apparently a huge group of, especially religiously motivated reactionary stuff going on.
And is the percentage of women in elected office necessarily a product of sexism, or abortion policy stemming from something sinister beyond genuine moral considerations? That's one of the problems with these isms and phobics: you have to twist everything to mean Obama was a raging homophobe before he wasn't, and the Clintons the same way. It will always shortcut debate and prompt backlash. Hi what are you political opinions, ok here's mine and by the way yours are motivated by racism and sexism. Not productive.
|
United States42367 Posts
I know this is a long shot but have you considered being less racist in response to accusations of racism?
|
On July 20 2017 07:43 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2017 07:34 KwarK wrote:On July 20 2017 07:24 TheLordofAwesome wrote:On July 20 2017 07:08 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 06:48 Nyxisto wrote:On July 20 2017 06:46 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 04:40 KwarK wrote:On July 20 2017 04:32 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 03:47 Plansix wrote:
I visited the very flat state of Ohio this weekend and saw some of my very liberal friends there. They are all professors at Ohio State. We got into a bunch of discussions about politics and what we agree and disagree with. Several of them are from academic family backgrounds, while my wife and I are firmly from blue collar families(less so me, but my family all worked in our tiny factory). On the internet, people would consider that to be an echo chamber of people that agree, since we are all liberal. But that couldn’t be farther from the truth, since we all had very different viewpoints on educational, labor, regulation and pretty much everything else. And the view points were even broader when we visited my wife’s remaining family. But I know how everyone in that group voted during the election.
The left and right dynamic is a trap that will make you miss out on really understanding people’s political views and ideas.
If that's the only place you sound out your political views, you're living in an echo chamber. It doesn't refer to the self-evaluated size and scope of the disagreements, but rather to how many big picture ideas and understandings of the world are taken for granted ("very liberal" usually refers to a broad set). I absolutely know many insulated Californian liberals that were appalled anyone would vote for Trump, but would also bristle at being called an echo chamber--because they disagree with incrementalism, education, corporate taxation, and foreign affairs. Then they all get out and haven't talked to a single Trump voter about politics seriously and go off on the racism/sexism/stupidity diatribes just as before. So it really sounds like echo chamber is "close to the truth" instead of "couldn't be farther from the truth" The conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist is not from lack of exposure to Trump voters. It's from the opposite. I'm a little happy that people like you arrive at the conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist. He had a hair less than half the country vote for him, but the line you take is that exposure to their views just confirms that this is a huge constituency. Which means what you call racist and sexist is overly broad (common among thread liberals) or you're incapable of fair judgement (the other side isn't just wrong, they're racist sexist bigoted scumbags). It's a useful link to why liberals are so hated and actually bring it on themselves from their own unforced actions. the number of voters doesn't really say much about the assertion though, if a belief can't be bad by virtue of half of a nation holding it we'd all be living in a utopia Half the country is racist and sexist rates a little bit behind NASA faked the moon landings and the patriarchy is the most sinister force in the world today ... for me. It gives a good approximation of their progressive views on race and sex in America. Clinton got 66mil Trump 63mil, but you know those 63mil had a ton of irrational woman and black haters don't you know. It's actually a good sense of the gap America must bridge if we're to remain a united nation for much longer. Democrat polticians have so overplayed the race card on political opponents who were obviously not racist, that the term racist has lost all its power. Which is a real shame in a way, because then real actual racists get a free pass, because no one believes the accusation anymore. I don't think identity politics is the way to go for the Democrats, practically because being the Party who cried Racist doesn't work forever, and fundamentally it's morally wrong. I honestly think the identity politics thing is far stronger with the Republicans than anyone else. They have put all their chips on "white Christian male" and are insisting that they're the only hope for a restoration of the privileged days of the 50s where men were men, women were obedient, blacks weren't so uppity and gays knew better than to leave the closet. Republicanism is currently ideologically indistinguishable from this deplorable, fundamentally racist and sexist, delusional concept of a lost utopia that never was. It's not about lower taxes, fiscal responsibility, liberty, deregulation or anything else. The party message has lost all coherence, today it's nothing but masturbatory identity politics. That's why the #winning thing is so strong with them. All they really want is to know that blacks have been put back in their place and that the position of rich white men will always be safe in America. It doesn't matter what is done with the victory, the policies aren't important, all that matters is that the forces of "progress" are defeated. I for one wish women were obedient and blacks weren't so uppity. The gall to imagine they can be President and have success. Women demanding fair wages for the same amount of work! The nerve! We need those progressive values of the 50s back! (find the hyperbole and sarcasm)
If women were actually doing the same exact work for less pay, why would anyone ever hire men?
|
United States42367 Posts
On July 20 2017 08:04 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2017 07:43 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 20 2017 07:34 KwarK wrote:On July 20 2017 07:24 TheLordofAwesome wrote:On July 20 2017 07:08 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 06:48 Nyxisto wrote:On July 20 2017 06:46 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 04:40 KwarK wrote:On July 20 2017 04:32 Danglars wrote:On July 20 2017 03:47 Plansix wrote:
I visited the very flat state of Ohio this weekend and saw some of my very liberal friends there. They are all professors at Ohio State. We got into a bunch of discussions about politics and what we agree and disagree with. Several of them are from academic family backgrounds, while my wife and I are firmly from blue collar families(less so me, but my family all worked in our tiny factory). On the internet, people would consider that to be an echo chamber of people that agree, since we are all liberal. But that couldn’t be farther from the truth, since we all had very different viewpoints on educational, labor, regulation and pretty much everything else. And the view points were even broader when we visited my wife’s remaining family. But I know how everyone in that group voted during the election.
The left and right dynamic is a trap that will make you miss out on really understanding people’s political views and ideas.
If that's the only place you sound out your political views, you're living in an echo chamber. It doesn't refer to the self-evaluated size and scope of the disagreements, but rather to how many big picture ideas and understandings of the world are taken for granted ("very liberal" usually refers to a broad set). I absolutely know many insulated Californian liberals that were appalled anyone would vote for Trump, but would also bristle at being called an echo chamber--because they disagree with incrementalism, education, corporate taxation, and foreign affairs. Then they all get out and haven't talked to a single Trump voter about politics seriously and go off on the racism/sexism/stupidity diatribes just as before. So it really sounds like echo chamber is "close to the truth" instead of "couldn't be farther from the truth" The conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist is not from lack of exposure to Trump voters. It's from the opposite. I'm a little happy that people like you arrive at the conclusion that a lot of Trump voters are racist and sexist. He had a hair less than half the country vote for him, but the line you take is that exposure to their views just confirms that this is a huge constituency. Which means what you call racist and sexist is overly broad (common among thread liberals) or you're incapable of fair judgement (the other side isn't just wrong, they're racist sexist bigoted scumbags). It's a useful link to why liberals are so hated and actually bring it on themselves from their own unforced actions. the number of voters doesn't really say much about the assertion though, if a belief can't be bad by virtue of half of a nation holding it we'd all be living in a utopia Half the country is racist and sexist rates a little bit behind NASA faked the moon landings and the patriarchy is the most sinister force in the world today ... for me. It gives a good approximation of their progressive views on race and sex in America. Clinton got 66mil Trump 63mil, but you know those 63mil had a ton of irrational woman and black haters don't you know. It's actually a good sense of the gap America must bridge if we're to remain a united nation for much longer. Democrat polticians have so overplayed the race card on political opponents who were obviously not racist, that the term racist has lost all its power. Which is a real shame in a way, because then real actual racists get a free pass, because no one believes the accusation anymore. I don't think identity politics is the way to go for the Democrats, practically because being the Party who cried Racist doesn't work forever, and fundamentally it's morally wrong. I honestly think the identity politics thing is far stronger with the Republicans than anyone else. They have put all their chips on "white Christian male" and are insisting that they're the only hope for a restoration of the privileged days of the 50s where men were men, women were obedient, blacks weren't so uppity and gays knew better than to leave the closet. Republicanism is currently ideologically indistinguishable from this deplorable, fundamentally racist and sexist, delusional concept of a lost utopia that never was. It's not about lower taxes, fiscal responsibility, liberty, deregulation or anything else. The party message has lost all coherence, today it's nothing but masturbatory identity politics. That's why the #winning thing is so strong with them. All they really want is to know that blacks have been put back in their place and that the position of rich white men will always be safe in America. It doesn't matter what is done with the victory, the policies aren't important, all that matters is that the forces of "progress" are defeated. I for one wish women were obedient and blacks weren't so uppity. The gall to imagine they can be President and have success. Women demanding fair wages for the same amount of work! The nerve! We need those progressive values of the 50s back! (find the hyperbole and sarcasm) If women were actually doing the same work for less pay, why would anyone ever hire men?
Because the free market is not filled exclusively with perfectly informed perfectly rational actors. This is a textbook example of free market worship. Sexism is irrational, the free market penalizes economically irrational things, therefore there must be no sexism, ignore your lying eyes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
