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 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 reloaded is innocent 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
cringe power scalling (mostly Zoro vs Sanji) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Political Echo Chamber
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Political Echo Chamber
I'll spend time here posting articles and daily news instead of debating about politics since half the time these debates go nowhere and nobody's opinions are changed.
That being said, newsflash: A top economist disappeared after criticizing Xi Jinping in a private chat. Nobody knows where he disappeared to but it's a stark reminder that your privacy may be a privilege and not a full on right.
That being said, newsflash: A top economist disappeared after criticizing Xi Jinping in a private chat. Nobody knows where he disappeared to but it's a stark reminder that your privacy may be a privilege and not a full on right.
Careful, this one is a biggy
That... logical ?
I'm fighting for survival here, for me and others. So.. yeah ? Obviously ?
How can you expect me to compromise with survival ?
Something that people don't understand is that demanding to have a more progressive space does not mean creating an echo chamber.
You might not know that. But a leftist will never be as angry more than with another leftist. If you think leftist strongholds are echochambers you really are blinding yourself.
The problem with the assertion "you just want to have an echo chamber" is that it implies the fact that all opinions are deserving of having a place in "the debate" when in reality some are sayin "those people deserve to be oppressed or not helped" and others are simply disagreeing.
But the biggest problem with the vision that everyone from the far right to the far left deserve to express their opinion, is that it prevents people from REALLY trying to find and discuss rationnal, scientific and pragmatic good solutions because we are constantly stopped by the necessity of countering those who try to attack the rights and legitimacy of others.
So yes... we need to create a more progressive space and we must not allow certains toxic opinions to be shared.. simply because they are hurtfull individually and structurally.
Now..
You do what you want. I fought my battle here and I do not care anymore. I'm only replying to what is worth replying to. The rest is up to you.
Mais bro... if you were a leftist, the majority of what I'm saying would sound AT LEAST a bit logical to you.
I'm not even that radical.
You would never have laughed at me so many times when I pointed the transphobia or the racism of people here, you would understand why politization is necessary and why the structures shapes the way we think or why certain professions cannot - by structural nature - be progressive. You wouldn't have laughed like manyo others when I proposed to better the forum or to bring less structural toxicity or when I'm talking about the fact that the way this forum is structured shapes the way people see One Piece.
There is a fundamental political opposition between us just like there is a fundamental political opposition between me and Ravager or me and Nameless. It's not about opinion, it's about the vision of society and change.
There is a fundamental problem here and this is the following:
You do not or refuse (i don't know) to understand why there is a left and a right wing in the first place. This opposition is not here simply because groups of people are disagreeing. I's here because two fundamental visions of the world have been clashing for millenias.
Change VS Conservatism or more precisely Materialism VS Idealism
---------------------------------------
---------------------------------------
You don't have to read this last part, but it might help you understand more what I have to say:
And since you think I'm presuppositing things about you, I'll tell you a story about me and you will tell me if you relate:
A decade ago, around the time when I was deradicalizing from complotism, I became completely obsessed in change. I obsessed with the idea of creating a perfect utopia based on science only. At that time, a same gender union law was about to be voted in France and a LOT of far rightist were against it. At this time I didn't know who a trans person really was, it was only about gay and lesbians. So I wrote, a LOT, to counter this bigoted propaganda.
At the same time, a lot of noise about a growing feminist movement that I knew called "SJW" was starting to reach me, I didn't know a lot about that, so I watched youtube channels that talked about it.. mainly reactionnary ones. And so.. I started to developp, slowly an aversion for both SJW and far rightist.
After a time and my deradicalization from complotism and far right ideas completed, I started to watch and read a LOT of content related to critical thinking and rationnality. I knew at that time that a world without ideology was impossible but I was completely convinced that the best path was a world ruled by rationnality and science.
Of course, the content I watch was a content of the rationnality of natural sciences and mathematicians. I didn't know anything else and those I was following didn't talk about anything else. So during that period, I started to grow into the idea that the extrem (SJW at the time) and the far right were the option to avoid and since I was a rationnal person, I should be able to tell the good from the bad in the discourse of politics.
It's funny, because in retrospective, I was kinda of an early product of social medias. I appropriated very early the macronist idea that the right and rationnal answer was somewhere in the middle. This is how I became what very people were making fun at the time :
A centrist.
But, as you can see in the last 10 years in France.. this clownery stopped quickly to become the hegemonous thinking. Now, if you are politicized on one side or another radically (mainly on the left) you will be called an extremist and become a laughing stock for those who have power.
This is the great accomplishment of democrates, they made people believe that the rationnal answer was the lack of radicality.
Do you start to relate ?
I was like that. Thinking that radicality was a problem, thinking that SJW, that started to be called "woke" were the reason why change was not possible. Until I understood that what I was fighting for all this time... was NOT change, but the opposite.
And this is logical, how can change truly happen if you think that both sides of an argument have good points ? It's an illusion.
The real rationnality is being able to see the ENTIRE spectrum of reality and science and the reason why radicality is necessary. Change can't happen in a system that fights for the status co. Such system must be transformed.
This is why you.. and me are opposed on a fundamental basis. I want change, you do not.
That... logical ?
I'm fighting for survival here, for me and others. So.. yeah ? Obviously ?
How can you expect me to compromise with survival ?
Something that people don't understand is that demanding to have a more progressive space does not mean creating an echo chamber.
You might not know that. But a leftist will never be as angry more than with another leftist. If you think leftist strongholds are echochambers you really are blinding yourself.
The problem with the assertion "you just want to have an echo chamber" is that it implies the fact that all opinions are deserving of having a place in "the debate" when in reality some are sayin "those people deserve to be oppressed or not helped" and others are simply disagreeing.
But the biggest problem with the vision that everyone from the far right to the far left deserve to express their opinion, is that it prevents people from REALLY trying to find and discuss rationnal, scientific and pragmatic good solutions because we are constantly stopped by the necessity of countering those who try to attack the rights and legitimacy of others.
So yes... we need to create a more progressive space and we must not allow certains toxic opinions to be shared.. simply because they are hurtfull individually and structurally.
Now..
You do what you want. I fought my battle here and I do not care anymore. I'm only replying to what is worth replying to. The rest is up to you.
Mais bro... if you were a leftist, the majority of what I'm saying would sound AT LEAST a bit logical to you.
I'm not even that radical.
You would never have laughed at me so many times when I pointed the transphobia or the racism of people here, you would understand why politization is necessary and why the structures shapes the way we think or why certain professions cannot - by structural nature - be progressive. You wouldn't have laughed like manyo others when I proposed to better the forum or to bring less structural toxicity or when I'm talking about the fact that the way this forum is structured shapes the way people see One Piece.
There is a fundamental political opposition between us just like there is a fundamental political opposition between me and Ravager or me and Nameless. It's not about opinion, it's about the vision of society and change.
There is a fundamental problem here and this is the following:
You do not or refuse (i don't know) to understand why there is a left and a right wing in the first place. This opposition is not here simply because groups of people are disagreeing. I's here because two fundamental visions of the world have been clashing for millenias.
Change VS Conservatism or more precisely Materialism VS Idealism
---------------------------------------
---------------------------------------
You don't have to read this last part, but it might help you understand more what I have to say:
And since you think I'm presuppositing things about you, I'll tell you a story about me and you will tell me if you relate:
A decade ago, around the time when I was deradicalizing from complotism, I became completely obsessed in change. I obsessed with the idea of creating a perfect utopia based on science only. At that time, a same gender union law was about to be voted in France and a LOT of far rightist were against it. At this time I didn't know who a trans person really was, it was only about gay and lesbians. So I wrote, a LOT, to counter this bigoted propaganda.
At the same time, a lot of noise about a growing feminist movement that I knew called "SJW" was starting to reach me, I didn't know a lot about that, so I watched youtube channels that talked about it.. mainly reactionnary ones. And so.. I started to developp, slowly an aversion for both SJW and far rightist.
After a time and my deradicalization from complotism and far right ideas completed, I started to watch and read a LOT of content related to critical thinking and rationnality. I knew at that time that a world without ideology was impossible but I was completely convinced that the best path was a world ruled by rationnality and science.
Of course, the content I watch was a content of the rationnality of natural sciences and mathematicians. I didn't know anything else and those I was following didn't talk about anything else. So during that period, I started to grow into the idea that the extrem (SJW at the time) and the far right were the option to avoid and since I was a rationnal person, I should be able to tell the good from the bad in the discourse of politics.
It's funny, because in retrospective, I was kinda of an early product of social medias. I appropriated very early the macronist idea that the right and rationnal answer was somewhere in the middle. This is how I became what very people were making fun at the time :
A centrist.
But, as you can see in the last 10 years in France.. this clownery stopped quickly to become the hegemonous thinking. Now, if you are politicized on one side or another radically (mainly on the left) you will be called an extremist and become a laughing stock for those who have power.
This is the great accomplishment of democrates, they made people believe that the rationnal answer was the lack of radicality.
Do you start to relate ?
I was like that. Thinking that radicality was a problem, thinking that SJW, that started to be called "woke" were the reason why change was not possible. Until I understood that what I was fighting for all this time... was NOT change, but the opposite.
And this is logical, how can change truly happen if you think that both sides of an argument have good points ? It's an illusion.
The real rationnality is being able to see the ENTIRE spectrum of reality and science and the reason why radicality is necessary. Change can't happen in a system that fights for the status co. Such system must be transformed.
This is why you.. and me are opposed on a fundamental basis. I want change, you do not.
I'm not.
Freedom is amazing until it's used to oppress other people. You can't have illimited freedom unless all people behave in synchronization and complete cohesion with one another.
On top of that. You seem to think that saying oppressive things is a basic human right. You couldn't say something more pertinent to prove the fact that we are on opposite sides of the political spectrum.
Freedom is amazing until it's used to oppress other people. You can't have illimited freedom unless all people behave in synchronization and complete cohesion with one another.
On top of that. You seem to think that saying oppressive things is a basic human right. You couldn't say something more pertinent to prove the fact that we are on opposite sides of the political spectrum.
