Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine #votebluenomatterwhat are you having fun al? are you having van al? gaolang>jurota i refuse to pay my taxes is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? it's over for trump life goal sister harem mfw kamala harris can actually win real men pay taxes tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you
« if truth doesn’t existing is true it means that truth exists because it makes that statement true » is a sophism from an amateur 
Perspectivism über alles
Perspectivism über alles
There is also local relativism, i.e, relativism in certain areas of discourse. This second kind of relativism doesnt face that problem
Last edited:
You think that the rioters who burned down property during the George Floyd riots cared about human lives?
Let's see how many deaths happened. Hmm...
At least 19 deaths? (1)
Emotions run high during these highly chaotic events though and violence tends to get exchanged between all sides of the conflict (the property owners, the rioters, and the law enforcement). You think that these rioters ever cared about the lives of bystanders and property owners/employees of businesses that they looted and/or damaged?
Let's see the extent of these "damages" caused during the George Floyd riots hmm. By the way, these are just in Minneapolis-St Paul.
There's also this website that maps out which buildings in Minneapolis, St-Paul ended up damaged (whether by vandalism or by fire) or eradicated.
You say that the rioters of Jan 6 are the extremists but other than some white house property damage they didn't manage to burn down shit nor purposefully take anyone's lives (other than via accident or from law enforcement).
Let's see how many deaths happened. Hmm...
At least 19 deaths? (1)
Emotions run high during these highly chaotic events though and violence tends to get exchanged between all sides of the conflict (the property owners, the rioters, and the law enforcement). You think that these rioters ever cared about the lives of bystanders and property owners/employees of businesses that they looted and/or damaged?
Let's see the extent of these "damages" caused during the George Floyd riots hmm. By the way, these are just in Minneapolis-St Paul.
Major damage and property loss to over 200 locations just in that area alone? Btw the approximate cost of these damages from riots caused up to what, 2 billion in total costs?
One can guess how many families have their lives completely ruined as a result of the damage from those riots now.
One can guess how many families have their lives completely ruined as a result of the damage from those riots now.
You say that the rioters of Jan 6 are the extremists but other than some white house property damage they didn't manage to burn down shit nor purposefully take anyone's lives (other than via accident or from law enforcement).
Last edited:
For this level of incompetence to be comprehended, an order (or a plot) from the top brass might have been a factor in explaining why the local police had to stand down against the assassin (that was given the chance to retreat no less). The secret service sniper didn't even do anything except watch for a couple minutes even after he and his buddy located the sniper on the rooftop until the sniper started firing off rounds
and got a rally participant killed in the process
and got a rally participant killed in the process
That is very interesting !
Aside from the core notion (that i politically need), I never dived really in those philosophical subjects, but your post made me take a searching journey because there was something tickling me with those notion and I didn't know what. Its seems like I figured it out:
I'm a materialist, as I believe that everything in our universe and beyond is the product of material and physical interactions. I believe that is the most truthfull way to see the world. This is what shaped me as a militant and the reason why I have all those political values.
So.. philosophically, I'm also mostly a realist. Since I believe in an objective reality.
Now.. through those research, I tried to understand what type of relativism you were talking about and it seems like what you are calling "global relativism" is in reality "moral relativism".
Moral relativism seems to be categorize in three categories (wiki):
- Descriptive : Different cultures can or have different moral standards. Decriptive relativism do no necessarily advocate for the tolerance of all behavior.
- Meta-ethical : Same things but there is no "good", "bad", "right", "wrong" as those concept are relative to traditions, convictions or practices of an individual or a group of people.
- Normative : same as the two others but its the belief that we must tolerate those behavior even when they goes against our moral standards.
I went farther and I looked at the opposition of moral relativism which is "moral universalism. Moral universalism is the meta-ethical position that some system of ethics applies universally regardless of culture race, sex, religion, nationality etc.
So its seems that what you are really talking about is the Normative moral relativism, since the other two (descriptive and meta-ethical) are widely considered by human sciences as legitimate.
And I agree. Normative moral relativism, is simply not a reasonnable position to hold if we seek for the development of the human specie. At least under most circounstances.
This is the case of Noland:
Now, Noland here was lucky, because the girl wanted to live, but in real life, most of the time, dying in such a matter would be an honor, and while there would be obvious fear, there would also be a great will to die.
So, acting against the cultural behavior and not accepting it would result in reality in a big load of individual and social consequences.
This is the case of Toda Mariko in Shogun. (SPOILER for "Shogun") To give you a context, Mariko is a character whose father was completely "dishonored" during feodal japan. She lived in cultural and individual shame all her life. She seeked for only one thing : death through Seppuku.
Now.. what happens if we refuse the normative moral relativism and refuse her this death like John Blackthorne (an english who ended up in Japan) seemed to be against ? Well, a great deal of self inflicting pain, so much that she would be unable to live happily
In reality, the only solution in this case is the normative vision. Here, Mariko was finally granted the right to commit Seppuku, but the one supposed to accompagny her in the process refused to show himself, so , out of love for her, John decided to help her despite being completely against the process:
This means that there are indeed cases when the normative approach is needed.
In fine, its seems like moral universalism or anti realism are not really pertinent and congruent approach in regards to reality. And it appears that there is not really a good and a bad kind of moral relativism. Indeed, most of the time, the best will be to refuse the normative way of thinking, but sometimes, we need to understand the implication of such a refusal of the cultural differences.
I learned a few things tonight. That's cool.
Yup, mostly.
If not, you wouldn't be going against trans rights..
Riot are not pretty mate.
Its not about "who respects who". Its about "what to do if not that ?"
Its very easy to say that riot are problematics when you don't face systemic violence or oppression all your life or live in fear of being shot by a dumb policeman. The reality is that the american system is broken and do not allow real change in those matter. So yeah, people, get angry, people get tired, and so they riot and they are legitimate to do so.
Of course, no violence against civilian is justified. But those things happen and the best way to avoid them is not to cry about those who are tired of the oppression but to make a change for those riot not to be needed in the first place.
Riots scare the powers. They do make a difference, so unless you have a better option or you have a way to bring a real leftist party to the table, please, keep out.
Those rioters were aiming to do harm to ELECTED OFFICIALS mate. Again, you are comparing things that are not comparable. Its was not a riot, it was an insurrection. Without those barricades, there would have been much more dead guys.
Stop listening to far right and ignorant propaganda FFS.
Moral relativism is just an area of relativism. Global relativism is about not one but the set of all areas
This paper is a summary of all discussion
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/relativism/
This paper is a summary of all discussion
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/relativism/
The fact that you pick and choose what type of riots you don't like is indicative enough that you're not arguing from a point of real concern or deeply held beliefs. If you dislike riots, by definition you have to dislike J6, because it's also the textbook definition of political violence.
If you want to pretend I'm defending the riots on the left, you can do just that (even though I haven't done that at any point) but it's obvious you're willing to dismiss the actions those people took for the sake of your narrative, just like you chose to post fake info just the other day.
And when did I deny it. I'm simply pointing out the hypocrisy that the right has when it comes to political violence. I don't recall ever justifying the burning and looting that took place at that time, but if you truly care about law and order, you wouldn't be invoking whatboutism in order to dismiss the numerous times there's been riots perpetrated by the right.
LOL! There's literally videos of rioters looking for specific congresspeople such as AOC and Nancy Pelosi. There ain't no way you think those mfs were peaceful, breaking into the capitol by force and "looking" for congresspeople is not exactly small potatoes.
If you want to pretend I'm defending the riots on the left, you can do just that (even though I haven't done that at any point) but it's obvious you're willing to dismiss the actions those people took for the sake of your narrative, just like you chose to post fake info just the other day.
Post automatically merged:
And when did I deny it. I'm simply pointing out the hypocrisy that the right has when it comes to political violence. I don't recall ever justifying the burning and looting that took place at that time, but if you truly care about law and order, you wouldn't be invoking whatboutism in order to dismiss the numerous times there's been riots perpetrated by the right.
Post automatically merged:
LOL! There's literally videos of rioters looking for specific congresspeople such as AOC and Nancy Pelosi. There ain't no way you think those mfs were peaceful, breaking into the capitol by force and "looking" for congresspeople is not exactly small potatoes.
Last edited:
