Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wierd]

This is a situation where I would be VERY VERY pleased to be proven wrong.

However, I have seen an alarming amount of support for Trump in the local conservative human pool I have had the pleasure of speaking to. It might just be regional, but I fully expect Trump to have very good numbers in bible-belt states.

At that point, it starts to degrade into a pissing match between partisan political voters-- and the theoretical impact of basic name awareness on disinterested voters.

Most people are NOT investing the energy required to vote responsibly. Keep that in mind.

[NullForceOmega]

Seriously, being found in bed with another woman would probably improve Hillary's chances.

[wierd]

I had considered making that quip ^^  but decided it would be in bad taste.

[SalmonGod]

Which is exactly what I just said--

Completely ignores the collateral consequences of rushing the reforms out on a society that is ill equiped to absorb them.

(For an example of just how dangerous radicalization is, look at the middle east. Once radicalization sets in, it is VERY VERY hard to eradicate. Prevention is the better medicine. Dont just handwave away the consequences of having a pretty non-trivial percentage of your population driven toward the radicalization axis of human behavior. )

You're presenting a choice between radicalizing a small number of people who will do bad things or allowing the continued unjustified suffering of a large number of people over the course of generations.  You're saying progressives choose the former out of ignorance.  I'm saying they choose it out of preference.

[NullForceOmega]

I say they choose it out of blind-determination, and a lack of good sense.  Suffering is universal.

[mainiac]

However, I have seen an alarming amount of support for Trump

Yeah I've seen it too.  But visible support doesn't mean a close election or even a competitive one.

Seriously, being found in bed with another woman would probably improve Hillary's chances.

I was referencing

The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy.[/url]

[wierd]

You are discounting the full spectrum of the consequence of domestic terrorism. Radicalization goes both ways, and once it does, you end up with situations like Isreal VS Palestine.

EG, Domestic terrorist feels that all political options to mitigate "Social decadence" have failed, leaving only the violent paths. So, they elect to use violence. (Clinic bombings, et al.) As they use this violence, they radicalize the opposition-- they see their ideological opponents as violent bastards that the world is better off without, instead of seeing them as desperate people who cannot cope with the new shape of the world. As such, they further put pressure on this demographic, and people whom they view as being part and parcel with it (People who exhibit counter-cultural views, but are not themselves radicalized yet.) This then radicalizes these people, and it festers and festers and festers.

Discounting this cycle of violence as being "less than the consequences of being more tactful" is just straight up ignorant. Sorry Salmon, but it is.

[SalmonGod]

Discounting this cycle of violence as being "less than the consequences of being more tactful" is just straight up ignorant. Sorry Salmon, but it is.

How do you tactfully say

"We need for you to accept living out your life without basic human rights.  We think you should have these rights, and we have the momentum to make sure you get them... but that would mean actually having to defend them.  Sorry it's just too much."

[Shadowlord]

I don't know about you, but I haven't heard of any abortion-rights supporters shooting or bombing anything.

By the way, I'd say that if people are being radicalized it's due to the influence of other people, not just because society is changing around them. Someone has to convince them that they should be really, really angry about that change.

[NullForceOmega]

Define unjustified suffering.  And while you're at it you'd better explain how someone is being denied basic human rights.  If you cite an example outside of the US I'm going to ignore you, because the UN has no actual power to enforce shit, and if you aren't in a nation that actually guarantees basic human rights you don't have them.

If someone in the US is being denied basic human rights then they have all the tools at their disposal (through our federal government) to have the problem dealt with, they just have to get off their damn asses and do something, instead of whine.

And for the last time STOP TRYING TO SENSATIONILZE THINGS.  It does not help your cause.  It does not fix things.  It just makes people ignore you.

[wierd]

Leadership is about hard choices Salmon.

You dont always get what you want.  Good leadership is often pragmatic, and acknowledging humanity's intrinsic faults is important, especially if your ultimate goal is to minimize total human suffering.

EG, More will suffer in the long term from the continuing cycle of radicalization (the middle east has seen this for CENTURIES. CENTURIES!!) than will suffer from a more realistic pace of social reform. Is waiting 100 years instead of 60 years really that important to you, that you would seriously consider playing chicken with a radicalized populace?



Shadowlord:  Being dismissive is an effective form of social violence. 
http://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/research/2011/110510WilliamsOstracism.html

When you write off a demographic like that, you ostracize them, and it has real consequences. You dont have to use physical violence; social violence is just as damaging.

[Flying Dice]

e: You know what? Fuck them. If they want to engage in terrorism because people are getting equal rights and treatment before the law, we'll treat them like terrorists. You are literally saying that we should bow to terrorists and radicals because it's easier that way. Go back to 1930s Britain please.

I don't know about you, but I haven't heard of any abortion-rights supporters shooting or bombing anything.

By the way, I'd say that if people are being radicalized it's due to the influence of other people, not just because society is changing around them. Someone has to convince them that they should be really, really angry about that change.

Note: That MIC piece explicitly pointed out the fetus organ hoax as the impetus for the new wave of anti-choice terrorism, and that's a fairly accurate assessment of the situation. It took a right-wing think tank running a propaganda campaign to stir things back up.

[wierd]

The question you are ignoring though FD, is why the think tank exists to begin with.

[Flying Dice]

Ignoring? It's pretty blatant: these people continue because they are allowed to continue. See above re: appeasement.

[wierd]

I see you are radicalized. Fancy that.

(As I linked to earlier, social ostracism has very real, very deep consequences on the human psyche. Using it as a response to physical violence does not help those people, and only makes the problem worse in the long run. Once you make the leap from "That's a person who has a problem" to "Those people only exist because we tolerate it, (implying a strict policy of intolerance is warranted)", you have crossed into the radical axis of human thought.)