ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags media criticism

Reply
Old 29th December 2016, 08:57 AM   #121
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
This is fake news. Quite typical of the left. They believe "fake but accurate" is good enough (regardless of the fact that half the country would dispute the "accurate" part).
All you could ever hope to accomplish when you use "half the country would dispute" something is a draw.
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th December 2016, 09:01 AM   #122
sunmaster14
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 10,017
Originally Posted by The_Animus View Post
Almost 50% of Trump supporters believe the blatantly fake Clinton pedophile pizzagate bs.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/poli...icle-1.2926098
This is fake news as well. Also typical of the left. Lefties are constantly running out to do a poll of Republicans with nutty questions in an attempt to paint them as nutjobs. But these polls are easily manipulated. The very process of asking nutty questions causes a huge selection bias in response rate. In this particular case, the question asked was whether or not the following was true:

"Leaked e-mails from the Clinton campaign talked about pedophilia and human trafficking - 'Pizzagate'."

Not quite the question the New York Daily News indicated it was, right? Also, the headline on the Yougov article is "Belief in conspiracies largely depends on political identity." The New York Daily News fabricated the misleading headline about nearly half of Republicans believing that Hillary Clinton was involved in a pedophilia ring.
sunmaster14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th December 2016, 12:06 PM   #123
fuelair
Suspended
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 55,698
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
This is fake news. Quite typical of the left. They believe "fake but accurate" is good enough (regardless of the fact that half the country would dispute the "accurate" part).
The dog *********** part anyway!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 01:51 AM   #124
WilliamSeger
Master Poster
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,454
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
This is fake news as well. Also typical of the left. Lefties are constantly running out to do a poll of Republicans with nutty questions in an attempt to paint them as nutjobs. But these polls are easily manipulated. The very process of asking nutty questions causes a huge selection bias in response rate. In this particular case, the question asked was whether or not the following was true:

"Leaked e-mails from the Clinton campaign talked about pedophilia and human trafficking - 'Pizzagate'."

Not quite the question the New York Daily News indicated it was, right? Also, the headline on the Yougov article is "Belief in conspiracies largely depends on political identity." The New York Daily News fabricated the misleading headline about nearly half of Republicans believing that Hillary Clinton was involved in a pedophilia ring.
Did the leaked e-mails talk about a pedophilia ring or not? If someone believes they did, then you'd have to do some careful parsing of the question and the headline to draw a distinction. What are you trying to say? That some people might believe the e-mails did talk about that, but it wasn't a real thing? Or that they don't necessarily believe that Clinton herself was involved? What?

But you're dodging the real issue, anyway: Why did so many of Trump's supporters answer "yes" to the question you quoted? Why do they believe so much other garbage? But no, you'd rather try to find some false equivalence somewhere, as if that's an argument or an excuse. Do you listen to Rush Limbaugh a lot?
WilliamSeger is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 02:16 AM   #125
asydhouse
Master Poster
 
asydhouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Swansea in the UK
Posts: 2,368
Originally Posted by logger View Post
Liberals I know are deceitful, immoral and only care about winning, because liberalism is a religion.


Your caricatures (as here) of "liberals" have long ago established pretty clearly that you have never met a liberal in your life, let alone got to know any.
__________________
asydhouse art website http://www.asydhouse.co.uk/asydhouse...Syd_house.html
asydhouse is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 07:17 AM   #126
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,064
Originally Posted by asydhouse View Post
Your caricatures (as here) of "liberals" have long ago established pretty clearly that you have never met a liberal in your life, let alone got to know any.
It's actually full blown projection. It's standard MO for Trumpistas.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 07:23 AM   #127
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,928
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
It's actually full blown projection. It's standard MO for Trumpistas.
Partisans on both sides are prone to caricature the "enemy", often with flaws which they display (especially concerning honesty). Surely, it takes little effort to notice a few liberals around here who accuse conservatives of dishonesty on flimsy evidence.

The tendency to be sold on any hodgepodge of incoherent positions as if they were the right and best political positions doesn't really lend itself to fairness, dispassionate judgment, etc. Partisans tend to be foolish. Duh.

ETA: That said, anyone who ended up supporting Trump on partisan grounds has crossed a line. Good God, that's a poor choice by any stretch of the imagination.

Last edited by phiwum; 31st December 2016 at 07:24 AM.
phiwum is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 07:24 AM   #128
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,064
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
Partisans on both sides are prone to caricature the "enemy", often with flaws which they display (especially concerning honesty). Surely, it takes little effort to notice a few liberals around here who accuse conservatives of dishonesty on flimsy evidence.

The tendency to be sold on any hodgepodge of incoherent positions as if they were the right and best political positions doesn't really lend itself to fairness, dispassionate judgment, etc. Partisans tend to be foolish. Duh.
There's no equivalency.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 07:25 AM   #129
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,928
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
There's no equivalency.
Right, well, if you say so without any argument, I'm sure to accept it. Thanks!
phiwum is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 07:28 AM   #130
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,064
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
Right, well, if you say so without any argument, I'm sure to accept it. Thanks!
I'm tired of getting bombarded by BS from RWNs, and when someone points it out, someone else always pipes up with a "both sides does it", despite the thread being filled to the brim with right wing BS.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 07:58 AM   #131
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,928
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
I'm tired of getting bombarded by BS from RWNs, and when someone points it out, someone else always pipes up with a "both sides does it", despite the thread being filled to the brim with right wing BS.
Not sure what RWNs means, but surely I have said nothing to suggest that the right and the left are equally decent. That said, it is clear that the worst bits of the left are guilty of many of the same sins as the medium to worst bits of the right currently. The very worst of the right are despicable indeed, as are the very worst of the left, though I think the former is larger and more influential than the latter.

Does that make my point somewhat clearer?
phiwum is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 09:22 AM   #132
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,064
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
Not sure what RWNs means, but surely I have said nothing to suggest that the right and the left are equally decent. That said, it is clear that the worst bits of the left are guilty of many of the same sins as the medium to worst bits of the right currently. The very worst of the right are despicable indeed, as are the very worst of the left, though I think the former is larger and more influential than the latter.

Does that make my point somewhat clearer?
RWN = Right Wing Nut.

It's not necessary to point out that there are nutcases on the extreme left every time someone points out an RWN. What that does is set up a false equivalency and a tu-quoque. Nuttery is mainstream on the right. It's not on the left.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 12:05 PM   #133
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,928
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
RWN = Right Wing Nut.

It's not necessary to point out that there are nutcases on the extreme left every time someone points out an RWN. What that does is set up a false equivalency and a tu-quoque. Nuttery is mainstream on the right. It's not on the left.
I don't like it when you claim a particular behavior, seen on both sides of the fence, is standard MO for Trump supporters. I think it's misleading.

But I also don't mean to indicate any sort of equivalency between the two sides.

By the way, if you'd like to discuss the notion of tu quoque, which you seem to misunderstand, feel free to join the thread over in general skepticism. Not a damned thing I said even remotely approached a tu quoque fallacy, dear sir.
phiwum is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 12:54 PM   #134
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,226
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
This is fake news. Quite typical of the left liberals. They believe "fake but accurate" is good enough
ftfy

Quote:
(regardless of the fact that half the country would dispute the "accurate" part).
More than half the country by now, more like 2/3.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 01:17 PM   #135
WilliamSeger
Master Poster
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,454
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
ftfy



More than half the country by now, more like 2/3.
That survey clearly shows the effects of the right-wing attempts to demonize and delegitimize the mainstream news media: That downward trend is composed mainly of Republicans and independents.

http://content.gallup.com/origin/gal...m2vdnmh1ma.png

And now we see the result: Half of Trump's supporters will believe whatever crap he tells them and dismiss out-of-hand anything the news media says about it. As I said before, this is a classic tactic of fascists.
WilliamSeger is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 01:22 PM   #136
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,226
Originally Posted by blutoski View Post
It's worth reiterating that CFI is scored as an unbiased news source in most objective systems.
Do you have examples of such objective systems?

Quote:
I'm reaching retirement age, and have considered pursuing journalism. It may be the most productive way I can contribute to skepticism.
Why not just start a blog or something?
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 01:31 PM   #137
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,226
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
That survey clearly shows the effects of the right-wing attempts to demonize and delegitimize the mainstream news media
As opposed to the slightly-less-right-wing attempts to angelize and legitimize the mainstream news media?

Quote:
That downward trend is composed mainly of Republicans and independents.
Democrats also go down. Not that it matters.

Quote:
And now we see the result: Half of Trump's supporters will {...} dismiss out-of-hand anything the news media says {...}.
I don't see the problem with that.

Quote:
As I said before, this is a classic tactic of fascists.
A classic tactic of fascists would be to argue that they should believe the media telling them they should go into aggressive wars by promoting loony conspiracy theories.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 02:11 PM   #138
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,064
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
I don't like it when you claim a particular behavior, seen on both sides of the fence, is standard MO for Trump supporters. I think it's misleading.
I don't particularly care what you think. It's prevalent enough among Trump supporters to be called standard MO. Hell, Trump himself is a master of it. That other people do it too is completely beside the point. Within the specified group of people called Trump supporters, projection is standard MO. It is not among the group indicated by logger as 'liberals'.

Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
But I also don't mean to indicate any sort of equivalency between the two sides.
Well, you did.

Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
By the way, if you'd like to discuss the notion of tu quoque, which you seem to misunderstand, feel free to join the thread over in general skepticism. Not a damned thing I said even remotely approached a tu quoque fallacy, dear sir.
I'm not very interested in that. I'm aware of my misuse of 'tu-quoque' in my post above, and I retract it.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1

Last edited by uke2se; 31st December 2016 at 02:13 PM.
uke2se is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 02:16 PM   #139
WilliamSeger
Master Poster
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,454
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Quote:
And now we see the result: Half of Trump's supporters will {...} dismiss out-of-hand anything the news media says {...}.
I don't see the problem with that.
Since you cut it out of the quote, I'll assume you DO see a problem that Trump supporters believe his crap regardless of what the news media says about it. And, you don't care where Trump supporters get their "facts."

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
A classic tactic of fascists would be to argue that they should believe the media telling them they should go into aggressive wars by promoting loony conspiracy theories.
It might, depending on which "media," which side was making that argument, and to whom they might make it. On the "left" during that time, it was well known that any source that was merely reporting what the Bush administration said, with no real journalism, should not be believed -- because the Bush administration could not be believed. But somehow, we had access to plenty of media that were telling us we were likely being fed a load of BS by BushCo, and that invading Iraq was a perfectly stupid thing to do in any case. And it turns out they were right on both counts.

Last edited by WilliamSeger; 31st December 2016 at 02:17 PM.
WilliamSeger is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 02:38 PM   #140
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,226
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
Since you cut it out of the quote
You made a compound claim with an "and" between, I'm perfectly free to argue only one of those (sub)claims.

Quote:
I'll assume you DO see a problem that Trump supporters believe his crap regardless of what the news media says about it.
No I really don't see a problem that Trump supporters don't believe the news media.

Quote:
And, you don't care where Trump supporters get their "facts."
I don't care that it's not, specifically, the mainstream news media.

Quote:
because the Bush administration could not be believed.
Can the Obama administration be believed? Could a Clinton administration be believed?

Quote:
But somehow, we had access to plenty of media that were telling us we were likely being fed a load of BS by BushCo
And? You were likely being fed a load of BS by that "plenty of media" as well, just on other subjects.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 03:39 PM   #141
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 63,813
Originally Posted by rdwight View Post
Perhaps we are talking past each other by mistake. Let me recap -

I feel we as consumers have more power to change things through our viewing and buying habits than by any other method. It should be the main, most important part that we play in changing the situation we are discussing.

My impression is that you feel that is a small piece that should be a part of the overall push to implement change. Is that accurate?
I did not say "small". You are oversimplifying the world when you think everything is based directly on market forces.

Originally Posted by rdwight View Post
Oh I do not deny there are non-profit and different business models within the media industry. When I say for profit, I mean it in every way. PBS might be non-profit but more viewers mean more donations which mean more ability to research and share news/information. No matter the media business, each requires exposure to consumers for their message and information to be effective.
No, they don't. Again, you are oversimplifying a complex world where cause and effect are not always as direct as you seem to think.

Originally Posted by rdwight View Post
Sure a billionaire could endow a company with millions to operate at a loss just because he wants a specific message or viewpoint spread through them, but they still have goals to reach in regards to getting that message out.
You should read more about the influence of the Kochs and the Scaifes and a few more self interested billionaires. There are no losses, there is only influence that pays off for them in other ways. For example, they pay for think tanks and lobbyists and even seek to influence universities. In return they get fake tax shelters like Trump's faux foundation, and deregulation that gives them the ability to pollute while the cleanup costs go to taxpayers.

Originally Posted by rdwight View Post
What is the endgame for political pressure, naming and shaming and boycotts? Decreasing buying and viewing of said product. You are basically stating ways to reach the endpoint I said we need.

Not sure how effective expose and educate works. Same as retractions in newspapers of the past, how effective this method is depends on the viewing publics willingness to actually search for the truth after the fact.
Again you see the complex world in neat little black and white bundles.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 08:35 PM   #142
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,486
Fake news or whatever the media scandal du jour may be is not the real issue here. News outlets really are just a bunch of gossips. In a workplace situation, for example, you might find that Susie usually gets the facts right while Bobby consistently garbles the story. So if you hear rumors that the company is closing, with layoffs imminent and some severance deal offered, you might give Susie's account more credibility than Bobby's. There really is not difference between this and "mainstream media" at any level.

Reporters like to be right and absolutely hate being wrong. I would extend this even to the level of Sean "I spit on him and all his progeny" Hannity. He got taken in by some fake story and I'm sure it really bothered him. Any weakness on "the facts" means his ability to BS at will is somewhat compromised. Over time I think the more credible sources reveal themselves and media consumers make choices on what to believe, based on their predilections but also on who is less likely to make them look (or, more importantly, FEEL) stupid.

There's no magic bullet here, no Board of Credibility, yet I believe there is a human aversion to feeling stupid that helps balance the scales over time. I can't cite a lot of examples because I don't consume a lot of media, but at one extreme I'm sure it's become fairly difficult to find people who see Glen Beck as the epitome of accuracy. Keep saying the world will end tomorrow and pretty soon no one will believe you. Those who do will be your hard-core fans but not necessarily a significant portion of the media-consuming public.

Last edited by Minoosh; 31st December 2016 at 08:37 PM.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 08:50 PM   #143
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,486
Originally Posted by blutoski View Post
I'm reaching retirement age, and have considered pursuing journalism. It may be the most productive way I can contribute to skepticism.
There are pretty big gaps in a lot of news coverage as budgets and staff have shrunk. Original, fact-filled and thoughtful content will draw readers, either through the slow process of building a blog or the somewhat faster process of feeding an existing outlet. If you have a good information stream, readers will come, and will begin providing useful leads.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 09:23 PM   #144
logger
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,924
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
RWN = Right Wing Nut.

It's not necessary to point out that there are nutcases on the extreme left every time someone points out an RWN. What that does is set up a false equivalency and a tu-quoque. Nuttery is mainstream on the right. It's not on the left.
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
I don't like it when you claim a particular behavior, seen on both sides of the fence, is standard MO for Trump supporters. I think it's misleading.

But I also don't mean to indicate any sort of equivalency between the two sides.

By the way, if you'd like to discuss the notion of tu quoque, which you seem to misunderstand, feel free to join the thread over in general skepticism. Not a damned thing I said even remotely approached a tu quoque fallacy, dear sir.
Phiwum you're arguing with a partisan. He won't admit though. Hope it helps you understand the sea of liberals I'm swimming in.

Last edited by logger; 31st December 2016 at 10:52 PM.
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 09:30 PM   #145
Paul2
Illuminator
 
Paul2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,875
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
I think the burden is going to have to be put on the grassroots to fix this. People are going to need to engage with each other. African-Americans and LGBTQ representatives are going to have to meet up with Christian conservatives and hash out their differences. This is going to have to take place nationwide.
One can only hope. This would make some real, long-lasting change, but it would take a coordinated effort that's never been seen before. Better something than nothing, though. Anyone can start on their own.
__________________
It's nice to be nice to the nice.

Aristotle, so far as I know, was the first man to proclaim explicitly that man is a rational animal. His reason for this view was one which does not now seem very impressive: it was, that some people can do sums. - Bertrand Russell
Paul2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2016, 11:03 PM   #146
logger
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,924
Originally Posted by Aepervius View Post
Labels are only good as far as they represent an intrinsic reality. The problem with the US politic is that label are used as pejorative throw away; they are used as an excuse to not listen to what the perceived opponent has to say. Your post is a perfect reflection of that. You categorized the people under labels, and whatever they say is then in your view is tainted. Another reflection of that is how your label some media as "liberal" as if it was an insult, or a guaranty that whatever they "print" is tainted.

You are not alone to do that, pretty much bi partisan politic is what rots US politics, IMO.

The reality is that most people are not of one side or another, people will find themselves on a far wider spectra, from far left (which is not represented in the US, your jibe non withstanding), to far right, and everybody will be spread , some even wanting some part of the republican agenda and some part of the democrats agenda, but not finding satisfaction with neither party 100%. So as such , label are a wrong thing to do, they will simplify reality to the absurd. Heck I even do the same reduction sometime, I am not innocent either.

What would be better , would be to discuss single issues, but they would mean taking time to understanding issues, and almost certainly not get finally to a black and white picture but something more gray and color.

But can't get that right... Complex issues would be too problematic to admit, but simply reducing to the absurd the issue, label it, and then throw the label away because it has been preemptively declared bad e.g. your "leftist" which is certainly not written in fond love in your post, and tada all world complex issues are now "gone" (not really, but like very young children if it is not in view , it is gone/disappeared).

As an aside about the spumre court nomination a bit off topic :
The real issue is that a supreme court justice should work impartially of republican/democrat viewpoint, and only view constitutionally issues. But that's not what you and other republican want, right ? The sad reality is that you wanted somebody doing republican decision. Not constitutional one. The point in foreground was and has always been you wanted a conservatism there, like Scalia. I don't see that much on democrats side, which were even wanting to compromise by pushing a moderate. No it was block-block-block-now-we-can-name-an-ultra-fanatic-you-lost-you-LOST.
Such a long post that says nothing. You're just as much a partisan as I am, but you just can't admit it!
As a partisan, I know the issues just as much as anyone, I've chosen the right because I believe the policies are rooted in what works. its interesting people on the right couldn't care less about labels, not so with the left.
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 07:22 PM   #147
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,337
Originally Posted by logger View Post
Such a long post that says nothing. You're just as much a partisan as I am, but you just can't admit it!
As a partisan, I know the issues just as much as anyone, I've chosen the right because I believe the policies are rooted in what works. its interesting people on the right couldn't care less about labels, not so with the left.
You say "on what works" I say "in what is easy."

The Right's policies are very much rooted in the baser aspects of human nature, in selfishness, greed, individualism. Ring wing politics habours racism and xenophobia easily because it supports the attitudes of "what is in it for me and people like me?" It is far easier to convince someone to do something when they perceive getting a gain for themselves out of it, even if it hurts someone else, than getting them to do something that involves them making a sacrifice, especially if that sacrifice helps others who they might not actually like.

So yes, Rightwing policies just work, because they are easy, they align to the basest and worse parts of our nature. Leftwing policies are hard work, they are contrary to our very natures to just look out for number one, they may even involve us making sacrifices that only benefit other people. We have to fight for these ideals every single day, often against ourselves.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.

Last edited by PhantomWolf; 3rd January 2017 at 07:23 PM.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2017, 06:40 AM   #148
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,928
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
You say "on what works" I say "in what is easy."

The Right's policies are very much rooted in the baser aspects of human nature, in selfishness, greed, individualism. Ring wing politics habours racism and xenophobia easily because it supports the attitudes of "what is in it for me and people like me?" It is far easier to convince someone to do something when they perceive getting a gain for themselves out of it, even if it hurts someone else, than getting them to do something that involves them making a sacrifice, especially if that sacrifice helps others who they might not actually like.

So yes, Rightwing policies just work, because they are easy, they align to the basest and worse parts of our nature. Leftwing policies are hard work, they are contrary to our very natures to just look out for number one, they may even involve us making sacrifices that only benefit other people. We have to fight for these ideals every single day, often against ourselves.
Eh, I'd prefer that you don't pretend that the left is noble and the right is selfish. Each side has some virtue, and each side has some vice.
phiwum is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2017, 07:37 AM   #149
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,064
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
Eh, I'd prefer that you don't pretend that the left is noble and the right is selfish. Each side has some virtue, and each side has some vice.
I'd prefer that you stop it with the false equivalence. You said you weren't trying to do it, but you're still doing it.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2017, 08:09 AM   #150
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,928
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
I'd prefer that you stop it with the false equivalence. You said you weren't trying to do it, but you're still doing it.
Sorry, but I honestly don't think that the right is fundamentally bad. They're a wee closer to wrong, perhaps, but not really bad persons.
phiwum is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2017, 09:14 AM   #151
sunmaster14
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 10,017
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
Eh, I'd prefer that you don't pretend that the left is noble and the right is selfish. Each side has some virtue, and each side has some vice.
Although PhantomWolf probably meant for his post to convey that self-serving idea, he unintentionally captured an important distinction between left and right. I think it is true that conservatives are more accepting of humans as they are, with all the "good" and the "bad," and they try to design policies which allow the greatest freedom of action. In doing so, they allow even the so-called vices to be harnessed for the greater good, and they avoid the unintended consequences of trying to engineer humans into something they're not.

I don't think it's a coincidence that people tend to get more conservative as they age. And it's not because they get more selfish or greedy. They almost certainly get less. It's because they learn from experience.
sunmaster14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2017, 09:22 AM   #152
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,064
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
Sorry, but I honestly don't think that the right is fundamentally bad. They're a wee closer to wrong, perhaps, but not really bad persons.
Not what I'm talking about. By all means, gush over all the virtues of the right wing, but don't assume we must spend equal time arguing against the left as we do arguing against the right. Fact is, there's a lot more wrong with the right wing in the US at the moment. There's just no equivalency.

But some I assume are good people.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2017, 09:23 AM   #153
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
Although PhantomWolf probably meant for his post to convey that self-serving idea, he unintentionally captured an important distinction between left and right. I think it is true that conservatives are more accepting of humans as they are, with all the "good" and the "bad," and they try to design policies which allow the greatest freedom of action. In doing so, they allow even the so-called vices to be harnessed for the greater good, and they avoid the unintended consequences of trying to engineer humans into something they're not.

I don't think it's a coincidence that people tend to get more conservative as they age. And it's not because they get more selfish or greedy. They almost certainly get less. It's because they learn from experience.
I know plenty of conservatives--and older people--who are rigid and judgmental.
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison

Last edited by twinstead; 4th January 2017 at 09:24 AM.
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2017, 09:25 AM   #154
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,064
Originally Posted by twinstead View Post
I know plenty of conservatives who are rigid and judgmental.
I'd say that about all conservatives I'm aware of. Especially the judgmental part. That's pretty much part and parcel of modern conservatism.

As is projection, as we've seen before.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2017, 10:56 AM   #155
sunmaster14
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 10,017
Originally Posted by twinstead View Post
I know plenty of conservatives--and older people--who are rigid and judgmental.
I'm pretty sure you misunderstood my point. It has nothing to do with being rigid and judgmental. It has to do with accepting the truth about human nature, which is that we're hard-wired to a large degree, and that no amount of social engineering is going to eliminate our vices, let alone do so without extraordinarily negative consequences. We are not blank slates on which society can transcribe anything it wants. Far, far from it. This is the key non-normative distinction between conservatives and progressives. Progressives believe in the blank slate, and conservatives don't. And the progressive belief is just plain wrong.
sunmaster14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2017, 11:31 AM   #156
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
I'm pretty sure you misunderstood my point. It has nothing to do with being rigid and judgmental. It has to do with accepting the truth about human nature, which is that we're hard-wired to a large degree, and that no amount of social engineering is going to eliminate our vices, let alone do so without extraordinarily negative consequences. We are not blank slates on which society can transcribe anything it wants. Far, far from it. This is the key non-normative distinction between conservatives and progressives. Progressives believe in the blank slate, and conservatives don't. And the progressive belief is just plain wrong.
I think that's too narrow of a view. One isn't simply either a "progressive" or a "conservative". Besides, from what I can see, conservatism is full of trying to trying to engineer us and our "vices". Religion, the war on drugs, gay marriage, blue laws, etc...conservatives are just as interested in denying our nature, just in different ways.
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2017, 01:49 PM   #157
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,337
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
Eh, I'd prefer that you don't pretend that the left is noble and the right is selfish. Each side has some virtue, and each side has some vice.
You're the one that used Noble, not me, I'd say more good intentions, and as they say, the road to hell is paved with those.

I also didn't say that it was necessarily wrong to take the easy way or to appeal to people's baser emotions in some things. For instance a Capitalist market place is entire based on greed, but I think that the vast majority of people would agree that, when well regulated, it is better and more efficient for an economy that a more socialistic Collective Based Economy.

Too be honest, either extreme is very bad, a well run system needs a little bit of the extremes, a splash of the not so extreme, at a very large dash of the middle.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2017, 02:19 PM   #158
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 17,718
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
No, the problem discussed in the article is far more serious. It's how we got to a world where the Vast Right-Wing BS Machine can create its own reality, which is ultimately how we got to the doorstep of fascism.


We are forever at the doorstep of fascism, but only in Europe do they seem to step over the threshold. With apologies to Tom Wolfe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
carlitos is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2017, 02:22 PM   #159
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,337
Originally Posted by twinstead View Post
I think that's too narrow of a view. One isn't simply either a "progressive" or a "conservative". Besides, from what I can see, conservatism is full of trying to trying to engineer us and our "vices". Religion, the war on drugs, gay marriage, blue laws, etc...conservatives are just as interested in denying our nature, just in different ways.
Quite true. Rightwing tends to be very restrictive on social issues and vice, whereas Leftwing tends to be very restrictive of economy and finances, and vice versa, with the Rightwing being all about freedom of economy and finances and the Leftwing being all about social freedoms.

This is why we need things from both ends of the spectrum, though rarely far enough to give open slather on anything. It's one of the things I find ridiculous about both ends. The Right demands freedoms when it comes to how they use their money, and at the extreme want to pay no tax and make everything user pays, and remove all regulations and just let people effected badly by businesses sue, but socially they want to outlaw anything they deem as unnatural or a vice. On the other end you have the Left who would be happy to tax at 100% and then have the state provide for every need leading to no financial freedom at all, and while willing to regulate businesses to the point of bankruptcy, when it comes to social freedoms and vices they're quite happy to have no regulations at all.

I'm more for allowing both large financial and social freedoms with a small amount of good regulations on both, and balancing State provided market where there is a service is a need, and Capitalism driven where a service is a want.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.

Last edited by PhantomWolf; 4th January 2017 at 02:25 PM.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2017, 02:27 PM   #160
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 63,813
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
.... For instance a Capitalist market place is entire based on greed, but I think that the vast majority of people would agree that, when well regulated, it is better and more efficient for an economy that a more socialistic Collective Based Economy.

Too be honest, either extreme is very bad, a well run system needs a little bit of the extremes, a splash of the not so extreme, at a very large dash of the middle.
And yet the right wing has demonized regulations and unions. It's also the mainstream GOP sentiment along with demonizing the government.

They even call any social safety net programs 'redistribution of wealth' while redistributing the wealth upward is ignored or denied. Trying to address income inequality gets one an instant defense of the rich.

On the left, you be talking about the fringe if you went that far in the opposite direction.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:54 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.