Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 30 31 [32] 33 34 ... 3566

Author Topic: AmeriPol thread  (Read 4220223 times)

wierd

  • Bay Watcher
  • I like to eat small children.
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Trump Immigration Boogaloo edition
« Reply #465 on: February 01, 2017, 04:42:52 pm »

It did.

The USA.


Anti-US sentiment, coupled with rampant US nationalism, is breeding that very scenario right now.
Logged

Dozebôm Lolumzalìs

  • Bay Watcher
  • what even is truth
    • View Profile
    • test
Re: AmeriPol thread: Trump Immigration Boogaloo edition
« Reply #466 on: February 01, 2017, 04:48:17 pm »

Argument from popularity
That's so basic m8
For starters just splurging out all the fallacies you've got remembered is not an argument, seconds, I wasn't even making an argument I asked a question xD
* You must admit that your tone is hard to read.
* You were saying "nah dude, he can't be authoritarian, why would half the country vote for him if he were fascist", right?
* I was tired. You were making a fallacy. I just wanted to point that out. please don't mention the fallacy fallacy
No, it's "I'm the one with the gun"!!
I like my saying more. Your one feeds arrogance, mine feeds respect for enemies, the former kills you
I was making a joke, I'm not actually a might-makes-right sort of person.
Logged
Quote from: King James Programming
...Simplification leaves us with the black extra-cosmic gulfs it throws open before our frenzied eyes...
Quote from: Salvané Descocrates
The only difference between me and a fool is that I know that I know only that I think, therefore I am.
Sigtext!

wierd

  • Bay Watcher
  • I like to eat small children.
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Trump Immigration Boogaloo edition
« Reply #467 on: February 01, 2017, 04:53:41 pm »

It is not really a fallacy to point out that our new tinpot despot with orange skin and hair (and very tiny hands), is supported by nearly half the electorate, and question why this is.

Especially when the rhetoric is focused around how unqualified for the job the man is, and how wonderously superior the modern progressive candidates are/were.  There are reasons why those candidates were sidelined. Acknowledging them instead of ostrich head-planting is how you improve. Said head planting is how you go into full denial mode.

Copouts like "because people stirred up race hatred and other ugliness" do not really get to the bottom of the issue. There is political unrest and disfavor, even in the so-called "good years".  Labeling these people "Stupid" and "safe to ignore" is how we got here.

I think that is more the message LW wanted you to take away.
Logged

smjjames

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Trump Immigration Boogaloo edition
« Reply #468 on: February 01, 2017, 04:54:20 pm »

It did.

The USA.


Anti-US sentiment, coupled with rampant US nationalism imperialism, is breeding that very scenario right now.

Nationialism may be the current driving force behind US policy, but the imperialism is more the usual complaint. And yes, the whole ban is feeding into the anti-Trump (and larger anti-American) sentiment around the world plus brewing backlash.

There's always some anti-American sentiment, sure, that comes with the territory of being a world superpower and being in everything, but Trumps actions are (starting to, we haven't seen the last or the worst of it) pouring oil onto the fire. Trumps stances before the election definetly haven't helped either, even though most countries seemed to try and give things a fresh start and a chance.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2017, 05:00:11 pm by smjjames »
Logged

wierd

  • Bay Watcher
  • I like to eat small children.
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Trump Immigration Boogaloo edition
« Reply #469 on: February 01, 2017, 04:58:29 pm »

It did.

The USA.


Anti-US sentiment, coupled with rampant US nationalism/s] imperialism, is breeding that very scenario right now.

Nationialism may be the current driving force behind US policy, but the imperialism is more the usual complaint. And yes, the whole ban is feeding into the anti-Trump (and larger anti-American) sentiment around the world plus brewing backlash.

There's always some anti-American sentiment, sure, that comes with the territory of being a world superpower and being in everything, but Trumps actions are (starting to, we haven't seen the last or the worst of it) pouring oil onto the fire. Trumps stances before the election definetly haven't helped either, even though most countries seemed to try and give things a fresh start and a chance.

Unintentional error in closing bracket makes even better statement. LOL.

"Rampant US" is definitely closer to the core issue than either nationalism or imperialism.
Logged

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH
Re: AmeriPol thread: Trump Immigration Boogaloo edition
« Reply #470 on: February 01, 2017, 04:59:29 pm »

Its contagious, too. It gets hard to not think of your enemy as the devil incarnate when he insists on thinking that way about you.
Yeah, especially since you can't criticize such a situation when everyone is doing it, because everyone is doing it and no one wants to be the first to stop lol

The hard thing is to overcoming that and learning to understand and respect your enemy. History has often took the easy path, though, that is, turning enemies into allies by throwing a mutual, greater enemy at them. The biggest political entities of our age came about due to that, at least initially.
But there's no obvious greater threat around anymore, or at least not one most want to recognize. Will our world burn in the firefight between hypocritical dweebs that are too dense to realize that they are not the sole guardians of truth, and the people who disagree with them?
Jihadis seem to be a pretty easy mutual foe to everyone across the world. Don't understand why westerners are so scared to oppose jihadis, as if they think ordinary Muslims like getting blown up by zealots just because they agree on some principles

* You must admit that your tone is hard to read.
* You were saying "nah dude, he can't be authoritarian, why would half the country vote for him if he were fascist", right?
* I was tired. You were making a fallacy. I just wanted to point that out. please don't mention the fallacy fallacy
*No
*Not saying that
*No fallacy made
I'm saying you gotta ask why half the country looked at an authoritarian nationalist taking power and said: Yes this is good let me help
They obviously would not be doing that if they thought that was a bad choice

I was making a joke, I'm not actually a might-makes-right sort of person.
A wise Mexican once said, might does not make right, but might makes

smjjames

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Trump Immigration Boogaloo edition
« Reply #471 on: February 01, 2017, 05:00:54 pm »

It did.

The USA.


Anti-US sentiment, coupled with rampant US nationalism/s] imperialism, is breeding that very scenario right now.

Nationialism may be the current driving force behind US policy, but the imperialism is more the usual complaint. And yes, the whole ban is feeding into the anti-Trump (and larger anti-American) sentiment around the world plus brewing backlash.

There's always some anti-American sentiment, sure, that comes with the territory of being a world superpower and being in everything, but Trumps actions are (starting to, we haven't seen the last or the worst of it) pouring oil onto the fire. Trumps stances before the election definetly haven't helped either, even though most countries seemed to try and give things a fresh start and a chance.

Unintentional error in closing bracket makes even better statement. LOL.

"Rampant US" is definitely closer to the core issue than either nationalism or imperialism.

Whoops, lol.

Did fix it though, thanks.
Logged

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Trump Immigration Boogaloo edition
« Reply #472 on: February 01, 2017, 05:17:05 pm »

Its contagious, too. It gets hard to not think of your enemy as the devil incarnate when he insists on thinking that way about you.

The hard thing is to overcoming that and learning to understand and respect your enemy. History has often took the easy path, though, that is, turning enemies into allies by throwing a mutual, greater enemy at them. The biggest political entities of our age came about due to that, at least initially.

The interesting thing behind that is that feuds are often between groups who are similar but slightly off. e.g. German Christians vs German Jews, when the German Christians seemingly had no problem teaming up with Asians and  Turks. Or the ethnic clashes in Rwanda, between designated groups which outside observers probably couldn't tell apart. or the North Ireland troubles between Irish people who were largely indistinguishable to outsiders but divided themselves strongly into Catholic and Anglican camps, and the Catholics were happy to receive help from Arabs apparently.

So it's almost like identity is more threatened by the similar than the very different. And if you look at American politics, conservative vs liberal is actually far more vitriolic than racial divisions. The thing is, mainstream conservative and liberal politicians are more similar to each other than we care to admit - we just focus on the difference and ignore that there are huge swathes of policy and "America first" stuff that's just implicit. It never comes up because neither side questions it. Then someone like Trump comes along, and he's the alien to both sides and suddenly liberals are wishing he was Romney or someone. Romney doesn't look so bad now, right?
« Last Edit: February 01, 2017, 05:18:57 pm by Reelya »
Logged

TempAcc

  • Bay Watcher
  • [CASTE:SATAN]
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Trump Immigration Boogaloo edition
« Reply #473 on: February 01, 2017, 05:22:21 pm »

It is not really a fallacy to point out that our new tinpot despot with orange skin and hair (and very tiny hands), is supported by nearly half the electorate, and question why this is.

Especially when the rhetoric is focused around how unqualified for the job the man is, and how wonderously superior the modern progressive candidates are/were.  There are reasons why those candidates were sidelined. Acknowledging them instead of ostrich head-planting is how you improve. Said head planting is how you go into full denial mode.

Copouts like "because people stirred up race hatred and other ugliness" do not really get to the bottom of the issue. There is political unrest and disfavor, even in the so-called "good years".  Labeling these people "Stupid" and "safe to ignore" is how we got here.

I think that is more the message LW wanted you to take away.

Indeed, and thats the thing, people have become proud of being unable to understand the motivations of people that disagree with them. How often have we witnessed people being dismissed and made fun of (in the old ameripol thread, as well, specially mid election) for not going with the general flow of the louder, more visible side of the people? How often have figures from both sides made use of dismissal and sanctimony against each other? Not that this is some sort of new thing, but now it is more clear than ever. The repeated retarded screams of "omg fascism" being thrown left and right, the old-new drug of politics.

At the same time, both sides have genuine and valid concerns and motivations. I see the current period as a chance for people to learn that maybe the other side isn't as hellish as they thought it was. I'm an optimist, you see. Distruption and crisis are good things, they make people reevaluate themselves and their ideas, if they're not complete idiots, that is.

If that doesnt happen, welp, I'll just have to hope we'll still be here when the next power transition comes into being, so people can have another shot.

@LW: I agree, but it seems nobody knows (or agrees on) a way to fight said enemy. The west is still a bunch of idiots with multiple solutions that are ineffectualy thrown at multiple things, while also taking time to take stabs at each other. The question is, will the huge orangutan in the room (carefuly nudged by the few clever people with power and influence) break the stalemate?

I have no idea, so until then, I will take refuge in the hue.
Logged
On normal internet forums, threads devolve from content into trolling. On Bay12, it's the other way around.
There is no God but TempAcc, and He is His own Prophet.

wierd

  • Bay Watcher
  • I like to eat small children.
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Trump Immigration Boogaloo edition
« Reply #474 on: February 01, 2017, 05:27:31 pm »

Reelya:

This is nothing new.  It is the other slope on the model of the uncanny valley after all.

It is why humans love robots that are super shiny, and totally not humans-- but are repulsed by overly-humanized silicone skin, dead staring eyes, etc. (Similar with "creepy dolls", et al)

When something is very close to the same, but subtly different, it causes that subtle difference to stand out more and more, which is upsetting to people.

I am quite sure that if we found ourselves in a horrible dystopian future where all children are artificially prepared clones of Donald Trump, and thus literally identical aside from disfigurements, the ones with moles, or scars would be the new minority, and the other clones would react in horror at seeing them.
Logged

smjjames

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Trump Immigration Boogaloo edition
« Reply #475 on: February 01, 2017, 05:33:15 pm »

@LW: I agree, but it seems nobody knows (or agrees on) a way to fight said enemy. The west is still a bunch of idiots with multiple solutions that are ineffectualy thrown at multiple things, while also taking time to take stabs at each other. The question is, will the huge orangutan in the room (carefuly nudged by the few clever people with power and influence) break the stalemate?

I have no idea, so until then, I will take refuge in the hue.

Which enemy are we talking about?

ISIS? They're not something you can actually respect. Sure, one might respect an enemy for their prowess or <insert some character trait that would fit a warrior>, but it's not something that is politically palatable. Whether we are being ineffective towards ISIS is up for debate though.

Russia? Sure, we could respect them on some level, and they are trying to seek respect as a global power, but at the same time, they're being rather belligerent. As far as being ineffective, yeah, the West has been pretty reluctant to respond heavily to Russia and we could definetly have done better.
Logged

wierd

  • Bay Watcher
  • I like to eat small children.
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Trump Immigration Boogaloo edition
« Reply #476 on: February 01, 2017, 05:40:26 pm »

More, respect WHY ISIS exists:

ISIS exists, because:

1) the western world imposed sanctimonious control over the region to secure oil production interests, and installed/supported despots to accomplish this.

2)Said despots treated the locals like total shit, which has fomented generations of hatred.

3)Religion is a very good focus for angry people to come together.

4)Angry people, who have been indoctrinated under totalitarianism, unite under a religious banner (even though this is counter to many of the religious dogmas that are more modern.) [See southern baptist movements in the US for western parallels, as well as the whole IRA thing in Ireland in the 80s]

This has happened many MANY MANY times in history. It will continue to happen as long as powerful interests/regimes install totalitarian despots in order to secure material wealth or economic status by force, instead of with actually fair trade.

Respecting how and why ISIS exists is fundamentally important to defeating it-- because it will just reappear again and again as long as the preconditions for its appearance are sustained.

Fun activity:

Suffer through the really dry writings of Frank Herbert's DUNE, and substitute every instance of "arrakeen" with "Muslim", and every instance of "Fremen" with "ISIS"-- Bonus for replacing "the imperium" with "The west" and "Spice" with "oil".

See how horribly similar the narrative is.

« Last Edit: February 01, 2017, 05:46:57 pm by wierd »
Logged

smjjames

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Trump Immigration Boogaloo edition
« Reply #477 on: February 01, 2017, 05:50:51 pm »

The problem now though is, how do you fix this without screwing things up? Pretty much the only solutions we have are some form of Western intervention, whether direct, indirect, or somewhere in the middle. And Western intervention is one of the more despised things in the region.

And of course, the regions politics complicate things immensely.

Not that it's impossible, but it'll definetly take a very long time.

edit: Ironic use of the word 'dry' there (though I don't expect everybody to be a fan of the Dune series), but yes, I see the similarities (and the Fremen were pretty blatantly 'sci-fi future Muslims'*). Also, House Harkonnen would be a better fit for the West, or Capitalism at least.

*Then again, the sexes were pretty equal, it's the Tleiliaxu that take the whole 'women are lesser' to a real extreme.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2017, 05:58:36 pm by smjjames »
Logged

Frumple

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Prettiest Kyuuki
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Trump Immigration Boogaloo edition
« Reply #478 on: February 01, 2017, 05:51:44 pm »

Russia? Sure, we could respect them on some level, and they are trying to seek respect as a global power, but at the same time, they're being rather belligerent.
Less a matter of trying to seek respect and more a matter of trying to seek submission, tbh. S'kinda' like the general difference vis a vis foreign policy between conservatives/reps and liberals/dems in the US, really. Dems'll at least try to offer a modicum of respect most of the time, work out diplomatic solutions, economic ties, stuff like that. Respect for sovereignty, capability, etc. Reps... not so much, at the absolute least for a while now. More direct intervention, unilateral action, belligerency and dismissive/demeaning language, and so on. You have to cherry pick like a mofo to miss the difference, heh, for all that's been half a hobby for a lot of the country over the last few decades :V
Logged
Ask not!
What your country can hump for you.
Ask!
What you can hump for your country.

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH
Re: AmeriPol thread: Trump Immigration Boogaloo edition
« Reply #479 on: February 01, 2017, 06:22:10 pm »

I think that is more the message LW wanted you to take away.
Pretty much, thanks for that well-done post

If that doesnt happen, welp, I'll just have to hope we'll still be here when the next power transition comes into being, so people can have another shot.
Fingers crossed no WWIII. At most, 8 years, no WWIII.

@LW: I agree, but it seems nobody knows (or agrees on) a way to fight said enemy. The west is still a bunch of idiots with multiple solutions that are ineffectualy thrown at multiple things, while also taking time to take stabs at each other. The question is, will the huge orangutan in the room (carefuly nudged by the few clever people with power and influence) break the stalemate?
I have no idea, so until then, I will take refuge in the hue.
Probably the first and easiest would be to stop treating Muslims like they're all one people and instead start treating them like equals. In the West you take a look at Christians and you begin categorizing them down to the individual atom, taking into all considerations from sects to schisms, regions to nationality and locality, but when dealing with Islam all Muslims get treated as just "Muslims." This has had disastrous effects where Muslims from various schools of interpretation or from around the world have been allowed to fall under one sole authority, the West has not really noticed that Bangladeshi Muslims started adopting Arab customs and interpretations because it can't tell the difference between the two. This has been disastrous owing to the sheer volume of extremist clerics coming from Arabia, I kekled when the Germans didn't find it suspicious that Saudi Arabia was building mosques in their country for the refugees, but spent no money on churches, schools or hospitals, or gave any aid, or indeed, housed refugees in their own nation. Who could've guessed what their intentions were what a shocking surprise. In typical stupid fashion Merkel responded by banning fashion, so I concur with you, the West really seems determined to kill itself with style

Which enemy are we talking about?
ISIS? They're not something you can actually respect. Sure, one might respect an enemy for their prowess or <insert some character trait that would fit a warrior>, but it's not something that is politically palatable. Whether we are being ineffective towards ISIS is up for debate though.
Political concerns are valid, especially when dealing with a group that is seeking legitimacy in order to become a state-entity. That is where I think it is worth separating "respecting an enemy" from "paying respects to an enemy". A bay12 example would be in the ol' Yurop threads of yore, I remember giving all the evidence that ISIS were infiltrating Europe amongst the mass human flow, everyone just joked about how they were stupid goatfuckers who couldn't achieve anything.
Worth emphasizing, I had emphasis that infiltrating Europe was their own stated goal, that their fighters had been caught infiltrating Europe, and that ISIS fighters had already infiltrated Europe - people still laughed it off, because they were a disrespected enemy. The impression was that they were an army of hobo virgins who slept with goats and had no skills.

Heck, I remember making this in 2015:
Quote
P.s. if ISIS is not as uneducated and idiotic as you believe, you will not find them - especially with no border checks, you will never know.
People responded to this with top bants about a grand conspiracy of Mohammedan assassins with sexy beards. Whilst hilarious, I think it underscores what happens when you don't respect your enemy. They are stupid goatfuckers, ergo we are safe, ignore the warning signs, nothing will go wrong.

Then you've got to respect who ISIS fighters are. Thousands of men and women leaving safety, good jobs, well-educated, good lives leaving with their family or embarking on suicide attacks to kill the people whom they belong to, or kill innocent people thousands of miles away they've never met before or had quarrel with.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Stuff like this is hilarious but Westerners don't ask serious questions as to why so many Muslims are violently rejecting liberal society whereas their forefathers were content. Why does someone reject Higher Education, good pay, tolerant multicultural society and sexual liberalism, seeking instead to eradicate it by swordtip? There's gonna be those that just want to have adventure, sex slaves and warfare but they aren't more than a significant minority and brush over all of the jihadi brides, or the doctors, scientists, media, IT and other support staff ISIS managed to recruit from the West. Especially since ISIS itself isn't all that important, there won't be much use in destroying the entity if it is simply replaced by numerous successor entities founded by all its former veterans who have returned home to recruit in the West's ever-growing populations, one in which the vacuum of any greater unity or fraternity leaves open to strong movements. I was most amused reading the story of one girl who felt like she was being an edgy rebel by wearing the burqa, it wasn't so funny after she flew to Syria for example.

Then there are the similarities, whilst Western liberals have spent their time checking privileges and warning of muh toxic masculinities, convinced that ISIS fighters are the penultimate evil - it doesn't help at all when it comes to formulating a plan of action in destroying the appeal of ISIS. The appeal of being a hero, a rebel, warrior, a ghazi, of fighting - without providing an alternative to this, ISIS will continue to be a powerful beacon for young, very bored Muslim men, who are not given into the material distractions of the West. Which is an issue since the same people who cannot comprehend this are the same people in the West who push for millions of young Muslim men to arrive but then find they have no idea how to deal with them; with all valid concerns of this policy being disregarded as the realm of another "stupid, ignorant enemy": the right wing.

We need friendship and love in this day and age. Not the hippy crap, the toxic kind

Russia? Sure, we could respect them on some level, and they are trying to seek respect as a global power, but at the same time, they're being rather belligerent. As far as being ineffective, yeah, the West has been pretty reluctant to respond heavily to Russia and we could definetly have done better.
Like I said before, there may come a point where the West will have to kill many Russians; that does not mean one cannot respect them. They want to defend their world as much as we want to defend ours
Pages: 1 ... 30 31 [32] 33 34 ... 3566