TRUMP - Some people think......... How do you feel?

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
“Political rancor is oppressive today in its animosity and divisiveness. This is evident from the local to the global scale, from the right and left, from the top to the bottom. The modus operandi is to take sides on an issue, and then vehemently mock, deride, blame, or write off anyone who disagrees with you. Increasingly this civil hard-headedness is becoming uncivil – and worse, it is breeding fear and deadly violence in the form of bombs, beatings, and mass shootings.” From: The Politics of Jesus by J. Heinrich Arnold
 
If one takes the firm position that white nationalism is horrible - and another thinks it’s okay - pretty hard to politely agree to disagree. Particularly for the outgroups they target. Also pretty ineffective at changing anything. Violence is never okay, is never a solution. Sometimes harsh criticism of really terrible ideas is necessary, though.
 
GeoFee said:
“Political rancor is oppressive today in its animosity and divisiveness. This is evident from the local to the global scale, from the right and left, from the top to the bottom. The modus operandi is to take sides on an issue, and then vehemently mock, deride, blame, or write off anyone who disagrees with you. Increasingly this civil hard-headedness is becoming uncivil – and worse, it is breeding fear and deadly violence in the form of bombs, beatings, and mass shootings.” From: The Politics of Jesus by J. Heinrich Arnold
Click to expand...
This is just more "both sides are the same" crap. Over gay rights, are both sides the same? White supremacy, both sides the same? Anti-semitism, both sides the same?

If you have a dangerous ideology, it is going to be mocked, derided and attacked with logic and words. The measure of your idea is how it stands up to all of the above. This is also why, when we are being critical of an idea, we don't half-ass the criticism and make it look better than it is in the process.

What the proponents of racial-based anti-immigration and religion-based anti-semitism and anti-LGBTQ policies want, are to be placed in that "both sides the same" bin. They want to appeal to our instinct for "fairness" to equate themselves with their opponents. That's bulls**t. There are ideas worth opposing in the strongest terms, and I am not going to tiptoe around and say that racism and religious bigotry is anything but the half-baked fears of a subset of mostly white men who are scared about losing their majority status and their ability to be their old ignorant selves in public without backlash.
 
I don't want you beside me. You're the person I was thinking of when I lamented on the dangers of "half-assing" the dissection of an idea.
 
chansen said:
I don't want you beside me. You're the person I was thinking of when I lamented on the dangers of "half-assing" the dissection of an idea.
Click to expand...
I don’t think I’ve done that. I am the one who has been derided for using the word fascism to point out actual fascism. I haven’t minced words and have brought concepts to people’s attention here, hopefully...while people would prefer me to use a less controversial term so as not to be too harsh, and I’m told to “listen to the other side” before calling out really bad ideas...as if those ideas haven’t been heard too much everywhere already.
 
Last edited:
Kimmio said:
and I’m told to “listen to the other side” before calling out really bad ideas...as if those ideas haven’t been heard too much everywhere already.
Click to expand...

Listen to people whose views are different from yours does not have to be only the extreme right. This is not a black and white issue. When I've said that I've agreed with someone you despise, I get told I've been brainwashed. That is not listening. Labelling and accusing is part of the problem.

What if we recognized that both sides are motivated by a desire for a better country? I personally do not think neo-nazi views will improve things for the record. What can you do to improve your world? Can you do it without labels or blaming?
 
Kimmio said:
I don’t think I’ve done that. I am the one who has been derided for using the word fascism to point out actual fascism. I haven’t minced words and have brought concepts to people’s attention here, hopefully...while people would prefer me to use a less controversial term so as not to be too harsh, and I’m told to “listen to the other side” before calling out really bad ideas...as if those ideas haven’t been heard too much everywhere already.
Click to expand...

No, you spam the forum with the word until it loses all meaning and people start yawning when they see it.

I have no interest in arguing alongside you, and have found myself not responding to threads because you were already active, and not wanting to engage you. I now completely avoid topics we disagree on because you arguing for them is more effective than me arguing against them.

I want you to be able to slow down, take your time, and compose your thoughts. Spamming articles you agree with is not helpful - that's like unsafe spamming Christian memes. Arguing while you're emotional is not helpful. I've seen you be effective in the past, but your style of posting over the last long while has me completely turned off.

If I needed people in my corner to reinforce my points, I wouldn't be an atheist on a Christian forum. I usually agree with your positions, but I almost always disagree with how you present them. So when you start with, "Preach it brother chansen," it caused an adverse reaction in me.
 
Northwind said:
Listen to people whose views are different from yours does not have to be only the extreme right. This is not a black and white issue. When I've said that I've agreed with someone you despise, I get told I've been brainwashed. That is not listening. Labelling and accusing is part of the problem.

What if we recognized that both sides are motivated by a desire for a better country? I personally do not think neo-nazi views will improve things for the record. What can you do to improve your world? Can you do it without labels or blaming?
Click to expand...
Some important issues particularly where human rights of the marginalized are concerned, are going to stay black and white for me - because taking the middle road, is like not taking any stand, which is as consequential as taking the opposite view. Whether I argue my points effectively or not, or if they change anyone’s minds, is a different matter. I don’t see the necessity in bringing what I can do in my world into this debate. I’m not asking you that. But since you asked a personal question...I already told you I inquired about volunteering for the NDP. I support causes and efforts that align with my views. I oppose things that don’t.
 
Last edited:
chansen said:
No, you spam the forum with the word until it loses all meaning and people start yawning when they see it.

I have no interest in arguing alongside you, and have found myself not responding to threads because you were already active, and not wanting to engage you. I now completely avoid topics we disagree on because you arguing for them is more effective than me arguing against them.

I want you to be able to slow down, take your time, and compose your thoughts. Spamming articles you agree with is not helpful - that's like unsafe spamming Christian memes. Arguing while you're emotional is not helpful. I've seen you be effective in the past, but your style of posting over the last long while has me completely turned off.

If I needed people in my corner to reinforce my points, I wouldn't be an atheist on a Christian forum. I usually agree with your positions, but I almost always disagree with how you present them. So when you start with, "Preach it brother chansen," it caused an adverse reaction in me.
Click to expand...
Sounds like an emotional reaction on your part. Anyway, I was joking. Sorry about that.
 
Lastpointe said:
Listened to interesting discussion as to trump and his campaign. How he spends all his time fear mongering about invaders from the south when in fact he could be talking about the booming economy, low unemployment.........

One reason is that for the areas who voted for him, where factories and mines have closed and there are no jobs..... things havent gotten better for them. The economy may be roaring ahead but they ar still being left behind

So he has to keep focussing in things that will engage tho folks
Click to expand...
Fear seems to work in politics (see history and even the candidates that we like their election campaigns...notice how they slag their opponents using fear etc); the first half of 2016 Hillary campaign focusses on policy etc, which wasnt working...then she hired a really good PR group who started using fear...but too little too late...
Strangely tho the fear based words by sombunall celebrities and MSM on 45 being a " Nazi" "white supremacist" "racist" etc never seems to stick...that I don't quite grok because those words are box office poison and good mud slinging technique

The persuasion munitions of the 2016 election are still going off, courtesy of our minds...amazing...

I vote for building a wall around USA and cutting their connection to the World so as to keep us safe from their polarization and further infecting us with their anxiety and fear...then send over Peacebombers with highly trained Tibetian monks who parachute into kindergartens etc to teach them meditation...

Fear in the Mind Killer and Can b Addictive,
Inannawhimsey
 
Northwind said:
Listen to people whose views are different from yours does not have to be only the extreme right. This is not a black and white issue. When I've said that I've agreed with someone you despise, I get told I've been brainwashed. That is not listening. Labelling and accusing is part of the problem.

What if we recognized that both sides are motivated by a desire for a better country? I personally do not think neo-nazi views will improve things for the record. What can you do to improve your world? Can you do it without labels or blaming?
Click to expand...
Some but not all is a good term
Clumsy

Like sombunall people that are called fascists are actually fascists*
Somebunall antifa are really silly people
Sombunall african-americans don't consider themselves oppressed
Sombunall oppressed people don't believe in White privilege
And so on...

* which fascism? The really recent usage of "you don't agree with my version of intersectionality"? Different scholars have different ideas on fascism theory Definitions of fascism - Wikipedia

Which is all my attempt at steelmanning (opposite of strawman. Steelmanning is helping people strengthen their argument or proposition) people who use the term fascism. Trying to help them argue better :3

Like Fascist states are authoritarian, but not all auhoritarians are fascist (by some theories of fascism).

By a common usage of fascism, the new Brazilian poo bah ain't fascist because he doesn't disapprove of free markets. He has some of the other markers.

So we should beware of tossing around powerful words without knowing their nuances. Like labelling anything proWest as "white supremacy". That way you can make a stronger argument.

Green and Teal Martian Supremacy,
Inannawhimsey
 
Hi,
chansen said:
There are ideas worth opposing in the strongest terms
Click to expand...
Here you hit the nail on the head. If democracy is to be viable each person must wrestle with ideas. First in the context of that person's inner sphere. Getting your head together so that what comes out of your mouth is coherent and effective. Then in and through all of your relations. Where do we see such conversation among the general population? The majority are being played by the propaganda of corporate power. That corporate power exploiting both left and right to further the increase of power; expressed as profit and privilege.

At the helm of both Democrats (Liberals) and Republicans (Conservatives) are persons seeking power. This being the core value of the western social economy, taking root in the mid sixteenth century. Thomas Hobbes makes it explicit: "So that in the first place I put for a general inclination of all mankind a perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceaseth only in death."

The tragedy is that it matters not what party in in place; either will exercise and seek to increase their measure of power. Obama may be slick and Trump a baboon, but they play the same game. No matter which party governs, the planet and its peoples will continue to be exploited and oppressed. This while a minority of oligarchs (corporate overlords) serve their own interest; paving the way for tyranny.

Belittling persons who express ideas is not the same as opposing those ideas. You and I do not have to agree in the realm of ideas. My hope is that we at the very least respect each other while negotiating our differences. The negotiation of difference being a primary challenge to the human race just now.

George

 
Another Zetetic human being
(Who has struggled* with this empirical fact--eeep! Careful there...lol)
How something absurd can b fundamentally very helpful

A Fish Sometimes Aware of Water,
Inannawhimsey

*he being of the human freedom ideology
 
Last edited:
Kimmio said:
Sounds like an emotional reaction on your part. Anyway, I was joking. Sorry about that.
Click to expand...
Joking is good
(Tho can b difficult 2 see here in text :p)
And I hope you sometimes can see chansen has been trying to help you
Steelmanning your propositions and arguments so they become stronger and more robust
More focussed

Life is 2 Serious 2 b Serious,
Inannawhimsey
 
Inannawhimsey said:
Some but not all is a good term
Clumsy
Click to expand...

Inannawhimsey said:
Like sombunall people that are called fascists are actually fascists*
Somebunall antifa are really silly people
Sombunall african-americans don't consider themselves oppressed
Sombunall oppressed people don't believe in White privilege
And so on...
Click to expand...

Thanks. I guess that's my reaction. It seems sometimes that if we argue right of a certain point we're supporting Nazi's. Not all people of colour are oppressed. Even if they are, it is not up to us to decide how to respond.
 
Inannawhimsey said:
Some but not all is a good term
Clumsy

Like sombunall people that are called fascists are actually fascists*
Somebunall antifa are really silly people
Sombunall african-americans don't consider themselves oppressed
Sombunall oppressed people don't believe in White privilege
And so on...

* which fascism? The really recent usage of "you don't agree with my version of intersectionality"? Different scholars have different ideas on fascism theory Definitions of fascism - Wikipedia

Which is all my attempt at steelmanning (opposite of strawman. Steelmanning is helping people strengthen their argument or proposition) people who use the term fascism. Trying to help them argue better :3

Like Fascist states are authoritarian, but not all auhoritarians are fascist (by some theories of fascism).

By a common usage of fascism, the new Brazilian poo bah ain't fascist because he doesn't disapprove of free markets. He has some of the other markers.

So we should beware of tossing around powerful words without knowing their nuances. Like labelling anything proWest as "white supremacy". That way you can make a stronger argument.

Green and Teal Martian Supremacy,
Inannawhimsey
Click to expand...

Capitalism and free market can serve fascism’s aims. Fascism is a shapeshifter, rather than a static ideology - in different times and places, it picks up whatever elements of the culture it can wield more power with to secure authoritarian dominance over people...but its hallmarks are anti-immigrant, anti-feminist, anti-minority in general; harkening back to a mythical great time when a nation had no problems - “before those__ (whatever outsider or new idea) showed up and wrecked our perfect nation” - often rallying loyalists around folklore, legend and hero mythology that often involves military conquest - a great battle. So, it’s not about “just because they disagree with my version of intersectionality”. It is because they are against the social progress and social justice aims that theorists of intersectionality and other progressive social theorists have, and against solving the social inequality they point to. And they would like to roll back social progress gains for the marginalized “outgoups” because they see those groups as the ruination of “their people”. This obviously presents a danger to the marginalized who they deem to be getting in the way of their artificially elevated great nation.

By the way, Pinochet was a free market fascist.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top