User Tag List

First 4567 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 66

  1. #51
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,991

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    I dont like groupthink either, though I think its most insidious when its not even recognised as such.

    Orwell wrote about how he didnt think domestic fascism in the UK would be resisted because it wouldnt be recognised for what it was, people would be looking out for swastikas when it'd come in the shape of the lion and unicorn (british national/royal symbols).

    Most of the greatest offenders when it comes to groupthink these days dont believe they are responsible for it or engaging in it, they think they're positively doing great things with universal benefice. Although that's probably all part of it and one of the hallmarks.

    Your experience though is likely to become more widespread, people wont buy arguments which seem to go against the grain of the simplist and most reductive "be nice to everyone" arguments until something happens and they wind up thinking "hey, maybe that so and so had something all alone". I just really hope when that time comes that the "so and so" in question isnt some fascistic loon hater.
    GroupThink in America has led to the creation of a group of mini-fascist dictators, each with his or her own political agenda. Their followers have no political identity beyond the group, no thinking beyond "our side is good (therefore right), yours is evil (therefore wrong)." Their goal is "to win," their goal for those on the other side, is "to lose."

    For a clue to their methods, check out this wikipedia page:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  2. #52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    GroupThink in America has led to the creation of a group of mini-fascist dictators, each with his or her own political agenda. Their followers have no political identity beyond the group, no thinking beyond "our side is good (therefore right), yours is evil (therefore wrong)." Their goal is "to win," their goal for those on the other side, is "to lose."

    For a clue to their methods, check out this wikipedia page:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals
    But is it conscious or unconscious? I think its a psychological rather than political question at root.

  3. #53
    Senior Member two cents's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    125

    Default

    When I first read Ender's Game in high school, I didn't know anything about Orson Scott Card. I liked the book a lot (I still think it's a good book, although I'm not very impressed with a lot of his other work, including the sequel). One thing that jumped out at me, and it appears superunknown has also noticed it, was this subtext of homoerotic tension between Ender and Alai. Between having read Ender's Game and a few short stories by Card, I concluded at the time that the author must be gay (which definitely made me want to read more of his books, because homoerotic subtext was a MAJOR turn on and I was a horny teenager) Since I'd already read everything the library had on offer, I moved on to other books and authors and mostly forgot about him for years

    Some years later, I saw and read more of his books and also looked him up, which is when I learned about his views on homosexuality, and became disgusted with him for being a bigot.

    The thing about his bigotry is... He really does appear to play to the stereotype of the homophobe that secretly desires to engage in the behavior he so loudly condemns, and tries to distance himself from this desire and behavior by any available means. I know it's a tired stereotype, and I don't believe it applies to all homophobes, but, as a friend of mine quipped once, reading Card's work makes one think that he can't imagine why men would't want to have sex with other men, unless it was firmly forbidden (because it's wrong!).

    Thinking and writing about Card made me think of another guy who appears to be thinking/saying the exact same thing, although much more hilariously than Card, so I thought I'd share for everyone's giggling pleasure.

    Here's some stuff Dr. Paul Cameron, founder of the Family Research Institute and ISIS, the institute for the Scientific Investigation of Sexuality has said (re-quoted from this article http://atheism.about.com/b/2004/03/0...ot-gay-sex.htm)

    "Untrammeled homosexuality can take over and destroy a social system," says Cameron. "If you isolate sexuality as something solely for one's own personal amusement, and all you want is the most satisfying orgasm you can get- and that is what homosexuality seems to be-then homosexuality seems too powerful to resist. The evidence is that men do a better job on men and women on women, if all you are looking for is orgasm." So powerful is the allure of gays, Cameron believes, that if society approves that gay people, more and more heterosexuals will be inexorably drawn into homosexuality. "I'm convinced that lesbians are particularly good seducers," says Cameron. "People in homosexuality are incredibly evangelical," he adds, sounding evangelical himself. "It's pure sexuality. It's almost like pure heroin. It's such a rush. They are committed in almost a religious way. And they'll take enormous risks, do anything." He says that for married men and women, gay sex would be irresistible. "Martial sex tends toward the boring end," he points out. "Generally, it doesn't deliver the kind of sheer sexual pleasure that homosexual sex does" So, Cameron believes, within a few generations homosexuality would be come the dominant form of sexual behavior.
    And that's my two cents on the subject.

  4. #54
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,991

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    But is it conscious or unconscious? I think its a psychological rather than political question at root.
    When it comes to radicalism of course there's a certain irrationalism. And that's all I'm talking about, is the radicals, not the "average gay" who just wants to live and let live. From my personal experience, the closest analogy I can think of would be Ayn Rand and her group of radical Randroids. They don't have simply a philosophy in common, but a Jewish heritage. And although anybody can join up as long as they believe everything Rand believed, the vast majority, at least at the beginning of the 1960s movement, were/are Jewish.

    This has led to an Objectivist Jewish off-shoot known as NEO-TECH.
    http://www.neo-tech.com/
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_R._Wallace

    While appearing to be a philosophy of benevolence, Neo-tech followers ascribe to the idea that the attacks on 9/11 were evil, not because 3000 people died, but because the terrorists destroyed some awesome skyscrapers. They are technophiles who worship genius and innovation.

    So I believe the key to understanding these "communities" that have grown up around political leaders, is to consider who or what they worship.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  5. #55
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,991

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    But is it conscious or unconscious? I think its a psychological rather than political question at root.
    Unconscious.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  6. #56
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,991

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by two cents View Post
    When I first read Ender's Game in high school, I didn't know anything about Orson Scott Card. I liked the book a lot (I still think it's a good book, although I'm not very impressed with a lot of his other work, including the sequel). One thing that jumped out at me, and it appears superunknown has also noticed it, was this subtext of homoerotic tension between Ender and Alai. Between having read Ender's Game and a few short stories by Card, I concluded at the time that the author must be gay (which definitely made me want to read more of his books, because homoerotic subtext was a MAJOR turn on and I was a horny teenager) Since I'd already read everything the library had on offer, I moved on to other books and authors and mostly forgot about him for years

    Some years later, I saw and read more of his books and also looked him up, which is when I learned about his views on homosexuality, and became disgusted with him for being a bigot.

    The thing about his bigotry is... He really does appear to play to the stereotype of the homophobe that secretly desires to engage in the behavior he so loudly condemns, and tries to distance himself from this desire and behavior by any available means. I know it's a tired stereotype, and I don't believe it applies to all homophobes, but, as a friend of mine quipped once, reading Card's work makes one think that he can't imagine why men would't want to have sex with other men, unless it was firmly forbidden (because it's wrong!).

    Thinking and writing about Card made me think of another guy who appears to be thinking/saying the exact same thing, although much more hilariously than Card, so I thought I'd share for everyone's giggling pleasure.

    Here's some stuff Dr. Paul Cameron, founder of the Family Research Institute and ISIS, the institute for the Scientific Investigation of Sexuality has said (re-quoted from this article http://atheism.about.com/b/2004/03/0...ot-gay-sex.htm)

    "Untrammeled homosexuality can take over and destroy a social system," says Cameron. "If you isolate sexuality as something solely for one's own personal amusement, and all you want is the most satisfying orgasm you can get- and that is what homosexuality seems to be-then homosexuality seems too powerful to resist. The evidence is that men do a better job on men and women on women, if all you are looking for is orgasm." So powerful is the allure of gays, Cameron believes, that if society approves that gay people, more and more heterosexuals will be inexorably drawn into homosexuality. "I'm convinced that lesbians are particularly good seducers," says Cameron. "People in homosexuality are incredibly evangelical," he adds, sounding evangelical himself. "It's pure sexuality. It's almost like pure heroin. It's such a rush. They are committed in almost a religious way. And they'll take enormous risks, do anything." He says that for married men and women, gay sex would be irresistible. "Martial sex tends toward the boring end," he points out. "Generally, it doesn't deliver the kind of sheer sexual pleasure that homosexual sex does" So, Cameron believes, within a few generations homosexuality would be come the dominant form of sexual behavior.
    That last part is a statement against promiscuity, not homosexuality per se. And to assert that homosexuality promotes promiscuity is absurd.

    However, if having a marriage certificate helps with the promiscuous side of homosexuality that does exist, then I'm for it. I'm just saying there's more to the story than meets the eye. Social attitudes against homosexuality also promote promiscuity. If those attitudes can be turned around, then there will be less promiscuous behavior.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  7. #57

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    When it comes to radicalism of course there's a certain irrationalism. And that's all I'm talking about, is the radicals, not the "average gay" who just wants to live and let live. From my personal experience, the closest analogy I can think of would be Ayn Rand and her group of radical Randroids. They don't have simply a philosophy in common, but a Jewish heritage. And although anybody can join up as long as they believe everything Rand believed, the vast majority, at least at the beginning of the 1960s movement, were/are Jewish.

    This has led to an Objectivist Jewish off-shoot known as NEO-TECH.
    http://www.neo-tech.com/
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_R._Wallace

    While appearing to be a philosophy of benevolence, Neo-tech followers ascribe to the idea that the attacks on 9/11 were evil, not because 3000 people died, but because the terrorists destroyed some awesome skyscrapers. They are technophiles who worship genius and innovation.

    So I believe the key to understanding these "communities" that have grown up around political leaders, is to consider who or what they worship.
    Most groups have a "religion", ie an ethical framework and object of devotion, what is most important is whether they are conscious or unconscious of it.

    Contemporary liberalism is not completely conscious of itself, its intents, aims and possible consequences, at least in the hegemonic centres of the english spekaing world.

  8. #58
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,991

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Most groups have a "religion", ie an ethical framework and object of devotion, what is most important is whether they are conscious or unconscious of it.

    Contemporary liberalism is not completely conscious of itself, its intents, aims and possible consequences, at least in the hegemonic centres of the english spekaing world.
    Yes, I commented above that it's unconscious. I think this is due to the idea that radicalism is considered to be the norm, therefore there is nothing unusual to be conscious of.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  9. #59
    The Dark Lord The Wailing Specter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/so
    Socionics
    ENFP Ne
    Posts
    3,266

    Default

    I am Right-Libertarian.
    The primary reason I lean right is that I have observed that on their own, people tend to look out for themselves. Ayn Rand is far further right than I am, but I can see where letting people handle their own money would improve their lives and their world.
    Enneagram: 6w7 (phobic) > 2w1 > 9w1
    Alignment: Chaotic Neutral
    Holland Code: AIS
    Date of Birth: March 15, 1996
    Gender: Male
    Political Stance: Libertarian Liberal (Arizona School/Strong BHL)
    ATHEIST UNITARIAN UNIVERSALIST HUMANIST
    and
    SCIENCE ENTHUSIAST


    I say this as a reminder to myself, but this goes for everyone:

    You can achieve anything you set your mind to, and you are limited only by how dedicated you are to succeed!

    -Magic Qwan

  10. #60
    Senior Member tkae.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    IEI
    Posts
    762

    Default

    Mal, from what I've read of this thread, you're being a bit contrary just for the sake of it. You like or agree with this man and take offense to others being offended by him.

    I dislike his prejudiced views and the insensitivity he's expressed through his words to spread those views, and therefor do not like him, and so I won't be supporting him financially or giving him any of the benefits that comes with publicity.

    I don't need to cite a reason for why I don't like him, despite what you feel you're entitled to. He offends me, I find him reprehensible, and that's the end of it.

    The fact that so many others feel the same way is more likely to mean that he's coming across that way to the public than that he's the victim of a tribalistic society. You're searching for the effect to fit the cause instead of just accepting the easy correlation.

    People have given you answers to your question, and, based on your preparedness in rebutting their answers, you knew what their answers were going to be. You're just looking to be right, not to get answers to your question, and I don't respect that.
    "Not knowing how near the truth is, we seek it far away." -Ekaku Hakuin
    http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b1...psdunkqmep.png
    5w4 . IEI . Chaotic Good
    Right-Libertarian Minarchist

Similar Threads

  1. Ender's Game *SPOILERS*
    By Ginkgo in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 01-18-2015, 08:50 PM
  2. Ender's Game Movie
    By cafe in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-11-2014, 02:16 PM
  3. Pope Francis on homosexuals: "Who am I to judge?"
    By Typh0n in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 08-02-2013, 08:06 PM
  4. Ender's Game (2013)
    By Rail Tracer in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 05-12-2013, 10:04 AM
  5. Ender's Game/Shadow
    By Evan in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 10-10-2008, 01:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO