Members banned from this thread: Spookycolt


Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31
Thanks Tree23Thanks

Thread: Sam Harris: Has extremism dominated modern politics?

  1. #21
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    42,396
    Thanks
    25011

    From
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by MaryAnne View Post
    Antifa is a boogey word used by Cons. I could care less.
    It really isn't a boogey word, it appears a bunch of youth that seek some sort of ideological purity where you either believe as they do or else feels they can outshout the rest down. Not unlike the rights extremists. It hurts both parties tremendously as it makes particularly younger voters less engaged in politics as they don't want to be name called or they sit in the middle and don't feel desired by either side.
    Thanks from johnflesh

  2. #22
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    42,396
    Thanks
    25011

    From
    New Hampshire
    This sort of thing doesn't help..Sets to divide us.

    “God Bless America” is a “warmongering song” that should not be played at sporting events, according to an Ithaca College professor. “In the aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001, the expressions of hyper-patriotism took hold,” Professor Stephen Mosher wrote in an op-ed for The Ithacan, “Irving Berlin’s warmongering song ‘God Bless America’ became our second, unofficial national anthem at the ballpark.” According to the library of Congress, Berlin wrote “God Bless America” as a “peace song” in response to the “fascism and war threaten[ing] Europe” in 1938. “Regardless of Berlin’s intentions, “God Bless America,” was used to motivate the U.S. population to enter WWII,” Mosher said."

    'God Bless America' a 'warmongering song,' Ithaca professor says | Fox News
    Thanks from Blues63

  3. #23
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    21,748
    Thanks
    12025

    No, just the republican party and right wingers

  4. #24
    New Member Pureinheart's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    590
    Thanks
    149

    From
    USA
    *copied and pasted from Google* Formally stated, Newton's third law is: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. The statement means that in every interaction, there is a pair of forces acting on the two interacting objects. The size of the forces on the first object equals the size of the force on the second object.

    Translated into political terms, you get a push from one political side, this creates a need to a push from another/opposite political side. This is what we've had going on since probably Woodrow Wilson... possibly the women's movement started this.

    The women's movement, 'Suffrage' I believe is the correct term, started out with rational and needed change, but now IMO it's run it's course and has gone into the realm of ridiculous and at times hideous. Like all of the movements that started out as a need, but now are out-of-control. The needs were met and changes implemented, but they turned a profit so they need to keep that money rolling in, thus the 'problems' we have today.

  5. #25
    Veteran Member Moorhuhn Wanted Champion Hollywood's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    66,316
    Thanks
    31449

    From
    Memphis, Tn.
    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    No, Trump seems pretty moderate to me.

    He gave in to the democrats, they are the ones that refuse to budge on anything.

    So this is a one party problem.

    How many times did the republicans give in to Obama while he never gave in once to them.
    The OP did not say one fucking word about Trump.

  6. #26
    Moderator Nicnam's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    11,451
    Thanks
    3335

    From
    :> )
    Moderates are generally easy prey because they can see both sides of a subject matter, but to the left or right, it is either one side or nothing and the attacks begin.
    Last edited by Nicnam; 4th October 2017 at 09:54 AM.

  7. #27
    RNG
    RNG is offline
    Moderator RNG's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    9,969
    Thanks
    5561

    From
    Between everywhere
    Thread Ban Notice

    Spookycolt has been banned from this thread.

    Please do not refer or reply to their posts.

    Thank you.

    Thanks from Blues63

  8. #28
    SWED Missle Command Champion johnflesh's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    19,408
    Thanks
    9644

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by Blues63 View Post
    Sam Harris is a well known figure with strong opinions. To paraphrase Harris, that there is no moderate stance on issues that doesn't leave one open to attack. The extreme left seem to be confused on issues at the moment, with attempts to stifle discussion with identity politics, yet they appear to embracing one of the vilest dogmas encountered by the west, and if we drift to the edge of the right we meet some utterly disgusting individuals who value life based upon constructs of race and religion with 'God on their side', who live in a dualistic universe mired in superstition and emotion.

    Are moderates being 'bullied' into silence through the vociferous nature and intimidation of the extremists on both sides? Are those with genuine concerns and rational solutions on issues being silenced and sidelined in this wave of hysteria we are seeing in the last year or so?

    I'm interested in your thoughts on the subject. This is not about a single issue, but free speech and rational political discourse.
    Yes, absolutely. Reason, even if not agree upon, always gets pushed to the wayside over screaming, tribal extremes.

    And in order to be heard, some will have to raise their voice (so to speak) and fall into the same methods as the extremists.

    Also, I see a lot of what I'd like to call "issue fatigue" where people are taking too many issues/causes upon themselves and tend to bring attitudes from one, over to the other. Even if they aren't related (as already witnessed in this thread).
    It used to be treehuggers, or save the whales or whatever, now you have to have a pulse on every issue, have a position on it, and often that doesn't lead to well thought out positions.

    And then some people are literally cracking under their own pressure.
    Thanks from Blues63

  9. #29
    Chubby Member
    Joined
    May 2006
    Posts
    9,622
    Thanks
    3020

    Even moderates fuel the fire. If you are a moderate, you still likely have a stance on each issue. You can be a moderate, for example, but be staunchly pro life, so that you get caught up in the debate, and the pro choice folks start to seem absolutely crazy to you. Next thing you know you're on a political blog writing stupid shit about how Liberals want free shit with no work so they can lay around and be lazy and have sex and drugs. Or if you're pro choice, next thing you know the conservatives are evil oppressive Nazis who want to tell everybody how to live according their own morality, while half of them are divorced anyway.

    I loathe the red herrings, the topics of the day. So easy to split people into camps using these brainless issues like immigration. "Dey took'r jobs!!!!" I think the parties have been defining the narrative for long enough.

    Here's a moderate issue: "Quit slashing taxes on the rich and paying for it with my kid's tax dollars."

    Or how about, "Stop selling government power to the highest bidder."

    These seem like universal, easy, no-brainer issues.
    Thanks from HayJenn and Blues63

  10. #30
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    53,022
    Thanks
    25394

    From
    Vulcan
    It gets even worse when the personal attacks on candidates are used in place of actual issues and arguments.

    I have told Republicans straight out, who tried to get me to not vote for Clinton because she is an evil person, that "so is Trump - and a LOT worse, because _____," and then we get into a (very) brief battle about who is worse - until I point out that the Republican was always going to vote Republican and would never vote for a Democrat anyway, so it would be naive of me to think that was really the reason for their vote, when in fact it has nothing to do with it.

    In other words, they will say almost anything other than the issues is designed to manipulate me into voting against my political interest - i.e., the agenda I want - and vote for their agenda instead, based on reasons having nothing to do with that agenda. The more extreme it gets, the worse this phenomenon gets, until we get something like the 2016 election, which was almost issue-free.

    But when you get right down to it, the Democrats agree with me more than the Republicans do, so I vote Democrat. If you cannot persuade me on the issues, then you will not persuade me on any other basis and should stop trying. I can respect centrists whose votes may shift with differences in the candidates' positions on the issues, but trying to convince me you are voting on any other basis when I know better is foolish, dishonest, radicalizing and ultimately nothing but destructive.
    Thanks from Blues63

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 14th July 2015, 09:36 AM
  2. Why Is the Green Movement So Dominated by White Dudes?
    By Svengoolie in forum Political Controversies
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 20th July 2014, 04:16 PM
  3. Replies: 278
    Last Post: 17th February 2014, 09:03 PM
  4. Modern Politics
    By Babba in forum Political Ideologies
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 31st July 2011, 01:01 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 15th December 2010, 12:54 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed