(07-06-2018, 10:30 AM)pirkster Wrote: [ -> ] (07-05-2018, 05:33 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I'm always seeking help and growth and I hope you are too.
In that spirit, if you're genuinely concerned that too many people approach politics and something that is like fashion and about feelings, and you genuinely wish to help such people, challenge them with questions. Ask, "did your own experience teach you that this was true? Did you deduce that this was true from facts that you observed? Or do you just want to appear in fashion? or did somebody who may not be trustworthy and may not have your best interest at heart manipulate your emotions until you believe this?"
if those are your concerns those are the questions you should be asking first of yourself and then of others.
It's quite common for those who have experienced being duped and have survived it, to try to help others they find to be in the same peril.
I've been there and back again. If you're satisfied in your cocoon, then it's natural for you to have settled where you find comfort and seek to preserve it by shutting out the outside.
One of the things asked of jurors and debaters is to adopt the opposite side. Argue for them. I've lived that inside and outside the courtroom. If you're brave enough, you might try it yourself. I think you'd find it very insightful and life changing.
I've been duped too.
Here's the problem: defining a broad category of political thought in entirely negative terms, as you did, is the kind of thing that dupers do.
Those who seek to save people from being duped ask people to examine their own experiences rather than bully them with a "trust me, I've been there." Those who dupe always ask for our trust. That you think your experience means you deserve my trust doesn't change the essential nature of your appeal from my perspective - it can not be distinguished from the many dupers out there.
(07-05-2018, 11:34 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ] (07-05-2018, 01:57 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Nah, the swines ate my pearls. It'll be a little while before more are revealed.
Right, if you define liberalism that way, as a unified thing with those qualities, everything else you say logically follows.
Problem: people who actually identify as liberal wouldn't define liberalism that way. In fact, they would offer many very different definitions, including some that conflict with each other, if you asked.
But that was not a definition, but an observation. Can you name a Progressive politician who does not base a significant part of his/her rhetoric on victimization?
What does "take our country back" or "make america great again" mean? Does it not mean that the "good" or "great" people and ideals of America have been victimized?
(07-05-2018, 10:59 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (07-05-2018, 01:57 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Nah, the swines ate my pearls. It'll be a little while before more are revealed.
What you thought were pearls were actually just toadstools growing in the fertilizer.
I hear an oink.
Most who realize they are wrong, never want to admit they are wrong. Pride stings. See above.
Only the truth shall set you free. And man, does it feel good to come clean.
(07-06-2018, 12:56 PM)pirkster Wrote: [ -> ]Most who realize they are wrong, never want to admit they are wrong. Pride stings. See above.
Only the truth shall set you free. And man, does it feel good to come clean.
We've both admitted to being duped in the past. Who is failing to admit that they are wrong? What is that person wrong about?
(07-06-2018, 12:14 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (07-06-2018, 10:30 AM)pirkster Wrote: [ -> ]It's quite common for those who have experienced being duped and have survived it, to try to help others they find to be in the same peril.
I've been there and back again. If you're satisfied in your cocoon, then it's natural for you to have settled where you find comfort and seek to preserve it by shutting out the outside.
One of the things asked of jurors and debaters is to adopt the opposite side. Argue for them. I've lived that inside and outside the courtroom. If you're brave enough, you might try it yourself. I think you'd find it very insightful and life changing.
I've been duped too.
Here's the problem: defining a broad category of political thought in entirely negative terms, as you did, is the kind of thing that dupers do.
Those who seek to save people from being duped ask people to examine their own experiences rather than bully them with a "trust me, I've been there." Those who dupe always ask for our trust. That you think your experience means you deserve my trust doesn't change the essential nature of your appeal from my perspective - it can not be distinguished from the many dupers out there.
(07-05-2018, 11:34 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ]But that was not a definition, but an observation. Can you name a Progressive politician who does not base a significant part of his/her rhetoric on victimization?
What does "take our country back" or "make america great again" mean? Does it not mean that the "good" or "great" people and ideals of America have been victimized?
(07-05-2018, 10:59 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]What you thought were pearls were actually just toadstools growing in the fertilizer.
I hear an oink.
Oddly enough all I hear is the droning of a pretentious windbag.
(07-06-2018, 06:20 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (07-06-2018, 06:06 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Oddly enough all I hear is the droning of a pretentious windbag.
pre·ten·tious
prəˈten(t)SHəs/
adjective
- attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed.
You could only call me this if you (1) know that I don't have great importance or talent, and (2) actually have more importance or talent than me. While (2) is possible, (1) is not. You know nothing about me. So which one of us is actually using $0.50 words that they don't actually understand?
Lol, your answer is all the evidence required.
(07-06-2018, 10:36 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ] (07-06-2018, 12:14 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]
What does "take our country back" or "make america great again" mean? Does it not mean that the "good" or "great" people and ideals of America have been victimized?
No, it means the policies that have been used when dealing with foreign countries were disadvantageous to our national interests. MAGA is a policy statement, not a claim of victimization.
And I see that you couldn't name anyone.
Can you name someone on the "progressive" side and show that they are using or abusing a "claim to victimization"? And show that said claim is not actually a "policy statement"?
(07-06-2018, 11:33 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ] (07-06-2018, 11:08 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Can you name someone on the "progressive" side and show that they are using or abusing a "claim to victimization"? And show that said claim is not actually a "policy statement"?
Yes.
Oh, you want me to name them? Why didn't you say so?
Obamacare was based on the victimization of people who were not covered by health insurance. Obama, Pelosi, and pretty much every other Dem at the time claimed that people had a right to health insurance, implying they were victims because that right was ignored.
And don't try to claim it was a "policy" that caused people to not have health insurance. I know the Left thinks a lack of government regulation is a "policy," but I was talking about active policy decisions made by the ruling class in favor of foreign countries, not just a lack of a desired policy.
I think every change to policy starts out with a problem statement. And I think any problem statement could be construed as a claim of victimization.
"Taxes are too high" could be constructed as a claim that the government's taking too much of my money and I'm not living the best life I could live anymore.
Which is not to say that these things are totally the same. They're not. There are big significant differences between asking your member of Congress for a tax cut and asking your member of Congress to completely rewrite Health Care regulations.
I'm just saying I don't think you've hit upon what the difference actually is.
(07-06-2018, 08:11 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (07-06-2018, 06:20 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]pre·ten·tious
prəˈten(t)SHəs/
adjective
- attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed.
You could only call me this if you (1) know that I don't have great importance or talent, and (2) actually have more importance or talent than me. While (2) is possible, (1) is not. You know nothing about me. So which one of us is actually using $0.50 words that they don't actually understand?
Lol, your answer is all the evidence required.
Citing a dictionary is pretentious?
(07-08-2018, 07:47 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2018, 07:11 PM)rollerjag Wrote: [ -> ]Citing a dictionary is pretentious?
That guy? Yep.
The word he was looking for was pedantic, probably.
When people come in to a conversation feeling like they have nothing to learn, any new information will come across to them as didactic, pedantic, or condescending. While the guy may never feel good feelings towards me, hopefully some of the unwelcome new information I send his way will be remembered.
(07-09-2018, 08:53 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2018, 07:47 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]That guy? Yep.
The word he was looking for was pedantic, probably.
When people come in to a conversation feeling like they have nothing to learn, any new information will come across to them as didactic, pedantic, or condescending. While the guy may never feel good feelings towards me, hopefully some of the unwelcome new information I send his way will be remembered.
I think the word I'd prefer is [BLEEP], but the filter tends to remove it.
Nobody on this board is happier to see the Dow spike up by 334 points today --- retirement in 6 years barring any economic collapse .... and ironically enough, it could coincide directly with Trumps presidency, if he gets re-elected.
(07-09-2018, 09:03 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2018, 08:53 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]The word he was looking for was pedantic, probably.
When people come in to a conversation feeling like they have nothing to learn, any new information will come across to them as didactic, pedantic, or condescending. While the guy may never feel good feelings towards me, hopefully some of the unwelcome new information I send his way will be remembered.
I think the word I'd prefer is [BLEEP], but the filter tends to remove it.
Well a tiny bit of civility is welcome even if it's forced, bud.
(07-08-2018, 07:47 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2018, 07:11 PM)rollerjag Wrote: [ -> ]Citing a dictionary is pretentious?
That guy? Yep.
There's a substantial amount of irony in this exchange.
(07-09-2018, 09:57 PM)rollerjag Wrote: [ -> ] (07-08-2018, 07:47 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]That guy? Yep.
There's a substantial amount of irony in this exchange.
I keep an irony on hand to press out the wrinkles.
(07-09-2018, 08:27 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2018, 09:03 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]I think the word I'd prefer is [BLEEP], but the filter tends to remove it.
Well a tiny bit of civility is welcome even if it's forced, bud.
Yeah, the board government lets me exercise my freedom to not use the words I want, friend.