Jump to content
Samie Bagley

When Did it Become Acceptable to Bring Politic of Hate into SL?

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, Seicher Rae said:

I've never seen such a time when there was such a theoretical fluidity over what is a fact. Monyihan said it best with, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." When faced with someone who doesn't get that, there's no room for discussion

Exactly why I do not engage with them.

ETA Michelle Goldberg calls it “epistemological nihilism.” 

Edited by Pamela Galli
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Pamela Galli said:

Exactly why do not engage with them.

lol

The-Emperors-New-Clothes.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Resi Pfeffer said:

Democracy is a nice and shiny Utopia, nothing more.
Mankind always did and still consists of some wolves and a lot of sheeps. I dont see, why anything was changing or will change about that.

Please leave wolves out of it. They do not deserve the bad reputation they've been given. In many ways, they are more humans than human are.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Ew, politics

ok, here’s mine:

-Anyone who crosses the any US border illegally should be shot on sight, men, women, children, dogs, don’t care. No prison expenditures, ammo is cheap.

-However if you immigrate through the legal means we have in place, awesome, bring your food, I’m an American and I live to eat your food.

-Farming families need to be tax exempt, they make almost nothing worth taxing and are vital to the US domestic economy.

-Circumcision is genital mutilation and should be banned nationwide, ***** your religious tradition, and if you defend it as a choice you are advocating for the mutilation of infants and you should hang yourself promptly.

-Nuclear power needs more funding, just overall, partially state run power to get rid of coal and oil burning power.

-Michelle Obama’s healthy school meal plan didn’t make kids eat healthier, it made them not eat what they are served. Kids don’t like skim milk and vegetables, they need greasy pizza and chocolate 2%.

-The next time anyone starts some crap in the Middle East, glass their city and be done with it. If they can still retaliate then glass it again. Not worth sending a single American soldier anywhere else in the world.

-Speaking of which, cut ties with our ungrateful allies who can’t manage their own military and rely on the USA as the key player in NATO. When we struggled to keep our crap in Japan and South Korea managed well, both those nations picked up the slack automatically. We were not the dominant force, we were just help, as we should be. The UK and EU can honestly ***** off with expecting joint military funding from the US.

-Israel, just leave. Let them genocide eachother and be done with it. We give them obscene amounts of money and weapons and get absolutely nothing in return but an ally who we essentially created, and who keeps shooting children in the desert.


some other hot takes:

-If you still use Facebook in 2020 you’re out of touch, nobody uses centralized social media anymore, get with the times grandma.

-If your website has a popup that won’t let me see the content without disabling my ad blocker, I’m just going to flag it as an ad for my adblocker to block. 

-America is a nation of prudes, religion should never be allowed in politics, churches shouldn’t be tax exempt

 

And with that I hope I either get forum banned so I don’t have to see these retarded posts ever again, or it’ll get the thread locked as being argumentative.

Edited by cheesecurd
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Suppose that we instead put aside our positions and our ideological allegiances, and begin from really fundamental principles that we do agree on. Life is better than death. Equity and equality are better than inequality. Freedom is better than tyranny. Everyone deserves access to the necessities of life. And so forth.

The devil, of course, is in the details, but any negotiator knows that you start from common ground, and work your way outward from that. Someone who believes that life begins at conception (or that contraception is immoral) is not likely going to be able to sway me from views on reproductive choice -- but if we begin from fundamentals that we agree on, they, and I, are a lot less likely to simply demonize and dismiss the views of others.

Evil, mostly, isn't "people." It's the actions that people take in pursuit of things that they believe are good. So, let's start by examining those fundamentals: what is good?

To compare ("better than") equity and inequality is ludicrous.  Generally, equity in life will LEAD to inequality.  I work harder than my neighbor, and I do better work, so it is equitable that I get a promotion and make more money with better perks.  Now my neighbor and I are in a state of inequality.  As for life being better than death, people tend to apply that "fundamental principle" pretty haphazardly, ie. however it is convenient for them.  Executing a serial killer is evil, because life is better than death.  Euthanizing a terminally ill person is good, because choice is more important than life, apparently.  "Freedom" tends to mean different things to different people.  Witness the current tendency of "progressives" to claim that freedom of speech is subservient to their freedom to not be offended by speech they disagree with.  Some would say we're seeing the rise of tyranny in government actors (ie. universities) censoring who can speak on campuses, regulating what they deem to be "hate speech", and eliminating due process for those accused of a whole host of offenses.  Everyone "deserves" "access" to the "necessities" of life?  Each of those 3 words is subject to strenuous debate, so considering that to be a "fundamental principle" is silly, and usually used as an emotional appeal to try and push through the proposal de jour for yet another program of government largess at the expense of, well, the person who worked hard and earned the promotion and now has to pay more taxes to pay for a program to benefit the spawn of her lazy neighbor to get a free college education.

Me, I just sit back and laugh as the world burns, knowing that the Aristotlean progression of governments is inevitable, and that in a generation or two the decrepit democracies of the West will collapse into new monarchies (albeit with a shint new name, since "king" is passe).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Evil, mostly, isn't "people."

:::and other reasonable stuff:::

Evil, mostly, isn't people. Hm. But there are evil people, and they do evil things. It does happen, not infrequently. When theoretically not-evil people support evil, then... what does that say about people? Individuals and society? I guess I'm in a quoting mood today: The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

:::wanders back to my safe little cell at Misanthropes Anonymous:::

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

Me, I just sit back and laugh as the world burns, knowing that the Aristotlean progression of governments is inevitable, and that in a generation or two the decrepit democracies of the West will collapse into new monarchies (albeit with a shint new name, since "king" is passe).

No. If we can't learn to cooperate, and soon, our world as we know it (civilization) will not be around much longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I know it's supposedly evil to Godwin a thread, but is there a point at which we use the term "evil' to describe someone who is excessively focused on self and individualism without any concern for others and  the cooperation needed for a healthy society?  Like, for example, Hitler?

You may wish to review the definition of "fascism", as fascism is all about suborning the individual to the state.  Funny, isn't it, how so many of the evil rules of the 20th century - Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot - all espoused a particular economic system know as socialism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Normally I'm not someone who will talk about my politics with others unless specifically asked. I was taught to listen to others more than talk because that is how we learn.

I experienced two similar things in both rl and sl related to current politics here in the US that has made the willingness to listen stop. At least to an extent. The first time was in sl. I was at a park with my zooby daughter. I got a message saying that they saw from my profile I was one of the many useless humans living off the government because I'm deaf. That they had hope Trump would purge the country of people like me because I didn't contribute to society. Although this happened in sl, it shook me up. I grabbed my daughter and teleported home because although no one can cause physical harm in sl, it did cause harm in other ways.

A similar experience happened in rl about a year ago while I was at the grocery store shopping with a friend. My friend and I were signing back and forth. I had an older gentlemen approach us with the same assumptions we lived off the government and that he hoped along with the illegals being rounded up, members in society like us would be rounded up as well. That it would be a good move for our country to get rid of us. This was much more terrifying for obvious reasons.

If I know someone is a Trump supporter, I will avoid them in both worlds. We all have the freedom of our political views and to express those views. I realize that. I'm not going to blame LL for those who get hateful about their views though. I'm not going to stop showing my support financially because of it. It just means I'm very careful about who I interact with.

 

  • Like 3
  • Sad 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:
52 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I know it's supposedly evil to Godwin a thread, but is there a point at which we use the term "evil' to describe someone who is excessively focused on self and individualism without any concern for others and  the cooperation needed for a healthy society?  Like, for example, Hitler?

You may wish to review the definition of "fascism", as fascism is all about suborning the individual to the state.  Funny, isn't it, how so many of the evil rules of the 20th century - Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot - all espoused a particular economic system know as socialism.

This is a complicated subject!

But Bernie Sanders doesn't propose what Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and Pol Pot espoused...

Edited by Luna Bliss
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

This is a complicated subject!

But Bernie Sanders doesn't propose what Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and Pol Pot espoused...

It's not very complicated at all.  They all espoused socialism, just as Sanders does.  He just pretends he's smarter than all of them and will get it right this time.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tolya Ugajin said:
9 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

This is a complicated subject!

But Bernie Sanders doesn't propose what Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and Pol Pot espoused...

It's not very complicated at all.  They all espoused socialism, just as Sanders does.  He just pretends he's smarter than all of them and will get it right this time.

There are different types of Socialism.

Which proposals on Bernie's website are the same as the ones Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and Pol Pot espoused?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Beth Macbain said:

lest people who believe it's morally acceptable to exterminate an entire race of people actually take the steps to do that very thing. 

You mean like they've already been doing since 1492 or so? I wouldn't mind sending them all back to whatever country their immigrant forbearers came from. Conquerors my ass. Bunch of damn fanatic thieves was what they really were. Taking and/or destroying everything in their path and leaving nothing for anyone else.

Yeah, I went there. And now I'm going to walk away before I really come uncanted, my blood pressure skyrockets and I have a heart attack.

 

Not attacking you Beth. Just using your post to springboard and relieve some pressure. Everyone is too busy pointing fingers and casting blame to look at their own contributions to the world burning. That is what greed and xenophobia breed. Extermination of Homo sapiens sapiens and the annihilation of the planet. And all I can do is watch them drag us all down with them.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

To compare ("better than") equity and inequality is ludicrous.  Generally, equity in life will LEAD to inequality.  I work harder than my neighbor, and I do better work, so it is equitable that I get a promotion and make more money with better perks.  Now my neighbor and I are in a state of inequality.  As for life being better than death, people tend to apply that "fundamental principle" pretty haphazardly, ie. however it is convenient for them.  Executing a serial killer is evil, because life is better than death.  Euthanizing a terminally ill person is good, because choice is more important than life, apparently.  "Freedom" tends to mean different things to different people.  Witness the current tendency of "progressives" to claim that freedom of speech is subservient to their freedom to not be offended by speech they disagree with.  Some would say we're seeing the rise of tyranny in government actors (ie. universities) censoring who can speak on campuses, regulating what they deem to be "hate speech", and eliminating due process for those accused of a whole host of offenses. 

You may find this difficult to believe, but I agree with you on these things. There's political craziness all around.

 

15 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

Everyone "deserves" "access" to the "necessities" of life?  Each of those 3 words is subject to strenuous debate, so considering that to be a "fundamental principle" is silly, and usually used as an emotional appeal to try and push through the proposal de jour for yet another program of government largess at the expense of, well, the person who worked hard and earned the promotion and now has to pay more taxes to pay for a program to benefit the spawn of her lazy neighbor to get a free college education.

Here is where it gets dicey. I agree about the free college education for all that you are declaiming. I think in a Utopian society that would be a grand thing. We are far from that. I will vote for a candidate who espouses the free college, because that isn't Trump, and I'd vote for a demented, drunk, 6-legged tarantula over Trump. My candidate of choice is under the age of 70, fwiw. 

BUT, when you are talking about social safety nets, things that you might be terming "largess" and when you characterize the recipients of such programs as "lazy" then... no. The current regime is pushing hard on its war against the poor. Not the war on poverty anymore, but the war on the poor. Medicaid and food assistance is under attack. This is a political topic with a moral attachment. 

21 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

Me, I just sit back and laugh as the world burns, knowing that the Aristotlean progression of governments is inevitable, and that in a generation or two the decrepit democracies of the West will collapse into new monarchies (albeit with a shint new name, since "king" is passe).

While I understand this on one level, eff it we'll all be dead anyway... And governments do evolve or devolve as the case may be, sitting by while things are burning isn't a great choice. This happened in, oh let's just say, Germany, for example, sometime in the last century. Also, the world is literally burning, unless you are a climate change denier. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

It's not very complicated at all.  They all espoused socialism, just as Sanders does.  He just pretends he's smarter than all of them and will get it right this time.

Yeah, Hitler was a socialist. Thanks for that fascinating historical tidbit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

There are different types of Socialism.

Which proposals on Bernie's website are the same as the ones Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and Pol Pot espoused?

Different types of socialism?  Has anyone told Karl?

Look, I'm not going to get into a debate on socialism via a text medium with someone who believes socialism is a path to utopia, despite the clear evidence of it failing over and over and over again.  You're free to enjoy your delusion, just as libertarians are free to believe a completely free market will lead to paradise.  But, I will leave you with this - what Bernie currently proposes is NOT socialism, it's a Northern European style welfare state that many ignorant Americans (especially those on the right) wrongly believe is "socialism".  But Bernie's past rhetoric makes it very clear he favors actual socialism - which never has and never will fail to fail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:
18 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

This is a complicated subject!

But Bernie Sanders doesn't propose what Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and Pol Pot espoused...

It's not very complicated at all.  They all espoused socialism, just as Sanders does.  He just pretends he's smarter than all of them and will get it right this time.

Tolya, please, you are smarter than this. The logic you just did doesn't flow. I'm actually giggling by writing Bernie and Pol Pot in the same sentence, it is that ludicrous. OK...

Some despots are socialists. Not all socialists are despots. FIFY

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lyssa Greymoon said:

Yeah, Hitler was a socialist. Thanks for that fascinating historical tidbit.

If you don't understand that he was a socialist, then you are unusually ignorant. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

Not attacking you Beth.

Oh, I completely agree with you. What happened when the intruders decided to settle in this "uninhabited" land is unconscionable. What is still happening today is unconscionable. The way it has been, literally, white-washed by the history books is unconscionable. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

But, I will leave you with this - what Bernie currently proposes is NOT socialism, it's a Northern European style welfare state that many ignorant Americans (especially those on the right) wrongly believe is "socialism".  But Bernie's past rhetoric makes it very clear he favors actual socialism - which never has and never will fail to fail.

It sounds like you believe what they have in Europe is really bad, but they have it much better than we do in the US. Though it appears Europeans pay more in taxes they actually don't, as they get far more services that we have to pay for ourselves in the US which are not assigned the name of 'tax'.  Services such as health care, bullet trains, great schools, nursing care, prescriptions, 4 weeks paid vacation, paid maternity leave, paid sick leave, daycare, free college. Since we have to pay for all this ourselves (we could call these 'hidden taxes') the net effect is that those in the US come out far worse compared to most other 1st world countries (especially when we go bankrupt due to medical bills, or become one of the 40,000 annually that die due to lack of health insurance).

Edited by Luna Bliss
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d rather know than not know someone’s views, even though I do not discuss my politics much at all, I do try to make my values obvious inworld too, it makes for a more pleasant encounter since everyone does make judgements, no question...but I still think limiting and making containment areas for these topics on forums is best. 

I have to say that I prefer inworld boxing though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Seicher Rae said:

Tolya, please, you are smarter than this. The logic you just did doesn't flow. I'm actually giggling by writing Bernie and Pol Pot in the same sentence, it is that ludicrous. OK...

Some despots are socialists. Not all socialists are despots. FIFY

Kindly give me a nice long list of non-despotic socialist regimes.  Real socialists, not mere nanny states of Europe.  I can add Chavez and Castro and Kim to mine, so I'm at, what, 8?  And I'm not even counting all the lesser known ones, like the socialist party of Mongolia, which attempted to extirpate their national hero, Chinggis Khan, from their history.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Seicher Rae said:

Medicaid and food assistance is under attack.

Two things, without which, I would already be dead. As if that is what I deserve just for not being white and male.

JFC, I need to close this thread and stop reading the utter bullcrap that's been posted.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

It sounds like you believe what they have in Europe is really bad, but they have it much better than we do in the US. Though it appears Europeans pay more in taxes they actually don't, as they get far more services that we have to pay for ourselves in the US which are not assigned the name of 'tax'.  Services such as health care, bullet trains, great schools, nursing care, prescriptions, 4 weeks paid vacation, paid maternity leave, paid sick leave, daycare, free college. Since we have to pay for all this ourselves (we could call these 'hidden taxes') the net effect is that those in the US come out far worse compared to most other 1st world countries (especially when we go bankrupt due to medical bills, or become one of the 40,000 annually that die due to lack of health insurance).

Europe's nanny states are neither good nor bad, as they are what the people want.  They are almost certainly economically unsustainable, but that is not my problem, as I have no desire to live there.  BTW, being that I'm marrying a Canadian, I'm familiar with the lack of prescription coverage, lack of dental coverage, and 26 week average waiting periods that their version of NHS provides them, which, fortunately, my capitalist company offsets by providing a supplemental benefits package.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...