The Bible talks about morals and the spiritual experience of relationship to the divine as two very different and separate things. If someone says that morals only come from deity, and then recommends the Christian god as the source, just know that this individual does not understand the book they are talking about. They are fundamentally uninformed, ignorant, or deeply misinformed about the Bible and Christianity and should not be relied on as an authoritative source.
Additionally, your consideration of the spiritual life is just as misinformed as the person who says that morals only come from deity. The fundamental concept of Christianity is that at the moment of belief there is no longer any punishment, and all rewards are imputed to the believer at that instant as well. All the work is done by the divine, not by man. What this arrangement provides is not morality, but an experience of life that is beyond obsessive preoccupation with self condemnation, doubt, and negative self reference.
By contrast, one can be incredibly moral and base that morality on the constant observation of what is wrong, both inside themselves and in the observed actions of others. This leads to the holier-than-thou syndrome that so puts others off. It is evident in everything from virtue signaling to self righteousness in religious people. In addition, morality can be closely related to empathy, understanding, and initiative. This is where you see true charity, anonymous giving, compassion, etc. Neither of these are the spiritual life.
In contrast, the spiritual life removes the problem of human fallibility as a reference point and replaces it with the knowledge that there is only one frame of reference from which all human experience and endeavors can be judged perfectly, and the consciousness that occupies that frame of reference has declared you free, accepts you fully as you are, loves you completely, and will provide for you in every moment of life. Free from condemnation, free from the debts created by your imperfection, from your lack of sight, and your human fallibility, accepted in spite of your constant self recrimination, by a being of infinite purity and sight, and provided for, supported, and loved in every moment of life. This experience of life means that the individual comes from a place of gratitude, recognition, and understanding of the divine, breathing in infinite blessing from the divine, and breathing out unadulterated reflection of that blessing toward mankind. The results may look the same, however it is the experience of life for the spiritual practitioner that is fundamentally different.
Sure, it's a lens. Does it mean anything, in a cosmic sense? No one knows until death. In the meantime, its a blast to live in that place, if you can get there.
I get where you are pointing, however the only standard that need be applied in these circumstances, the only moral compass necessary, is the Constitution.
Dedication to the epistemological orientation pointed to in that document creates a civic creature that knows their own worth, power, and position in the hierarchy. An example of the proper application of which would have been, in the same sex marriage debate, the assertion that the power of marriage choice is a power not attributed to the federal government, nor the states, but inherent to the People. In the proper application of the system, the approval of a government official, system, or law is not necessary for two member of the same sex to have their marriage recognized by the state. It would only be the word of the two that they are married, such is the power inherent in the People.
Instead we have the ones with the power begging and scraping before the servants asking to receive from them what they already possess.
The problems inherent in making fallible servants into the masters of society is exactly what the Constitution was written to combat. That the People have turned the document on its head and now seek to have their own inalienable rights given to them by the power of the government is indicative of what is really wrong with our Country.
Hint: It's not the people in government. They are always going to be like that, they always have been. It's the People and their understanding of their place in this system.
So, inherent in this statement are many sentiments. First, implied is that this is an issue and considering it in the context of change is beneficial, otherwise why bring it up in the context of change in the first place?
See the words "...change that too much..."? This points to something that is acknowledged as needing to be changed, but because of other factors can't be adjusted too much. What you miss is the implication of "currently."
Also implied is that this is a problem in that currently only those that take this additional stress and work hours are advanced. This implies that if we keep this model as a matter of necessity, we should also consider other criteria for advancement. For example, in a more collaborate environment (female-centric in the context of this missive) we could advance those that create cohesive and productive collaboration.
This is the problem with looking for offense in what people say and think, rather than looking for the meaning behind the words; their intention and what they are really committed to. You respond to the context that is there for you, rather than the context that is there. Instead of seeing promise and possibility and being inspired, you see the overlap Venn diagram of your own limitations and those limitations you attribute to the messenger. If you start from the premise that Damore is sexist, hates women, feels they are inferior, and can't be any other way because he is a white male, you will never see what he is pointing toward and what he intends to create. You will take a statement like this one, which is full of options, promise for change, and empowerment for both women and men, and turn it into something lifeless, a dead end.
It is all a matter of perspective. If you bring your own perspective and superimpose it on the message you don't get anything new. You leave with what you came in with: an inexhaustible grudge.
This in particular is directed at liberals/left/progressive because they are the political force that is supposed to balance and counter the conservative/right/corporatist forces that lead to longer work hours, lower wages, the necessity of two wage earners, employment instability, exploitation of workers, and situations like we are in now where 0% of the economic recovery since 2008 has gone into increased wages.
In short, the left associated groups have historically occupied a certain role in defending the electorate from predation by corporate interests and right wing collusion with business interests. I think it is time we all recognize the left has abdicated that role in favor of a new one. The proof is everywhere. In this case identity politics was much preferred to the apparently old and tired "workers rights/corporate ownership of labor" dichotomy.
What disgusts me the most is how advancing the status quo for all workers, and especially women, was thrown on the trash heap in favor of attacking a classicly liberal white male. I need to get used to it though, as this is now the chosen role of the left.
As for Christians, I understand their book better than many of them do. Politics is the last place they should be involved. It is the job of Christ to remake this world when he returns, not the place of faux Christians who won't read their own Bible to force others to adhere to a false morality. Their insufferable holier than thou morality destroys more lives through harsh prison sentences and prohibition than outright criminality ever could. That being said, I would welcome their inept and unintentionally monstrous interference if they could pivot toward workers rights and humanitarianism, a la Jimmy Carter. As it stands they are an unwitting force for the corporate interests that persecute all of us in this country on top of their anti-Biblical meddling.
I fear Bernie was the last best hope for the American worker. If the current paradigm of identity politics vs corporatism is what we are left with going forward, I know who will win and it ain't the American People.
The level of journalism corresponds to the level of intelligence of the anticipated reader, specifically: none.
Instead of looking for meaning or understanding, most readers are looking for an emotional response. They either do not know or do not care that such an emotional response will completely inhibit their ability to process information rationally. There is no subtlety, no nuance, no partial agreement. It's all ticker tape parades or pitchforks and torches, nothing in between. Catering to this self destructive desire is how our news industry has become so ridiculous. It is the way of the land now.
Reading Miamoto Mushashi's Dokkodo (again) today hit me pretty hard. What he says to avoid are the same existential plagues I see dominating the minds of my American brothers and sisters. If only dispassionate consideration without passing judgement were valued and rewarded as much as flying off the handle and leveling outlandish false accusations. We might actually make some progress in this country. As it is the voice of the people is just word salad and infant screams.
You read an article and swallowed it whole. No thought, no dissection, nothing that could even remotely be called thought went into that.
Let me put Damore's writing into terms you can understand:
Men built this company and the others like it. Because of this, every chair has a Fleshlight built into it. Everyone should like that right? Damore says no, let's remove some of the Fleshlights and put some Sybian vibrators on the seats. This, in turn, will result in more women wanting to work here.
He didn't attack women. He attacked the culture of Google and implied that if women were taken into consideration as women, and not offered a free fleshlight with their employment, change in levels of employment would be organic, self starting, and sustainable. Just throwing more money at "diversity" or lowering standards does nothing to address the culture that has kept the qualified women looking elsewhere for opportunity.
He argued for shorter working hours, more egalitarian promotion criteria, and a healthier overall worker environment that takes into consideration the attractive qualities from other industries.
And dumbfucks came out of the woodwork to call him a sexist. No wonder this country is so fucked up. The workers are arguing for longer hours, less pay, and more abuse. Any worker that stands up and tries to change it gets attacked by both the corporate overlords AND their peers!
The guy said that an industry that is overwhelmingly staffed by, run by, and controlled by, and designed around men, and has been for decades, might be, at a fundamental level, less interesting to women. He pointed at the parts of the industry that aren't the actual job itself as the culprits.
He basically attacked the culture, not the work, and said its Patriarchy (without saying so) and should be updated. He attacked shameless self promotion as the major metric for advancement, working hours that cause burn out, working weekends, and sacrificing your entire personal life for the company. That's not being an asshole. That is trying to change a broken system for the benefit of everyone.
The result? (Asshole alert, here it comes...)
Progressive morons attacked him as a sexist. What complete and utter fools. If they had joined him we could have seen some real change in corporate America. Shortsighted and ignorant groupthink prevailed because someone with a stick up their butt was too stupid to understand his memo wasn't a condemnation of women, but a scathing rebuke of corporate America's stranglehold on the life of their workers. It's dangerously socialist when you break it down to its basics, and revolutionary if embraced. I was surprised at the reaction of those that call themselves left, liberal, and progressive. Apparently they would rather have horrible working conditions for everyone, provided they can scapegoat some uninvolved party, than good working conditions for everyone without someone to blame.
It's this kind of crab mentality that gives me the confidence to say that politicization due to ideological self-identification is the most detrimental force in America. It turns otherwise rational individuals into helpless tools of their own enslavement. What is worse, they scream and cry as they drag everyone down with them. If you're going to destroy yourself and everyone else around you, would you at least shut the fuck up as you do it?
Donald Trump's unhinged tantrums on Twitter are game theory. Tit for tat.
He is merely feeding back to the American public exactly what they are putting out.
Like your post. It is unhinged, ridiculous on its face (and increasingly so after any level of consideration), and a testament to the absolute insanity that partisanship foments. To me it looks identical to the Twitter account of Donald Trump in tone and intellect.
In many ways this fits the description I have heard about "the government you deserve." When the electorate learns maturity, restraint, and civility we will get mature, restrained, and civil governance.
Well, when your only option as a business is to invest in illegal activities, extortion is certainly on the menu. I imagine it is a little of both, "Here's your cash for helping us out. By the way, if you ever say anything or try to buck the yoke we kill your family in front of you, slowly." Carrot and stick.
"Remember, the fundamental goal is to get middle class and poor people to vote against their own economic interests and instead vote for the interests of the extreme rich. Making that happen requires all sorts of crazy things."
When the only choices you have are Democrat and Republican, every option is a vote against your own economic interests and for the extreme rich.
My suggestion, which no one seems to support, is to STOP FUCKING ELECTING MILLIONAIRES!
Thank you for embodying exactly what I was talking about. You have nothing to say that has any merit, value, or sense. All you can do is vomit unfounded accusations you have been programmed to repeat. You poor vapid soulless moron.
A traditional liberal might commiserate with me on the death of intellectual liberalism and lack of representation of liberal ideals in American politics. We might talk about how the erosion of sensible liberal policies allowed our current president to hijack vast voting blocks away from their normal voting behaviors. We could chat about Thomas Franks and his ideas concerning an amalgamation of classical liberalism and populism as the panacea for the hyper-bullshit of the Trump Republicans. We could lament the chain of events and faulty thinking that led our last Democratic presidential candidate to offer direct insults to the electorate, rather than the normal policy of platitudes, empty campaign promises, and a salutary visit to the state.
Disappointingly, you can't even form thoughts like those, much less articulate anything resembling cogent exposition on the subject. Forget anything like a productive discussion of the issues that have led us to this point and strategics on how to get back. You do have that newfangled Democrat pod person thing down though, don't you? "RUSSIIIAANNNN!!!!!!! SCREEEE!!!!!!!"
Thanks to intentionally brain-dead offensive shit-for-brains dumb asses like you usurping the Democrat party from intellectuals, we are all fucking doomed. Jackass.
Democrats and Republicans are political parties. There is no liberal party, just as there is no conservative party.
Your other wild musings are really quite funny. I like learning new and interesting ways people can be completely wrongheaded and still express 100% confidence in themselves. Keep it up!
Free speech is just the tip of the iceberg. You don't just stop at free speech. You give of yourself, and in return you redeem someone to the whole of society. Not a bad exchange, one might posit, and incredibly effective if it changes the mind of even one racist.
It is a vastly different approach than, say, telling all white people they are racist because they were born white, or creating safe spaces where "people of color" can exclude white people, or beating the shit out of other black kids when they achieve academic success because it's "acting white."
The first thing it requires, that most politically active "anti-racists" will never possess, is not being a fucking piece of shit racist yourself. This is why many politically active "anti-racists" people have called this man, who has done more to combat real deep seated racism than anyone I have ever seen, a traitor to his own race. Apparently, curing a white person of their racism with love is unacceptable to fucking piece of shit racists, period.
Why, you ask? Well, as someone who is repulsed by the inexplicable actions of fucking piece of shit racists of every race, I have no goddamned clue.
Thank you for explaining the joke inherent in my sardonic, taking the piss post. Your explicit and erudite explanation of what I was pointing at killed any semblance of humor I might have been able to conjure.
Such a cogent and illuminating exploration of the topic is the last thing I would expect from someone with your nom de plume. Not really living up to your namesake, are you, Obfuscant?
Every partisan individual in the US is a conspiracy nutter. They have been hoodwinked into thinking that every person of the "other party" is out to get them.
In reality, the only people out to get them are the ones running the parties.
The bigger conspiracy is that of political partisanship. All of that bickering is based on the actions of people who aren't you, and aren't the person you argue with. You make politics mean something about yourself, when it doesn't, and are trapped into defending something that means nothing. Your ego tricks you into carrying water for a bunch of rich elitists that do not care one single whit about your life and/or your death. They only care for your money and your support so they can continue to ride herd on you without recourse.
You poor simple bastards. If you only knew how much power you give up when you divide yourselves and fight yourselves.
Of course, I am wrong and just a conspiracy theorist. Partisanship is as natural as sexual preference. You're born a democrat or a republican. No cultural indoctrination is necessary, no grooming is needed, no reinforcement is required. No politicians ever spent hundreds of millions of dollars on focus groups, wedge issues, decoding the American electorate's psyche, for the ultimate purpose of fracturing the natural coalitions and commonalities between our American brothers and sisters. Nope, doesn't happen. Ever.
Very interesting post. I remember as a child having a very firmly defined sense of right and wrong, truth and non-truth. It was binary and relatively uninformed, however as I began to read the encyclopedias at my house I developed a system of grading "truth" and knowledge that was no longer binary. There was true, false, told as true (or false) when it was known to bet the opposite, told as true (or false) by many but unsubstantiated, generally known as true (and it is not), generally known as false (and it is not), generally known as wither true or false (and it is!), reported as true (or false) merely for entertainment, reported as true (or false) merely to be contradictory, reported as true (or false) merely to be inflammatory, devils advocacy (I didn't call it this as a child, I leaned the phrase much later when accused of doing it by a teacher)...There were more, many more.
After a couple of years of this, at about age 9, I realized that the vast majority of human beings I was forced to interact with were completely full of shit, had no regard for actual truth and knowledge, and carried around a bunch of completely false information in their heads that allowed them to justify their own actions without ever engaging in any serious introspection or circumspect examination of reality.
Nothing I have seen in the rest of my time on this planet has contradicted this thought with regard to the vast majority of humans.
The problem with exposure as a panacea for this type of pervasive thought is that people continue to bring themselves with them to their new areas of exposure. They go to church, and because they are judgmental and small minded, turn God into a judgmental and small minded reflection of themselves. They go to school, and because they are both insecure and tyrannical, they turn their schools into adult daycare with whacked out cultural rules that prevent humans from ever having a real interaction with other humans. They go to work, and because they are obsessed with their own success as a means to quiet their own insecurity and inadequacy, they create an environment where everyone needs to watch their back, must be guarded, defensive of their position and reputation lest someone stomp all over their future prospects. Ad infinitum, ad nauseum.
I get what you are saying though. Exposure is key, like the Mark Twain quote about travel implies. However, it also takes a receptive spirit for that exposure to do it's work.
What is missing is simple, and can be summed up in one word: Humility.
If you haven't been in a discussion of Twitter on Slashdot before there are a couple of rules you need to know:
1) Censorship is only ever done by governments. No one except a government can censor anything. This has been proven by hundreds of not thousands of shitposts by low-UID slashdotters and is therefore unassailable. Take this into consideration for all future uses of the word censorship.
2) Twitter is a private company (actually its a public company, but don't let facts stop you) and can do whatever they want on their platform. Period. They are free from any repercussions because reasons.
Now that you know the newspeak, err rules, you need to go rewrite your posts.
The whole article appears to be a way to get people who have previously claimed that "Twitter is a private company and can do whatever they want on their own platform" to engage in severe cognitive dissonance and condemn Twitter for doing whatever they want on their own platform.
Welcome to the human centipede that is current American political thought.
Slashdot Mirror
The Bible talks about morals and the spiritual experience of relationship to the divine as two very different and separate things. If someone says that morals only come from deity, and then recommends the Christian god as the source, just know that this individual does not understand the book they are talking about. They are fundamentally uninformed, ignorant, or deeply misinformed about the Bible and Christianity and should not be relied on as an authoritative source.
Additionally, your consideration of the spiritual life is just as misinformed as the person who says that morals only come from deity. The fundamental concept of Christianity is that at the moment of belief there is no longer any punishment, and all rewards are imputed to the believer at that instant as well. All the work is done by the divine, not by man. What this arrangement provides is not morality, but an experience of life that is beyond obsessive preoccupation with self condemnation, doubt, and negative self reference.
By contrast, one can be incredibly moral and base that morality on the constant observation of what is wrong, both inside themselves and in the observed actions of others. This leads to the holier-than-thou syndrome that so puts others off. It is evident in everything from virtue signaling to self righteousness in religious people. In addition, morality can be closely related to empathy, understanding, and initiative. This is where you see true charity, anonymous giving, compassion, etc. Neither of these are the spiritual life.
In contrast, the spiritual life removes the problem of human fallibility as a reference point and replaces it with the knowledge that there is only one frame of reference from which all human experience and endeavors can be judged perfectly, and the consciousness that occupies that frame of reference has declared you free, accepts you fully as you are, loves you completely, and will provide for you in every moment of life. Free from condemnation, free from the debts created by your imperfection, from your lack of sight, and your human fallibility, accepted in spite of your constant self recrimination, by a being of infinite purity and sight, and provided for, supported, and loved in every moment of life. This experience of life means that the individual comes from a place of gratitude, recognition, and understanding of the divine, breathing in infinite blessing from the divine, and breathing out unadulterated reflection of that blessing toward mankind. The results may look the same, however it is the experience of life for the spiritual practitioner that is fundamentally different.
Sure, it's a lens. Does it mean anything, in a cosmic sense? No one knows until death. In the meantime, its a blast to live in that place, if you can get there.
I get where you are pointing, however the only standard that need be applied in these circumstances, the only moral compass necessary, is the Constitution.
Dedication to the epistemological orientation pointed to in that document creates a civic creature that knows their own worth, power, and position in the hierarchy. An example of the proper application of which would have been, in the same sex marriage debate, the assertion that the power of marriage choice is a power not attributed to the federal government, nor the states, but inherent to the People. In the proper application of the system, the approval of a government official, system, or law is not necessary for two member of the same sex to have their marriage recognized by the state. It would only be the word of the two that they are married, such is the power inherent in the People.
Instead we have the ones with the power begging and scraping before the servants asking to receive from them what they already possess.
The problems inherent in making fallible servants into the masters of society is exactly what the Constitution was written to combat. That the People have turned the document on its head and now seek to have their own inalienable rights given to them by the power of the government is indicative of what is really wrong with our Country.
Hint: It's not the people in government. They are always going to be like that, they always have been. It's the People and their understanding of their place in this system.
"...if we try to change that too much..."
So, inherent in this statement are many sentiments. First, implied is that this is an issue and considering it in the context of change is beneficial, otherwise why bring it up in the context of change in the first place?
See the words "...change that too much..."? This points to something that is acknowledged as needing to be changed, but because of other factors can't be adjusted too much. What you miss is the implication of "currently."
Also implied is that this is a problem in that currently only those that take this additional stress and work hours are advanced. This implies that if we keep this model as a matter of necessity, we should also consider other criteria for advancement. For example, in a more collaborate environment (female-centric in the context of this missive) we could advance those that create cohesive and productive collaboration.
This is the problem with looking for offense in what people say and think, rather than looking for the meaning behind the words; their intention and what they are really committed to. You respond to the context that is there for you, rather than the context that is there. Instead of seeing promise and possibility and being inspired, you see the overlap Venn diagram of your own limitations and those limitations you attribute to the messenger. If you start from the premise that Damore is sexist, hates women, feels they are inferior, and can't be any other way because he is a white male, you will never see what he is pointing toward and what he intends to create. You will take a statement like this one, which is full of options, promise for change, and empowerment for both women and men, and turn it into something lifeless, a dead end.
It is all a matter of perspective. If you bring your own perspective and superimpose it on the message you don't get anything new. You leave with what you came in with: an inexhaustible grudge.
This in particular is directed at liberals/left/progressive because they are the political force that is supposed to balance and counter the conservative/right/corporatist forces that lead to longer work hours, lower wages, the necessity of two wage earners, employment instability, exploitation of workers, and situations like we are in now where 0% of the economic recovery since 2008 has gone into increased wages.
In short, the left associated groups have historically occupied a certain role in defending the electorate from predation by corporate interests and right wing collusion with business interests. I think it is time we all recognize the left has abdicated that role in favor of a new one. The proof is everywhere. In this case identity politics was much preferred to the apparently old and tired "workers rights/corporate ownership of labor" dichotomy.
What disgusts me the most is how advancing the status quo for all workers, and especially women, was thrown on the trash heap in favor of attacking a classicly liberal white male. I need to get used to it though, as this is now the chosen role of the left.
As for Christians, I understand their book better than many of them do. Politics is the last place they should be involved. It is the job of Christ to remake this world when he returns, not the place of faux Christians who won't read their own Bible to force others to adhere to a false morality. Their insufferable holier than thou morality destroys more lives through harsh prison sentences and prohibition than outright criminality ever could. That being said, I would welcome their inept and unintentionally monstrous interference if they could pivot toward workers rights and humanitarianism, a la Jimmy Carter. As it stands they are an unwitting force for the corporate interests that persecute all of us in this country on top of their anti-Biblical meddling.
I fear Bernie was the last best hope for the American worker. If the current paradigm of identity politics vs corporatism is what we are left with going forward, I know who will win and it ain't the American People.
What I got from this exchange is that all militant jackbooted liars are leftists.
The level of journalism corresponds to the level of intelligence of the anticipated reader, specifically: none.
Instead of looking for meaning or understanding, most readers are looking for an emotional response. They either do not know or do not care that such an emotional response will completely inhibit their ability to process information rationally. There is no subtlety, no nuance, no partial agreement. It's all ticker tape parades or pitchforks and torches, nothing in between. Catering to this self destructive desire is how our news industry has become so ridiculous. It is the way of the land now.
Reading Miamoto Mushashi's Dokkodo (again) today hit me pretty hard. What he says to avoid are the same existential plagues I see dominating the minds of my American brothers and sisters. If only dispassionate consideration without passing judgement were valued and rewarded as much as flying off the handle and leveling outlandish false accusations. We might actually make some progress in this country. As it is the voice of the people is just word salad and infant screams.
You read an article and swallowed it whole. No thought, no dissection, nothing that could even remotely be called thought went into that.
Let me put Damore's writing into terms you can understand:
Men built this company and the others like it. Because of this, every chair has a Fleshlight built into it. Everyone should like that right? Damore says no, let's remove some of the Fleshlights and put some Sybian vibrators on the seats. This, in turn, will result in more women wanting to work here.
He didn't attack women. He attacked the culture of Google and implied that if women were taken into consideration as women, and not offered a free fleshlight with their employment, change in levels of employment would be organic, self starting, and sustainable. Just throwing more money at "diversity" or lowering standards does nothing to address the culture that has kept the qualified women looking elsewhere for opportunity.
He argued for shorter working hours, more egalitarian promotion criteria, and a healthier overall worker environment that takes into consideration the attractive qualities from other industries.
And dumbfucks came out of the woodwork to call him a sexist. No wonder this country is so fucked up. The workers are arguing for longer hours, less pay, and more abuse. Any worker that stands up and tries to change it gets attacked by both the corporate overlords AND their peers!
The guy said that an industry that is overwhelmingly staffed by, run by, and controlled by, and designed around men, and has been for decades, might be, at a fundamental level, less interesting to women. He pointed at the parts of the industry that aren't the actual job itself as the culprits.
He basically attacked the culture, not the work, and said its Patriarchy (without saying so) and should be updated. He attacked shameless self promotion as the major metric for advancement, working hours that cause burn out, working weekends, and sacrificing your entire personal life for the company. That's not being an asshole. That is trying to change a broken system for the benefit of everyone.
The result? (Asshole alert, here it comes...)
Progressive morons attacked him as a sexist. What complete and utter fools. If they had joined him we could have seen some real change in corporate America. Shortsighted and ignorant groupthink prevailed because someone with a stick up their butt was too stupid to understand his memo wasn't a condemnation of women, but a scathing rebuke of corporate America's stranglehold on the life of their workers. It's dangerously socialist when you break it down to its basics, and revolutionary if embraced. I was surprised at the reaction of those that call themselves left, liberal, and progressive. Apparently they would rather have horrible working conditions for everyone, provided they can scapegoat some uninvolved party, than good working conditions for everyone without someone to blame.
It's this kind of crab mentality that gives me the confidence to say that politicization due to ideological self-identification is the most detrimental force in America. It turns otherwise rational individuals into helpless tools of their own enslavement. What is worse, they scream and cry as they drag everyone down with them. If you're going to destroy yourself and everyone else around you, would you at least shut the fuck up as you do it?
Donald Trump's unhinged tantrums on Twitter are game theory. Tit for tat.
He is merely feeding back to the American public exactly what they are putting out.
Like your post. It is unhinged, ridiculous on its face (and increasingly so after any level of consideration), and a testament to the absolute insanity that partisanship foments. To me it looks identical to the Twitter account of Donald Trump in tone and intellect.
In many ways this fits the description I have heard about "the government you deserve." When the electorate learns maturity, restraint, and civility we will get mature, restrained, and civil governance.
Well, when your only option as a business is to invest in illegal activities, extortion is certainly on the menu. I imagine it is a little of both, "Here's your cash for helping us out. By the way, if you ever say anything or try to buck the yoke we kill your family in front of you, slowly." Carrot and stick.
The only weaknesses needed to penetrate any border:
1) Money
2) A human being that can be bribed
Our "war on drugs" provides an infinite flow of cash to people who are only allowed to reinvest that money in illegal activities.
It won't matter what kind of wall we put up unless we legalize drugs.
"Remember, the fundamental goal is to get middle class and poor people to vote against their own economic interests and instead vote for the interests of the extreme rich. Making that happen requires all sorts of crazy things."
When the only choices you have are Democrat and Republican, every option is a vote against your own economic interests and for the extreme rich.
My suggestion, which no one seems to support, is to STOP FUCKING ELECTING MILLIONAIRES!
Thank you for embodying exactly what I was talking about. You have nothing to say that has any merit, value, or sense. All you can do is vomit unfounded accusations you have been programmed to repeat. You poor vapid soulless moron.
A traditional liberal might commiserate with me on the death of intellectual liberalism and lack of representation of liberal ideals in American politics. We might talk about how the erosion of sensible liberal policies allowed our current president to hijack vast voting blocks away from their normal voting behaviors. We could chat about Thomas Franks and his ideas concerning an amalgamation of classical liberalism and populism as the panacea for the hyper-bullshit of the Trump Republicans. We could lament the chain of events and faulty thinking that led our last Democratic presidential candidate to offer direct insults to the electorate, rather than the normal policy of platitudes, empty campaign promises, and a salutary visit to the state.
Disappointingly, you can't even form thoughts like those, much less articulate anything resembling cogent exposition on the subject. Forget anything like a productive discussion of the issues that have led us to this point and strategics on how to get back. You do have that newfangled Democrat pod person thing down though, don't you? "RUSSIIIAANNNN!!!!!!! SCREEEE!!!!!!!"
Thanks to intentionally brain-dead offensive shit-for-brains dumb asses like you usurping the Democrat party from intellectuals, we are all fucking doomed. Jackass.
Democrats and Republicans are political parties. There is no liberal party, just as there is no conservative party.
Your other wild musings are really quite funny. I like learning new and interesting ways people can be completely wrongheaded and still express 100% confidence in themselves. Keep it up!
What a bunch of idiots. It's not like this is rocket science.
You want to see how real racism is cured?
https://www.npr.org/2017/08/20...
Free speech is just the tip of the iceberg. You don't just stop at free speech. You give of yourself, and in return you redeem someone to the whole of society. Not a bad exchange, one might posit, and incredibly effective if it changes the mind of even one racist.
It is a vastly different approach than, say, telling all white people they are racist because they were born white, or creating safe spaces where "people of color" can exclude white people, or beating the shit out of other black kids when they achieve academic success because it's "acting white."
The first thing it requires, that most politically active "anti-racists" will never possess, is not being a fucking piece of shit racist yourself. This is why many politically active "anti-racists" people have called this man, who has done more to combat real deep seated racism than anyone I have ever seen, a traitor to his own race. Apparently, curing a white person of their racism with love is unacceptable to fucking piece of shit racists, period.
Why, you ask? Well, as someone who is repulsed by the inexplicable actions of fucking piece of shit racists of every race, I have no goddamned clue.
+1, awesome. Thanks!
Thank you for explaining the joke inherent in my sardonic, taking the piss post. Your explicit and erudite explanation of what I was pointing at killed any semblance of humor I might have been able to conjure.
Such a cogent and illuminating exploration of the topic is the last thing I would expect from someone with your nom de plume. Not really living up to your namesake, are you, Obfuscant?
Great post. +1 for not being an idiot like the rest of us.
Every partisan individual in the US is a conspiracy nutter. They have been hoodwinked into thinking that every person of the "other party" is out to get them.
In reality, the only people out to get them are the ones running the parties.
The bigger conspiracy is that of political partisanship. All of that bickering is based on the actions of people who aren't you, and aren't the person you argue with. You make politics mean something about yourself, when it doesn't, and are trapped into defending something that means nothing. Your ego tricks you into carrying water for a bunch of rich elitists that do not care one single whit about your life and/or your death. They only care for your money and your support so they can continue to ride herd on you without recourse.
You poor simple bastards. If you only knew how much power you give up when you divide yourselves and fight yourselves.
Of course, I am wrong and just a conspiracy theorist. Partisanship is as natural as sexual preference. You're born a democrat or a republican. No cultural indoctrination is necessary, no grooming is needed, no reinforcement is required. No politicians ever spent hundreds of millions of dollars on focus groups, wedge issues, decoding the American electorate's psyche, for the ultimate purpose of fracturing the natural coalitions and commonalities between our American brothers and sisters. Nope, doesn't happen. Ever.
Very interesting post. I remember as a child having a very firmly defined sense of right and wrong, truth and non-truth. It was binary and relatively uninformed, however as I began to read the encyclopedias at my house I developed a system of grading "truth" and knowledge that was no longer binary. There was true, false, told as true (or false) when it was known to bet the opposite, told as true (or false) by many but unsubstantiated, generally known as true (and it is not), generally known as false (and it is not), generally known as wither true or false (and it is!), reported as true (or false) merely for entertainment, reported as true (or false) merely to be contradictory, reported as true (or false) merely to be inflammatory, devils advocacy (I didn't call it this as a child, I leaned the phrase much later when accused of doing it by a teacher)...There were more, many more.
After a couple of years of this, at about age 9, I realized that the vast majority of human beings I was forced to interact with were completely full of shit, had no regard for actual truth and knowledge, and carried around a bunch of completely false information in their heads that allowed them to justify their own actions without ever engaging in any serious introspection or circumspect examination of reality.
Nothing I have seen in the rest of my time on this planet has contradicted this thought with regard to the vast majority of humans.
The problem with exposure as a panacea for this type of pervasive thought is that people continue to bring themselves with them to their new areas of exposure. They go to church, and because they are judgmental and small minded, turn God into a judgmental and small minded reflection of themselves. They go to school, and because they are both insecure and tyrannical, they turn their schools into adult daycare with whacked out cultural rules that prevent humans from ever having a real interaction with other humans. They go to work, and because they are obsessed with their own success as a means to quiet their own insecurity and inadequacy, they create an environment where everyone needs to watch their back, must be guarded, defensive of their position and reputation lest someone stomp all over their future prospects. Ad infinitum, ad nauseum.
I get what you are saying though. Exposure is key, like the Mark Twain quote about travel implies. However, it also takes a receptive spirit for that exposure to do it's work.
What is missing is simple, and can be summed up in one word: Humility.
If you haven't been in a discussion of Twitter on Slashdot before there are a couple of rules you need to know:
1) Censorship is only ever done by governments. No one except a government can censor anything. This has been proven by hundreds of not thousands of shitposts by low-UID slashdotters and is therefore unassailable. Take this into consideration for all future uses of the word censorship.
2) Twitter is a private company (actually its a public company, but don't let facts stop you) and can do whatever they want on their platform. Period. They are free from any repercussions because reasons.
Now that you know the newspeak, err rules, you need to go rewrite your posts.
The whole article appears to be a way to get people who have previously claimed that "Twitter is a private company and can do whatever they want on their own platform" to engage in severe cognitive dissonance and condemn Twitter for doing whatever they want on their own platform.
Welcome to the human centipede that is current American political thought.
You posted the wrong article. Go find the right one. Nothing in the article you posted refutes what the AC posted.
If you can't defeat an AC, don't reply to them. It sets a poor precedent.