EPTIt is the “Tyler Durden is cool” effect, where someone likes the Tyler Durden character in fight club and doesn’t want to contend with the idea that he is the leader of a suicide cult that greatly resembles fascist indoctrination. People like they simple mythology about history.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 969
| 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 | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
It is the “Tyler Durden is cool” effect, where someone likes the Tyler Durden character in fight club and doesn’t want to contend with the idea that he is the leader of a suicide cult that greatly resembles fascist indoctrination. People like they simple mythology about history. | ||
|
Ryzel
United States529 Posts
On December 04 2018 23:52 Biff The Understudy wrote: Please don’t. This thread got rid of really vague ideological discussions, it’s not something i miss. The whole “us should be a theocracy with lots of dukes and enlightenment suck » was really funny, but I’m not sure it’s a discussion we need to spend days of your lives on. Unless your plan is to convince RS that his ideas are truly fucking terrible, but if it didn’t occur to him spontaneously, I’m afraid you are losing your time. On December 04 2018 23:57 Dangermousecatdog wrote: I like vague ideological discussions. We should invite and unban xdaunt and danglars just for this "discussion". Putting aside the laughable implication that someone should not be allowed to debate their ideas on a public(ish) forum just because you disagree with your perception of their views, what meritorious discussions are we denying by allowing someone to debate their point? Multiple conversations can happen simultaneously in a forum (pretty sure the Roman ones were famous for having people screaming over each other). So if either of you have something in mind worth discussing, then by all means share it with us so we can discuss it. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
iamthedave
England2814 Posts
On December 05 2018 00:23 Plansix wrote: They are not talking about prohibiting the topic. They are discussing if the topic will result in a worthwhile discussion within the context of this thread and the TL members that post here regularly. It's alright, you and me can be the history crusaders correcting everyone about all the ways it sucked way back when a samurai was legally allowed to test the sharpness of their blade on a random peasant if they felt the need, or local lords could have sex with any serf's wife on the wedding night provided they were on his land, or how the generally perceived and proven ungodly behaviour of Kings and the church itself lead to thinkers determining that this god business is a sham and the enlightenment happened. A lot of people don't see history as a chain of events but a bunch of individual moments cut off from one another. It was religion that caused the enlightenment, as inexorably as it caused the Inquisition. Also, ran into this today: https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/12/04/coup-protests-engulf-wisconsin-capitol-outgoing-scott-walker-and-gop-move-cripple Wat dis? | ||
|
Ryzel
United States529 Posts
On December 05 2018 00:23 Plansix wrote: They are not talking about prohibiting the topic. They are discussing if the topic will result in a worthwhile discussion within the context of this thread and the TL members that post here regularly. Right, and I agree that in that context it probably won’t, but I guess I have a problem with the idea that the general biases of individual members of a forum (even if they are shared by a majority participating in the thread) should dictate what is and is not worthwhile discussion. Barring hate speech and breaking mod rules, I was under the impression that anyone who likes SC/War3/DotA/CS/whatever should feel welcome in sharing and debating their opinions in threads on this website. TLDR: I don’t understand why it’s not OK to debate with Sum about his ideas until a more “meritorious” discussion presents itself. EDIT - @iamthedave Wow that’s some messed up shit. | ||
|
IyMoon
United States1249 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/29/magazine/the-new-front-in-the-gerrymandering-wars-democracy-vs-math.html The Wisconsin Republican party is the center the anti democratic section of the national party. Not only do they try to rig their own elections by picking their voters, but they have taken to attacking other state’s elections. Paul Ryan was on TV complaining about California’s elections and questioning how Republicans got their clock cleaned so badly in that state. He knows why, of course. But he wants to depict Wisconsin as some normal state and not rigged nightmare government he and Scott Walker created. But people in Wisconsin are so done with this bullshit. You are going to see some real nasty politics coming out of that state in the next two years because the state Republican never believed in fair elections and the people of the state are demanding them. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
He can post his fantasy version of medieval history and his fantasy Catholic fanfic, but there is nothing to discuss, except to point out that he is well, posting his fantasy version of medieval history and his fantasy Catholic fanfic. Normally it's a Protestant fanfic, but that doesn't actually change that we have seen all this before. Just as he can post his fanfic, we too can post to point out the failure to adhere to reality and the absurdity of his version of history. He's not debating his idea on a public forum, he is posting a fanfic. Of world history. Where catholicism = humanity. Where a hereditary position of basically absolute authority within the State is his ideal government. Where the events that lead to USA and the rest of world history doesn't exist. In the, may I remind you, US politics thread. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15686 Posts
 The article also mentions some stuff will be redacted for this or that reason, which is totally expected. https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/419567-special-counsel-will-make-manafort-memo-public-by-friday-spokesman | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On December 05 2018 00:19 Ryzel wrote: Putting aside the laughable implication that someone should not be allowed to debate their ideas on a public(ish) forum just because you disagree with your perception of their views, what meritorious discussions are we denying by allowing someone to debate their point? Multiple conversations can happen simultaneously in a forum (pretty sure the Roman ones were famous for having people screaming over each other). So if either of you have something in mind worth discussing, then by all means share it with us so we can discuss it. You have to understand that this is in the context of US politics as it exist post 2016. We endured so many bad faith arguments made by people who are aggressively and proudly ignorant that everyone in this thread is quick to call them out. This isn’t about dictating what is acceptable, but asking the simple question: Are folks sure they want to debate with a guy who thinks theocratic monarchy is a good idea in 2018? Have folks thought about how warped that view of history has to be to come to the conclusions theocratic monarchy were ever a good idea? | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On December 05 2018 01:29 Plansix wrote: Wisconsin Republicans have so heavily gerrymandered the state that the republicans were able to keep an overwhelming majority in state government while losing the popular vote. That will end in 2020, since a democrat has been elected governor and will in charge of redrawing districts in 2020. They are attempting to limit his power because it is pretty much all they have left, because he is going to be in office through 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/29/magazine/the-new-front-in-the-gerrymandering-wars-democracy-vs-math.html The Wisconsin Republican party is the center the anti democratic section of the national party. Not only do they try to rig their own elections by picking their voters, but they have taken to attacking other state’s elections. Paul Ryan was on TV complaining about California’s elections and questioning how Republicans got their clock cleaned so badly in that state. He knows why, of course. But he wants to depict Wisconsin as some normal state and not rigged nightmare government he and Scott Walker created. But people in Wisconsin are so done with this bullshit. You are going to see some real nasty politics coming out of that state in the next two years because the state Republican never believed in fair elections and the people of the state are demanding them. Well, North Carolina isn't going to let Wisconsin take that throne easily. Look at everything the NC Republicans did to neuter Cooper, and I mean you had a campaign consultant straight up committing election fraud there. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
At least the technocratic government discussion that which arose as a sideline was interesting in that it opened up people to display their thoughts. Thoughts that are somewhat rooted in a version of reality that we can profess to have some overlap with. For is that not the whole point of a forum? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On December 05 2018 02:18 ticklishmusic wrote: Well, North Carolina isn't going to let Wisconsin take that throne easily. Look at everything the NC Republicans did to neuter Cooper, and I mean you had a campaign consultant straight up committing election fraud there. That thing out of North Carolina is lit. The election commission won't even certify the results, which is unheard of in a US election. And it is a preview of how some of these Republican strongholds fixated on voter suppression will respond when faced with the prospect of losing the election. Because once they are out, they will never be able to rework the system to their benefit like they did in 2010. | ||
|
Ryzel
United States529 Posts
I understand where you’re coming from but you are making a LOT of unsubstantiated claims about what Sum does or doesn’t know. I had to reread the thread to make sure I didn’t miss some conversation you had with him that I missed, but I just don’t see where these claims are coming from. Some examples... - He’s a conspiracy theorist (I don’t know where this came from, perhaps from a previous conversation?) - He has no idea what a theocratic monarchy is (None of his posts elaborate further on his ideal government so we don’t know what he does or does not know on this subject. You’re probably making the assumption he doesn’t know what it is because if he did he would not want it, which regardless of whether true or not is an assumption). - He’s posting a fantasy version of medieval history (Perhaps this is in reference to the discussion about dukes? He never claimed anywhere that he was recounting history, just his opinions). - He’s proudly beating his chest over his own intranscience (Are you referring to how he defends his concept of what a duke is here? If so, I don’t think that’s an appropriate characterization of his statement. We’ve all been guilty of beating our chests proudly when we’re confident we’re right, even if we’re wrong. He shouldn’t have made an assumption about others’ understanding of history though). All he did was answer iamthedave’s question, elaborate on it slightly, and try to debate his concept of a duke. Personally I was interested to see what would motivate someone to have an opinion like that on an ideal government and wanted to see what things he has experienced that would lead him to develop such a view. I would probably debate some (or all) of those points with him, but I thought it had potential to be an interesting discussion as I don’t have experience with things hat would lead me to develop a Catholic fundamentalist worldview. To answer your question, I believe the point of a forum is the free and open exchange of ideas, following a given direction and set of rules determined by the hosts of the forum (in this case, TL mods). | ||
|
Mercy13
United States718 Posts
I request that DMCD try to post less aggressively when someone says something he doesn't agree with. This wasn't the first time. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
To put it bluntly, installing a form of aristocracy to any level of government means stripping citizens of their ability to vote on who leads their government. This is considered a fundamental right in all modern democracies. Furthermore the concept of governance through the mandate of citizens was created as a way to solve the problem of transfers of power within governments/nations. Prior to full governance through the people, monarchies were a dominate form of government where power transferred through “legitimate” heirs. Of course the concept of legitimacy was subjective and often caused to civil wars, infighting, and general bedlam during the transfer of power. People who enjoy Game of Thrones might miss the undertone of the series that the concept of the “Throne” or rightful king is inherently bad. The faults of monarchy are so ingrained in modern culture that it is difficult to take someone advocating for the return of aristocracy seriously. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18825 Posts
 | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21666 Posts
On December 05 2018 03:23 Mercy13 wrote: Sun is welcome to explain his reasoning but I've seen enough 'alternative facts' to know how its story is going to go and to know that nothing productive will come of it.I agree. Sun's views very well could have been nonsense but I think it would have been interesting to learn their perspective instead of badgering them off. I don't post a ton but I like reading the thread because it's a way to get exposed to a lot of different sometimes weird ideas I don't encounter in the day-to-day. A center-left circle jerk where everyone agrees on the basics is pretty boring, at least for me personally. I request that DMCD try to post less aggressively when someone says something he doesn't agree with. This wasn't the first time. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15686 Posts
On December 05 2018 03:23 Mercy13 wrote: I agree. Sun's views very well could have been nonsense but I think it would have been interesting to learn their perspective instead of badgering them off. I don't post a ton but I like reading the thread because it's a way to get exposed to a lot of different sometimes weird ideas I don't encounter in the day-to-day. A center-left circle jerk where everyone agrees on the basics is pretty boring, at least for me personally. I request that DMCD try to post less aggressively when someone says something he doesn't agree with. This wasn't the first time. It'd be different if anything Sun was saying was remotely new or interesting. It is the same pseudo intellectual stuff we have heard before where someone think they are the smartest person alive for trying to apply elementary logic to social structures. Every year or so, we get someone pretty much saying the exact same shit. I forget the name of the guy before this one, but it always has the same tone and content. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15686 Posts
On December 05 2018 03:45 farvacola wrote: I like what sum said simply because i think it revealed his past user name Yeah, I'm trying not to be too aggressive, but this seems like pretty obvious ban dodging. To any of the mods of TL, is there a reason you guys let people who were banned post under a new alias so long as they start behaving a bit better? The big thing is: This person has presented their ideas in the past, and we've all gone through it, and the ideas just aren't well constructed. It is just a pain in the ass how they try to pretend this is some new person with new ideas. It feels like they are hoping with a new persona, the ideas might be better received. But the ideas suck. Why do we need to keep going through this? | ||
| ||
