Discussion in 'The Red Room' started by Lanzman, Aug 9, 2018.
You don't want them to abandon their evil, dirty, animal religion?
No, that is not even remotely what she did.
Democrats are not going to win over people who are drawn to Trump because of white identity politics. And I’m okay with that.
I’m actually not convinced the Russians were the source of this idea, just that they helped spread it. I’ve already explained why it’s not a good idea from my pov, but I’m sure it does appeal to quite a few Americans. They seem mostly college-aged kids, whose political selves are not fully formed yet, questioning the assumptions they’ve lived with their whole lives and trying out different ideas. This is all a part of growing up, and I have no problem with it whatsoever. I also really don’t like seeing such youthful innocence cynically exploited by experienced political operatives with a definite agenda.
You're a Nazi because you admitted deporting people who've done everything they're supposed to gives you a fucking boner.
You're just gonna have to live with that.
A world where you get a kiss on the cheek for cheering on the cruel and petty acts of sociopath fascists isn't ever gonna come, so you can keep on dreaming.
There is what you wrote and then there is reality.
You are an idiot. Green card holders would remain green card holders and so not be deported. They would not be rewarded with citizenship, fuckwit, unless they can show they can actually support themselves. Who would be deported would be people who committed fraud in order to gain their status provided said fraud was proven in a court of law. That is always what the law has said so actually enforcing the law is a good thing, idiot.
None of which has anything to do with mythical Nazis which exist only in your head.
Fuck. Off. Adolph.
Which is what I and everyone else in the reality based community have been saying all along. I am so glad you could finally join us in the real world.
The Russians don't generally make things like this up. What they do do is find fringe groups and try to amplify them. You will notice their propaganda campaigns tend to try to hurt Democrats and help Republicans because Trump is their partner in this conspiracy.
Jesus Tapdancing Fuckballs.
Yes, the real world does exist and you should try visiting it some time. It is a bit more complicated than your fantasy world but all in all it is a better place to be.
There's nothing "complicated", about bigotry and hate.
That's caveman shit.
You're welcome to it.
It's exactly your speed.
See? There you go again proving you do not live in the reality based community.
Put the crack pipe down, dude, and come back to the real world. I know you find it scary, I know you don't want to have to think and deal with pesky facts, but ultimately you will be better off if you do.
Learn to spell.
"Reality": where "the" is spelled "tge."
Maybe that should be the default response to all of @Dinner's bigot posts. Eventually he'll put everyone on Ignore and end up talking to himself.
What part of “or anyone in their household” don’t you understand? Immigrants fully capable of supporting themselves would be barred if their spouse were old, poor, or infirm, or had children who were.
Personally I’m guessing you have no problem comprehending that, you’re just a xenophobic nationalist fuckwit.
If they are working and have private insurance then they won't be on welfare. We are talking about noncitizen legal residents and if they should be allowed to become citizens. The law says if you are taking government welfare then you don't so the question is should we continue ignoring the law or should we actually enforce the law. I come down on the side of the rule of law.
You can push the fantasy that supporting the rule of law makes one a "nationalist" but that is a garbage argument and essentially just boils down to a snarl word not an actual argument.
Personally, I would expand immigration, make it mostly skills and employment based with employers bidding for the available visas with the highest bidders getting to bring in the foreigner workers they want. You also massively increase law enforcement to remove illegal aliens, require every employer to use E-Varify without exceptions (and make it a prison sentence for all CEOs and board members if a company don't), and fully impliment the Niskanen Centers 20 reforms.
We will see a lot more immigration, we will see better immigration, and the cost to taxpayers will go way down while criminals are removed. But intelligent discourse no longer happens that often at Wordforge. It's all just Nazi-Commie name calling bull shit from lazy partisan hacks.
Learn how to use a comma.
Anytime anyone claims to be representing the "reality based community" you can be pretty sure they're delusional.
Look, for the slow among you, here's the point I was trying to make: Russians aside, there is a serious divide occuring in this country. You can see it reflected in this very thread. It's no longer sufficient to argue from fact or even principle. The opponent is not only wrong, they are evil, or stupid, or blind to being manipulated by some sinister puppetmaster. Both sides believe this about the other. There is no dialogue, there are two groups of polarized idiots screaming past each other to no effect.
You may believe with all your heart and mind that you're right about a particular issue. And maybe you are. But maybe you aren't, and absent any willingness to attend to the slightest disagreement with your position, you're not acting as a rational creature, but an emotional one.
Trump and the trumpets are a serious problem with the soul of America. But the answer to that is not to cast them out, it's to embrace them and pull them in. Delusion must be met with calm reason and reassurance, not with ridicule and derision. That only hardens them in their beliefs, and it's already hard enough to lift people out of ignorance. So consider how you're interacting with those you disagree with or we watch Civil War Mk II kick off in our lifetimes.
When was it ever on the Internet? This hiding-behind-the-keyboard is @Dinner's definition of "reality based." Or do you encounter many trolls IRL?
This I agree with 100%. The only way we're going to win as a species, and as a society, is to be compassionate. I do understand why people get upset, because sometimes things look hopeless, and the concern is that if we don't push back as hard and as fast as possible, the people we care about will pay for it. I believe this is true in many cases, but I also believe we can push back firmly without having to resort to the same underhanded tactics used by people like Trump. I think the 2000-teens will be seen as the age of the knee-jerk reaction.
The emotional centers of the brain can shutdown higher brain functions, such as the ability to reason and understand logic. This is a scientific fact. Your attempts to convince others to be reasonable is a lost cause.
"Let me explain my thoughts on the Laffer Curve to you."
"Let me explain how Africans are inferior to Whites."
If you don't understand the difference between the two and feel both should have equal access then you are too wrapped up in your own smug privilege to debate.
I find it humorous that those on the right, those who were the worst with bashing “libtards” and Obama and all thing left of center are suddenly calling for peace. Especially when the most divisive content comes from Fox News and the NRA channel.
Tell you what, you denounce all that, and I’ll openly accept any dialog in which you wish to engage.
^^^ Still doesn't get it.
What's funny is that I agree with this too.
Here's the thing: I agree with @Lanzman that people shouldn't jump straight to hyperbole and offense. I can't tell you how many times I see headlines like "You won't believe the offensive remark made by so and so," and roll my eyes because who is honestly offended anymore? It's less a genuine feeling and more a gut reaction based on strong dislike of the speaker. Remember when people got offended at Obama for the "god and guns" remark? What he said wasn't wrong, and it wasn't offensive. What it did, though, was force people to look at themselves, and they didn't like what they saw. So they retaliated against the messenger and used the message as a bludgeon. This is becoming so common now, that I'm not certain that there can be any kind of genuine discussion in the political arena. Each side just wants to bludgeon the other side with their message.
The difference, however, is in the messages themselves. As you say, people are going to disagree on things like "we need government ran health care," as compared to "we need privatized healthcare." There will be disagreements on both sides, but it gets difficult to have a discussion with someone who starts with "Muslims should be exterminated," or "gays shouldn't be allowed to own homes." It's the context of the message along with the message itself that causes this difficulty. How do you discuss something rationally with people who take a wholly irrational stance against someone's biology, or someone who holds beliefs rooted in bigotry?
It's all about context. Context, context, context. Let me offer an example: fearing for your life if a black man shoves you on the ground and starts screaming at you is a reasonable reaction. Fearing for your life because a black man walks into a convenience store is not. So while there is a "both sides" that want to speak, it honestly depends on where the middle lies. In a situation such as that, the middle ground is simply "you cannot blame all black people for the actions of a few." The problem is that such a statement isn't a middle ground, it needs to be the default position because it is unreasonable and irrational to hold the belief that all black people are criminals.
So YES we need to engage with more compassion, more kindness, a strong willingness to listen, but at the same time, it is difficult to engage rationally and openly with people whose arguments are based in bigotry and xenophobia. We live in an age of misinformation, where people are fed tailored news programs that reinforce what they believe, and as a result we get people like @Dinner, who spews racism and bigotry, but seems (at least on the surface) to think he's being completely rational and not at all racist. How do you handle that? Compassion is key, in that you want people to come around to your point of view, but when that view is diametrically opposed, and the person themselves digging their heels in, engaging in personal denial, and turning the message back on everyone else, what else can be done? I don't hate Dinner, I don't even dislike him. It's just at this point I'm very direct with him because every other avenue has failed, and I'm quite desperate to pull him out of the deep water he's drowning in.
So people become frustrated, they become angry because people who believe entire groups of human beings need to be "neutralized" or "sterilized," or marginalized are very dangerous. I have dear friends who are gay, friends who are devout Muslims, people who are transgender, and I love all of them very much, and so when I see the President of the United States talking about the people I care about as if they're a nuisance, it does worry me, and I believe I have a right to be worried. Believe it or not, I WANT to draw Trump into a compassionate discussion, I want him to know that he is still considered a human being, worthy of being loved, but he's also going to need to stop what he's doing and listen to the people he is putting in harm's way.
I realize this is WAY too long for most people to read, but the issue isn't at all simple, because human beings are not simple. We're complex, and we all carry our own baggage with us as we deal with other human beings. I wish it were simple. I wish it were as simple as I try to live, which is just to love people, and to forgive as often as possible, to understand that we're all just trying our damnedest to navigate the very confusing world in which we live. The more we consider one another as actual people rather than ideologies, or statistics, the better off we'll be, but that is something that needs to be employed on a grand scale, and for the moment there's far too much profit in obfuscating such a message.
Okay, I've said my piece on it.
You see what I mean, @Lanzman ?
Now, now, they're trying so hard.
Let's take them at their word, and see how long this lasts.
1. There's a certain percentage of the trumpets that aren't ever coming back. Ridicule and derision go hand in hand with reason when addressing those people, not to win them over, but rather to expose them and stop reasonable people from buying into their nonsense. No amount of fact checking is going to turn Alex Jones into a reasonable guy.
2. "That only hardens them in their beliefs" feels true, but it's not. How did public opinion about slavery change? Or segregation? Or gay marriage? Or sexual harrassment? Part of it was reason and reassurance, but part of it was refusing to bigoted arguments as worthy of consideration. It was people calling out and criticizing unacceptable actions instead of ignoring or minimizing them. Shame and peer pressure are powerful motivators.
3. Civil War II would certainly be a pain in the ass. But appeasement is worse. Not for an older straight white cisgender guy like yourself, but for a shitload of vulnerable people.
Oh, and all this "Sure, what Trump is doing is awful, but stop resisting so actively and noisily! You're causing a scene and making people angry," argument makes the people using it sound like fucking rapists.
Separate names with a comma.