Search Results - SC2 Mafia
Register

Search:

Type: Posts; User: yzb25

Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 4

Search: Search took 0.12 seconds.

  1. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    "dodging the discussion" is the wrong phrasing. I didn't mean to imply you were being dishonest or something.
  2. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by rumox View Post
    Kind of dodging the discussion? What discussion? That people can be moral or immoral with marriage and divorce? No shit, there is no discussion to be had there. People can do fucked up shit we all get that. Ganelon said divorce is immoral. Not only is that an explosive hill to stand on, it's factually wrong even considering the institutes stance on it that he was advocating for. I'm not here to argue how people can be moral or immoral with marriage, I was here to point out saying divorce is immoral is retarded.

    Yzb25, is divorce immoral?
    No, but it's like not recycling. When it happens a lot it makes the world worse.
  3. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    To be clear, it's not like I look down my nose at individuals who get divorces. It's their life to live and it's not my place to judge them. Even if I wanted to, I couldn't possibly fully know their circumstances. But acting like marriage and divorce are moral choices that can be made in a solely individualistic context strikes me as a little off.
  4. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    The whole point of marriage is that a serious effort is made to maintain the relationship following the marriage. Various laws / benefits can only be feasibly applied to married couples on this basis. If the institution of marriage becomes sufficiently redundant, many of these laws would become redundant too. People who get married and divorce a week later are undermining the institution of marriage and are showing a lack of respect. Of course, the person you marry may spontaneously reveal themselves as a psychopathic abuser after 3 days and then you're fully justified in leaving them =P. However, you're kind of dodging the discussion by insisting that "the actions or landscape determine the morality of it" - that applies to literally every decision anyone ever makes.
  5. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    I donít really see that as oppression. Some degree of authority is necessary. A country canít survive if its constituent parts can leave whenever they want. It makes for a chaotic environment. The other issue is that it would be quite complex a matter, too. The constituent part could then blackmail the federal government into doing something they wanted threatening to leave if they didnít get what they wanted. Also, the state could then just leave if the Union decided to go to war with a neighbor and thus be spared from the consequences resulting from that, and could even sign a separate treaty with the offending nation, only to rejoin once hostilities ended. Some degree of cohesion is important.

    Look at the early US. It was essentially a confederation. The national government was so weak they basically couldnít collect taxes unless the individual states agreed to, and they didnít really have a federal standing army either.
    As I said, if they could check in or check out whenever they like that'd be a problem too. But you're kind of misinterpreting me. I gave my own country as an example of a system closer to "fair".
  6. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    I donít really see that as oppression. Some degree of authority is necessary.
    Imagine how much less incentivized the central government is to look after the interests of their minority states when all they can do is try to swing their minority voting power. In all fairness, I believe the electoral college is deliberately designed to give disproportionate weight to the south, but the conversation seems to have become more general anyway. Furthermore, autonomy is never a guaranteed blessing if the central government maintains absolute authority. Just look at what happened in Jammu and Kashmir.

    Again, I'd rather get away from the word "oppression" because that conjures up rather dramatic images. I dunno, maybe it'd be more productive to start with you clarifying how you distinguish a "declaration of independence" from a "failed rebellion". Does the state have to receive a certain degree of mistreatment from the central government before it's permitted to think about independence? How do you determine how much mistreatment is enough?
  7. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    Individuals are allowed to leave, allowed to move from state to state or even to leave the supranational region entirely. The rights of the individual are more important than the rights of the states in my view, and the individual was most certainly not oppressed in the South; at least, not the ones who voted for secession.
    I mean, people associate "oppressed" with much more hardcore shit. I'd rather use the phrase "overly authoritarian", or something to that effect. But that doesn't fundamentally change the point.

    That said, there were lots of actually-oppressive governments that were happy for you to fuck off if you didn't like how they handled their shit. That's not really fair to expect people to abandon their homeland for what they should be entitled to and is thus also besides the point.
  8. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    Pretty much every administrative division and/or state is oppressed then.
    ...

    YES
  9. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    Of course not, but I donít see the Confederate as being Ďoppressedí by the north. On the contrary, they were highly autonomous (as states are wont to be), and were allowed to keep slavery as an institution; they were represented in Congress, and had the right to participate in presidential elections. The only thing they werenít allowed to do is leave.
    B U T T H A T ' S T H E M O S T I M P O R T A N T T H I N G .
  10. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by deathworlds View Post
    The Confederacy ceased to be our fellow countrymen when they denounced the United States and its federal government.
    They literally were a hostile nation wtf bro, and to answer yzb never did I say that the Confederacy was bad ONLY because they rebelled. They kept and tried to defend an institution that's barely a step above genocide in the "things you can do to a population moral ladder". That alone is enough to declare war in my humble opinion, at least in an pre nuclear era
    I'm not saying you said that. I believe they were bad ONLY because they were founded upon keeping slaves, and I'm saying you at least partially see them as bad for "rebelling" (attempting to secede). Am I wrong about that?
  11. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    It would be chaotic if they could check in or check out whenever they like, but permitting military force to keep them in line is very authoritarian. I think the EU has the right balance. Trying to leave is bureaucratic hell, but nevertheless nominally permitted at the very least. And the UK now permits Scotland to vote for independence. But it's made sharply clear that if they leave, they won't be allowed to come back. And the vote is held rarely.
  12. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    If they do, the whole concept of government breaks down.
    Sorry is this supposed to be a counter argument? :P

    Lol but seriously, it's a shame that the strength of the central government erodes, but that doesn't entitle them to rule over people who reject them. That's fundamentally undemocratic. I don't think "the whole concept of government breaks down". The minority will just go form their own government.

    Would this put you on the side of England who ruthlessly crushed Ireland's and Scotland's numerous attempts to leave?
  13. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    I'm kind of mystified that y'all seem to view declaring secession as intrinsically bad. I thought we were in agreement that the confederacy was bad because they were founded primarily to hold onto slavery, whether driven by economics and ideology or pure ideology is besides the point. Forcing groups to remain part of a state on the other hand is fundamentally oppressive. And I'm willing to bet the union didn't give a shit about slaves lol.
  14. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Helz View Post
    I honestly did not have any 'message' there. I just liked that thought and had never taken a moment to think about the purpose of a landmark in relation to the events/culture as seen through time. I do kinda like the idea of landmarks being created but then having to survive through time to earn their place as something that gives them value. A sort of 'trial by time' that weeds out those unworthy of existing kinda thing.

    On your reply though I don't really care for the mix of politics and art. But at the same time I hate politics in general. Its like the practice of manipulating populations to get power and using that power for your personal interest without getting caught. I think its really disgusting that this is how we function as a species but thats just my take on politics.
    Ah, fair enough. That's quite a romantic thought, actually.

    That makes sense, but why on earth are you posting in the thread then? :P
  15. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    Why has this issue (the statues) become so polarizing lately? Ten years ago it wasnít in the public eye - not to this extent. What changed?
    I am not talking about the Confederacy because this thread shows nothing good can come from this topic.

    Furthermore, doesnít anyone else feel lIke politics has become much more polarized in the last 5 years or so? I canít recall a year that was as polarized as this. I guess in retrospect Bushís presidency was also controversial, although that is for some understandable reasons.
    The economy is going to shit - in some ways we never truly recovered from the 2008 recession. A bunch of corrupt goons are in charge, and our society is changing faster than it ever has before, and the internet has profoundly changed how people acquire information and, by extension, how politicians are incentivized to behave. Then on top of all that we now have to deal with coronavirus. That said, the politics of this period of time isn't particularly polarizing in the grand scheme of things... yet...

    There have always been people who had a problem with these statues. People are just getting angrier about the fact our system has become so stagnant we can't even get rid of a fucking statue any more without a full on riot lol.
  16. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Helz View Post
    I have never even considered this. Is the objective of a landmark to preserve the opinion held at its time of creation or is it more important to preserve current ideology? Is preserving ideology only ok when it corresponds with current ideology? Im not sure which way is best but maybe its some combination that gives value to old monuments in that they were important enough at the time of their creation to be erected while also moral enough to survive the years of changing views.

    I think someone said it earlier but its probably worth noting neither qualifys for the preservation of most southern civil war statues as that the greater number of them were erected long after the civil war as a push against rights movements.
    You're making this much more abstract than is appropriate. I'm not saying that "preserving ideology is only ok when it corresponds with the current ideology". Statues of political figures in public spaces are maintained using taxes from the local citizens and those spaces are used and enjoyed by the local citizens. It's rather unfair if a large swathe of the citizens are paying taxes to put up with a statue of a political figure in a public space who is, by modern moral standards, an asshole. That's very different from believing "preserving ideology is only ok when it corresponds with the current ideology". I'm not suggesting we break into people's houses to destroy whatever statues society currently considers racist.

    I've read this several times and still may not fully understand what you're saying, but I think you're suggesting that these statues have historical and cultural value and the decision of whether they're kept up or taken down shouldn't be made solely by examining whether the message of the statue is moral by current standards. If the statue was in a museum or was on someone's private property, I'd say "fair enough". However, this is a statue of a political figure paid for by taxes in a public space. Its existence is deeply political and viewing it simply like a piece of art is naiive. Though you perhaps view my perspective as rather cold.

    p;edit both paragraphs are replying to your first paragraph, to be clear
  17. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Intentionally or unintentionally, Helz makes an excellent argument for why we should tear down the Union statues as well. This isn't about whether these people were "evil" because of their racism. This is about the fact that figures you dedicate larger than life statues to can and should reflect the ideals of the CURRENT society, rather than the ideals of some society 100s of years ago. I don't know why "should we put up statues of racist people that were contemporary heroes?" needs to be conflated with "are they bad because they were racist in a society where everyone was racist?". You can be a moral relativist and still oppose the existence of these statues.

    But I think it's important to remember that we are always encouraged to spend endless amounts of time talking about the symbolism like the flags and the statues rather than the concrete things we can do to combat modern social issues like ending the drug war or ending for profit policing.
  18. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Helz View Post
    I would say Nah. I read the first 2 pages, skiped to participate, then felt guilty and read up... I want that portion of my life back >.<
    I've almost caught up bb
  19. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Worth reading or nah?
  20. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Hmm still at it I see
  21. ►►Re: twitch user suing the platform over suggestive content put out by women◄◄

    Woah woah woah hold up you can get necrosis from masturbating too much??? What kind of sick world is this
  22. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    Right. How about we put up a statue of Georgi Zhukov? I have absolutely no problem with that. Just not Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Hitler. None of them deserve statues. Generals are completely different , however. Itís really not as if Southern culture is strictly about racism; even back then it wasnít. I donít particularly like it myself as itís a bit backward in my eyes, but hey, if they want to be proud of their history sure. Nobody is exalting the virtues of slavery, apart from the white nationalists. Really nothing wrong with Southern culture, and itís jot all racist
    Sorry I hadn't read the earlier post you already made when I said this. Your perspective is consistent to be fair, I just don't see why we need to pedestalize any Soviet officials lol

    Rommel and Zhukov afaik didn't take part in any of their regime's atrocities, but Robert Lee did own slaves, nor did he treat them very well.

    https://gyazo.com/053e447ecd0430f2befa3fd3acf85278
  23. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    I'm not intentionally trying to sound like I'm strawmanning you I'm trying to make sense of where you draw the line. Putting up a statue of someone suggests you pedestalize them as an ideal. Or at least that's what I thought. That's why we don't put up statues of people that happen to have historical prominence but are terrible people, right?
  24. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    A statue of Stalin is completely different. Stalin killed millions; Robert Lee didnít.
    Yeah, Stalin was much worse. I'm trying to guage how bad the man of the statue needs to be to justify being taken down in your eyes. Robert Lee fought for the preservation of slavery, but didn't personally own millions of slaves. Perhaps you'd be alright with some prominent Soviet general who didn't directly order the deaths of millions but was a nonetheless heroic general who defended Stalin's rule? If Stalin only enslaved millions of people rather than killing them would it be alright to put up a statue of Stalin then?
  25. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    It rose to prominence during the Civil War; the actual Confederate flag was too similar to the US flag.
    https://gyazo.com/2a93da126f83dc851086411ae74945fe

    idk if this is reliable but I've heard it elsewhere... I can't recall a more reliable source right now
  26. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    Two local groups who support preserving the Lee statue also condemned Saturday's protests.
    "We remain committed to preserving the Robert E. Lee Monument in its park through the legal process in the courts because of its historic and artistic value," said a group called Save the Robert E. Lee Statue. "We soundly and completely reject racism, white supremacy, and any other identity-based groups that preach division and hate no matter which side of the issue they happen to support."










    Where would you draw the line? Would you keep up a statue of Joseph Stalin in a public square, even if some of the taxpayers contributing to looking after that statue are descendants of refugees who fled from Stalinism? That statue would also certainly have historical and, potentially, artistic value.
  27. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    I remember hearing the confederate flag in common use today isn't the original flag commonly used during the short-lived 5 year long confederacy. It's a flag that largely rose to prominence when it was flown as a middle finger to the civil rights movement.
  28. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by oops_ur_dead View Post
    The Canada pronoun law hit the country hard. I remember the one time I was going to Tim Hortons with my buddy, and they only added one cream instead of two to his coffee. Dude started bitching about it, and without thinking, I said "dude stop being such a wom-". Before I could even get the word out, the Pronoun Police had stopped right next to me and withdrew their guns, and screamed at me to get on the ground for misgendering someone who had clearly identified themselves as he/him as per the new mandatory pronoun name tags. Obviously, misgendering someone carries a penalty of immediate summary execution, so I started praying (to a non-denominational god, of course, as all deities except for Allah had been banned 2 years prior). Then, out of nowhere, both cops got run over by a mystery car. The door opened, and it was none other than Jordan Peterson, come to personally save me from tyranny. He told me to hop in and offered me a Xanax, then we drove off into the sunset to go trigger more college students.
    HAHAHAHAHAH
  29. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    They are a minority all right, but I do think theyíre very influential...
    What tangible policies have these 19yo dyed-hair college kids managed to pass? Don't you dare mention that Canadian pronoun law :P
  30. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    Why would they need to satisfy the mob of the day if the mob of the day werenít in favour of their views?
    And I donít think they are. I think the silent majority doesnít care about the BS thatís being pushed rn.
    PR is extremely important.
  31. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    The perception of them is many times greater than their actual size. Everyone has seen that clip of the red-haired feminist woman from a few years back being super rude on camera. That means lots of people have now had an "SJW experience" even though only one SJW is behind that moment.
  32. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    To be clear I'm not trying to say "SJW"s don't exist". I'm saying they are a tiny minority of people with very little actual power and the sway they seem to hold over companies amounts to detatched companies pandering to whatever mob they see for PR. When "woke movies" or "woke video games" are made, it's meaningless symbolism that your outlets convince you is part of a grand cultural takeover rather than companies being goofy.
  33. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    The overwhelming majority of people, I suspect, feel as I do. Thereís a reason Fox News and conservative out lets tend to have high likes on YT, for instance, compared to CNN, say.

    And itís not like this data is based solely off of FoxNews either: look at what GitHub is doing. Look at what Harvard is doing, look at what Cambridge is doing; look at what the various companies in the game industry are doing right now. Look at the comments political leaders in America (many of them Republican, many of them Democrat) are making on the George Floyd protests/riots. Look at how people are getting banned for not being left. Look at how Twitter is trying to censor Trump. Look at how coronavirus videos criticizing the lockdown are being taken down from YouTube. Look at how Trumpís rallies are attacked as Ďimmoralí because they endanger public safety, when the riots were actually given the geeen light by health experts because apparently racial inequality is a huge health risk.

    Look at how in Canada a prominent professor went to a University to talk about free speech and was attacked by a mob of mindless students who proceeded to call him a Ďtransphobic piece of shití.

    Its really not just Fox News lol.
    Dude these companies literally do whatever they need to satisfy the twitter mob of the day. Some right wing outlet published a video showing some CNN figure claiming to be a democratic socialist. The guy got fired within days. Some lady missing an arm got kicked off the BBC because parents were complaining she "was scaring their children". in the US, you could legally fire someone for being LGBTQ+ until very recently. The outlets you see concentrate on the cases that suit your ideology.

    Also, you can't use the likes on a youtube video to measure the cultural zeitgeist. The like/dislike suffers from a massive selection bias. Right wing people are happy with Fox News' content. No self-respecting leftist (or anyone) is happy with the bullshit CNN is pedalling. All of CNN's political videos get heavily disliked, irrespective of whether they're about economics or ideology, afaik.
  34. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    My real issue to give you an example of what Iím talking about is the idea that white people should feel responsible for slavery - in and of itself, an okay idea but then you get into the issue of blaming ALL white people for something that happened ages back and that most had nothing to do with. I think this is a form of class war disguised as race war, because the Ďoppressedíin this new narrative are ethnic minorities with low average income. You almost never see the media talking about Asians for instance, nor about Jews, even though a) they were LITERALLY massacred not even a century ago and b) itís mostly whites who did that, and Antisemitism was extremely popular in the west until the Second World War.
    bro how many left wing people "blame white people for slavery". How many left wing people have you spoken to on here or in real life who actually think that? How many white people do you think would tick yes if polled on the question "do you blame yourself for the atlantic slave trade?"
  35. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by yzb25 View Post
    The toppling foreign regimes was about the government, though the defense industry and oil industry indirectly contribute to that through lobbying. When I said "political propaganda" I was specifically thinking of all the propaganda the Koch Brothers funds discrediting climate change. Though more broadly anyone who pours lots of money into mainstream media company's pockets through ad revenue is contributing "political propaganda". Mainstream media outlets are incentivized not to question their economic power due to the source of their ad revenue.

    Just look out how soft all the left wing media outlets were on Michael Bloomberg, a racist, sexist oligarch who fundamentally opposes everything anyone remotely left wing stands for. They gave him a total free pass because he was 10s of millions into their pockets by paying for his political ads.
    I mean it's not only right-wing outlets funding political propaganda. That's just my bias showing. I oppose left wing billionnaires funding ads raising awareness for climate change. I just don't want oligarchs controlling our discourse lol
  36. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    They probably do for the most part, yes, although I cannot attest to that. Which companies and how many actually do the things you’ve accused them of?
    The toppling foreign regimes was about the government, though the defense industry and oil industry indirectly contribute to that through lobbying. When I said "political propaganda" I was specifically thinking of all the propaganda the Koch Brothers funds discrediting climate change. Though more broadly anyone who pours lots of money into mainstream media company's pockets through ad revenue is contributing "political propaganda". Mainstream media outlets are incentivized not to question economic power due to the source of their ad revenue.

    Just look out how soft all the left wing media outlets were on Michael Bloomberg, a racist, sexist oligarch who fundamentally opposes everything anyone remotely left wing stands for. They gave him a total free pass because he put 10s of millions into their pockets by paying for his political ads.
  37. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    I’d have to assume that MANY people are lying about what’s happening and I can’t imagine that being the case. It would be extremely complicated;
    It's not. The individual disseminators of information overlook the misinformation or logic jumps they're spreading because they still believe their ideology is correct as a whole and assume others in their ideology are telling the truth. The vast majority of consumers of the disinformation do not need to be involved in any misinformation, they're just passing on what they heard. This is how massive groups of people espousing comically wrong statements come to fruition.

    Has Fox News ever shown you actual polling data of how many people think "The West is evil" or "The West is White Supremacist"? Of course not.
  38. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    Iím not sure what that solves.
    This will be a very insensitive thing to say, (remember Iím not rich by any stretch of the imagination, Iím actually rather poor rn), but: I donít think that people who donít know what to do with money should be give any money. Free healthcare, schooling etc is a good idea, but only up to s point. I donít think having a minimum wage is a good idea.
    Yeah and you think those people getting billions know what the hell to do with that either? The government and the mega-wealthy are always pedalling the notion that they know best, when time and time again they've demonstrated they do not. Some people may spend some of their wage on narcotics and shit, but they would still overall spend that money better than some massive institution actively funding political propaganda or toppling foreign regimes.
  39. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    Itís just, I donít know maybe Iím just too paranoid, but donít you guys feel like there is a legitimate issue with how the moderate right is being attacked now, and specially how the West is being attacked? This white guilt narrative is a huge part of that. The idea that the west is a patriarchy is one, too.
    We don't have that feeling because we don't watch Fox News lmao. They're a partisan hack network bent on convincing their viewers that the "other side" hates them and wants to destroy their way of life. They're constantly caught twisting what people say and do, editing pictures and outright lying. MSNBC and CNN are the same except more PC.
  40. Replies
    681
    Views
    6,773

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperJack View Post
    Why are you all having the same arguements but starting at different points of the arguement.

    Can we just skip a couple of chapters like nation health a good idea and stuff?
    yes... pls can we tax the rich billionnaires just a little . I just want them to pay taxes too... I love Bill Gates he's such a GOOD PERSON for GIVING all that money FOR FREE but pls I just want him to pay his taxes... Why is this so hard DX

    And maybe fine them of all of their wealth for tax-evading their entire lives, selling out our country's economies to hire slaves abroad and spitting in the face of society? :3

    Oh wait hold on they released a statement declaring racism is bad awwh wow they're so kind and brave nvm then I guess..
  41. ►►Re: if you do not do the full version of this political quiz and post the results, you have no balls◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by secondpassing View Post
    :]
    intrigue intensifies
  42. ►►Re: if you do not do the full version of this political quiz and post the results, you have no balls◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by yzb25 View Post
    Well, at the very least, they can present drastically different natures of god to the point where they only seem to nominally refer to the same god.
    Either way, as Ganelon said, the representation of God is so different in these different religious texts that it justifies referring to the "Christian god" or "Muslim god" regardless of whether you technically deem that to be philosophically correct.
  43. ►►Re: if you do not do the full version of this political quiz and post the results, you have no balls◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by aamirus View Post
    The god of judaism, Christianity, and Islam is the exact same god
    Well, at the very least, they can present drastically different natures of god to the point where they only seem to nominally refer to the same god.
  44. ►►Re: if you do not do the full version of this political quiz and post the results, you have no balls◄◄

    My new theological stance is countably infinite agnosticism, and frankly I implore the rest of you to join me. There really is no evidence to the contrary, and logically the burden of proof is on the rest of you to convince me otherwise.
  45. ►►Re: if you do not do the full version of this political quiz and post the results, you have no balls◄◄

    We define an individual to be countably infinitely agnostic iff. for all n they do not hold any belief over the nth order belief
  46. ►►Re: if you do not do the full version of this political quiz and post the results, you have no balls◄◄

    Who said being agnostic is neutral? Believing that you don't believe either way is surely a form of belief!

    Personally, I'm a third order agnostic. Which means I don't hold any belief over whether I don't hold any belief over whether I don't hold any belief!
  47. ►►Re: if you do not do the full version of this political quiz and post the results, you have no balls◄◄

    Yeah in practice the left/right divide goes far beyond economics lol.

    I think the alliances question is a nod to shit like NATO or the GCC. Alliances are always about much more than "let's not attack eachother lol". I can imagine how someone may oppose joining alliances in principle, though some countries really don't get the privilege of choosing not to pick a side.
  48. Replies
    52
    Views
    1,558

    ►►Re: I challenge all Atheists to answer this question.◄◄

    Tbh, I hear a lot of (maybe most) atheists tout very cynical views on why religion exists or its origins i.e. it was made up to explain things or it was made up to try and control people. Noone can really say for sure how or where religion comes from, but I find it very unlikely it went like that. SJ's video is amusing but misrepresentative imo. I think these narrow explanations stem from the fact most atheists view religion as a collection of empirical statements. However, religious people don't necessarily view their religion that way, nor have they necessarily ever. I'm not simply asserting that they blindly believe these things out of emotion, either. That again is still viewing it in terms of empirical statements.

    Faith isn't an assertion of some statement or an emotional thing. It's more like a mood. If statements are the foreground objects in a painting, and the colours are the emotions, then faith is like the background. Whether you believe or not affects how you contextualize everything in the foreground without fundamentally changing the items in the foreground. Though it has no effect on the objects of the foreground, it totally changes the painting. I think the loss of faith in our society has less to do with what we've learnt about the foreground objects and more how we contextualize those objects.

    this video is okay https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJZ8ib93vSk

    p;edit Well, there are a lot of empirical statements in religion too I guess lol. I guess I'm trying to say there's more to it than just a collection of empirical statements. And "faith" doesn't represent some kind of axiomatic belief.
  49. Replies
    4
    Views
    172

    ►►Re: Parallels in interrogation and Mafia◄◄

    I'd never heard of Eric Maddox. He sounds like a fascinating character.

    I think the parallel between RL interrogation and FM does hold some genuine merit. Not just for the psychology of the interrogated, but also the psychology of the interrogator. This may be more relevant to the "pour water down someone's throat" kind of interrogation, but I think an amateur interrogator often ends up just finding the information they want to find and focusing on pointing out superficial lies/contradictions/slips and stuff. There's a strong parallel between that and bad tunnels in FM.
  50. ►►Re: if you do not do the full version of this political quiz and post the results, you have no balls◄◄

    I don't know how I feel about the specific labels but it's drawing out a lot of distinctions in people's worldviews tbf
Results 1 to 50 of 500
Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 4