The Biden Administration

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Weirdly enough the left is getting more and more traditionally “conservative” in its modus operandi while the right is now the one growing more open minded. Old fashioned liberals like yourself are slowly going extinct while the dogmatic lunatics you created take over the asylum.

I could have bought that argument six years ago. Now, in a post-Trump environment? Nope. If anything woke fundamentalism seems to be losing more and more support among the left, judging by the actual conversations I have with people on the left. There is a growing demand to fix the cause of all these problems, rather than waste time on things like language policing. It probably helps that Biden isn't exactly a "woke" guy and the folks more invested in adhering to the party line have to account for that. I think there's a growing consensus that "woke" politics are pretty useless; I mean they couldn't even get a plurality of white women to vote for Hillary Clinton.

Despite all the right-wing sky-is-falling hysteria we're hearing about it, this stuff really does seem to have hit its peak years ago. People are actually now way more open to discussing the flaws of "woke" politics than they used to be. (As someone who was doing that in 2015, you can trust me on that.) This mass censorship you are talking about for people criticizing "woke" ideas? It no longer seems to exist when such criticisms are made in good faith.

Also believe it or not I had lots of interesting conversations about politics with my cousin who was a Trump supporter yesterday and we didn't kill each other. Do you know why? He talked to me as an individual and respected me as such; he acknowledged my actual views and didn't treat me as part of a Biden-worshipping hive mind . But he's more of a genuine anti-establishment guy (who unfortunately was still taken in by a con man) and to this day not really a "true believer" in conservative dogma.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I can tell the difference between Republicans/conservatives who are interested in an actual exchange of opinions, and those who are not interested in understanding the point of view of people who disagree with them. I have had worthwhile and enjoyable conversations with the first, but engaging with the second is generally a waste of time. Yes, there are Democrats/liberals who are similarly closed-minded. I have run into some of those, but not nearly as many. I wonder if there is something implicit in the liberal or progressive worldview that makes them more likely to examine and consider divergent points of view, but that is pure speculation. In any case, this forum has had a good handful of members who complain that more conservative political viewpoints don't get a fair hearing, while not bothering to make an actual case for them, and rebuffing requests for explanation.

I think there is a greater tendency for liberals and progressives to learn from their mistakes, which translates into being open to hearing other points of view. Conversely, conservatives tend to either double down on their mistakes (because they see it as "strong" or something like that; learning from mistakes is a sign of weakness), or at best refuse to acknowledge that they actually made them.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Well, yeah. But victim mentality is a key component of conservatism. An explanation would end the victimization and without it, what would become of their façade? They simply wait for the right wing outrage machine to feed them something new. But they beg to have a "conversation" with anyone on the left because it pisses them off. And fuels that victim mentality. Rinse and repeat.

People just want to be martyrs, I suppose. If that's the case, I'm not going to stand in their way.

 

[Coriolis]

I’ve painstakingly explained the logic of many of my ideas before, many times to you personally, but the fact that politics has become a religion substitute for your kind makes the subject far less objective and rational than you assume. There is a deep psychological need to feel moral and just, and the subconscious will dismiss deconstruct and bend whatever reasoning or reality is necessary to its will to defend that. This is where censorship kicks in- when logic can no longer win arguments, they must therefore be silenced for whatever adhoc reasoning fits.

I used to think it was important that people with opposing ideas talked, and I’m certain it still is, but I no longer care to advocate for it. My SO came around on some of the more obvious bits of leftist insanity- she’s embarrassed by the woke cult, cancel culture, and trans women being allowed to kick the shit out of actual women (most of her heros are second wave feminists). She’s also starting to realize how important economic management is and is beginning to understand how awful the government is at everything, and how absolutely moronic the people in charge actually are. If we can come to a compromise, I don’t really care about anyone else. Debate with strangers has always just been practice for me for more important people in my life.

So yes, the constructive solution is obvious.

*I will add that where the forum fails the fostering of political debate is the same place most online forums fail it. There is a double standard applied to right wing posters that inevitable terminates the possibility of a common ground with which to communicate. End result being that it’s impossible for people on the right (and I mean literally impossible) to participate in discussions here. Maybe that’s what you want, but in a country that’s 50/50 having a 99/1 representation is quite divorced from reality.

Comments like the highlighted do nothing to make your case, and stop open discussion in its tracks. They do not engage with the substance of a discussion, and are just "kinder, gentler" ad-hominem. It is obvious that you no longer care to advocate for what you actually think. Given that, why do you even continue to post here? Members with conservative views do post here, and from what I have seen, are well received to the extent that they make their case with reason and civility, and dispense with personal attacks and broadbrush assumptions. In any case, political debate is not the focus of this forum. Members for whom that is an important outlet would do better seeking it elsewhere.

Open mindedness is an inherently liberal trait, and closed mindedness is an inherently conservative trait. But those qualifiers no longer pair with left and right. Instead you have a bit of both now, libertarians being more open minded than the totalitarian cult of woke- which has been taking your side of the aisle over since Obama’s second term.

Weirdly enough the left is getting more and more traditionally “conservative” in its modus operandi while the right is now the one growing more open minded. Old fashioned liberals like yourself are slowly going extinct while the dogmatic lunatics you created take over the asylum.

See? More assumptions about me as an individual, and broadbrush generalizations about a group you assume I am part of.

I think there is a greater tendency for liberals and progressives to learn from their mistakes, which translates into being open to hearing other points of view. Conversely, conservatives tend to either double down on their mistakes (because they see it as "strong" or something like that; learning from mistakes is a sign of weakness), or at best refuse to acknowledge that they actually made them.

I don't know if I would go that far. Human nature transcends political boundaries, so I'm not sure either camp is more ready to learn from mistakes than the other. What I had in mind was that being liberal, or at least progressive, suggests embracing change and new ideas. Conservatives, by definition, want to preserve what currently exists. Ideally, conservatives will at least examine the new ideas and reject them for good reason, but they can just as easily cling to the past or status quo uncritically. On the flip side, liberals ideally will not throw out the baby with the bath water, and will adopt only those new ideas that really will promote the common good, while holding on to tried and true ideas that are still working well.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Ideally, conservatives will at least examine the new ideas and reject them for good reason, but they can just as easily cling to the past or status quo uncritically.

I can respect the former, but the latter seems to be much more common, unfortunately.

I would say that I do see more of an iterative learning-process going on with the left that I find to be a pleasant surprise given my generally low expectations.

 

[anticlimatic]

I could have bought that argument six years ago. Now, in a post-Trump environment? Nope. If anything woke fundamentalism seems to be losing more and more support among the left, judging by the actual conversations I have with people on the left. There is a growing demand to fix the cause of all these problems, rather than waste time on things like language policing. It probably helps that Biden isn't exactly a "woke" guy and the folks more invested in adhering to the party line have to account for that. I think there's a growing consensus that "woke" politics are pretty useless; I mean they couldn't even get a plurality of white women to vote for Hillary Clinton.

Despite all the right-wing sky-is-falling hysteria we're hearing about it, this stuff really does seem to have hit its peak years ago. People are actually now way more open to discussing the flaws of "woke" politics than they used to be. (As someone who was doing that in 2015, you can trust me on that.) This mass censorship you are talking about for people criticizing "woke" ideas? It no longer seems to exist when such criticisms are made in good faith.

Also believe it or not I had lots of interesting conversations about politics with my cousin who was a Trump supporter yesterday and we didn't kill each other. Do you know why? He talked to me as an individual and respected me as such; he acknowledged my actual views and didn't treat me as part of a Biden-worshipping hive mind . But he's more of a genuine anti-establishment guy (who unfortunately was still taken in by a con man) and to this day not really a "true believer" in conservative dogma.

The great Woke Walkback has already begun? Well that’s encouraging.

 

[anticlimatic]

Comments like the highlighted do nothing to make your case, and stop open discussion in its tracks. They do not engage with the substance of a discussion, and are just "kinder, gentler" ad-hominem. It is obvious that you no longer care to advocate for what you actually think. Given that, why do you even continue to post here? Members with conservative views do post here, and from what I have seen, are well received to the extent that they make their case with reason and civility, and dispense with personal attacks and broadbrush assumptions. In any case, political debate is not the focus of this forum. Members for whom that is an important outlet would do better seeking it elsewhere.


See? More assumptions about me as an individual, and broadbrush generalizations about a group you assume I am part of.


I don't know if I would go that far. Human nature transcends political boundaries, so I'm not sure either camp is more ready to learn from mistakes than the other. What I had in mind was that being liberal, or at least progressive, suggests embracing change and new ideas. Conservatives, by definition, want to preserve what currently exists. Ideally, conservatives will at least examine the new ideas and reject them for good reason, but they can just as easily cling to the past or status quo uncritically. On the flip side, liberals ideally will not throw out the baby with the bath water, and will adopt only those new ideas that really will promote the common good, while holding on to tried and true ideas that are still working well.

I love hearing from INTJs how conversation discussion and debate should be conducted considering their renowned social skills and expertise on human interaction.

 

[Jai]

I love hearing from INTJs how conversation discussion and debate should be conducted considering their renowned social skills and expertise on human interaction.

This just in: Forum member makes cringe post attempting to delegitimise someone's valid argument by making a gross stereotype based upon their MBTI of all things. Stay tuned for next week's installment Best of TypoC to find out how this story ends!

 

[Coriolis]

It is time for the usual reminder:

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

The great Woke Walkback has already begun? Well that’s encouraging.

Hey, I have no issue with you being a martyr. It's your birthright as a cultural Evangelical. As I said, if you get your rocks off by feeling like you are being fed to the lions, have at it.

 

[anticlimatic]

Hey, I have no issue with you being a martyr. It's your birthright as a cultural Evangelical. As I said, if you get your rocks off by feeling like you are being fed to the lions, have at it.

Not sure how we got off on this tangent, originally I just wanted to share my current thoughts on the Biden admin- what your brain autocorrects to “right wing talking points”- and move on. Didnt mean to segue into a bitchfest of typoC.

Daddy hereby decrees that you all return to your regularly scheduled patting yourselves on the back for your grace and intelligence, and self fapping to your imagined superiority over the “chuds.”

 

[Red Herring]

"Let's pick up the discussion where it ended with Trump"

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I lol whenever a chud uses "communist" like it's a death sentence level insult.

I didn't even realize it was meant to be an insult, here. But it probably was.

Do you guys ever press for an explanation of what communism is, from people who use it as a derogatory catch-all? The mental acrobatics they employ to avoid actually defining it whilst trying trying to effectively convince it's definitely something to be scared of are almost fascinating. Almost.

The more a person can actually define it (in a way that effectively shares reality with others), the less scared they are that the "socialist" ambitions of the progressive party will ever even remotely result in communism. Or even socialism.

It's pretty clear that those who use these words the most - in a deragatory way - are the ones who least understand what they mean, and they're relying on the fear these words generate to fill in the blanks they aren't capable of filling in with substantial content. I really don't understand why journalists aren't taking advantage of blatant tells like that. Simply going into further detail about these *spooky words* would remove some of the histrionic fear-paralysis effect they have on a lot of people.

It is time for the usual reminder:

Isn't there some way to have a thread or sub forum that's far more strict in terms of actual dialogue? Where posts can be removed or deleted if they don't meet a higher standard, and people can be banned (from those discussions) for repeated attempts to participate without contributing substantial content? I've only used these (existing) threads for venting for as long as I can remember, and the reason is because they're nothing more than co-mingling echo chambers anyway.

Just because a person has an opposing viewpoint and they show up to interact doesn't qualify their contribution as dialogue per se. This forum coddles people who can't grasp that. If the forum is going to allow for that in some areas, can't there be a separate area where standards are more strictly upheld? I mean, that could even potentially attract better posters.

ETA: Ideally, people wouldn't feed trolls and the trolls would get bored and leave. But people always feed the trolls. In fact, the more elaborately troll-y any given statement is, the MORE it's going to generate responses. And when some particularly stupid line or paragraph gets quoted repeatedly, it's that much more difficult for people who have trolls on ignore to ignore them.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

ETA: Ideally, people wouldn't feed trolls and the trolls would get bored and leave. But people always feed the trolls. In fact, the more elaborately troll-y any given statement is, the MORE it's going to generate responses. And when some particularly stupid line or paragraph gets quoted repeatedly, it's that much more difficult for people who have trolls on ignore to ignore them.

Meh, you should know I feel no need to feed them any longer. I was hoping I could induce someone to contribute in a way that would be more beneficial for everyone involved but that's clearly not happening.

 

[Coriolis]

Do you guys ever press for an explanation of what communism is, from people who use it as a derogatory catch-all? The mental acrobatics they employ to avoid actually defining it whilst trying trying to effectively convince it's definitely something to be scared of are almost fascinating. Almost.

I ask for explanations all the time, and often offer them myself to try to avoid misunderstanding. Terms like feminism, woke, safe space, etc. often mean different things to different people, and needless argument can result simply because people are not talking about the same thing.

Isn't there some way to have a thread or sub forum that's far more strict in terms of actual dialogue? Where posts can be removed or deleted if they don't meet a higher standard, and people can be banned (from those discussions) for repeated attempts to participate without contributing substantial content? I've only used these (existing) threads for venting for as long as I can remember, and the reason is because they're nothing more than co-mingling echo chambers anyway.

Just because a person has an opposing viewpoint and they show up to interact doesn't qualify their contribution as dialogue per se. This forum coddles people who can't grasp that. If the forum is going to allow for that in some areas, can't there be a separate area where standards are more strictly upheld? I mean, that could even potentially attract better posters.

Of course there is a way. Our Support/Advice subforum is more strictly moderated. We can in principle do the same to any subforum. The question is: will the membership tolerate it? Is that what most, or enough, of us want? Even the current more limited degree of moderation raises the hackles of people who equate it to stifling free speech, especially of those with less popular opinions. I can say I have never felt stifled when my position was in the minority. Then again, I will actually explain what I think and why, and address arguments and objections directly. Personally I would favor enforcing a higher standard of discourse in subforums such as this, but then I tend to go for quality over quantity.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I ask for explanations all the time, and often offer them myself to try to avoid misunderstanding. Terms like feminism, woke, safe space, etc. often mean different things to different people, and needless argument can result simply because people are not talking about the same thing.

This is something you are very good at. I wish I were as good at this as you are.

Of course there is a way. Our Support/Advice subforum is more strictly moderated. We can in principle do the same to any subforum. The question is: will the membership tolerate it? Is that what most, or enough, of us want? Even the current more limited degree of moderation raises the hackles of people who equate it to stifling free speech, especially of those with less popular opinions. I can say I have never felt stifled when my position was in the minority. Then again, I will actually explain what I think and why, and address arguments and objections directly. Personally I would favor enforcing a higher standard of discourse in subforums such as this, but then I tend to go for quality over quantity.

Yeah, I'm kind of loathe to even bring it up, because I don't like creating work for other people and I realize it would take a specific kind of mindset ("these are the rules for this particular sub forum, you don't have to participate in it if you don't want to do the work of making sure your responses qualify, etc") in the first place that not everyone has. Historically, this is precisely the kind of thing that yields insanely manipulative arguments about what's "fair". Even though not many people would visit someone else's house and start arguing with the host about what kind of behavior should be allowed (and that it's "not fair" for being kicked out just because they kept doing something they were asked not to do, etc), there's a deeply ingrained sense of entitlement to this forum. It seems like there should be a way. I'm not talking about a "safe space"; "safe space" implies affirmations would be welcome, and affirmations would be as superfluous as empty criticism (e.g. "that's so stupid I don't understand how you can say it and still be smart enough to breathe" kind of criticism). I'm inclined to believe most people would see it as too much work, and they'd go back to the threads without such stringent parameters. But I don't know, maybe I'm navel gazing here. I just know that sometimes there is a really thoughtful post, and not only does it get quickly drown out - it doesn't get seen by the kind of people who would make a thoughtful response because they avoid these threads once they become venomous little cesspools (which I acknowledge my venting contributes to, but I wouldn't be shitting in them if they hadn't already been turned into toilets).

 

[ceecee]

Do you guys ever press for an explanation of what communism is, from people who use it as a derogatory catch-all? The mental acrobatics they employ to avoid actually defining it whilst trying trying to effectively convince it's definitely something to be scared of are almost fascinating. Almost.

Of course. In fact, that is what I start conversations with conservatives - after they make some inflammatory, baseless claim. Why do you think <insert thing>? Where did your information/research on <insert thing> come from, I'd like to see it? Or What is communism (or socialism or Marxism or whatever Tucker Carlson is running off at the mouth about)? Their answer to those inquiries do more than anything to explain what they're hearing and/or reading.

I see that "inflation" is now coming up in this thread. This is very predictable as it's been a keyword of the GOP since Biden took office. Without googling, I am betting most people don't know what a normal annual rate of inflation is to begin with but for people that don't read and don't follow economics at all (which are most people), this is simply a fearmongering move on the part of the right/conservatives/GOP punditry.

Some center right research with graphs and everything.

Don’t overreact to inflation data this spring

Also, I'm not exactly sure why anyone thinks they can have a conversation with the person in question in this thread. He's shown repeatedly that he is not interested and the "left" is simply " you people". He thinks he's a spectacular person when in reality he's a garden variety right winger with anger issues and imaginary grievances, far removed from a reality most people face. And he wonders, unironically, why anyone wouldn't want to be more like him lol.

 

[Virtual ghost]

"Let's pick up the discussion where it ended with Trump"

Pretty much.
I really have doubts how we will be able to trust GOP for the foreseeable future. They seem to be a conglomerate of pretty much everything that majority here is trying to throw out or keep out of offices.
Plus they gave us anti-vaxx stuff that are killing our people and a number of other stupid debates or ideas. Therefore since they are pushing away the traditional allies they are weakening the US in the process (just in time when US could really use a few good friendships).

 

[Virtual ghost]

Of course. In fact, that is what I start conversations with conservatives - after they make some inflammatory, baseless claim. Why do you think <insert thing>? Where did your information/research on <insert thing> come from, I'd like to see it? Or What is communism (or socialism or Marxism or whatever Tucker Carlson is running off at the mouth about)? Their answer to those inquiries do more than anything to explain what they're hearing and/or reading.

I see that "inflation" is now coming up in this thread. This is very predictable as it's been a keyword of the GOP since Biden took office. Without googling, I am betting most people don't know what a normal annual rate of inflation is to begin with but for people that don't read and don't follow economics at all (which are most people), this is simply a fearmongering move on the part of the right/conservatives/GOP punditry.

Some center right research with graphs and everything.

Don’t overreact to inflation data this spring

Also, I'm not exactly sure why anyone thinks they can have a conversation with the person in question in this thread. He's shown repeatedly that he is not interested and the "left" is simply " you people". He thinks he's a spectacular person when in reality he's a garden variety right winger with anger issues and imaginary grievances, far removed from a reality most people face. And he wonders, unironically, why anyone wouldn't want to be more like him lol.

If I can add:

Here we started to vote massively for progressives exactly to remove the remains of Communists and Communism. Which are generally seen pretty much as the GOP is seen in blue states: people that are out of date, mass corruption and interest groups, lies and spins, open or subtle authoritarian mindset, generally very loyal base (which tends to be older and lives in nostalgia), ties with Russia, bad at precise governing and keeping infrastructure functioning, anti-intellectual mentality with redneck elements ... etc. The only real differences are in economy and money flow. Therefore if you can't tell a difference between genuine progressives and genuine communists you obviously don't understand a few things.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

If I can add:

Here we started to vote massively for progressives exactly to remove the remains of Communists and Communism. Which are generally seen pretty much as the GOP is seen in blue states: people that are out of date, mass corruption and interest groups, lies and spins, open or subtle authoritarian mindset, generally very loyal base (which tends to be older and lives in nostalgia), ties with Russia, bad at precise governing and keeping infrastructure functioning, anti-intellectual mentality with redneck elements ... etc. The only real differences are in economy and money flow. Therefore if you can't tell a difference between genuine progressives and genuine communists you obviously don't understand a few things.

Any conservative reading this would probably just say you've been brainwashed by Democrat propaganda, ignoring the fact that you don't live in the U.S.