Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine #votebluenomatterwhat are you having fun al? are you having van al? gaolang > your fav i refuse to pay my taxes imagine thinking trump is the good guy is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? it's over for trump life goal sister harem loli mfw kamala harris can actually win real madrid tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you worst thread ever
think the truth tends to lean more in the middle then just plainly whatever x or y idealogy sees as true
be it leftism,conservtism or whatever
rarely anything functions as good or bad, there's always shades of grey with things kinda feel like at least on topics conservatives tend to listen better towards arguments where leftists value the belief of their cause higher
which is quite funny cause just 20 years ago during ragan's era, it was the conservatives who were more hardcore zealots and the liberals who were more open minded ig it's as the sang goes absolute power corrupts absolutely
Its not about good or bad, its about value that work and follow reality VS values that don't work and hurt people.
Capitalism > Doesn't work
Then we must give a chance to another system
Conservatism > Hurt people
Then we must prevent hurtfull conservatism
Meritocracy > Doesn't work
Then we must find another system
This is the injonction to nuance. In some cases, its completely fallacious.
Let me take you back to WWII and the extermination camps : Do you think there is a grey area where those camps are not just plainly monstruous ?
Sometimes, nuance is not needed. Things are just bad and we must denounce them as bad:
Racism = Bad
LGBTQ+phobia = Bad
Sexism = Bad
Do you have nuances to add here ?
Capitalism > Doesn't work
Then we must give a chance to another system
Conservatism > Hurt people
Then we must prevent hurtfull conservatism
Meritocracy > Doesn't work
Then we must find another system
This is the injonction to nuance. In some cases, its completely fallacious.
Let me take you back to WWII and the extermination camps : Do you think there is a grey area where those camps are not just plainly monstruous ?
Sometimes, nuance is not needed. Things are just bad and we must denounce them as bad:
Racism = Bad
LGBTQ+phobia = Bad
Sexism = Bad
Do you have nuances to add here ?
no such thing
most that can be argued factually would be that black people can be poor or have high rates of such but same is true for white people
most of the society would treat racism as a negative thing, condemn people who insult others on race and or make policy
besides any remaining any legal opression of black people have far since been over
slavery
segregation and so on
Post automatically merged:
think your taking a extreme example here
and besides if you want grey morality
america bombed japan twice and killed so many innocents
the grey morality in ww2 was moreso that everyone did bad things not so much that act had some grey area
it's a general ideal that racism,sexism and anti lbgtq are bad
think that's a fair sentiment
however ig the problem is taking the extreme where's the middle ground for murder
and then acting it applies to all issues
Last edited:
I dont think that is where he was going at, but maybe
Some people are just racist though.
Sure
Yeah no lmao.
sense*
My sentence is still fairly easy to understand though
So you never scrolled down when i share dictionaries? Figures.
But even without reading the detailed explanation definitions are usually clear cut
Well obviously in usage, depending on context. And gender identity being in the dictionary is also a point against the nonsense you are spouting since this isnt even common usage yet. More people than not still reject this concept and ive seen conservatives bash dictionaries because they adapted this concept, just like back when the mrna vaccines were distributed and dictionaries changed the definition for vaccine.
Sometimes the evolution happens fast.
Geschlecht is biological or grammatical. Which is why we literally adopted gender into our dictionary lmao. An english word
Not at all. I dont necessarily like the definitions. Im just using words correctly as they are defined.
Which is why i shifted when actually reading the definition for gender a couple days ago, despite me favoring the definition about gender identity
Disagreeing =/= not understanding
*your inability
The backtracking begins
Bye nameless
You literally yourself cried in several posts about nuance in racism and that some forms of racism are worse than other forms lmfao
Post automatically merged:
Some people are just racist though.
Post automatically merged:
Sure
Post automatically merged:
Yeah no lmao.
Post automatically merged:
sense*
My sentence is still fairly easy to understand though
Post automatically merged:
So you never scrolled down when i share dictionaries? Figures.
But even without reading the detailed explanation definitions are usually clear cut
Post automatically merged:
Well obviously in usage, depending on context. And gender identity being in the dictionary is also a point against the nonsense you are spouting since this isnt even common usage yet. More people than not still reject this concept and ive seen conservatives bash dictionaries because they adapted this concept, just like back when the mrna vaccines were distributed and dictionaries changed the definition for vaccine.
Sometimes the evolution happens fast.
Post automatically merged:
Geschlecht is biological or grammatical. Which is why we literally adopted gender into our dictionary lmao. An english word
Post automatically merged:
Not at all. I dont necessarily like the definitions. Im just using words correctly as they are defined.
Which is why i shifted when actually reading the definition for gender a couple days ago, despite me favoring the definition about gender identity
Post automatically merged:
And you inability to understand what I'm saying makes you a step under the feet of far rightist here :)
Be glad. You are helping them
Be glad. You are helping them
*your inability
Post automatically merged:
The backtracking begins
Post automatically merged:
Bye nameless
Post automatically merged:
You literally yourself cried in several posts about nuance in racism and that some forms of racism are worse than other forms lmfao
Last edited:
Sure, keep denying researched and documented subjects.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8688641/
So your statement "there's always shades of grey" is not extreme, but mine suddenly is ? What are you even smoking dude t create so much fallacious reasonnings ?
This is not a grey reasonning.
Nazism was monstruous
Bombing Hiroshima and Nagazaki was also monstruous
We are not talking about the nuances of the acts of a nation here Einstein. Everybody know that all people in one nation doesn't think the same. We are talking about the denounciations of specific acts of violence and therefore specific values that are behind those acts of violence and the fact that when you denounce something, sometimes there is NO nuances to search for.
Therefore, demanding that I should be "nuanced" when I talk about rightists values when we NOW and it is DOCUMENTED that the MAJORITY of those values are harmfull, is being completely irrationnal and close to the reasonning of a teenager that just discovered that there are multiple sides in the political spectrum and that we should therefore listen to everyone to make sure that we can make good compromises.
There is no compromises to make with toxic values.
There is no middle ground. Murder is bad, even if its done for a good reason.
Oh trust me, he was.
The same way that he is trying to equate the sufferings of men with the current systemic oppression of women under patriarchy.
No. We are not born racist, we become racist. And in the case of those people, this racism is created in reaction to the system of oppression they face.
It doesn't excuse their behaviors, but it means that we shouldn't put the same attention in those behaviors that we need to put in the bahvior that promote systemic racism.
We always need to fight systems of oppression first rather than those who act in vengeance because of said system of oppression unless its basolutely needed. But that's not something easy to understand I agree. In fact we are not helped by the culture as this is something that most heroes movies have a hard time understanding (because this is a liberal leaning genre first) and why you will often see super heroes fights those who act because of vengeance or radical ideas and you will almost never them fight the actual system of oppression.
We have a name for that in French. We call that "the Magneto syndrom"
(French but subtitled and you can translate them in english)
Or in English with another video:
Hm.. yes it. Its amazingly far more efficient and precise to understand the meaning of a word.
Repeat it please.
Because they have to be. Its one of the weaknesses of dictionnaries and one of the reasons why they are not a reliable source of knowledge.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8688641/
So your statement "there's always shades of grey" is not extreme, but mine suddenly is ? What are you even smoking dude t create so much fallacious reasonnings ?
This is not a grey reasonning.
Nazism was monstruous
Bombing Hiroshima and Nagazaki was also monstruous
We are not talking about the nuances of the acts of a nation here Einstein. Everybody know that all people in one nation doesn't think the same. We are talking about the denounciations of specific acts of violence and therefore specific values that are behind those acts of violence and the fact that when you denounce something, sometimes there is NO nuances to search for.
Therefore, demanding that I should be "nuanced" when I talk about rightists values when we NOW and it is DOCUMENTED that the MAJORITY of those values are harmfull, is being completely irrationnal and close to the reasonning of a teenager that just discovered that there are multiple sides in the political spectrum and that we should therefore listen to everyone to make sure that we can make good compromises.
There is no compromises to make with toxic values.
There is no middle ground. Murder is bad, even if its done for a good reason.
Oh trust me, he was.
The same way that he is trying to equate the sufferings of men with the current systemic oppression of women under patriarchy.
No. We are not born racist, we become racist. And in the case of those people, this racism is created in reaction to the system of oppression they face.
It doesn't excuse their behaviors, but it means that we shouldn't put the same attention in those behaviors that we need to put in the bahvior that promote systemic racism.
We always need to fight systems of oppression first rather than those who act in vengeance because of said system of oppression unless its basolutely needed. But that's not something easy to understand I agree. In fact we are not helped by the culture as this is something that most heroes movies have a hard time understanding (because this is a liberal leaning genre first) and why you will often see super heroes fights those who act because of vengeance or radical ideas and you will almost never them fight the actual system of oppression.
We have a name for that in French. We call that "the Magneto syndrom"
(French but subtitled and you can translate them in english)
Or in English with another video:
Hm.. yes it. Its amazingly far more efficient and precise to understand the meaning of a word.
Repeat it please.
Because they have to be. Its one of the weaknesses of dictionnaries and one of the reasons why they are not a reliable source of knowledge.
it's nuanced cause you are not solely saying german bad
or america bad, you are looking at the context of various things and saying yea all these counties were doing bad things
another example being soviet nations's gulags
a non nuanced take would be only germany was evil and all other countries were morally right
which is untrue, britan bombed dresden as a another example
carrot what's your thoughts on urakrine getting bombed by russia recently?
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/russia...ssile-attack-kyiv-kharkiv-lavrov-un-cbs-news/
Post automatically merged:
x men
they named something after x men?
I see, you are right indeed.
When you say "correctly" you put a value on the good usage of words as their are defined in a dictionnaries that is - let's not forget - only something that is meant to records words from usage, its not the divine words. People actually CAN disagree by usage with the usage described in dictionnaries
And like I told you, dictionnaries favor the usage and sometimes (in this case) a enbyphobic usage. Which is why defending this definition like you did is queerphobe.
Again, defending the "correct usage" is a moral value, its not based on fact.
No. Here you are not just disagreeing. You are also not understanding the point.
Intent =/= Result
When I'm talking about racism, I'm ALWAYS talking about systemic racism.
Racism = Bad. There is no nuances to have here.
Never read Karl Marx. The only time I met his work was in Assassin's creed Syndicate where our mission is to kill a rich guy and liberate workers from bad labor conditions. Sorry.
What you don't understand is that we are not talking about country or nation - like I said - but the denounciations of specific acts of violence.
So you are comparing Carrots with Potatoes here.
Horrible. Russia must get the F* away from Ukraine.
Yes. This comes from a french pop culture and lefdt leaning politician youtuber. He wrote a book called the "magneto syndrom" explaining what he explains here in this video:
- Bad guys acts, the heroes reacts : Which leads to heroes fighting for the status co and not against the reasons of the radicalization of the bad guys.
- They suffered a lot and therefore radicalize : Which leads to the idea that the "good" approach is the approach of the Heroes. Meaning the approach that is always the one that stays moderate, pragmatic and non pro active. The approach that doesn't let suffering dictate the way we think. A position of priviledge.
- The Vengeance : Those Bad guys seems to always be seen as vengeful and not having a real reasonnable reason to fight. Which is a way to deligitimize their actions and the reasons why they fight.
- The end justify their means : The extremism is what distinguishes the bad guy and the good guys. Even why they are fighting the same problem. But this "extremism" has no real definition in those medias.. A rioter could be portrayed as a extremist in those stories.. and suddenly the narrative would transform them into a second Hitler for some reason. This is a way to deligitimize any actions that are not moderate and peacefull.
- Denonciation of the violences : This is the process in which we denounce any violences of the Bad Guys against the status co or against real oppression as bad but we somehow accept the violences that the good guys will inflict to the bad guys.
- One motivation can hide another : Its the idea that people who fight for a virtuous purpose is always seen as strange, effy. Its the ideas that those motivations are always seens as one motivation hidden another one. A bad one. If someone say that they fight for the good cause then it's sure - looking at those stories - that they are the bad guys, they MUST be the bad guys as anyone who proclame to do things for the good of the people are always bad. > This is done in a way again to deligitimize anyone who are fighting for "just causes" and most of the times people like me or leftist who are trying to move the status co.
- Totalitarism : Its the process that we tend to depict any project of radical transformation of society as authoritarism/totalitarism process. And its logical, a dominant culture - a liberal one here - will hardly create media that will try to question it or promotes its overtaking so we are left with media where in the majority of the cases, Bad guys who wants to completely reform society in a radicalize way will always do it through totalitarist processes.
- Free cruelty : Those bad guys who are fighting against the status co are often depicting atrocious actions for no other reasons that... they are bad guys.
To sum up, anyone in our world that want to REALLY take down the status co (and not what you think the right is doing right now), is treated as radical, extremist, bad guys, totalitarist, fascists.. just like those bad guys of the pop culture who where delibateraly depicted that way in order to undermine any behavior that would radicaly change the system.
When you say "correctly" you put a value on the good usage of words as their are defined in a dictionnaries that is - let's not forget - only something that is meant to records words from usage, its not the divine words. People actually CAN disagree by usage with the usage described in dictionnaries
And like I told you, dictionnaries favor the usage and sometimes (in this case) a enbyphobic usage. Which is why defending this definition like you did is queerphobe.
Again, defending the "correct usage" is a moral value, its not based on fact.
No. Here you are not just disagreeing. You are also not understanding the point.
Intent =/= Result
When I'm talking about racism, I'm ALWAYS talking about systemic racism.
Racism = Bad. There is no nuances to have here.
Never read Karl Marx. The only time I met his work was in Assassin's creed Syndicate where our mission is to kill a rich guy and liberate workers from bad labor conditions. Sorry.
What you don't understand is that we are not talking about country or nation - like I said - but the denounciations of specific acts of violence.
So you are comparing Carrots with Potatoes here.
Horrible. Russia must get the F* away from Ukraine.
Yes. This comes from a french pop culture and lefdt leaning politician youtuber. He wrote a book called the "magneto syndrom" explaining what he explains here in this video:
- Bad guys acts, the heroes reacts : Which leads to heroes fighting for the status co and not against the reasons of the radicalization of the bad guys.
- They suffered a lot and therefore radicalize : Which leads to the idea that the "good" approach is the approach of the Heroes. Meaning the approach that is always the one that stays moderate, pragmatic and non pro active. The approach that doesn't let suffering dictate the way we think. A position of priviledge.
- The Vengeance : Those Bad guys seems to always be seen as vengeful and not having a real reasonnable reason to fight. Which is a way to deligitimize their actions and the reasons why they fight.
- The end justify their means : The extremism is what distinguishes the bad guy and the good guys. Even why they are fighting the same problem. But this "extremism" has no real definition in those medias.. A rioter could be portrayed as a extremist in those stories.. and suddenly the narrative would transform them into a second Hitler for some reason. This is a way to deligitimize any actions that are not moderate and peacefull.
- Denonciation of the violences : This is the process in which we denounce any violences of the Bad Guys against the status co or against real oppression as bad but we somehow accept the violences that the good guys will inflict to the bad guys.
- One motivation can hide another : Its the idea that people who fight for a virtuous purpose is always seen as strange, effy. Its the ideas that those motivations are always seens as one motivation hidden another one. A bad one. If someone say that they fight for the good cause then it's sure - looking at those stories - that they are the bad guys, they MUST be the bad guys as anyone who proclame to do things for the good of the people are always bad. > This is done in a way again to deligitimize anyone who are fighting for "just causes" and most of the times people like me or leftist who are trying to move the status co.
- Totalitarism : Its the process that we tend to depict any project of radical transformation of society as authoritarism/totalitarism process. And its logical, a dominant culture - a liberal one here - will hardly create media that will try to question it or promotes its overtaking so we are left with media where in the majority of the cases, Bad guys who wants to completely reform society in a radicalize way will always do it through totalitarist processes.
- Free cruelty : Those bad guys who are fighting against the status co are often depicting atrocious actions for no other reasons that... they are bad guys.
To sum up, anyone in our world that want to REALLY take down the status co (and not what you think the right is doing right now), is treated as radical, extremist, bad guys, totalitarist, fascists.. just like those bad guys of the pop culture who where delibateraly depicted that way in order to undermine any behavior that would radicaly change the system.
Last edited:
good for you. not the case with other people necessarily, so might want to make that clear in the future when you talk about it and people just assume its "racism" without a prefix.
bruh, its not like your points are hard to get. they usually just suck ass
no im not
Post automatically merged:
bruh, its not like your points are hard to get. they usually just suck ass
Post automatically merged:
no im not
bruh no one said they are a scource of knowledge lmao.
you really have to stop putting words into peoples mouths, making baseless random retarded assumptions left and right.
and then those people who became racist are racist. you can become racist through other means than suffering from systemic oppression. and this systemic oppression is still highly dependent on location.
not sure whether im sad or happy about him becoming president again. it will be an entertainment fest, thats for sure
no u
you really have to stop putting words into peoples mouths, making baseless random retarded assumptions left and right.
Post automatically merged:
and then those people who became racist are racist. you can become racist through other means than suffering from systemic oppression. and this systemic oppression is still highly dependent on location.
Post automatically merged:
not sure whether im sad or happy about him becoming president again. it will be an entertainment fest, thats for sure
Post automatically merged:
S*itty weebs
