|
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 November 28 2017 01:15 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 00:39 Biff The Understudy wrote:On November 28 2017 00:22 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 00:10 Plansix wrote:
As always Danglars, you want be able embrace the most divisive form of politics without consequences. We are all only human and can only put in so much effort to understanding people on the other side.. The Trump brand of politics is division and grievance and there is only so much energy people can put in. Between being actively screwed over by the GOP and the day to day grind of life, some people have become too much effort. I put people on notice a long time ago that they best come prepared to justify remaining in my life if they openly supported Trump. And some folks have made it work. Most did not have not. We are all human and must talk to each other’s and strike friendships across the political aisle because we don’t all individually or intra-Party have all the answers. That’s very theoretical and your reasoning breaks down as soon as the example is extreme enough. If you lived in Germany in 1932, you would find it obvious that people could stop being friends over politics and that the whole “strike friendshop across the other aile” wouldn’t work. Politics may be decisive on to whom i give my friendship because i like and admire people with certain qualities, that are incompatible with some political stances. I sincerely cannot have a good friend who likes the idea of torture, or death penalty, or opposes gay people, or has no problem with poor people being unable to aford a healthcare insurance. It’s not that i am narrow minded, bit that i don’t want to be around people whose ideas horrify me; inversely i highly value compassion and tolerance, and i don’t want friends who are unable to display either. So again, it’s not political per say. It’s about people, and what their political opinions says about them. I’ll never befriend a Le Pen supporter because in my view and with my values, you are really not a good person if you think she is great and align with her ideas, that i find simply repulsive. Why do you have to start with Nazi references to make your point? I consider it a very weak open if Trump isn't declaring American needs lebensraum in Canada and Mexico. Here's a hint: If the treatment of your political enemies relies on Hitler references, maybe you need to tone down the paranoia and treat fellow citizens as fellow citizens. And maybe remember why you became friends with a certain person to begin with.
I’m saying you make a general point (politics shouldn’t influence friendship) that obviously doesn’t work when someone’s political opinions are repulsive enough. You don’t want friends with repulsive ideas.
Used Hitler because it’s one guy everyone agrees on (even though these days...) Could do the same with any leader you and me would agree is repulsive enough to be a deal breaker with someone who supports him.
Now wether Trump should ever be in that category is something we might disagree on, but that’s another question.
Don’t strawman me saying i compare Trump and AH. I’m just saying that, yeah, your political opinions will influence your friendships past a certain point and if the ideas you support are shocking enough for some people.
I personally can’t imagine being close friend with someone who supports death penalty, for example. I find that fucking horrible.
|
On November 28 2017 03:30 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 03:03 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 02:46 Plansix wrote:On November 28 2017 02:39 Logo wrote:On November 28 2017 02:36 Plansix wrote:
The problem is that you assume folks like myself are "value(ing) friendships so lightly." That isn't the case. How dare you value your wife's well being over a friendship. You monster. I know. I’m such a terrible person for allowing that to happen. I should have convinced lies to those friends and said it wasn’t a huge deal, wouldn’t be a problem and their desire to overtly talk about “getting the government out of healthcare” was fine. Mind you, a couple fierce libertarian friends straight up changed their mind on healthcare after those discussions. Because those friends saw that removing the ACA and Mass health protections would hurt someone they know and made the leap that people were more important that politics. You might actually persuade them to your side. Another good reason to keep friends for the reasons they are your friends in the first place. If you fail to convince, move on. It shows humanity and empathy, and not the political tribalism that is too rampant these days. I don't think you have to embrace it to effectively oppose Trump--it's way too scorched-earth. You continue to miss the point. These people are told about the problems we face due to the results of the election. We explain it to them like polite people. They respond that they do not believe our problems are real. So we are not friends with them.
I don't know about you guys, bust most of my friendships with liberals ended was over shit like cultural appropriation, the legitimacy of gender fluidity, and my criticisms of campus identity politics.
In California, lots of gay people said that they were scared for their lives because Trump is in office and statistically and anecdotally, that is bullshit. Lots of women with nice jobs and attending good universities continue to insist they are oppressed when they are in a pretty good position compared to most Americans. And so many PoCs on college campuses engage in outright bullying and use their identity to cynically silence people. When you look more into their background, its not uncommon to see that they came from good families.
I can befriend people with many different political views and can still disagree with them, but with many urban progressives, I am always one comment from being socially ruined.
|
On November 28 2017 03:28 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2017 23:40 Danglars wrote:On November 27 2017 15:10 NewSunshine wrote:On November 27 2017 14:06 Danglars wrote:On November 27 2017 11:59 doomdonker wrote:On November 27 2017 11:05 LegalLord wrote:
Bummer to hear that from a columnist I actually think is pretty good. I don't think there's anything wrong with his statement. Its not a binary statement where if you don't support Trump, you support the Democratic Party. You can still support, say, Mike Pence or choose some other conservative politician. At this point, you're dumber than a sack of bricks if you STILL support Trump. We're talking about a man who clearly understands little about the world, who barely does his job, is obsessed with the media instead of America, doesn't give a shit about the people he specifically campaigned for, is flipflopping around what he campaigned for and is busy trying enrich himself and his family through the most powerful office in the world. If you look at all of this and still think "fake news", there's nothing to talk to you about because you're living in a different reality. He's an utter legislative failure whose only achievement is getting a SC appointed, despite having majorities in both the house and senate. Which wasn't even his success but rather McConnell pulling the strings. You can't even say that he's like Jimmy Carter either because Trump is objectively a terrible person. It's a very dangerous thing to declare there is only one opinion left to have on the situation, and to ruin personal friendships over politics. I still think he's worthy of support on some issues and opposition on others. He has helpfully made great progress bringing attention to some of society's discarded topics (in ways where polite discourse just gets dismissed, you racist bigots). If you declare there is no reason to support him whatsoever and will politicize your interpersonal friendships, there's less reason to hope for a period of national healing and unity in the future. Talk to the other side and don't rely on the right or left's propaganda to color your judgments. It's fine to preach healing and unity, but you're choosing the wrong person to blame. The blame lies with the person actively sowing the damage and the disunity. The blame lies with the person who launches a social media war against anyone and everyone who says things he disagrees with. The blame lies with the person who calls for brown people to be fired when they make a statement about racism, and conveniently ignores white people who do the same. The blame lies with the person who campaigned on a wall, to keep the rapists out of our country, that the rapists would pay for. The blame lies with the man who sides with a sex offender and pedophile, silencing women when it's convenient for him politically. The blame lies with the person who says he'll drain the swamp, then hires people who are even deeper in companies' pockets, threatening our free speech. You're absolving the president of a lot of responsibility in what he has done when you think "the left" is to blame for everything. He's gotten where he is by sowing chaos and discord among Americans, inciting and encouraging hate crimes and marginalizing people who just want to be treated the same as you. He has a very loud mouth, and people like you listen to him. Consider that. Let me get this straight: You side with the person breaking personal relationships over politics and want to say the other side forced you to adopt such an idiotic stance? I don’t care if you want to blame Trump, Nazis, or lizard people for the status quo, I just thought you had more moral agency than this. Over siding with Donald Trump? The man who has done, and is doing, all the above I detailed, which you conveniently didn't argue? What the fuck kind of question is this? YES. There's a reason I haven't had much energy for this lately. Your posting is as garbage as ever.
This isn't a binary. This was the stated opinion of a columnist. It isn't about agreeing with friends who think Trump's great on this or that issue. It's about whether or not politics has the authority to break friendships in your life.
I point out that you're speeding towards assigning blame to a regrettable status quo without addressing the topic at hand. Calm down. If you don't have an opinion on political disagreements between friends, but want to talk about who's to blame for political division today, make your case on something I wrote. Spend your energy on debating me if you wish, but not bashing Trump in the hopes that I agree there's no good reason to support any of his campaign pledges.
|
On November 28 2017 03:49 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 03:35 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:28 NewSunshine wrote:On November 27 2017 23:40 Danglars wrote:On November 27 2017 15:10 NewSunshine wrote:On November 27 2017 14:06 Danglars wrote:On November 27 2017 11:59 doomdonker wrote:On November 27 2017 11:05 LegalLord wrote:
Bummer to hear that from a columnist I actually think is pretty good. I don't think there's anything wrong with his statement. Its not a binary statement where if you don't support Trump, you support the Democratic Party. You can still support, say, Mike Pence or choose some other conservative politician. At this point, you're dumber than a sack of bricks if you STILL support Trump. We're talking about a man who clearly understands little about the world, who barely does his job, is obsessed with the media instead of America, doesn't give a shit about the people he specifically campaigned for, is flipflopping around what he campaigned for and is busy trying enrich himself and his family through the most powerful office in the world. If you look at all of this and still think "fake news", there's nothing to talk to you about because you're living in a different reality. He's an utter legislative failure whose only achievement is getting a SC appointed, despite having majorities in both the house and senate. Which wasn't even his success but rather McConnell pulling the strings. You can't even say that he's like Jimmy Carter either because Trump is objectively a terrible person. It's a very dangerous thing to declare there is only one opinion left to have on the situation, and to ruin personal friendships over politics. I still think he's worthy of support on some issues and opposition on others. He has helpfully made great progress bringing attention to some of society's discarded topics (in ways where polite discourse just gets dismissed, you racist bigots). If you declare there is no reason to support him whatsoever and will politicize your interpersonal friendships, there's less reason to hope for a period of national healing and unity in the future. Talk to the other side and don't rely on the right or left's propaganda to color your judgments. It's fine to preach healing and unity, but you're choosing the wrong person to blame. The blame lies with the person actively sowing the damage and the disunity. The blame lies with the person who launches a social media war against anyone and everyone who says things he disagrees with. The blame lies with the person who calls for brown people to be fired when they make a statement about racism, and conveniently ignores white people who do the same. The blame lies with the person who campaigned on a wall, to keep the rapists out of our country, that the rapists would pay for. The blame lies with the man who sides with a sex offender and pedophile, silencing women when it's convenient for him politically. The blame lies with the person who says he'll drain the swamp, then hires people who are even deeper in companies' pockets, threatening our free speech. You're absolving the president of a lot of responsibility in what he has done when you think "the left" is to blame for everything. He's gotten where he is by sowing chaos and discord among Americans, inciting and encouraging hate crimes and marginalizing people who just want to be treated the same as you. He has a very loud mouth, and people like you listen to him. Consider that. Let me get this straight: You side with the person breaking personal relationships over politics and want to say the other side forced you to adopt such an idiotic stance? I don’t care if you want to blame Trump, Nazis, or lizard people for the status quo, I just thought you had more moral agency than this. Over siding with Donald Trump? The man who has done, and is doing, all the above I detailed, which you conveniently didn't argue? What the fuck kind of question is this? YES. There's a reason I haven't had much energy for this lately. Your posting is as garbage as ever. If it is justifiable to break friendships with Trump voters of what he stands for, then I find it perfectly reasonable to destroy my friendship with people who vote for liberal voices. Hillary laughed when she talked about killing Qaddafi, I mean she literally destroyed a country HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW. In Palestine, when Hamas won over Fatah, she said that the elections should have been rigged, her track record regarding gay rights is just as shaky, if not worse than Trump, and she and her husband created the modern prison state that destroyed the African American community. Obama also did similar, most damning thing being was his record high deportations. But should people try to one up other progressives in moral purity? Hell no, it's a really stupid and dishonest game. I find it disingenuous when people get so self-righteous about Trump, yes he is repulsive but there is definitely a double standard coming from many liberals and even leftists. You don't have to excuse one to condemn the other. You're forcing a false dichotomy.
What I am trying to get at is you wouldn't refuse to be friends with a liberal because Hillary and Obama did certain things that are not progressive so why is it acceptable to do the same to a Trump supporter, assuming they are not calling you a cuck every other sentence.
|
United States42957 Posts
On November 28 2017 03:50 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 01:15 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 00:39 Biff The Understudy wrote:On November 28 2017 00:22 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 00:10 Plansix wrote:
As always Danglars, you want be able embrace the most divisive form of politics without consequences. We are all only human and can only put in so much effort to understanding people on the other side.. The Trump brand of politics is division and grievance and there is only so much energy people can put in. Between being actively screwed over by the GOP and the day to day grind of life, some people have become too much effort. I put people on notice a long time ago that they best come prepared to justify remaining in my life if they openly supported Trump. And some folks have made it work. Most did not have not. We are all human and must talk to each other’s and strike friendships across the political aisle because we don’t all individually or intra-Party have all the answers. That’s very theoretical and your reasoning breaks down as soon as the example is extreme enough. If you lived in Germany in 1932, you would find it obvious that people could stop being friends over politics and that the whole “strike friendshop across the other aile” wouldn’t work. Politics may be decisive on to whom i give my friendship because i like and admire people with certain qualities, that are incompatible with some political stances. I sincerely cannot have a good friend who likes the idea of torture, or death penalty, or opposes gay people, or has no problem with poor people being unable to aford a healthcare insurance. It’s not that i am narrow minded, bit that i don’t want to be around people whose ideas horrify me; inversely i highly value compassion and tolerance, and i don’t want friends who are unable to display either. So again, it’s not political per say. It’s about people, and what their political opinions says about them. I’ll never befriend a Le Pen supporter because in my view and with my values, you are really not a good person if you think she is great and align with her ideas, that i find simply repulsive. Why do you have to start with Nazi references to make your point? I consider it a very weak open if Trump isn't declaring American needs lebensraum in Canada and Mexico. Here's a hint: If the treatment of your political enemies relies on Hitler references, maybe you need to tone down the paranoia and treat fellow citizens as fellow citizens. And maybe remember why you became friends with a certain person to begin with. I’m saying you make a general point (politics shouldn’t influence friendship) that obviously doesn’t work when someone’s political opinions are repulsive enough. You don’t want friends with repulsive ideas. Used Hitler because it’s one guy everyone agrees on (even though these days...) Could do the same with any leader you and me is repulsive enough to be a deal breaker with someone who supports him. Now wether Trump should ever be in that category is something we might disagree on, but that’s another question. Don’t strawman me saying i compare Trump and AH. I’m just saying that, yeah, your political opinions will influence your friendships past a certain point and if the ideas you support are shocking enough for some people. I personally can’t imagine being close friend with someone who supports death penalty, for example. I find that fucking horrible.
Wouldn't the death penalty depend upon the argument they made in support of it? Within the context of life sentences without parole for people whose guilt is beyond question they're still getting a death penalty, it's just the method used is time. Once you start adding in solitary confinement and denial of their emotional needs I think you could certainly argue that the guillotine is the more humane method.
It's only once they stop caring that the death penalty is routinely given to innocent people and disproportionately to people from minority backgrounds (and men for that matter) that it becomes an abhorrent viewpoint.
|
On November 28 2017 03:30 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 03:03 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 02:46 Plansix wrote:On November 28 2017 02:39 Logo wrote:On November 28 2017 02:36 Plansix wrote:
The problem is that you assume folks like myself are "value(ing) friendships so lightly." That isn't the case. How dare you value your wife's well being over a friendship. You monster. I know. I’m such a terrible person for allowing that to happen. I should have convinced lies to those friends and said it wasn’t a huge deal, wouldn’t be a problem and their desire to overtly talk about “getting the government out of healthcare” was fine. Mind you, a couple fierce libertarian friends straight up changed their mind on healthcare after those discussions. Because those friends saw that removing the ACA and Mass health protections would hurt someone they know and made the leap that people were more important that politics. You might actually persuade them to your side. Another good reason to keep friends for the reasons they are your friends in the first place. If you fail to convince, move on. It shows humanity and empathy, and not the political tribalism that is too rampant these days. I don't think you have to embrace it to effectively oppose Trump--it's way too scorched-earth. You continue to miss the point. These people are told about the problems we face due to the results of the election. We explain it to them like polite people. They respond that they do not believe our problems are real. So we are not friends with them.
No problem here. You talked to your friends about struggles your family faces. They responded that you had nothing to worry about.
You didn't get on social media to ask that any Trump supporters around you are persona non grata in your friend circle. You just posted "And supporting Trump now and voting for him in 2016 are pretty different thing at this point" when someone did. Now you're starting to sound more reasonable.
|
United States42957 Posts
On November 28 2017 03:52 Shiragaku wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 03:49 KwarK wrote:On November 28 2017 03:35 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:28 NewSunshine wrote:On November 27 2017 23:40 Danglars wrote:On November 27 2017 15:10 NewSunshine wrote:On November 27 2017 14:06 Danglars wrote:On November 27 2017 11:59 doomdonker wrote:On November 27 2017 11:05 LegalLord wrote:
Bummer to hear that from a columnist I actually think is pretty good. I don't think there's anything wrong with his statement. Its not a binary statement where if you don't support Trump, you support the Democratic Party. You can still support, say, Mike Pence or choose some other conservative politician. At this point, you're dumber than a sack of bricks if you STILL support Trump. We're talking about a man who clearly understands little about the world, who barely does his job, is obsessed with the media instead of America, doesn't give a shit about the people he specifically campaigned for, is flipflopping around what he campaigned for and is busy trying enrich himself and his family through the most powerful office in the world. If you look at all of this and still think "fake news", there's nothing to talk to you about because you're living in a different reality. He's an utter legislative failure whose only achievement is getting a SC appointed, despite having majorities in both the house and senate. Which wasn't even his success but rather McConnell pulling the strings. You can't even say that he's like Jimmy Carter either because Trump is objectively a terrible person. It's a very dangerous thing to declare there is only one opinion left to have on the situation, and to ruin personal friendships over politics. I still think he's worthy of support on some issues and opposition on others. He has helpfully made great progress bringing attention to some of society's discarded topics (in ways where polite discourse just gets dismissed, you racist bigots). If you declare there is no reason to support him whatsoever and will politicize your interpersonal friendships, there's less reason to hope for a period of national healing and unity in the future. Talk to the other side and don't rely on the right or left's propaganda to color your judgments. It's fine to preach healing and unity, but you're choosing the wrong person to blame. The blame lies with the person actively sowing the damage and the disunity. The blame lies with the person who launches a social media war against anyone and everyone who says things he disagrees with. The blame lies with the person who calls for brown people to be fired when they make a statement about racism, and conveniently ignores white people who do the same. The blame lies with the person who campaigned on a wall, to keep the rapists out of our country, that the rapists would pay for. The blame lies with the man who sides with a sex offender and pedophile, silencing women when it's convenient for him politically. The blame lies with the person who says he'll drain the swamp, then hires people who are even deeper in companies' pockets, threatening our free speech. You're absolving the president of a lot of responsibility in what he has done when you think "the left" is to blame for everything. He's gotten where he is by sowing chaos and discord among Americans, inciting and encouraging hate crimes and marginalizing people who just want to be treated the same as you. He has a very loud mouth, and people like you listen to him. Consider that. Let me get this straight: You side with the person breaking personal relationships over politics and want to say the other side forced you to adopt such an idiotic stance? I don’t care if you want to blame Trump, Nazis, or lizard people for the status quo, I just thought you had more moral agency than this. Over siding with Donald Trump? The man who has done, and is doing, all the above I detailed, which you conveniently didn't argue? What the fuck kind of question is this? YES. There's a reason I haven't had much energy for this lately. Your posting is as garbage as ever. If it is justifiable to break friendships with Trump voters of what he stands for, then I find it perfectly reasonable to destroy my friendship with people who vote for liberal voices. Hillary laughed when she talked about killing Qaddafi, I mean she literally destroyed a country HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW. In Palestine, when Hamas won over Fatah, she said that the elections should have been rigged, her track record regarding gay rights is just as shaky, if not worse than Trump, and she and her husband created the modern prison state that destroyed the African American community. Obama also did similar, most damning thing being was his record high deportations. But should people try to one up other progressives in moral purity? Hell no, it's a really stupid and dishonest game. I find it disingenuous when people get so self-righteous about Trump, yes he is repulsive but there is definitely a double standard coming from many liberals and even leftists. You don't have to excuse one to condemn the other. You're forcing a false dichotomy. What I am trying to get at is you wouldn't refuse to be friends with a liberal because Hillary and Obama did certain things that are not progressive so why is it acceptable to do the same to a Trump supporter, assuming they are not calling you a cuck every other sentence.
A Hillary supporter whose support of Hillary was predicated on her covering up of sexual abuse (as in that's why they liked her) would be morally unacceptable to me. A Hillary supporter who supported her in spite of that because there was no better alternative would be fine for me.
The problem is that Trump supporters don't get to claim that there wasn't a less racist alternative to Trump. They can only say that the racism wasn't a significant factor to them.
|
On November 28 2017 03:50 Shiragaku wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 03:30 Plansix wrote:On November 28 2017 03:03 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 02:46 Plansix wrote:On November 28 2017 02:39 Logo wrote:On November 28 2017 02:36 Plansix wrote:
The problem is that you assume folks like myself are "value(ing) friendships so lightly." That isn't the case. How dare you value your wife's well being over a friendship. You monster. I know. I’m such a terrible person for allowing that to happen. I should have convinced lies to those friends and said it wasn’t a huge deal, wouldn’t be a problem and their desire to overtly talk about “getting the government out of healthcare” was fine. Mind you, a couple fierce libertarian friends straight up changed their mind on healthcare after those discussions. Because those friends saw that removing the ACA and Mass health protections would hurt someone they know and made the leap that people were more important that politics. You might actually persuade them to your side. Another good reason to keep friends for the reasons they are your friends in the first place. If you fail to convince, move on. It shows humanity and empathy, and not the political tribalism that is too rampant these days. I don't think you have to embrace it to effectively oppose Trump--it's way too scorched-earth. You continue to miss the point. These people are told about the problems we face due to the results of the election. We explain it to them like polite people. They respond that they do not believe our problems are real. So we are not friends with them. I don't know about you guys, bust most of my friendships with liberals ended was over shit like cultural appropriation, the legitimacy of gender fluidity, and my criticisms of campus identity politics. In California, lots of gay people said that they were scared for their lives because Trump is in office and statistically and anecdotally, that is bullshit. Lots of women with nice jobs and attending good universities continue to insist they are oppressed when they are in a pretty good position compared to most Americans. And so many PoCs on college campuses engage in outright bullying and use their identity to cynically silence people. When you look more into their background, its not uncommon to see that they came from good families. I can befriend people with many different political views and can still disagree with them, but with many urban progressives, I am always one comment from being socially ruined.
I also hear that a lot of gays don’t want to move out of MA or RI because the rest of the country is so unfriendly to them. I know people who have come back to the area because the rest of the country treated them like this. I have had Muslim friends who straight up left this country because it treated them so poorly. You don’t seem that interested in believe these folks, so I would argue that you value your political views more than their friendships.
|
On November 28 2017 03:54 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 03:50 Biff The Understudy wrote:On November 28 2017 01:15 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 00:39 Biff The Understudy wrote:On November 28 2017 00:22 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 00:10 Plansix wrote:
As always Danglars, you want be able embrace the most divisive form of politics without consequences. We are all only human and can only put in so much effort to understanding people on the other side.. The Trump brand of politics is division and grievance and there is only so much energy people can put in. Between being actively screwed over by the GOP and the day to day grind of life, some people have become too much effort. I put people on notice a long time ago that they best come prepared to justify remaining in my life if they openly supported Trump. And some folks have made it work. Most did not have not. We are all human and must talk to each other’s and strike friendships across the political aisle because we don’t all individually or intra-Party have all the answers. That’s very theoretical and your reasoning breaks down as soon as the example is extreme enough. If you lived in Germany in 1932, you would find it obvious that people could stop being friends over politics and that the whole “strike friendshop across the other aile” wouldn’t work. Politics may be decisive on to whom i give my friendship because i like and admire people with certain qualities, that are incompatible with some political stances. I sincerely cannot have a good friend who likes the idea of torture, or death penalty, or opposes gay people, or has no problem with poor people being unable to aford a healthcare insurance. It’s not that i am narrow minded, bit that i don’t want to be around people whose ideas horrify me; inversely i highly value compassion and tolerance, and i don’t want friends who are unable to display either. So again, it’s not political per say. It’s about people, and what their political opinions says about them. I’ll never befriend a Le Pen supporter because in my view and with my values, you are really not a good person if you think she is great and align with her ideas, that i find simply repulsive. Why do you have to start with Nazi references to make your point? I consider it a very weak open if Trump isn't declaring American needs lebensraum in Canada and Mexico. Here's a hint: If the treatment of your political enemies relies on Hitler references, maybe you need to tone down the paranoia and treat fellow citizens as fellow citizens. And maybe remember why you became friends with a certain person to begin with. I’m saying you make a general point (politics shouldn’t influence friendship) that obviously doesn’t work when someone’s political opinions are repulsive enough. You don’t want friends with repulsive ideas. Used Hitler because it’s one guy everyone agrees on (even though these days...) Could do the same with any leader you and me is repulsive enough to be a deal breaker with someone who supports him. Now wether Trump should ever be in that category is something we might disagree on, but that’s another question. Don’t strawman me saying i compare Trump and AH. I’m just saying that, yeah, your political opinions will influence your friendships past a certain point and if the ideas you support are shocking enough for some people. I personally can’t imagine being close friend with someone who supports death penalty, for example. I find that fucking horrible. Wouldn't the death penalty depend upon the argument they made in support of it? Within the context of life sentences without parole for people whose guilt is beyond question they're still getting a death penalty, it's just the method used is time. Once you start adding in solitary confinement and denial of their emotional needs I think you could certainly argue that the guillotine is the more humane method. It's only once they stop caring that the death penalty is routinely given to innocent people and disproportionately to people from minority backgrounds (and men for that matter) that it becomes an abhorrent viewpoint.
i dont think life sentences of solitary confinement are legal. but given all your consent talk earlier theres a very simple way to answer the question "is the death penalty more humane than a life sentence without parole?" ask the convict
|
On November 28 2017 03:50 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 01:15 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 00:39 Biff The Understudy wrote:On November 28 2017 00:22 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 00:10 Plansix wrote:
As always Danglars, you want be able embrace the most divisive form of politics without consequences. We are all only human and can only put in so much effort to understanding people on the other side.. The Trump brand of politics is division and grievance and there is only so much energy people can put in. Between being actively screwed over by the GOP and the day to day grind of life, some people have become too much effort. I put people on notice a long time ago that they best come prepared to justify remaining in my life if they openly supported Trump. And some folks have made it work. Most did not have not. We are all human and must talk to each other’s and strike friendships across the political aisle because we don’t all individually or intra-Party have all the answers. That’s very theoretical and your reasoning breaks down as soon as the example is extreme enough. If you lived in Germany in 1932, you would find it obvious that people could stop being friends over politics and that the whole “strike friendshop across the other aile” wouldn’t work. Politics may be decisive on to whom i give my friendship because i like and admire people with certain qualities, that are incompatible with some political stances. I sincerely cannot have a good friend who likes the idea of torture, or death penalty, or opposes gay people, or has no problem with poor people being unable to aford a healthcare insurance. It’s not that i am narrow minded, bit that i don’t want to be around people whose ideas horrify me; inversely i highly value compassion and tolerance, and i don’t want friends who are unable to display either. So again, it’s not political per say. It’s about people, and what their political opinions says about them. I’ll never befriend a Le Pen supporter because in my view and with my values, you are really not a good person if you think she is great and align with her ideas, that i find simply repulsive. Why do you have to start with Nazi references to make your point? I consider it a very weak open if Trump isn't declaring American needs lebensraum in Canada and Mexico. Here's a hint: If the treatment of your political enemies relies on Hitler references, maybe you need to tone down the paranoia and treat fellow citizens as fellow citizens. And maybe remember why you became friends with a certain person to begin with. I’m saying you make a general point (politics shouldn’t influence friendship) that obviously doesn’t work when someone’s political opinions are repulsive enough. You don’t want friends with repulsive ideas. Used Hitler because it’s one guy everyone agrees on (even though these days...) Could do the same with any leader you and me would agree is repulsive enough to be a deal breaker with someone who supports him. Now wether Trump should ever be in that category is something we might disagree on, but that’s another question. Don’t strawman me saying i compare Trump and AH. I’m just saying that, yeah, your political opinions will influence your friendships past a certain point and if the ideas you support are shocking enough for some people. I personally can’t imagine being close friend with someone who supports death penalty, for example. I find that fucking horrible.
Hitler is a lot different than conjuring up the most vile rhetoric you can to smear a political figure, then use that as justification that they're close enough to Hitler to treat them like one would treat Hitler. There isn't some "work yourself up in a tizzy" exemption for engaging with the President as if he were Hitler himself.
I don't really care if you support or oppose the death penalty. It's unlikely to come up in a conversation, and I'm more interested in talking about our families and how awesome that hike will be this Saturday. We didn't found the relationship on a Tookie Williams rally.
|
On November 28 2017 03:56 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 03:30 Plansix wrote:On November 28 2017 03:03 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 02:46 Plansix wrote:On November 28 2017 02:39 Logo wrote:On November 28 2017 02:36 Plansix wrote:
The problem is that you assume folks like myself are "value(ing) friendships so lightly." That isn't the case. How dare you value your wife's well being over a friendship. You monster. I know. I’m such a terrible person for allowing that to happen. I should have convinced lies to those friends and said it wasn’t a huge deal, wouldn’t be a problem and their desire to overtly talk about “getting the government out of healthcare” was fine. Mind you, a couple fierce libertarian friends straight up changed their mind on healthcare after those discussions. Because those friends saw that removing the ACA and Mass health protections would hurt someone they know and made the leap that people were more important that politics. You might actually persuade them to your side. Another good reason to keep friends for the reasons they are your friends in the first place. If you fail to convince, move on. It shows humanity and empathy, and not the political tribalism that is too rampant these days. I don't think you have to embrace it to effectively oppose Trump--it's way too scorched-earth. You continue to miss the point. These people are told about the problems we face due to the results of the election. We explain it to them like polite people. They respond that they do not believe our problems are real. So we are not friends with them. No problem here. You talked to your friends about struggles your family faces. They responded that you had nothing to worry about. You didn't get on social media to ask that any Trump supporters around you are persona non grata in your friend circle. You just posted "And supporting Trump now and voting for him in 2016 are pretty different thing at this point" when someone did. Now you're starting to sound more reasonable.
I did do that. I posted a long time ago that the policies being put in place by the Trump administration were negatively impacting my family and people should consider that when expressing their support of his administration. A few people decided that was too much for them or they didn’t want to believe it.
|
United States42957 Posts
On November 28 2017 04:00 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 03:54 KwarK wrote:On November 28 2017 03:50 Biff The Understudy wrote:On November 28 2017 01:15 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 00:39 Biff The Understudy wrote:On November 28 2017 00:22 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 00:10 Plansix wrote:
As always Danglars, you want be able embrace the most divisive form of politics without consequences. We are all only human and can only put in so much effort to understanding people on the other side.. The Trump brand of politics is division and grievance and there is only so much energy people can put in. Between being actively screwed over by the GOP and the day to day grind of life, some people have become too much effort. I put people on notice a long time ago that they best come prepared to justify remaining in my life if they openly supported Trump. And some folks have made it work. Most did not have not. We are all human and must talk to each other’s and strike friendships across the political aisle because we don’t all individually or intra-Party have all the answers. That’s very theoretical and your reasoning breaks down as soon as the example is extreme enough. If you lived in Germany in 1932, you would find it obvious that people could stop being friends over politics and that the whole “strike friendshop across the other aile” wouldn’t work. Politics may be decisive on to whom i give my friendship because i like and admire people with certain qualities, that are incompatible with some political stances. I sincerely cannot have a good friend who likes the idea of torture, or death penalty, or opposes gay people, or has no problem with poor people being unable to aford a healthcare insurance. It’s not that i am narrow minded, bit that i don’t want to be around people whose ideas horrify me; inversely i highly value compassion and tolerance, and i don’t want friends who are unable to display either. So again, it’s not political per say. It’s about people, and what their political opinions says about them. I’ll never befriend a Le Pen supporter because in my view and with my values, you are really not a good person if you think she is great and align with her ideas, that i find simply repulsive. Why do you have to start with Nazi references to make your point? I consider it a very weak open if Trump isn't declaring American needs lebensraum in Canada and Mexico. Here's a hint: If the treatment of your political enemies relies on Hitler references, maybe you need to tone down the paranoia and treat fellow citizens as fellow citizens. And maybe remember why you became friends with a certain person to begin with. I’m saying you make a general point (politics shouldn’t influence friendship) that obviously doesn’t work when someone’s political opinions are repulsive enough. You don’t want friends with repulsive ideas. Used Hitler because it’s one guy everyone agrees on (even though these days...) Could do the same with any leader you and me is repulsive enough to be a deal breaker with someone who supports him. Now wether Trump should ever be in that category is something we might disagree on, but that’s another question. Don’t strawman me saying i compare Trump and AH. I’m just saying that, yeah, your political opinions will influence your friendships past a certain point and if the ideas you support are shocking enough for some people. I personally can’t imagine being close friend with someone who supports death penalty, for example. I find that fucking horrible. Wouldn't the death penalty depend upon the argument they made in support of it? Within the context of life sentences without parole for people whose guilt is beyond question they're still getting a death penalty, it's just the method used is time. Once you start adding in solitary confinement and denial of their emotional needs I think you could certainly argue that the guillotine is the more humane method. It's only once they stop caring that the death penalty is routinely given to innocent people and disproportionately to people from minority backgrounds (and men for that matter) that it becomes an abhorrent viewpoint. i dont think life sentences of solitary confinement are legal. but given all your consent talk earlier theres a very simple way to answer the question "is the death penalty more humane than a life sentence without parole?" ask the convict
I don't see a huge issue with asking them, although I'm open to disagreement because I haven't put too much thought into it. Also we should use nitrogen asphyxiation rather than the lethal injection which is fucking barbaric.
There's a moral hazard that by worsening conditions in prisons we force prisoners into suicide. But that's an argument to make a prison system that doesn't suck, and that actually attempts to rehabilitate people. If all we're trying to do though is put people in a box so the rest of us can forget about them then I don't see the downside of letting people choose whether they want it to be a concrete cell or a wooden coffin. We should probably have higher standards for prison than that, but as long as we don't, fuck it, let them choose.
|
On November 28 2017 03:57 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 03:52 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:49 KwarK wrote:On November 28 2017 03:35 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:28 NewSunshine wrote:On November 27 2017 23:40 Danglars wrote:On November 27 2017 15:10 NewSunshine wrote:On November 27 2017 14:06 Danglars wrote:On November 27 2017 11:59 doomdonker wrote:On November 27 2017 11:05 LegalLord wrote:
Bummer to hear that from a columnist I actually think is pretty good. I don't think there's anything wrong with his statement. Its not a binary statement where if you don't support Trump, you support the Democratic Party. You can still support, say, Mike Pence or choose some other conservative politician. At this point, you're dumber than a sack of bricks if you STILL support Trump. We're talking about a man who clearly understands little about the world, who barely does his job, is obsessed with the media instead of America, doesn't give a shit about the people he specifically campaigned for, is flipflopping around what he campaigned for and is busy trying enrich himself and his family through the most powerful office in the world. If you look at all of this and still think "fake news", there's nothing to talk to you about because you're living in a different reality. He's an utter legislative failure whose only achievement is getting a SC appointed, despite having majorities in both the house and senate. Which wasn't even his success but rather McConnell pulling the strings. You can't even say that he's like Jimmy Carter either because Trump is objectively a terrible person. It's a very dangerous thing to declare there is only one opinion left to have on the situation, and to ruin personal friendships over politics. I still think he's worthy of support on some issues and opposition on others. He has helpfully made great progress bringing attention to some of society's discarded topics (in ways where polite discourse just gets dismissed, you racist bigots). If you declare there is no reason to support him whatsoever and will politicize your interpersonal friendships, there's less reason to hope for a period of national healing and unity in the future. Talk to the other side and don't rely on the right or left's propaganda to color your judgments. It's fine to preach healing and unity, but you're choosing the wrong person to blame. The blame lies with the person actively sowing the damage and the disunity. The blame lies with the person who launches a social media war against anyone and everyone who says things he disagrees with. The blame lies with the person who calls for brown people to be fired when they make a statement about racism, and conveniently ignores white people who do the same. The blame lies with the person who campaigned on a wall, to keep the rapists out of our country, that the rapists would pay for. The blame lies with the man who sides with a sex offender and pedophile, silencing women when it's convenient for him politically. The blame lies with the person who says he'll drain the swamp, then hires people who are even deeper in companies' pockets, threatening our free speech. You're absolving the president of a lot of responsibility in what he has done when you think "the left" is to blame for everything. He's gotten where he is by sowing chaos and discord among Americans, inciting and encouraging hate crimes and marginalizing people who just want to be treated the same as you. He has a very loud mouth, and people like you listen to him. Consider that. Let me get this straight: You side with the person breaking personal relationships over politics and want to say the other side forced you to adopt such an idiotic stance? I don’t care if you want to blame Trump, Nazis, or lizard people for the status quo, I just thought you had more moral agency than this. Over siding with Donald Trump? The man who has done, and is doing, all the above I detailed, which you conveniently didn't argue? What the fuck kind of question is this? YES. There's a reason I haven't had much energy for this lately. Your posting is as garbage as ever. If it is justifiable to break friendships with Trump voters of what he stands for, then I find it perfectly reasonable to destroy my friendship with people who vote for liberal voices. Hillary laughed when she talked about killing Qaddafi, I mean she literally destroyed a country HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW. In Palestine, when Hamas won over Fatah, she said that the elections should have been rigged, her track record regarding gay rights is just as shaky, if not worse than Trump, and she and her husband created the modern prison state that destroyed the African American community. Obama also did similar, most damning thing being was his record high deportations. But should people try to one up other progressives in moral purity? Hell no, it's a really stupid and dishonest game. I find it disingenuous when people get so self-righteous about Trump, yes he is repulsive but there is definitely a double standard coming from many liberals and even leftists. You don't have to excuse one to condemn the other. You're forcing a false dichotomy. What I am trying to get at is you wouldn't refuse to be friends with a liberal because Hillary and Obama did certain things that are not progressive so why is it acceptable to do the same to a Trump supporter, assuming they are not calling you a cuck every other sentence. A Hillary supporter whose support of Hillary was predicated on her covering up of sexual abuse (as in that's why they liked her) would be morally unacceptable to me. A Hillary supporter who supported her in spite of that because there was no better alternative would be fine for me. The problem is that Trump supporters don't get to claim that there wasn't a less racist alternative to Trump. They can only say that the racism wasn't a significant factor to them.
And when racism in the 21st century seems to be defined as not giving disrespect to certain people, is that the worst thing that someone can believe in? Whenever I hear people use that argument, it really sounds like they are crying wolf at this point. Racism really doesn't mean anything to most people anymore when it is constantly being applied.
What people fail to see is that Trump's campaign was not built upon racism, it was in reaction to the people left behind with globalization and many of them live in a worst situation than they did years or decades ago and when they have to pay respect to groups of people or use phrases they have never even heard of years ago, how do you expect them to react?
On November 28 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 03:50 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:30 Plansix wrote:On November 28 2017 03:03 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 02:46 Plansix wrote:On November 28 2017 02:39 Logo wrote:On November 28 2017 02:36 Plansix wrote:
The problem is that you assume folks like myself are "value(ing) friendships so lightly." That isn't the case. How dare you value your wife's well being over a friendship. You monster. I know. I’m such a terrible person for allowing that to happen. I should have convinced lies to those friends and said it wasn’t a huge deal, wouldn’t be a problem and their desire to overtly talk about “getting the government out of healthcare” was fine. Mind you, a couple fierce libertarian friends straight up changed their mind on healthcare after those discussions. Because those friends saw that removing the ACA and Mass health protections would hurt someone they know and made the leap that people were more important that politics. You might actually persuade them to your side. Another good reason to keep friends for the reasons they are your friends in the first place. If you fail to convince, move on. It shows humanity and empathy, and not the political tribalism that is too rampant these days. I don't think you have to embrace it to effectively oppose Trump--it's way too scorched-earth. You continue to miss the point. These people are told about the problems we face due to the results of the election. We explain it to them like polite people. They respond that they do not believe our problems are real. So we are not friends with them. I don't know about you guys, bust most of my friendships with liberals ended was over shit like cultural appropriation, the legitimacy of gender fluidity, and my criticisms of campus identity politics. In California, lots of gay people said that they were scared for their lives because Trump is in office and statistically and anecdotally, that is bullshit. Lots of women with nice jobs and attending good universities continue to insist they are oppressed when they are in a pretty good position compared to most Americans. And so many PoCs on college campuses engage in outright bullying and use their identity to cynically silence people. When you look more into their background, its not uncommon to see that they came from good families. I can befriend people with many different political views and can still disagree with them, but with many urban progressives, I am always one comment from being socially ruined. I also hear that a lot of gays don’t want to move out of MA or RI because the rest of the country is so unfriendly to them. I know people who have come back to the area because the rest of the country treated them like this. I have had Muslim friends who straight up left this country because it treated them so poorly. You don’t seem that interested in believe these folks, so I would argue that you value your political views more than their friendships.
I have grown up in rural America and there was definitely racism and homophobia. There were times when people refused to serve my mom because she was Asian and we had gay people who were bullied and eventually committed suicide. And the anti-Muslim sentiment was there, but on a personal level, most Muslims were integrated for the most part. But the Islamphobia is pretty bad and it is getting worse.
However, with people like Jon Stewart and shows like Glee, that all changed so fast for the better. Rural America, although not San Francisco or New York is definitely way much friendly and livable than it used to be.
When I moved to California, it was even better, especially for someone like me, but one thing that irks me is when I see people who have never experienced racism claiming oppression like some reward. I know what bigotry was like in action and there is nothing more infuriating when people in liberal bubbles LARP as a minority in their fictionalized view of suburban/rural America and use it to cynically promote their worldview.
|
Your having suffered bigotry in action while hailing from rural America is not a license to speak on behalf of the state of bigotry in rural America, contrary availability heuristics notwithstanding.
|
I also grew up in rural America. We had one black family in my entire school district, which encompassed 5 times. Then they moved and we had zero. The idea that cities like San Francisco or New York are not racist is a myth. Boston is super racist and progressive at the same time. They just fight constantly. You really need to amend your views of urban America as being the land of fragile snowflake liberals.
|
On November 28 2017 04:23 Plansix wrote:
I also grew up in rural America. We had one black family in my entire school district, which encompassed 5 times. Then they moved and we had zero. The idea that cities like San Francisco or New York are not racist is a myth. Boston is super racist and progressive at the same time. They just fight constantly. You really need to amend your views of urban America as being the land of fragile snowflake liberals.
You have to admit, there are tons of cases of people misusing the word racism, exaggerating oppression or bigotry in contemporary discussions about identity. Look at all the fake reports of hate crimes and discrimination, especially after Trump's election. Back in the 2000s and before, whenever there was a hate crime, it usually was a hate crime. But now, whenever those stories come up, we have to carefully verify it because so many of them are outright fake.
|
United States42957 Posts
On November 28 2017 04:14 Shiragaku wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 03:57 KwarK wrote:On November 28 2017 03:52 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:49 KwarK wrote:On November 28 2017 03:35 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:28 NewSunshine wrote:On November 27 2017 23:40 Danglars wrote:On November 27 2017 15:10 NewSunshine wrote:On November 27 2017 14:06 Danglars wrote:On November 27 2017 11:59 doomdonker wrote:
[quote]
I don't think there's anything wrong with his statement. Its not a binary statement where if you don't support Trump, you support the Democratic Party. You can still support, say, Mike Pence or choose some other conservative politician.
At this point, you're dumber than a sack of bricks if you STILL support Trump. We're talking about a man who clearly understands little about the world, who barely does his job, is obsessed with the media instead of America, doesn't give a shit about the people he specifically campaigned for, is flipflopping around what he campaigned for and is busy trying enrich himself and his family through the most powerful office in the world.
If you look at all of this and still think "fake news", there's nothing to talk to you about because you're living in a different reality. He's an utter legislative failure whose only achievement is getting a SC appointed, despite having majorities in both the house and senate. Which wasn't even his success but rather McConnell pulling the strings. You can't even say that he's like Jimmy Carter either because Trump is objectively a terrible person. It's a very dangerous thing to declare there is only one opinion left to have on the situation, and to ruin personal friendships over politics. I still think he's worthy of support on some issues and opposition on others. He has helpfully made great progress bringing attention to some of society's discarded topics (in ways where polite discourse just gets dismissed, you racist bigots). If you declare there is no reason to support him whatsoever and will politicize your interpersonal friendships, there's less reason to hope for a period of national healing and unity in the future. Talk to the other side and don't rely on the right or left's propaganda to color your judgments. It's fine to preach healing and unity, but you're choosing the wrong person to blame. The blame lies with the person actively sowing the damage and the disunity. The blame lies with the person who launches a social media war against anyone and everyone who says things he disagrees with. The blame lies with the person who calls for brown people to be fired when they make a statement about racism, and conveniently ignores white people who do the same. The blame lies with the person who campaigned on a wall, to keep the rapists out of our country, that the rapists would pay for. The blame lies with the man who sides with a sex offender and pedophile, silencing women when it's convenient for him politically. The blame lies with the person who says he'll drain the swamp, then hires people who are even deeper in companies' pockets, threatening our free speech. You're absolving the president of a lot of responsibility in what he has done when you think "the left" is to blame for everything. He's gotten where he is by sowing chaos and discord among Americans, inciting and encouraging hate crimes and marginalizing people who just want to be treated the same as you. He has a very loud mouth, and people like you listen to him. Consider that. Let me get this straight: You side with the person breaking personal relationships over politics and want to say the other side forced you to adopt such an idiotic stance? I don’t care if you want to blame Trump, Nazis, or lizard people for the status quo, I just thought you had more moral agency than this. Over siding with Donald Trump? The man who has done, and is doing, all the above I detailed, which you conveniently didn't argue? What the fuck kind of question is this? YES. There's a reason I haven't had much energy for this lately. Your posting is as garbage as ever. If it is justifiable to break friendships with Trump voters of what he stands for, then I find it perfectly reasonable to destroy my friendship with people who vote for liberal voices. Hillary laughed when she talked about killing Qaddafi, I mean she literally destroyed a country HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW. In Palestine, when Hamas won over Fatah, she said that the elections should have been rigged, her track record regarding gay rights is just as shaky, if not worse than Trump, and she and her husband created the modern prison state that destroyed the African American community. Obama also did similar, most damning thing being was his record high deportations. But should people try to one up other progressives in moral purity? Hell no, it's a really stupid and dishonest game. I find it disingenuous when people get so self-righteous about Trump, yes he is repulsive but there is definitely a double standard coming from many liberals and even leftists. You don't have to excuse one to condemn the other. You're forcing a false dichotomy. What I am trying to get at is you wouldn't refuse to be friends with a liberal because Hillary and Obama did certain things that are not progressive so why is it acceptable to do the same to a Trump supporter, assuming they are not calling you a cuck every other sentence. A Hillary supporter whose support of Hillary was predicated on her covering up of sexual abuse (as in that's why they liked her) would be morally unacceptable to me. A Hillary supporter who supported her in spite of that because there was no better alternative would be fine for me. The problem is that Trump supporters don't get to claim that there wasn't a less racist alternative to Trump. They can only say that the racism wasn't a significant factor to them. And when racism in the 21st century seems to be defined as not giving disrespect to certain people, is that the worst thing that someone can believe in? Whenever I hear people use that argument, it really sounds like they are crying wolf at this point. Racism really doesn't mean anything to most people anymore when it is constantly being applied. What people fail to see is that Trump's campaign was not built upon racism, it was in reaction to the people left behind with globalization and many of them live in a worst situation than they did years or decades ago and when they have to pay respect to groups of people or use phrases they have never even heard of years ago, how do you expect them to react?
With apologies to Danglars for the comparison I'm about to make, extreme antisemitism in Germany in the 30s was a reaction to the Great Depression and the defeat in the Great War. The latent root existed, but it was a reaction to changing economic and social conditions that allowed it to be whipped into the component of a political ideology.
I agree that the rise of white male identity politics has a lot to do with the economic marginalization of certain demographics, but I don't know that the why necessarily matters. The fact remains that we're experiencing a backlash against civil rights and all groups that benefited from them. We have Sessions, who is in my opinion undeniably a white supremacist, heading the Justice Department and a President telling the police to rough up thugs. There is an open nostalgia for the "good old days" of the 1950s within the political movement as a whole.
You can say the root cause is globalization (although I'd argue that economic change was inevitable and overall positive) while still acknowledging the problem.
|
On November 28 2017 04:14 Shiragaku wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 03:57 KwarK wrote:On November 28 2017 03:52 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:49 KwarK wrote:On November 28 2017 03:35 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:28 NewSunshine wrote:On November 27 2017 23:40 Danglars wrote:On November 27 2017 15:10 NewSunshine wrote:On November 27 2017 14:06 Danglars wrote:On November 27 2017 11:59 doomdonker wrote:
[quote]
I don't think there's anything wrong with his statement. Its not a binary statement where if you don't support Trump, you support the Democratic Party. You can still support, say, Mike Pence or choose some other conservative politician.
At this point, you're dumber than a sack of bricks if you STILL support Trump. We're talking about a man who clearly understands little about the world, who barely does his job, is obsessed with the media instead of America, doesn't give a shit about the people he specifically campaigned for, is flipflopping around what he campaigned for and is busy trying enrich himself and his family through the most powerful office in the world.
If you look at all of this and still think "fake news", there's nothing to talk to you about because you're living in a different reality. He's an utter legislative failure whose only achievement is getting a SC appointed, despite having majorities in both the house and senate. Which wasn't even his success but rather McConnell pulling the strings. You can't even say that he's like Jimmy Carter either because Trump is objectively a terrible person. It's a very dangerous thing to declare there is only one opinion left to have on the situation, and to ruin personal friendships over politics. I still think he's worthy of support on some issues and opposition on others. He has helpfully made great progress bringing attention to some of society's discarded topics (in ways where polite discourse just gets dismissed, you racist bigots). If you declare there is no reason to support him whatsoever and will politicize your interpersonal friendships, there's less reason to hope for a period of national healing and unity in the future. Talk to the other side and don't rely on the right or left's propaganda to color your judgments. It's fine to preach healing and unity, but you're choosing the wrong person to blame. The blame lies with the person actively sowing the damage and the disunity. The blame lies with the person who launches a social media war against anyone and everyone who says things he disagrees with. The blame lies with the person who calls for brown people to be fired when they make a statement about racism, and conveniently ignores white people who do the same. The blame lies with the person who campaigned on a wall, to keep the rapists out of our country, that the rapists would pay for. The blame lies with the man who sides with a sex offender and pedophile, silencing women when it's convenient for him politically. The blame lies with the person who says he'll drain the swamp, then hires people who are even deeper in companies' pockets, threatening our free speech. You're absolving the president of a lot of responsibility in what he has done when you think "the left" is to blame for everything. He's gotten where he is by sowing chaos and discord among Americans, inciting and encouraging hate crimes and marginalizing people who just want to be treated the same as you. He has a very loud mouth, and people like you listen to him. Consider that. Let me get this straight: You side with the person breaking personal relationships over politics and want to say the other side forced you to adopt such an idiotic stance? I don’t care if you want to blame Trump, Nazis, or lizard people for the status quo, I just thought you had more moral agency than this. Over siding with Donald Trump? The man who has done, and is doing, all the above I detailed, which you conveniently didn't argue? What the fuck kind of question is this? YES. There's a reason I haven't had much energy for this lately. Your posting is as garbage as ever. If it is justifiable to break friendships with Trump voters of what he stands for, then I find it perfectly reasonable to destroy my friendship with people who vote for liberal voices. Hillary laughed when she talked about killing Qaddafi, I mean she literally destroyed a country HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW. In Palestine, when Hamas won over Fatah, she said that the elections should have been rigged, her track record regarding gay rights is just as shaky, if not worse than Trump, and she and her husband created the modern prison state that destroyed the African American community. Obama also did similar, most damning thing being was his record high deportations. But should people try to one up other progressives in moral purity? Hell no, it's a really stupid and dishonest game. I find it disingenuous when people get so self-righteous about Trump, yes he is repulsive but there is definitely a double standard coming from many liberals and even leftists. You don't have to excuse one to condemn the other. You're forcing a false dichotomy. What I am trying to get at is you wouldn't refuse to be friends with a liberal because Hillary and Obama did certain things that are not progressive so why is it acceptable to do the same to a Trump supporter, assuming they are not calling you a cuck every other sentence. A Hillary supporter whose support of Hillary was predicated on her covering up of sexual abuse (as in that's why they liked her) would be morally unacceptable to me. A Hillary supporter who supported her in spite of that because there was no better alternative would be fine for me. The problem is that Trump supporters don't get to claim that there wasn't a less racist alternative to Trump. They can only say that the racism wasn't a significant factor to them. And when racism in the 21st century seems to be defined as not giving disrespect to certain people, is that the worst thing that someone can believe in? Whenever I hear people use that argument, it really sounds like they are crying wolf at this point. Racism really doesn't mean anything to most people anymore when it is constantly being applied. What people fail to see is that Trump's campaign was not built upon racism, it was in reaction to the people left behind with globalization and many of them live in a worst situation than they did years or decades ago and when they have to pay respect to groups of people or use phrases they have never even heard of years ago, how do you expect them to react? Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:On November 28 2017 03:50 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:30 Plansix wrote:On November 28 2017 03:03 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 02:46 Plansix wrote:On November 28 2017 02:39 Logo wrote:On November 28 2017 02:36 Plansix wrote:
The problem is that you assume folks like myself are "value(ing) friendships so lightly." That isn't the case. How dare you value your wife's well being over a friendship. You monster. I know. I’m such a terrible person for allowing that to happen. I should have convinced lies to those friends and said it wasn’t a huge deal, wouldn’t be a problem and their desire to overtly talk about “getting the government out of healthcare” was fine. Mind you, a couple fierce libertarian friends straight up changed their mind on healthcare after those discussions. Because those friends saw that removing the ACA and Mass health protections would hurt someone they know and made the leap that people were more important that politics. You might actually persuade them to your side. Another good reason to keep friends for the reasons they are your friends in the first place. If you fail to convince, move on. It shows humanity and empathy, and not the political tribalism that is too rampant these days. I don't think you have to embrace it to effectively oppose Trump--it's way too scorched-earth. You continue to miss the point. These people are told about the problems we face due to the results of the election. We explain it to them like polite people. They respond that they do not believe our problems are real. So we are not friends with them. I don't know about you guys, bust most of my friendships with liberals ended was over shit like cultural appropriation, the legitimacy of gender fluidity, and my criticisms of campus identity politics. In California, lots of gay people said that they were scared for their lives because Trump is in office and statistically and anecdotally, that is bullshit. Lots of women with nice jobs and attending good universities continue to insist they are oppressed when they are in a pretty good position compared to most Americans. And so many PoCs on college campuses engage in outright bullying and use their identity to cynically silence people. When you look more into their background, its not uncommon to see that they came from good families. I can befriend people with many different political views and can still disagree with them, but with many urban progressives, I am always one comment from being socially ruined. I also hear that a lot of gays don’t want to move out of MA or RI because the rest of the country is so unfriendly to them. I know people who have come back to the area because the rest of the country treated them like this. I have had Muslim friends who straight up left this country because it treated them so poorly. You don’t seem that interested in believe these folks, so I would argue that you value your political views more than their friendships. I have grown up in rural America and there was definitely racism and homophobia. There were times when people refused to serve my mom because she was Asian and we had gay people who were bullied and eventually committed suicide. And the anti-Muslim sentiment was there, but on a personal level, most Muslims were integrated for the most part. But the Islamphobia is pretty bad and it is getting worse. However, with people like Jon Stewart and shows like Glee, that all changed so fast for the better. Rural America, although not San Francisco or New York is definitely way much friendly and livable than it used to be. When I moved to California, it was even better, especially for someone like me, but one thing that irks me is when I see people who have never experienced racism claiming oppression like some reward. I know what bigotry was like in action and there is nothing more infuriating when people in liberal bubbles LARP as a minority in their fictionalized view of suburban/rural America and use it to cynically promote their worldview.
No one is "missing" anything concerning why Trump won. You're at least a year late to this discussion.
Rural white America is desperately clinging to "the good old days" where they could work in an outdated or obsolete economy and perpetuate a casually xenophobic and misogynistic culture and everyone was OK with it (insofar as no one bothered to do anything about it). Now society is pushing back, forcing conservatives to actually "play fair" on the socioeconomic front, and conservatives are losing their mind and think that losing the intrinsic privileges that they had at the expense of women, minorities, LGBTQ, etc. is the same as systemic oppression. It's the ultimate hypocrisy when they love to throw out lines about "special snowflakes" and whatnot.
Does this explain why so many people turn to Trump? Yes.
Does it mean they're right or that it's ethically justified? Hell no.
You have to admit, there are tons of cases of people misusing the word racism, exaggerating oppression or bigotry in contemporary discussions about identity. Look at all the fake reports of hate crimes and discrimination, especially after Trump's election. Back in the 2000s and before, whenever there was a hate crime, it usually was a hate crime. But now, whenever those stories come up, we have to carefully verify it because so many of them are outright fake.
"tons of cases"?
No.
This is just like that crap where people try to highlight fake rape accusations to discredit the whole movement. The only thing that's going on is that conservative news outlets are going insane and are highlighting the slightest fabrications to try to say, "SEE?! IT'S ALL FAKE!!!!"
Are there cases of exaggerations or false claims concerning racism, sexism, etc.? Absolutely. Anywhere near as much as conservatives pretend it is? Fuck no. I never see conservatives owning up to all of the false claims, dangerous rhetoric, or blatant sexism/racism/xenophobia coming from their side. They try to marginalize it while exaggerating the negatives on the left in an attempt to equivocate them ("there's so much bad over there you're not paying attention to! It's just as bad as ours, so pay more attention to that and less to ours!"). It's ethically disgusting and shameful.
|
Franken's presser was apparently a dumpster fire. He should go
|
I didn’t notice that many fake claims of racism, to be honest. But I was focused on the very real claims of racism and marches by hate groups.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
