Current Affairs Donald Trump POS: Judgement cometh and that right soon

[dholliday]

For me the two are simple to define. One side embraces change and the other fights tooth and nail and fear monger against change. Instead of looking to the future one side is always looking to the past when things were 'better'.

it's all very black & white for you then, not much nuance or shades of grey...

 

[ilikecheese]

it's all very black & white for you then, not much nuance or shades of grey...

Sure there are shades of grey but fundamentally those are the differences.

 

[dholliday]

Sure there are shades of grey but fundamentally those are the differences.

in your opinion...it sounds like something out of Star Wars, good-vs-evil stuff.

Alas, most political academics and learned commentators would disagree with you.

 

[mezzrow]

One advantage of being quite lefty liberal when young but more righty conservative (or at least centrist) when older is that you come to understand both sides, a quality lacking in many who participate in debate nowadays where often there is no quarter given.

Indeed. About half of the over-educated right was leftist in their youth. I'm guilty. I can still make those arguments. They haven't changed.

It's all about learning what actually works as opposed to what we think/hope/wish/believe/were told will work. I'm an empiricist that way. Now if we can just make the stinking football work. Not able to talk about that with any reserve.

 

[ilikecheese]

in your opinion...it sounds like something out of Star Wars, good-vs-evil stuff.

Alas, most political academics and learned commentators would disagree with you.

Why do you view it as good versus evil. Progressives embrace change...conservatives fight against it.

It's not good or evil.

 

[dholliday]

Why do you view it as good versus evil. Progressives embrace change...conservatives fight against it.

It's not good or evil.

Look how your worded what you believe is the core difference:

One side embraces change and the other fights tooth and nail and fear monger against change

"embrace" = positive, inclusive word.

"fear monger" = negative phrase, we don't like that.


Try to look at the differences from a fairer, more neutral perspective. It might help your understanding of things like Trump & Brexit, for the people who voted for such things are still people, not racist members of the dark empire.

Better debate results in more sound decisions at the ballot box, i.e. rather than Trump we'd have a Rand Paul or Bernie Sanders in charge.

 

[ilikecheese]

Look how your worded what you believe is the core difference:



"embrace" = positive, inclusive word.

"fear monger" = negative phrase, we don't like that.


Try to look at the differences from a fairer, more neutral perspective. It might help your understanding of things like Trump & Brexit, for the people who voted for such things are still people, not racist members of the dark empire.

Better debate results in more sound decisions at the ballot box, i.e. rather than Trump we'd have a Rand Paul or Bernie Sanders in charge.

I guess it's difficult to do so when you deep dive into right wing media outlets and despair at the actual fear mongering that happens every single day here.

I honestly spend time reading, watching, and listening to the message the right are sending out.

 

[mezzrow]

For me the two are simple to define. One side embraces change and the other fights tooth and nail and fear monger against change. Instead of looking to the future one side is always looking to the past when things were 'better'.

That depends on what you mean by "past". Some on the left would tweak around the edges, and some would burn it all down. Perhaps all this fear you perceive is of the state of nature that can be brought on by giving up the familiar beliefs and traditions of the recent past that have provided today's ease of living as opposed to earlier and much poorer cultures. Most of us have lost sight of how desperately poor most folks were before the advent of the rigors and afflictions of capitalism and modern technology. The world of 1914 was admittedly hidebound and traditional. Then they got to experience change.

 

[dholliday]

I guess it's difficult to do so when you deep dive into right wing media outlets and despair at the actual fear mongering that happens every single day here.

I honestly spend time reading, watching, and listening to the message the right are sending out.

I spend time reading lefty liberal publications and it's dominated by a divisive identity politics agenda.

So both sides are at it, and both sides could do with not being so tribalist about their beliefs.

 

[ilikecheese]

I spend time reading lefty liberal publications and it's dominated by a divisive identity politics agenda.

So both sides are at it, and both sides could do with not being so tribalist about their beliefs.

I don't see how a more inclusive society can be viewed as divisive.

 

[toffy]

All in all when it comes down to it both sides really aren't too far off in comparison with what they want.

It's more so the method and application of how to achieve it which differs, thus creating the divide.

 

[Deleted member 28206]

Both of the snidey Flynn’s being nicked this week.

 

[toffy]

I don't see how a more inclusive society can be viewed as divisive.

Is not that an inclusive society can be divisive, it's when society as a whole has multiple identities and each are told the other(s) are (insert concern/issue/belief) and as such you must oppose them at will.

This ultimately creates an us v them at all costs

 

[dholliday]

I don't see how a more inclusive society can be viewed as divisive.

the paradox of the modern Left: a.k.a the regressive Left. It preaches inclusiveness by being divisive: i.e. say one thing and do the opposite.

The Right are hardly innocent of this either, with their hawkish fighting for our freedoms by increasing military might via bombs & weapons deals which only cause more enemies. The problem is the perceived Left even do this too (Obama's drones have already been touched on here).

The most honest commentators nowadays are the likes of Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, Ben Shapiro & Milo Yiannopoulos. Interestingly the more young dynamic of these four are Ben & Milo who identify more with conservatism.

In the coming years we may see a swing towards new-conservatism dominating the media and universities once this current phase of liberal-fascism is done.

Me personally I just hope for more open honest dialogue, and more people identifying with neither side. We are individuals after all, it's not normal for everyone to have the same opinion on something.

...but then again centrism isn't as newsworthy as good-vs-evil.

 

[ilikecheese]

the paradox of the modern Left: a.k.a the regressive Left. It preaches inclusiveness by being divisive: i.e. say one thing and do the opposite.

The Right are hardly innocent of this either, with their hawkish fighting for our freedoms by increasing military might via bombs & weapons deals which only cause more enemies. The problem is the perceived Left even do this too (Obama's drones have already been touched on here).

The most honest commentators nowadays are the likes of Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, Ben Shapiro & Milo Yiannopoulos. Interestingly the more young dynamic of these four are Ben & Milo who identify more with conservatism.

In the coming years we may see a swing towards new-conservatism dominating the media and universities once this current phase of liberal-fascism is done.

Me personally I just hope for more open honest dialogue, and more people identifying with neither side. We are individuals after all, it's not normal for everyone to have the same opinion on something.

...but then again centrism isn't as newsworthy as good-vs-evil.

Firstly why is inclusiveness divisive? Why do conservatives rail against inclusive policies.

Milo is one of the most frightening people I have ever listened to. Poison to my ears.