Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well if far left reich says it, it MUST be true. Right!
Robert Reich is one of the most Far Left, radicals in the public venue. I have seen him speak in person, and read a lot of his Communist rants. Ignore him. He isn't worth your time. He was Bill Clinton's Secretary of Labor. That's all you need to know about this clown. Plus he has short man's complex.
The difference between Democrats and Conservatives is this:
Democrat voters are good-hearted people who are ruled by an amoral Democrat / Progressive aristocracy that manipulates them to gain power and control of the nation, using the psychology of religion. The aristocracy makes followers feel part of the group of "good guys," and create causes & policies that make the followers feel good about themselves (regardless of the real effect), while actually serving to consolidate the power of the ruling Upper Class. For Democrats, the ends justify the means, and discrediting the other side via name-calling, false labels, and "straw man" arguments is how business is done. Like all religions, leaders are blindly followed and idolized regardless of what they do - Obama being the perfect example. And as in all religions, followers cannot respond to (or even hear) logic and facts, since adherence to the "holy" in-group is the only thing that matters. A key fault is that Democrat voters NEVER take into account human nature when pushing new programs -- they cannot see that paying people to sit at home and breed children will increase the percent of the population doing that, while decreasing the percent working for a living (and paying for the former). Similarly, they care deeply about eradicating the social stigma that used to be associated with single motherhood, while ignoring the fact that by doing so they are condemning countless additional children to a lifetime of poverty, crime and psychological pain resulting from being raised in a home without 2 parents.
Conservatives have their own religion (or non-religious philosophy) that is separate from their political views, and thus their support of various policies and causes depends on their principles, plus what effect passing a law or implementing a program will have in the real world, the costs vs benefits of adoption, analysis of the unintended consequences, etc. Since their political views are NOT their religion, and being part of the "in-group" is not their concern, they can typically look at proposals for government action with some objectivity. Most importantly, they incorporate an understanding of human nature into their decision to support or not support a new proposal. Conservatives do NOT support their leaders without reservation and blind themselves to their leaders' shortcomings - they will stop supporting a candidate as soon as they see bad behavior or a failure to do a good job representing the electorate.
I find posts like this fascinating, because I consider how very different are the messages you receive, that you believe this, as compared to the ones that I do.
All of the input I get from left leaning sources indicates the exact opposite, that Conservatives are the religious fanatics who continue to support their leaders no matter how corrupt or horrible they might be.
I think that there's probably a grain of truth in a manure pile of exaggeration, in what both sides of the political and ideological spectrum are being told.
You know what I find to be a very interesting experiment? Go find someone you know, who will let you do this, who is on the absolute opposite side from whatever you believe. If you are a Liberal, go find a Conservative, if you are a Conservative, go find a Liberal. Nicely ask if you could, without making any comments, and under their supervision, simply scroll down their Facebook for like 3 minutes, and read any news shares that seem interesting to you. No speaking, just reading.
I have done this, and it was astonishing. And she and I both thought we were getting at least mostly true information, but the stories were absolutely, completely different. While I didn't come away from it persuaded that her "side" was right, I did come away from it understanding far better why she believed the things that she did.
I am very flattered. I must live in your head 24/7! LOL!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilot1
Sure. No accountability. Just what Libs want. Utopian fantasies.
As far as college goes, the more libertarian voices we have on campuses the better. I know you're not very keen on blacks and gays so I doubt interacting with young people across a variety of backgrounds would be something you would enjoy, even at your advanced age in the Delaware Valley.
You know what I find to be a very interesting experiment? Go find someone you know, who will let you do this, who is on the absolute opposite side from whatever you believe. If you are a Liberal, go find a Conservative, if you are a Conservative, go find a Liberal. Nicely ask if you could, without making any comments, and under their supervision, simply scroll down their Facebook for like 3 minutes, and read any news shares that seem interesting to you. No speaking, just reading.
I have done this, and it was astonishing. And she and I both thought we were getting at least mostly true information, but the stories were absolutely, completely different. While I didn't come away from it persuaded that her "side" was right, I did come away from it understanding far better why she believed the things that she did.
This is what I think of when I hear the much maligned term "alternate facts". Two sides seeing the same story presented with an entirely different set of facts, both true yet painting a very different picture. Say a given issue or story has a list of ten things that are true about it. Points 1, 3, 6, 7 & 8 support the left's narrative and the rest support the right's. Then go to CNN and read a story that includes 1, 3, 6, 7 & 8 and either doesn't mention or severely downplays the others. Then go to Fox and read a story highlighting 2, 4, 5, 9 & 10 while ignoring or downplaying the others. Neither story is a lie yet both are completely different and usually contradictory.
Your experiment wouldn't work with me though. I am a more conservative/libertarian(small l) minded person but if you look at my Facebook feed you won't find any news except local human interest stories. You'll mostly see upcoming concert dates and various updates from aquarium hobbyist groups I belong to(shoutout to otto who recommended them to me). It won't really be too insightful as far as my political views are concerned. And good thing too. I don't want that Zuckerberg guy tracking my politics. I don't trust him with that info. "Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of social justice."
This is what I think of when I hear the much maligned term "alternate facts". Two sides seeing the same story presented with an entirely different set of facts, both true yet painting a very different picture. Say a given issue or story has a list of ten things that are true about it. Points 1, 3, 6, 7 & 8 support the left's narrative and the rest support the right's. Then go to CNN and read a story that includes 1, 3, 6, 7 & 8 and either doesn't mention or severely downplays the others. Then go to Fox and read a story highlighting 2, 4, 5, 9 & 10 while ignoring or downplaying the others. Neither story is a lie yet both are completely different and usually contradictory.
Your experiment wouldn't work with me though. I am a more conservative/libertarian(small l) minded person but if you look at my Facebook feed you won't find any news except local human interest stories. You'll mostly see upcoming concert dates and various updates from aquarium hobbyist groups I belong to(shoutout to otto who recommended them to me). It won't really be too insightful as far as my political views are concerned. And good thing too. I don't want that Zuckerberg guy tracking my politics. I don't trust him with that info. "Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of social justice."
That is really cool, that you have a Facebook that is non-political, it really sounds so much...cleaner.
I'm envious.
I think that mine is full of so much Liberal chatter because I've got a number of LGBTQ+ and activist friends, and they share a lot of that stuff. I look at some of it now and then but don't share it, unless it's funny. Like there was a photo of Trump visiting the UK and standing with the Queen, showing that ill-fitting suit he was wearing, and it said, "He looks like Bugs Bunny is about to ruin his opera." OK I'm not trying to be overly political if I reshare that, I'm just really appreciating the Looney Toons joke reference. I love Bugs Bunny.
What I'm really looking for, and what I share, on Facebook, is things I find amusing, cat and other animal videos, and like interesting art, science or architecture. Things that make me perk up and laugh or say, "Ooo, cool!!" Politics only rarely makes me laugh, and NEVER makes me say, "Ooo, cool!"
That is really cool, that you have a Facebook that is non-political, it really sounds so much...cleaner.
I'm envious.
I think that mine is full of so much Liberal chatter because I've got a number of LGBTQ+ and activist friends, and they share a lot of that stuff. I look at some of it now and then but don't share it, unless it's funny. Like there was a photo of Trump visiting the UK and standing with the Queen, showing that ill-fitting suit he was wearing, and it said, "He looks like Bugs Bunny is about to ruin his opera." OK I'm not trying to be overly political if I reshare that, I'm just really appreciating the Looney Toons joke reference. I love Bugs Bunny.
What I'm really looking for, and what I share, on Facebook, is things I find amusing, cat and other animal videos, and like interesting art, science or architecture. Things that make me perk up and laugh or say, "Ooo, cool!!" Politics only rarely makes me laugh, and NEVER makes me say, "Ooo, cool!"
One trick if you want less politics on your page is to block pages people share their political posts from. Not blocking your friend but blocking the pages they share. The elipses on the upper right corner of their posts give you a number of options in that regard. They tend to do most of their sharing from a few specific pages so before long you just won't see their political stuff anymore(or at least a lot less of it) but you'll still see their other stuff. I have a couple of friends who post a lot of politics, from both sides of the aisle. It did not take long before I was able to block their political stuff while maintaining my online friendship with them in other aspects.
I have my politics, as my posts here can testify to, but I don't like it leaking in to every aspect of my life.
This is what I think of when I hear the much maligned term "alternate facts". Two sides seeing the same story presented with an entirely different set of facts, both true yet painting a very different picture. Say a given issue or story has a list of ten things that are true about it. Points 1, 3, 6, 7 & 8 support the left's narrative and the rest support the right's. Then go to CNN and read a story that includes 1, 3, 6, 7 & 8 and either doesn't mention or severely downplays the others. Then go to Fox and read a story highlighting 2, 4, 5, 9 & 10 while ignoring or downplaying the others. Neither story is a lie yet both are completely different and usually contradictory.
It's the fable of the three blind men and the elephant. All three of the blind-men are technically correct, as their experience goes. But each has incomplete experience. And each has the temerity to draw global conclusions from merely local observations.
The lesson is that we should be wary of labeling one or another source as "liars", but also, that we should be skeptical of any claim of truth. Truth is rarely entirely unassailable. Falsehood is rarely entirely irredeemable tripe. Even so, we have to occasionally form conclusions. We can't live our lives in utter suspension of judgment, lest we be unable to buy food, drive on the road, do anything at work, or post on the internet. What I prefer is to render my judgments as being contingent. Even the sincerely-held beliefs are contingent on continued good-reason to keep believing them. Contradictions, once encountered, don't necessarily mean discarding my beliefs... but they do mean taking the matter seriously, and possibly revising.
Such situational assessment and reassessment is harder to do, if we're committed to group identity and group support. For example, if I am an American, and hold fellow Americans in higher regard than non-Americans, well, that's both good and bad. The good is improved reliance on one's fellows for support. The fact that somebody in Africa or Asia happens to agree with me, is only of theoretical value. But if I want to get help with changing my car's flat-tire, rapport with the local group is useful. So, the conservative viewpoint is not without merit.
However, consider this scenario. Our city has a struggling economy, that's largely held together because of a large military base. The base doesn't serve a useful military function. It could be dismantled, dispersed and relocated. That would save taxpayer money and ultimately improve national defense. But it would eviscerate the local economy, costing jobs and tax-receipt, ruining property-values. The "liberal" solution would be to close the base, regardless of the negative local impact. The "conservative" solution would be to retain the base, regardless of the negative national impact.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,604,784 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colorado Rambler
I STILL don't know what "SJW" means, since this is the only place I see that acronym and the people who use ir never explain what it means.
I also have my doubts about the antifa thing. As a Democrat I've never seen an antifa type show up at our weekly "Democrats in the Four Corners" meetings. The antifa is a small, extremely fascist group. Were the antifa gang ever to gain some real traction in national politics, I think they would be strongly rejected by both the Dems and the Repubs.
As for the original subject of this thread, I think the Democrats have an unfortunate tendency to bring a knife to a gunfight. We twist ourselves into pretzels trying to prove that we and our leaders are as pure as Sir Galahad. The Al Franken resignation is a case in point. Had Al been a Republican, the party faithful would have circled their wagons in support of their guy. It would be brushed off as "fake news" perpetuated by the "failing" NY Times. After all, look at the things Trump has gotten away with since the news came out that - in his own words - Trump loves to grab felines.
Trumpers like to imagine that they still hold core Republican beliefs when nothing could be further from the truth. They pretend that they're against big government and the nanny state. Well, maybe at some time in the past this might have been true. However, today's Republicans are enamoured of authoritarism as never before - especially when it's one of their own who is waving the scepter. Women having control over their own bodies and healthcare? Absolutely NOT! Jesus will make his will known through the antics of red state legislatures. A woman who is 13 and became pregnant thanks to the fact that she was raped by her uncle? Too bad. It was obviously the will of God as enforced by the Alabama state legislature. Your government in action. Yeah, right.
It stands for social justice warrior 😑
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
