| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4751 Posts
On June 30 2025 23:07 LightSpectra wrote: It doesn't matter how nice or polite you are to them, they'll never learn until it's their faces getting eaten by the leopard. And even then, they often keep cheering the leopard on. So you wish to become as well intentioned as the stupid people. Smart. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States1367 Posts
| ||
|
oBlade
United States5524 Posts
On June 30 2025 02:27 Billyboy wrote: Fairly, but also it is because a lot of the illegals in red states are farm workers and no legals want to do it. Or just workers in various businesses that donate or "couldn't be competitive without them". The reality is instead of good thoughtful solutions you have performative shit that makes for great reels/tiktoks to stoke the rage in both parties. Some things require thoughtful solutions. Insurance is one. Figuring out how to divest power from people who run the system for their own benefit. Then what to actually do, in details, once you have the political capital. Crime, the border, and illegal immigration are not such a case. Leftist DAs do pretzel twists to try to figure out what a criminal is and explain we should never arrest them. It's not complicated. It's just that it's easier to pretend to sell solutions than it is to do actual simple work. So there is a cottage industry of overthinkers selling PhD level theorycrafted pipe dreams to do anything except stop people from committing crimes and arrest them if they do. Because that requires going outside. On June 30 2025 16:21 Velr wrote: Getting told what kind of food you can or can't buy with food stamps seems very insulting to me... Personally I find the fact that you get assistance that you can only use for food allready very demeaning. This is true for every kind of assistance? If you have a place to stay, but can't afford food, you get food assistance. If you don't have a place to stay, you can get a housing voucher. Medicaid will not pay your rent and food stamps will not pay your hospital visit. I worked in heating and cooling assistance. It was for people who got their electricity shut off and were going to boil in summer. It's not supposed to be happy. It's not supposed to have emotions at all. If it's demeaning, that's another psychological shield against dependency on it. The job of government is not to make sure nobody ever gets their feelings hurt. This gets you exactly to we can't arrest a criminal because they or their family might feel bad. You can spend your own money on whatever you want. If you want to give someone money with no conditions, they can spend your money on whatever they want. If they don't have money to the point they need help, the money should go to what they need. The minute the government uses force to take tax money from us and spend it, I stop giving a shit if someone were to feel "demeaned" instead of "thankful" and "appreciative" the government helped them. On June 30 2025 16:21 Velr wrote: "Oh, you ran into financial hardship? Must be because your an imbecile that can't handle his own money." you're* On June 30 2025 16:21 Velr wrote: While this surely is a concern with some recipients of goverment aid, such people should get more personal assistance by social workers that help them budget in the future instead of treating everyone that needs assistance like an imbecile. You want them to be able to technically be able to spend aid money on whatever they want, but if they can't do that responsibly, have a government worker in charge of helping them not spend on whatever they want. | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4751 Posts
I don't really aspire to be doing that. I'd rather find ways to capture the stupid people myself. I know insulting them ad nauseum doesn't work, but it seems you haven't figured it out quite yet. Maybe a few more rounds of institutionally self destruction might grant you some insight. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States1367 Posts
On June 30 2025 23:19 Uldridge wrote: No, you wish to both sides it. You want to race to the bottom with stupid people, or at least a side that has captured them. I don't really aspire to be doing that. I'd rather find ways to capture the stupid people myself. I know insulting them ad nauseum doesn't work, but it seems you haven't figured it out quite yet. Maybe a few more rounds of institutionally self destruction might grant you some insight. "Let's be unrelentingly nice to Republicans regardless of how evil they are" has led to a fascist dictatorship, but sure, the real problem is mean things people say on the Internet  | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44184 Posts
On June 30 2025 23:07 Uldridge wrote: Do you honestly think that these people are able to do a comprehensive impact assessment on a systemic level when they vote for a guy who says that tarrifs are going to bring back back breaking jobs and who says eggs will cost less? Do you know people like that? Because I do, and it's always very apparent when these types of people open their mouths what their type of ideology is going to be. Many people are stupid, don't forget that. Many stupid people also wish for malice on others. I don't fault them for that because they're stupid. They don't really understand impacts of anything other than when it hits them in the face, and even then. Sure, and none of that detracts from the practical mindset that if those stupid people who refuse to be compassionate or educated are going to destroy people's lives, it'd be better off if they destroyed their own lives instead of the lives of other innocent victims. I wish they wouldn't hurt anyone, but if they have to hurt someone, please let them hurt themselves. | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4751 Posts
Either you offer him a solution or you lose a portion of the population forever. Remember, stupid people have as much a say as you with their vote (even more so because bible belt state). So it doesn't matter in the end how good your analysis or strife is, they get to gloat because their side won and the fascists can do their fascistic shit. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States1367 Posts
On June 30 2025 23:31 Uldridge wrote: I didn't know that figuring out a left leaning platform for disenfranchised stupidity was being unrelentlessly nice. However you want to spin it, the moron redneck rustbelt unemployed bum isn't a fascist, he just wants to project his anger on something else than a systemic problem because that's not tangible to him. As someone who personally knows moron redneck rustbelt unemployed bums, you're 100% wrong. The cruelty is the point. They don't care if their life gets better. In fact, they get more bitter when it does because it gives them less of a perceived excuse to be sadistic. I remember an interview with an ill Republican in 2009, when the Affordable Care Act was going through Congress. He opposed the bill even though it would literally save his life, because he'd rather die than see black people get the help they need at the same time. That's not stupidity that can be reasoned with as long as you pull your punches. In my experience the only way to make them even begin critical thinking is by telling them billionaires are scamming them for tax cuts, but they won't feel very scammed unless they feel stupid for it at the same time, which is why being overly polite is actually detrimental. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23160 Posts
On June 30 2025 21:53 Simberto wrote: + Show Spoiler + The problem is that they are totally fine with it hurting other people. Then they only think it is bad that it hurts them, but often still double down on the thing in general. That makes it really hard to show compassion to them. They fuck shit up for everyone, were told that that what they do will indeed fuck shit up for everyone including themselves, they still do the thing, and once they go surprised Pikachu that it actually hurts themselves and not just other people, we need to feel sorry for them? I would still prefer that they hadn't done the thing to begin with, but the hope is that once it hurts themselves, they will notice that the thing is a bad thing, and stop doing it. It's remarkable to me how quickly/uncritically accelerationism has become the norm around here. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21633 Posts
On June 30 2025 23:31 Uldridge wrote: "They didn't know" was an excuse for Trump 1. By the time of Trump 2 they either don't know Trump 1 was a shit show, in which case they are living in a right wing news bubble (very likely) and Democrats are not going to reach them anyway. No right wing outlet they get their news from is going to tell them the Republicans are fucking them, so the only way they find out is when they get punched in the face.I didn't know that figuring out a left leaning platform for disenfranchised stupidity was being unrelentlessly nice. However you want to spin it, the moron redneck rustbelt unemployed bum isn't a fascist, he just wants to project his anger on something else than a systemic problem because that's not tangible to him. Either you offer him a solution or you lose a portion of the population forever. Remember, stupid people have as much a say as you with their vote (even more so because bible belt state). So it doesn't matter in the end how good your analysis or strife is, they get to gloat because their side won and the fascists can do their fascistic shit. Or they know but don't care, in which case the only way to get through to them is for them to get punched in the face. The redneck rustbelt unemployed bum was offered a solution, Hillary had a whole plan for revitalizing the communities decimated by the closure of mines. They instead voted for the guy offering to bring back the coal miner jobs that even the coal mining companies didn't want. You can't help them by offering realistic solutions because they don't want realistic solutions. They want to die from black lung like their daddies before them. Honestly if there is anything the Democrats should learn from Trump it is to just lie. Just lie to their faces and tell them your bringing back coal and getting rid of all the Mexicans who took their jobs. Then when your in power you can drag them kicking and screaming to actual help. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21633 Posts
On June 30 2025 23:44 GreenHorizons wrote: No, accelerationism is voting to break the system in the hope that in some mythical future the system will be rebuilt better.It's remarkable to me how quickly/uncritically accelerationism has become the norm around here. What people are advocating is that the harm is going to happen anyway, might aswell hope it hits the people who voted for it. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States1367 Posts
On June 30 2025 23:44 GreenHorizons wrote: It's remarkable to me how quickly/uncritically accelerationism has become the norm around here. It's not accelerationism. If your kid is about to put their hand on the hot stove, you do everything you can to stop them. But after they've burned themself the only thing you can say is "let this be a learning experience". | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23160 Posts
On June 30 2025 23:48 Gorsameth wrote: No, accelerationism is voting to break the system in the hope that in some mythical future the system will be rebuilt better. What people are advocating is that the harm is going to happen anyway, might aswell hope it hits the people who voted for it. Voting isn't required as part of accelerationism. People are advocating that increased suffering will lead to a realization and political realignment. That's accelerationism. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States1367 Posts
On June 30 2025 23:46 Gorsameth wrote: Honestly if there is anything the Democrats should learn from Trump it is to just lie. Just lie to their faces and tell them your bringing back coal and getting rid of all the Mexicans who took their jobs. Then when your in power you can drag them kicking and screaming to actual help. Okay, but how do you get Democrats to show up and vote for you in this case? | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44184 Posts
On June 30 2025 23:53 GreenHorizons wrote: Voting isn't required as part of accelerationism. People are advocating that increased suffering will lead to a realization and political realignment. That's accelerationism. I don't want bad things to get worse. I just want bad things to happen to bad people, if bad things are required to happen in the first place. I'd much rather have bad things get better, but that option seems to generally be off the table at the moment. | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4751 Posts
| ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2594 Posts
On June 30 2025 23:18 oBlade wrote: Some things require thoughtful solutions. Insurance is one. Figuring out how to divest power from people who run the system for their own benefit. Then what to actually do, in details, once you have the political capital. Crime, the border, and illegal immigration are not such a case. Leftist DAs do pretzel twists to try to figure out what a criminal is and explain we should never arrest them. It's not complicated. It's just that it's easier to pretend to sell solutions than it is to do actual simple work. So there is a cottage industry of overthinkers selling PhD level theorycrafted pipe dreams to do anything except stop people from committing crimes and arrest them if they do. Because that requires going outside. This is true for every kind of assistance? If you have a place to stay, but can't afford food, you get food assistance. If you don't have a place to stay, you can get a housing voucher. Medicaid will not pay your rent and food stamps will not pay your hospital visit. I worked in heating and cooling assistance. It was for people who got their electricity shut off and were going to boil in summer. It's not supposed to be happy. It's not supposed to have emotions at all. If it's demeaning, that's another psychological shield against dependency on it. The job of government is not to make sure nobody ever gets their feelings hurt. This gets you exactly to we can't arrest a criminal because they or their family might feel bad. You can spend your own money on whatever you want. If you want to give someone money with no conditions, they can spend your money on whatever they want. If they don't have money to the point they need help, the money should go to what they need. The minute the government uses force to take tax money from us and spend it, I stop giving a shit if someone were to feel "demeaned" instead of "thankful" and "appreciative" the government helped them. you're* You want them to be able to technically be able to spend aid money on whatever they want, but if they can't do that responsibly, have a government worker in charge of helping them not spend on whatever they want. Just giving people money with no preconditons is often a much better idea than having programs for specific things. First of all it's a lot more efficent. You just have to check they qualify for financial assistance which you have to do for every form of it anyway. Secondly you only need one main program for the vast majority of people and often edge cases with preconditions can be handled ad hoc. A third point is that most people know better then the goverment what they need money for. Buying a pair of nice pants and a shirt and going to to the barber might seem like a waste of money but if you have 5 job interviews lined up the next week it's a great investment. The final point is that its self selective for most people. You spend it on cigs and booze you will come back asking for more when you need food. This cuts down administration which is a huge cost. Have to look out for the kids though. Sure the first payment will be a bust but that's still often cheaper then the admin work. Some years the regional goverment have given all kids a card that allows them (and their parent if they are with them) to ride any public transport for free during the summer (normally school kids have this during the rest of the year if they are in high school). Sometimes it's for retired people. Always some people that argue it's not fair and it should be income based. One argument is that rich people won't use the system regardless, but the best one is that for the money you save being specific is the cost of the extra administration anyway. Granted public transport in the summer is pretty cheap thing to give away since it's far from capacity anyway but it's the same for most social programs. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44184 Posts
On June 30 2025 23:58 Uldridge wrote: How bad can a person with an iq of 80 or 90 actually be? At some point you need to see the difference between Vance and the random dumbass. I can't understand how you can't understand that. Most Republicans aren't an entire standard deviation below the mean IQ. Most also have the capacity to reason. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States1367 Posts
On June 30 2025 23:58 Uldridge wrote: How bad can a person with an iq of 80 or 90 actually be? At some point you need to see the difference between Vance and the random dumbass. I can't understand how you can't understand that. Psychologists studying captured Nazis at the Nuremberg Trials discovered the stupider ones were the ones more open to vapid cruelty, lacking empathy altogether, whereas the smarter ones were adept at simply tuning out their empathy for the sake of career advancement. Is that what you mean? | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11475 Posts
On June 30 2025 23:58 Uldridge wrote: How bad can a person with an iq of 80 or 90 actually be? At some point you need to see the difference between Vance and the random dumbass. I can't understand how you can't understand that. You can be evil and stupid at the same time. Intelligence is not a prerequisite for villainy, it just makes being evil more effective. I'd argue that ethics and intelligence are completely independent axis. You can be smart and compassionate, or smart and evil, or Forest Gump, or stupid and evil. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Other Games |
|
Wardi Open
PiGosaur Monday
The PondCast
Replay Cast
RSL Revival
WardiTV European League
Replay Cast
RSL Revival
WardiTV European League
FEL
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
