How Far Will the Woke Mob Go?

[cardgame]

Have you ever considered that you, while certainly not THE problem, may actually be part of the problem, and not offering any honest insights or productive solutions? Or can you actually see beyond your endless externalization and scapegoating onto others to avoid looking into the mirror at your own faults and wrongheaded ideas in these matters?

Don't be ridiculous

 

[Cloud_Strife]

Have you ever considered that you, while certainly not THE problem, may actually be part of the problem, and not offering any honest insights or productive solutions? Or can you actually see beyond your endless externalization and scapegoating onto others to avoid looking into the mirror at your own faults and wrongheaded ideas in these matters?

Solutions to what? That at least a 1/3rd of this country is so broken that they think Trump was and still is, a decent candidate worthy of ever electing? What are you trying to say here?

 

[Patine]

Solutions to what? That at least a 1/3rd of this country is so broken that they think Trump was and still is, a decent candidate worthy of ever electing? What are you trying to say here?

That perhaps the problem is not just one political, demographic, or socio-economic group, with everyone else just being "victims, who must unite in solidarity against a perceived one-sided tyranny in some cliched take on good vs. evil." That perhaps the problem, and the reason the state of affairs is as the crappy way it is, is more nuanced, complex, and intricate than the simplistic views you and many others espouse, and that binary power struggle narratives, absolutist demographic viewpoints, and hard demographic thinking (the exact same core mentality as the Nazis, KKK, Aryan Brotherhood, Rhodesian Front, and National Party of South Africa espouse, just with different demographics advocated for targeting and uplifting, different bizarre mythologized thinking on the issue, and different extremist solutions - but the same core psychological foundational mentality) might not help ANYONE in the long term, and only be a path to ruin. I am not a demographic thinker. I'm a Humanist. I believe in policies and viewpoints that will advance and promote opportunity, equality, prosperity, and justice for all, where demographic is, at least on a political and legal level, an irrelevancy, because it wouldn't need to be relevant on those specific levels. I know it's a vaunted, pie-in-the-sky ideal, but I find demographic thinking and narratives disturbing, and foresee none of them, whether from the left- or the right-wing of the socio-political spectrum having good end results at all.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

That perhaps the problem is not just one political, demographic, or socio-economic group, with everyone else just being "victims, who must unite in solidarity against a perceived one-sided tyranny in some cliched take on good vs. evil." That perhaps the problem, and the reason the state of affairs is as the crappy way it is, is more nuanced, complex, and intricate than the simplistic views you and many others espouse, and that binary power struggle narratives, absolutist demographic viewpoints, and hard demographic thinking (the exact same core mentality as the Nazis, KKK, Aryan Brotherhood, Rhodesian Front, and National Party of South Africa espouse, just with different demographics advocated for targeting and uplifting, different bizarre mythologized thinking on the issue, and different extremist solutions - but the same core psychological foundational mentality) might not help ANYONE in the long term, and only be a path to ruin. I am not a demographic thinker. I'm a Humanist. I believe in policies and viewpoints that will advance and promote opportunity, equality, prosperity, and justice for all, where demographic is, at least on a political and legal level, an irrelevancy, because it wouldn't need to be relevant on those specific levels. I know it's a vaunted, pie-in-the-sky ideal, but I find demographic thinking and narratives disturbing, and foresee none of them, whether from the left- or the right-wing of the socio-political spectrum having good end results at all.

Sounds like something a defender of the status quo would say

 

[Patine]

Sounds like something a defender of the status quo would say

No, I detest the status quo, utterly and completely. And I have railed endlessly against it on these very forums, and shown my utter disgust for it's vile corrupt, criminal, unjust, murderous, and lying institutions, and the plutocratic oligarchs that prop it up through graft and bribery, and the horrid wars abroad fought on utter lies and high crime. And I bet you don't even have a clue what Humanist ideology even entails, and how incompatible with the status quo it actually is, do you?But I see you haven't given up on slander and political invective based on lies and utter non-truths to smear those who disagree with by falsely accusing them of beliefs or ideals they not hold, and there is evidence no evidence of them holding. A tactic Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and McCarthy used with relish and abandon, and one with leaders like Putin, Orban, Erdogan, and, yes, Trump, love to use as well. And I see Gorbles' "like," of your post puts in the same despicable and disingenuous lot as well.

 

[Gorbles]

No, I detest the status quo, utterly and completely. And I have railed endlessly against it on these very forums, and shown my utter disgust for it's vile corrupt, criminal, unjust, murderous, and lying institutions, and the plutocratic oligarchs that prop it up through graft and bribery, and the horrid wars abroad fought on utter lies and high crime. And I bet you don't even have a clue what Humanist ideology even entails, and how incompatible with the status quo it actually is, do you?But I see you haven't given up on slander and political invective based on lies and utter non-truths to smear those who disagree with by falsely accusing them of beliefs or ideals they not hold, and there is evidence no evidence of them holding. A tactic Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and McCarthy used with relish and abandon, and one with leaders like Putin, Orban, Erdogan, and, yes, Trump, love to use as well. And I see Gorbles' "like," of your post puts in the same despicable and disingenuous lot as well.

Small note: it's hypocritical to complain about slander when you repeatedly compare everybody to Stalin, Hitler, etc, et al.

Your analysis is full of holes, Patine. That said, there's little point debating it when you resort to such slander at the drop of a hat, immediately polarising and thus (both ironically and hypocritlcally) poisoning any debate that could possibly be had with you. A quick summary would be your constant conflation of two opposing ends of the ideological spectrum works against any point you wish to make. "both sides are as bad as each other" is what you are effectively arguing, and even if you don't mean to, is how you're coming across by telling people that they are a "part of the problem".

Which, again, ironically, is pretty much what Cloud said to you, that you then interpreted as slander. Why? Is it okay for you to tell other posters they are a part of the problem? If so, why is it suddenly unfair and Stalin-esque for others to say the same of you?

 

[Patine]

Small note: it's hypocritical to complain about slander when you repeatedly compare everybody to Stalin, Hitler, etc, et al.

Your analysis is full of holes, Patine. That said, there's little point debating it when you resort to such slander at the drop of a hat, immediately polarising and thus (both ironically and hypocritlcally) poisoning any debate that could possibly be had with you. A quick summary would be your constant conflation of two opposing ends of the ideological spectrum works against any point you wish to make. "both sides are as bad as each other" is what you are effectively arguing, and even if you don't mean to, is how you're coming across by telling people that they are a "part of the problem".

Which, again, ironically, is pretty much what Cloud said to you, that you then interpreted as slander. Why? Is it okay for you to tell other posters they are a part of the problem? If so, why is it suddenly unfair and Stalin-esque for others to say the same of you?

Let's get a simple point straight, here. Saying someone shows a single trait or uses a tactic that horrible people like Hitler or Stalin did, if it can be demonstrated, is NOT the same thing as an outright, across-the-board, complete comparison to such people in their entirety. Now, I know the braindead, dumbed-down, unthinking, absolutist, and toxically deteriorated state of what remains of the public discourse on things likes to ignore these fine points and jump right to "all-or-nothing," and other extreme methods of responding, and the art of comparative and relative thinking is, unfortunately, dying - but that doesn't mean that I'm going to participate in that irrational and senseless cesspool of interaction style. And, I've often hoped, given the degree of education and insight you show, that you could also rise above it and engage matters with a more sensible degree of perspective. In that area, I keep being disappointed.

 

[Gorbles]

Let's get a simple point straight, here. Saying someone shows a single trait or uses a tactic that horrible people like Hitler or Stalin did, if it can be demonstrated, is NOT the same thing as an outright, across-the-board, complete comparison to such people in their entirety. Now, I know the braindead, dumbed-down, unthinking, absolutist, and toxically deteriorated state of what remains of the public discourse on things likes to ignore these fine points and jump right to "all-or-nothing," and other extreme methods of responding, and the art of comparative and relative thinking is, unfortunately, dying - but that doesn't mean that I'm going to participate in that irrational and senseless cesspool of interaction style. And, I've often hoped, given the degree of education and insight you show, that you could also rise above it and engage matters with a more sensible degree of perspective. In that area, I keep being disappointed.

There are plenty of ways of describing such behaviour without invoking the historical figures you choose to (repeatedly) invoke. You choosing not to do so is an active choice that you have to deal with the consequences of. For someone that allegedly loves clarity and precision of discussion, you don't seem to understand that calling someone's posting tactics akin to the tactics Hitler or Stalin may have employed is not a nuanced or precise argument.

Anyhow. Good job dodging the rest of the points made, thus proving conclusively that there's little point debating any of this. Cloud said that the points you made put you in the camp of sticking up for the status quo. There is nothing wrong with that statement. It may be incorrect, if you actually wanted to bother arguing it, but it is not wrong (to post. It's an opinion), and no amount of moral grandstanding from you makes it so.

Like I said, you're being hypocritical. You are, apparently, allowed to judge others, but others are not allowed to judge you (without in some specific fashion being compared to genocidal dictators).

(edited for specifics given the amount of tedious wordplay being invoked - apologies for anybody reading)

 

[Patine]

There are plenty of ways of describing such behaviour without invoking the historical figures you choose to (repeatedly) invoke. You choosing not to do so is an active choice that you have to deal with the consequences of. For someone that allegedly loves clarity and precision of discussion, you don't seem to understand that calling someone's posting tactics akin to the tactics Hitler or Stalin may have employed is not a nuanced or precise argument.

Anyhow. Good job dodging the rest of the points made, thus proving conclusively that there's little point debating any of this. Cloud said that the points you made put you in the camp of sticking up for the status quo. There is nothing wrong with that statement. It may be incorrect, if you actually wanted to bother arguing it, but it is not wrong (to post. It's an opinion), and no amount of moral grandstanding from you makes it so.

Like I said, you're being hypocritical. You are, apparently, allowed to judge others, but others are not allowed to judge you (without in some specific fashion being compared to genocidal dictators).

(edited for specifics given the amount of tedious wordplay being invoked - apologies for anybody reading)

Saying my statement "stands up for the status," can only mean two other things as logical conclusions if NOT deliberate slander, to be honest - either a complete lack of understanding of my position (in which case, she was in error in speaking in such a presumptive manner, especially with the assumption she spat out), or not actually reading my post, but using a "pre-canned," response. To be honest, slander, as a motive, at least gives her the benefit of the doubt, if nothing else, of a sense of initiative with a cognitive view and grasp of the course of the discussion, unlike the other two.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

No, I detest the status quo, utterly and completely. And I have railed endlessly against it on these very forums, and shown my utter disgust for it's vile corrupt, criminal, unjust, murderous, and lying institutions, and the plutocratic oligarchs that prop it up through graft and bribery, and the horrid wars abroad fought on utter lies and high crime. And I bet you don't even have a clue what Humanist ideology even entails, and how incompatible with the status quo it actually is, do you?But I see you haven't given up on slander and political invective based on lies and utter non-truths to smear those who disagree with by falsely accusing them of beliefs or ideals they not hold, and there is evidence no evidence of them holding. A tactic Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and McCarthy used with relish and abandon, and one with leaders like Putin, Orban, Erdogan, and, yes, Trump, love to use as well. And I see Gorbles' "like," of your post puts in the same despicable and disingenuous lot as well.

My friend, you're being very aggressive here and I'm talking to you in a cordial manner here so could you please return the favor

 

[aelf]

And is there a term for someone who continuously accuses the other party of ad hominem attacks without examining the criticism directed at them? I'm getting that a lot too elsewhere. New internet fad?

 

[Powerwise]

The people participating in this argument are using some of the most PRETENTIOUS writing styles I've ever seen, LOL. It's worth reading simply due to the fact that they like the smell of their own farts.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

My friend, you're being very aggressive here and I'm talking to you in a cordial manner here so could you please return the favor

"Cordial manner" lol. This right after some nonsense reductive one liner to his previous post.

If one wishes to receive respect, it would help to first cease disrespecting others.

 

[Gorbles]

@Powerwise

Sadly necessary when people go looking for offense!

If one wishes to receive respect, it would help to first cease disrespecting others.

This would help society a lot, yeah.

Throwing yourself in the ring ain't that though. If these things require a show of faith, your actions here are not it

----------

I've got to say, the sudden turn this thread has taken is very funny given the topic. I didn't take some folks here as genuinely interested in policing free speech along the lines of respect.

 

[Broken_Erika]

High quality posting.

 

[Patine]

My friend, you're being very aggressive here and I'm talking to you in a cordial manner here so could you please return the favor

Slandering me and declaring a faux intent to my beliefs based on lies and misinformation (like you did back when you called me a, "Fascist enabler," and "Fascist sympathizer,") is not cordial conduct, so there's no "favour to return," really.

And is there a term for someone who continuously accuses the other party of ad hominem attacks without examining the criticism directed at them? I'm getting that a lot too elsewhere. New internet fad?

A tactic that seems to be a signature trademark for you, at least.

 

[Berzerker]

Solutions to what? That at least a 1/3rd of this country is so broken that they think Trump was and still is, a decent candidate worthy of ever electing? What are you trying to say here?

and another 1/3rd put Hillary and Biden up against him

Sounds like something a defender of the status quo would say

now vote for Joe and keep quiet

My friend, you're being very aggressive here and I'm talking to you in a cordial manner here so could you please return the favor

lol

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Throwing yourself in the ring ain't that though. If these things require a show of faith, your actions here are not it

I'm not so angelic that I don't answer like for like, especially when it's a constant stream of it. Though respect is the default online forum position for me, disrespect is something earned.

Strings of insults, misrepresenting arguments while not addressing what was said at all, and then complaining about the responses to that behavior not being nice is something that merits reflection. Normally I just brush it off but the hypocrisy of the statement in question so quickly after behaving differently from it raised an eyebrow lol.

And is there a term for someone who continuously accuses the other party of ad hominem attacks without examining the criticism directed at them? I'm getting that a lot too elsewhere. New internet fad?

Common denominator might just be the conduct of spamming ad hominem posts.

It's reasonable to assume that posts resorting to that trash don't have anything worth saying and certainly don't have competent arguments. If they did, it wouldn't be necessary to resort to childish behavior and then complain when people don't engage with it as desired.

 

[Crezth]

Common denominator might just be the conduct of spamming ad hominem posts.

It's reasonable to assume that posts resorting to that trash don't have anything worth saying and certainly don't have competent arguments. If they did, it wouldn't be necessary to resort to childish behavior and then complain when people don't engage with it as desired.

Everyone gets ad hominemed. It's the internet. The standard on CFC is passive-aggressive remarks and insinuations that let you get away with it. This post comes off as churlish.

 

[aelf]

A tactic that seems to be a signature trademark for you, at least.

I accuse others of ad hominem attacks? Nope, I couldn't care less. I would only remark on the content of what they say, not the manner in which it's said. Crying for mommy because someone else wasn't nice is playground behaviour.