Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism - Page 16
Register

User Tag List

Page 16 of 17 FirstFirst ... 6 12 13 14 15 16 17 LastLast
Results 751 to 800 of 803
  1. ISO #751

  2. ISO #752
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by Voss View Post
    Just to reiterate, (though it's unneeded, since Banana already did a good job here) :


    Mag, you "countered?" my post about my take on why nazi-ism is being associated to conservatism by talking about climate change. what??

    I would not expect these types of logic jumps on mafia site. If these logic jumps have been prevalent throughout this thread, props to the people diligently responding to theses posts.
    My point is that radicalization, while it exists on both sides, is worse on the left.

  3. ISO #753
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    You can’t criticize people who have nothing to do with Nazism if the mainstream left is very radicalized.

  4. ISO #754
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by oops_ur_dead View Post
    Riddle me this: If the Confederacy wasn't fascist, how come when you take the fascist national focus in Hearts of Iron IV you play as the Confederate States of America?
    Idk, when you play as Fascist Australia you become the Platypus Empire

  5. ISO #755

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    You can’t criticize people who have nothing to do with Nazism if the mainstream left is very radicalized.
    "Nothing to do with nazism"

    Yet nazis are right wingers, and their views very closely align with those of other right wingers.
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho

  6. ISO #756

  7. ISO #757

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    My point is that radicalization, while it exists on both sides, is worse on the left.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    Anyways this is a bit of a rant but my question is:
    What do you feel about the idea that right-wing liberalism has nothing to do with conservatism?
    A second question is, why is the media trying to paint right wingers as immoral nazis?
    so the answer to "why is the media painting right wingers as nazis" is "radicalizations are on both sides and the left is worse"? That's not an answer, thats fallacious distracting.

    It seems like your responses are more suited to a separate thread where you post the statement: "Left wing radicalizations are worse than right radicalizations for reasons x, y, z". One of those reasons being climate change or something. Another reason could be that rioting is better than nazi-ism.

    That is not what you asked, and you did nothing to disprove my answer, nor agreed with it. I think my reasoning is spot on.

    FM XVII: Bonney Jewelry (Journalist)
    FM XVIII: Kalou (Savage Godfather)
    FM XX: Joseph Bertrand (Marshall)
    FM XXI: USA (Escort)
    FM XV: Whiskey (Whore)

  8. ISO #758

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    You can’t criticize people who have nothing to do with Nazism if the mainstream left is very radicalized.
    Yes I can. Why wouldn't I be able to?

    So, I haven't seen reasonings support of the fact that right wingers have nothing to do with Nazi-ism. In this thread, I have seen evidence of the contrary.

    That aside, this thread is about right wing conservatism, not why right wing tactics are ok given that we "allow" left wing folks to get away with bad things. It's hard to talk about one without talking about the other, sure. But you can't justify bad things because the other side is doing bad things. Which you are clearly doing here.

    FM XVII: Bonney Jewelry (Journalist)
    FM XVIII: Kalou (Savage Godfather)
    FM XX: Joseph Bertrand (Marshall)
    FM XXI: USA (Escort)
    FM XV: Whiskey (Whore)

  9. ISO #759

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by Voss View Post
    Yes I can. Why wouldn't I be able to?

    So, I haven't seen reasonings support of the fact that right wingers have nothing to do with Nazi-ism. In this thread, I have seen evidence of the contrary.

    That aside, this thread is about right wing conservatism, not why right wing tactics are ok given that we "allow" left wing folks to get away with bad things. It's hard to talk about one without talking about the other, sure. But you can't justify bad things because the other side is doing bad things. Which you are clearly doing here.
    I envy you in that you haven't read the entire thread, of which about half was devoted to countering the argument that the Confederacy was bad because it was a racist state founded on slavery with the argument of "well the Union did bad things too", in absolute earnest.

  10. ISO #760

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by Voss View Post
    Yes I can. Why wouldn't I be able to?

    So, I haven't seen reasonings support of the fact that right wingers have nothing to do with Nazi-ism. In this thread, I have seen evidence of the contrary.

    That aside, this thread is about right wing conservatism, not why right wing tactics are ok given that we "allow" left wing folks to get away with bad things. It's hard to talk about one without talking about the other, sure. But you can't justify bad things because the other side is doing bad things. Which you are clearly doing here.
    He is quite good at deflecting like this. There's a reason why this thread has over 700 responses
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho

  11. ISO #761

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Silly example, but illustrates the point:

    Imagine me Voss, as a right wing politician. I go and do some cool speech that gets televised and that gets people to vote for me. Next this self proclaimed nazi, called Noss, does this crazy evil stunt, and gets in front of a camera and says "Woo nazi-ism! Woo Voss! Voss 2020". If I don't denounce this person, I'm implicitly allowing support of this group to be part of the non nazis that support me. Ergo, Nazis are now part of my right wing coalition.

    A moral Voss politician should denounce this, to put some distance. Then, when some reporter asks why Voss is or isn't a nazi due to his supporter's affiliation, Voss can say "nono, I don't stand for that and I denounced it back on March 3, 2016". or something.

    A more concrete example would be that Unite the Right Rally. If you're going to a rally, and there are people waving nazi flags, you should leave, and denounce that rally.

    What the left does or doesn't do badly has nothing to do with this percept that the right has. I'll say it again. It's fallacious reasoning.

    FM XVII: Bonney Jewelry (Journalist)
    FM XVIII: Kalou (Savage Godfather)
    FM XX: Joseph Bertrand (Marshall)
    FM XXI: USA (Escort)
    FM XV: Whiskey (Whore)

  12. ISO #762

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by oops_ur_dead View Post
    I envy you in that you haven't read the entire thread, of which about half was devoted to countering the argument that the Confederacy was bad because it was a racist state founded on slavery with the argument of "well the Union did bad things too", in absolute earnest.
    I can just fall back to "climate change is not a reason against right wing nazi-ism.

    I also might bow out of this thread. I don't want to have to keep typing nazi.

    FM XVII: Bonney Jewelry (Journalist)
    FM XVIII: Kalou (Savage Godfather)
    FM XX: Joseph Bertrand (Marshall)
    FM XXI: USA (Escort)
    FM XV: Whiskey (Whore)

  13. ISO #763

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by Voss View Post
    Silly example, but illustrates the point:

    Imagine me Voss, as a right wing politician. I go and do some cool speech that gets televised and that gets people to vote for me. Next this self proclaimed nazi, called Noss, does this crazy evil stunt, and gets in front of a camera and says "Woo nazi-ism! Woo Voss! Voss 2020". If I don't denounce this person, I'm implicitly allowing support of this group to be part of the non nazis that support me. Ergo, Nazis are now part of my right wing coalition.

    A moral Voss politician should denounce this, to put some distance. Then, when some reporter asks why Voss is or isn't a nazi due to his supporter's affiliation, Voss can say "nono, I don't stand for that and I denounced it back on March 3, 2016". or something.

    A more concrete example would be that Unite the Right Rally. If you're going to a rally, and there are people waving nazi flags, you should leave, and denounce that rally.

    What the left does or doesn't do badly has nothing to do with this percept that the right has. I'll say it again. It's fallacious reasoning.
    I like this example but I think there's the caveat that denouncing or clarifying certain things does not absolve you of responsibility for them in every case. For example, if you say "I think we should solve our problem with insert target group here once and for all" and then later "clarify" that you meant solving crime or poverty within their communities or something, it's a clear-cut case of dogwhistling and doesn't mean you're free from the consequences of the alternate interpretation.

  14. ISO #764
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    You’re acting like one situation like that is in any way comparable to the influence the media holds, and which they use to push radical left ideology. I see this reflected in the pervasive PC culture that is inescapable nowadays. Affirmative action (which is actually quite racist and doesn’t help people, by the way) is a good example. Bright students are being discriminated against on the basis of their ethnicity. It doesn’t help black students either, lowering entry standards doesn’t help anyone.

    The movements to dismantle statues, many of which have very little to do with racism or even slavery, is another aspect. What does Churchill have to do with racism or slavery? Sure he had some racist views, but the man literally thought against one of the most oppressive regimes in history and was a great philosemite. There are many other examples. What does Christopher Columbus have to do with anything? He discovered (or, rather, REdiscovered) the American continent. Nobody celebrates him for his role in the expansion of the Spanish Empire, which resulted in the near destruction of relatively advanced civilizations like the Aztecs, the Mayans (the Mayan League had already stopped existing by the time Europeans got there, but I still count it because the Mayan civilization itself was still extant at the time of his first landing), or the Incans.

    The constant, down-your-throat force feeding of PC-agenda - in movies, video games, books - is another good example. Do you know what effect gender ideology has on children? Because it ain’t a good one.

    Finally, the fundamentally racist, racial rhetoric the media likes to peddle around nowadays that pits (primarily) white vs black is another example of the radical left-wing ideology that is being peddled around. I think the left needs to deal with their crazy cousins before they can worry about the right. Hell, they’re the reason the radical right has seen a surge in popularity nowadays. The left really can’t adopt a moralistic tone now because they’re the reason for the mess we find ourselves in.

  15. ISO #765

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    You’re acting like one situation like that is in any way comparable to the influence the media holds, and which they use to push radical left ideology. I see this reflected in the pervasive PC culture that is inescapable nowadays. Affirmative action (which is actually quite racist and doesn’t help people, by the way) is a good example. Bright students are being discriminated against on the basis of their ethnicity. It doesn’t help black students either, lowering entry standards doesn’t help anyone.

    The movements to dismantle statues, many of which have very little to do with racism or even slavery, is another aspect. What does Churchill have to do with racism or slavery? Sure he had some racist views, but the man literally thought against one of the most oppressive regimes in history and was a great philosemite. There are many other examples. What does Christopher Columbus have to do with anything? He discovered (or, rather, REdiscovered) the American continent. Nobody celebrates him for his role in the expansion of the Spanish Empire, which resulted in the near destruction of relatively advanced civilizations like the Aztecs, the Mayans (the Mayan League had already stopped existing by the time Europeans got there, but I still count it because the Mayan civilization itself was still extant at the time of his first landing), or the Incans.

    The constant, down-your-throat force feeding of PC-agenda - in movies, video games, books - is another good example. Do you know what effect gender ideology has on children? Because it ain’t a good one.

    Finally, the fundamentally racist, racial rhetoric the media likes to peddle around nowadays that pits (primarily) white vs black is another example of the radical left-wing ideology that is being peddled around. I think the left needs to deal with their crazy cousins before they can worry about the right. Hell, they’re the reason the radical right has seen a surge in popularity nowadays. The left really can’t adopt a moralistic tone now because they’re the reason for the mess we find ourselves in.
    You're still deflecting and distracting lmao
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho

  16. ISO #766

  17. ISO #767
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by Voss View Post
    Yes I can. Why wouldn't I be able to?

    So, I haven't seen reasonings support of the fact that right wingers have nothing to do with Nazi-ism. In this thread, I have seen evidence of the contrary.

    That aside, this thread is about right wing conservatism, not why right wing tactics are ok given that we "allow" left wing folks to get away with bad things. It's hard to talk about one without talking about the other, sure. But you can't justify bad things because the other side is doing bad things. Which you are clearly doing here.
    I’m not doing that, and it definitely isn’t at all clear that that is what I’m doing, because I’m not doing that st all. There is nothing moral about painting right wingers as nazis when there is a far more pressing concern on the left with regards to radicalism. One could almost call it deflecting - it is definitely a form
    of willful blindness and one has to ask themselves - why? Well, there’s a few possible reasons. The first and simplest reason is that the media (and the politicians they support) are lying about their actual intent, and their baseless (and in some cases, scientifically wrong) ideologies are actually just a smokescreen that they don’t expect anyone to seriously believe in (although college students seem to be quite vulnerable to this). The overwhelming majority of right wingers aren’t nazis, and there is absolutely no evidence that they are. Nobody is defending racist policies here or saying we should enact any.

  18. ISO #768

  19. ISO #769

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    I’m not doing that, and it definitely isn’t at all clear that that is what I’m doing, because I’m not doing that st all. There is nothing moral about painting right wingers as nazis when there is a far more pressing concern on the left with regards to radicalism. One could almost call it deflecting - it is definitely a form
    of willful blindness and one has to ask themselves - why? Well, there’s a few possible reasons. The first and simplest reason is that the media (and the politicians they support) are lying about their actual intent, and their baseless (and in some cases, scientifically wrong) ideologies are actually just a smokescreen that they don’t expect anyone to seriously believe in (although college students seem to be quite vulnerable to this). The overwhelming majority of right wingers aren’t nazis, and there is absolutely no evidence that they are. Nobody is defending racist policies here or saying we should enact any.
    Yet 100% of nazis are right wingers. Which is where the association is made.
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho

  20. ISO #770
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Honestly, if you guys can’t have a mature discussion and address my points instead of calling what I’m saying and doing ‘deflecting, distracting’ or saying that I’m defending nazis (which is a very reprehensible thing to say to someone you purport to like), then you need to grow the hell up. Stop attacking my character and address the points I’m trying to make. I literally feel like I’m talking to a wall and every time I find something to reach to you, it’s like you stick it together imperfectly with duct tape, leaving me with a smaller hole which I can use to try to get to you. But then, that process continues indefinitely until there’s no holes left. I am done. Unless someone is willing to address the points I’m trying to make in a mature, adult, and constructive way, I am done posting in this thread. Good nye

  21. ISO #771

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    For example, the media reports that the "Unite the Right" rally is a nazi rally attended by nazi supporters

    People on the right call foul, claim the rally had lots of good people who were just defending a statue and say the media should stop "painting them as nazis"

    Yet the rally was literally a nazi rally attended by nazis

    There's no painting being done here. If you dont want to.be associated with nazis, its up to you to distance yourself from them. First step is to make sure you arent caught accidentally defending them like you have in this post.
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho

  22. ISO #772
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    You’re literally the only people I know who are ignoring the fact that the media and society at large is very left - leaning, and radical. Even leftists in real life agree with me in that something us seriously wrong. There’s nothing wrong with being a leftist, but radicalism is where I draw the line.

  23. ISO #773
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho View Post
    For example, the media reports that the "Unite the Right" rally is a nazi rally attended by nazi supporters

    People on the right call foul, claim the rally had lots of good people who were just defending a statue and say the media should stop "painting them as nazis"

    Yet the rally was literally a nazi rally attended by nazis

    There's no painting being done here. If you dont want to.be associated with nazis, its up to you to distance yourself from them. First step is to make sure you arent caught accidentally defending them like you have in this post.
    Yes. That is one scenario where the right was wrong. I didn’t say the right didn’t do stupid shit. I said the left did more of it, and you can’t deny that if you look at the state of the world today.

  24. ISO #774

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    Honestly, if you guys can’t have a mature discussion and address my points instead of calling what I’m saying and doing ‘deflecting, distracting’ or saying that I’m defending nazis (which is a very reprehensible thing to say to someone you purport to like), then you need to grow the hell up. Stop attacking my character and address the points I’m trying to make. I literally feel like I’m talking to a wall and every time I find something to reach to you, it’s like you stick it together imperfectly with duct tape, leaving me with a smaller hole which I can use to try to get to you. But then, that process continues indefinitely until there’s no holes left. I am done. Unless someone is willing to address the points I’m trying to make in a mature, adult, and constructive way, I am done posting in this thread. Good nye
    Galeon, we are attacking your argument, not your character. We are asking you to stay focused on the argument instead of changing the argument into something else time and time again. Your response every time about anything is "yeah well the left is worse because of these reasons" when that has nothing to do with the original argument.
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho

  25. ISO #775
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    No, saying I’m deflecting and distracting is a complicated ad hominem and it’s one I refuse to engage in, because honestly every time I look at this thread I hope that MAYBE someone will finally agree with something that I have to say. But I know it’s never happening, because the points are make are cordial reasoning, deflections, defenses of Nazism or god knows what else.

  26. ISO #776

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho View Post
    Galeon, we are attacking your argument, not your character. We are asking you to stay focused on the argument instead of changing the argument into something else time and time again. Your response every time about anything is "yeah well the left is worse because of these reasons" when that has nothing to do with the original argument.
    ^^

    FM XVII: Bonney Jewelry (Journalist)
    FM XVIII: Kalou (Savage Godfather)
    FM XX: Joseph Bertrand (Marshall)
    FM XXI: USA (Escort)
    FM XV: Whiskey (Whore)

  27. ISO #777

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    Yes. That is one scenario where the right was wrong. I didn’t say the right didn’t do stupid shit. I said the left did more of it, and you can’t deny that if you look at the state of the world today.
    Yet this thread isnt even about the left. Its about right wing liberalism vs right wing conservatism. And apparently wanting to understand why right wingers are often conflated nazis. And when provided with reasons ehy, you immediately go on the defensive. Was your intention the whole time just hoping to bait certain responses so that you could rant about the left? Or to actually have your original questions answered?
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho

  28. ISO #778
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    I’m literally arguing the left is more radical and that they have no business painting right wingers as nazis when there is absolutely no evidence of this being the case, and then you launch into whatsboutisms about something Trump said. Sure, I agree that he fucked up there but one wrong move doesn’t make one a nazi.

  29. ISO #779
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Honestly I don’t even remember the original purpose of this thread, except that I understood my own beliefs a lot better after reading some paper. We all went on tangents that had nothing to do with the thread.

  30. ISO #780

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    No, saying I’m deflecting and distracting is a complicated ad hominem and it’s one I refuse to engage in, because honestly every time I look at this thread I hope that MAYBE someone will finally agree with something that I have to say. But I know it’s never happening, because the points are make are cordial reasoning, deflections, defenses of Nazism or god knows what else.
    You claim ad hominem. I say that your arguments are red herrings. Thats not an ad hominem attack, its an attack directly at your argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    I’m literally arguing the left is more radical and that they have no business painting right wingers as nazis when there is absolutely no evidence of this being the case, and then you launch into whatsboutisms about something Trump said. Sure, I agree that he fucked up there but one wrong move doesn’t make one a nazi.
    Trumps words supporting a nazi rally are absolutely relevant to a topic about why right wingers are associated with nazis
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho

  31. ISO #781
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Dude saying that someone’s argument is a red herring OVERAND OVER is not logical. I know I’m not the most straightforward person and oftentimes I am wrong, but nobody can be THAT wrong.

  32. ISO #782
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    The only time someone has agreed with me in this thread or not attacked me is when I took the leftist side.

  33. ISO #783

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    I’m literally arguing the left is more radical and that they have no business painting right wingers as nazis when there is absolutely no evidence of this being the case, and then you launch into whatsboutisms about something Trump said. Sure, I agree that he fucked up there but one wrong move doesn’t make one a nazi.
    You have been provided many pages of evidence

    Every time, you turn it into "yeah but the left is worse because..."

    You say everyone else is using whataboutisms yet every comeback is tu quoque - you answer criticisms about the right with criticisms about the left
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho

  34. ISO #784

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Here's an example of how I'd respond in your fashion:

    The media and the left aren't that bad. Pedophiles are bad and they're the real evil here. They're people like Epstein and they're the scum of the earth bc they ruin children.

    Now, this has nothing to do with the left, or the right arguments, but I can peddle that in response to each one of your posts. Let me tell you, it doesn't feel great.

    FM XVII: Bonney Jewelry (Journalist)
    FM XVIII: Kalou (Savage Godfather)
    FM XX: Joseph Bertrand (Marshall)
    FM XXI: USA (Escort)
    FM XV: Whiskey (Whore)

  35. ISO #785
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    When you’re ready to discuss this without emotions getting in the way, let me know. Until then, I am done. This really is my last post on this thread.

  36. ISO #786

  37. ISO #787

  38. ISO #788

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    Dude saying that someone’s argument is a red herring OVERAND OVER is not logical. I know I’m not the most straightforward person and oftentimes I am wrong, but nobody can be THAT wrong.
    Yet you've done nothing to disprove that except provide more/different red herrings ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Every bit of evidence is discarded in favor of tu quoque arguments about the left

    How we get from "right wingers arent nazis" to arguments about climate change is confusing
    Last edited by BananaCucho; July 7th, 2020 at 07:49 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho

  39. ISO #789

  40. ISO #790

  41. ISO #791

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    The only time someone has agreed with me in this thread or not attacked me is when I took the leftist side.
    That's because...

    Left is Right
    Freedom is Slavery
    War is Peace



    Also, this thread has derailed so many times that nobody can reply to anything logically anymore xD
    Quote Originally Posted by The Lawyer View Post
    Besides your lamp and your refridgerators, do you find anyone else suspicious?
    Quote Originally Posted by oliverz144 View Post
    it looks like many, e.g. MM and lag, suffered under the influence of paopan. However there is a victim: frinckles. He left the path of rationality and fully dived into the parallel reality of baby shark, king shark, and soviet union pizzas.
    Spoiler : The meaning of life :

  42. ISO #792

  43. ISO #793

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    it's partly why i didn't read the entire thread. I just read the second post and responded to it. Then we started talking about climate change?

    FM XVII: Bonney Jewelry (Journalist)
    FM XVIII: Kalou (Savage Godfather)
    FM XX: Joseph Bertrand (Marshall)
    FM XXI: USA (Escort)
    FM XV: Whiskey (Whore)

  44. ISO #794

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    I maintain that the left is good because Donald Trump is a literal child rapist and I won't listen to any of your arguments until someone posts a 500 page essay refuting that claim.

    I once saw a segment on TYT that told me that right-wing governments around the world are forcing people to use racial slurs when referring to any non-white minority, which I now accept as fact.

  45. ISO #795

  46. ISO #796

  47. ISO #797

  48. ISO #798

  49. ISO #799

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by rumox View Post
    Never said the North wasn't evil in fact I have made several posts indicating the opposite. If you choose to interpret that I have the stance that the North is morally superior and can't be evil after I have said numerous times they weren't then that's on you, not me. I'm not here to argue every half degree, intricate variable of the civil war. I have said my purpose time and time again, you cannot separate the abolishment sentiment that predominantly came from Northern states from why the South seceded. I think I have said this at least 5 times now. Literally go read the thread again if you think I am propping the North up on some false moral platform.

    You and Ganelon can run off on tangents all you want but I will keep bringing up the point that Ganelon tries to stray from.
    This has good points. I really think there is very few points you have made that I felt were unfair. I should probably step back and consider your position more as I post. Call it a character flaw of mine.
    Quote Originally Posted by rumox View Post
    This entire discussion is 50x longer than it needs to be because it literally ran off into dozens of whataboutisms.
    I do get what your saying here but I very honestly dislike the idea that "whataboutism" is treated like a logical fallacy. It basically allows for an argument to ignore context/circumstance when convenient and frame the other persons comments as a red herring. If what I said is erroneous its a red herring. If its not then "whataboutism" is just a crappy way to exclude conversation that detracts from your desired position. It creates the vague direction that someone is talking about 'other stuff' to deflate or support some other unspoken position which is one really ugly logic jump allowing misrepresentation on an extreme level.

    Maybe its just our mafia roots considering the counter train strategy but that line allows for an insane amount of bias while attempting to command the consideration of a logical fallacy and I just don't care for it.
    Intellectual growth comes from discussions, not arguments. If you are unwilling to change your position and hear the other persons side you are closed minded and wasting your time.
    If you can not clearly explain what the other sides reasoning is you can not disagree with their position because you do not understand it.

  50. ISO #800

    Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism

    Quote Originally Posted by oops_ur_dead View Post
    I think that intent, in a large portion of situations, is relatively constant. If you reduce it, most actions people take are done to benefit themselves or their lineage, at least to their own knowledge. Also in general I'm definitely a pragmatist, and I think sitting around philosophizing about intent and even morality of actions depending on one's ulterior motives is absolutely useless. I think someone's ulterior motives in taking an action, insofar as those ulterior motives don't manifest themselves as malicious actions down the line, don't matter at all.

    That's why I don't particularly care if Lincoln actually wanted to free the slaves or if he just wanted to use the slaves as a political tool against the south, because the end result was the same. The only reason I would care is if I had reason to believe that his motives one way or another resulted in a less favourable situation for black people in the US than would have otherwise happened.

    Keep in mind I'm not denying that motives are entirely irrelevant, to the extent that these motives might result in future underhanded actions. For example, someone giving a donation might want something out of it and attach strings to the donation, versus someone just donating out of the good of their heart. But again, this comes down to difference in actions, and to me it's useless to consider motives if the end result is exactly the same. This is also why murder and manslaughter deserve to be different crimes; someone who killed someone with intent has a different predisposition to commit more crimes than someone who killed someone unintentionally, and they should be treated differently based on that, whether in terms of future support or protecting society from them.



    I'm not really trying to paint the Union as moral, I just don't think that the Union's actions are in any way a reflection of what the Confederacy was. The Confederacy wanted to keep slaves and was founded on a cornerstone of racism, which is in stark contrast with the Union, which while also racist for many years also didn't have racism codified as a central belief. I don't think honouring Confederate symbols and figures is something that people should protect because of what the Confederacy represented. It's impossible to disentangle those ideas and symbols from slavery and racism.

    The Union did a lot of bad stuff during the war and they absolutely perpetrated racism, including systematic racism, for many years. But I really don't give a shit because that barely has anything to do with my original point.

    I understand the Union was majority Republican. I also understand that political parties change over many years. To my understanding, the Republican party was respectable and generally more aligned with my beliefs until Nixon's presidency.
    This makes a lot of sense to me in a lot of ways.

    -edit
    If your interested I think this piece does quite a bit to outline true systemic issues in the US law with great respect to intention and morality
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wl6yXjdMlHI
    Last edited by Helz; July 9th, 2020 at 11:51 PM.
    Intellectual growth comes from discussions, not arguments. If you are unwilling to change your position and hear the other persons side you are closed minded and wasting your time.
    If you can not clearly explain what the other sides reasoning is you can not disagree with their position because you do not understand it.

 

 

Members who have read this thread: 1

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •