• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Understanding the Liberal Mindset

theprestige said:
I'm not referring to incivility directed at people on this forum. I'm referring to the misanthropic, dehumanizing, merciless rhetoric referring to anyone and everyone suspected of voting the other way.
Click to expand...

oh see when you said you see misanthropy on this forum directed at the right i had thought you meant on this forum.

edit

not trying to be rude. but ultimately my point is that your voting preferences are most likely reflected in your opinions and attitude as much as what you’re writing on the paper.
 
Last edited:
427 Cobra said:
I find it fascinating that the people that routinely label all conservatives as racist, sexist, homophobic, etc., get upset when someone applies labels and stereotypes on them.
Click to expand...
I find it fascinating that people who routinely spout racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. get all whiny when they get called out on the horribleness of their views. Your lack of ability to take criticism in a constructive matter and improve yourself is not my problem.
 
acbytesla said:
I don't even know what a conservative is anymore. Today's Republicans do not resemble in the slightest old school conservative philosophy.of Republicans of the 1950s, 1960s and early 1970s. Conservatives were pro choice at that time. They didn't care about one's sexuality. Ever hear of Log Cabin Republicans? They wouldn't be for reckless tax cuts. That began to change in 1980 when Ronald Reagan created a coalition with the batcrap crazy religious nuts. Reagan combined fiscal recklessness with his deal with GConservatives. The Republicans have been ona dishonest downward slide ever since.

Trump's conservatives are not conservatives. MAGA isn't conservative. It's fascist.
Click to expand...
The republicans of the immediate post war years weren't really conservative, they were a mixture of classical liberals and the remnants of the core proto-social democrats which comprised the radical core of the original republican party. Yes economic conservatism was creeping in, but in terms of social values and welfare, they were well to the left of todays party (and in some cases either party).
 
Gulliver Foyle said:
I find it fascinating that people who routinely spout racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. get all whiny when they get called out on the horribleness of their views. Your lack of ability to take criticism in a constructive matter and improve yourself is not my problem.
Click to expand...
Unless you know Cobra personally outside the forum, you are reading an awful lot into 29 posts, most of them about cars.
 
angrysoba said:
The compassion for the Master Race is the good bit, no?
Click to expand...
No. I mean, maybe you think that compassion allocated to some but not others on the basis of bigotry is a moral good. I don't think so.

However, I must admit that I'm now interested in arguments that bigoted people go around doing moral good in a bigoted way, that involves withholding moral good from a lot of people. If you have any such arguments, please share.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
No. I mean, maybe you think that compassion allocated to some but not others on the basis of bigotry is a moral good. I don't think so.
Click to expand...
No, people are not compassionate because of bigotry. It is the refusal to be compassionate on the basis of bigotry which is the bad bit.
theprestige said:
However, I must admit that I'm now interested in arguments that bigoted people go around doing moral good in a bigoted way, that involves withholding moral good from a lot of people. If you have any such arguments, please share.
Click to expand...
“Doing moral good in a bigoted way” is your formulation, not mine. That’s why you find the idea so risible.
 
angrysoba said:
No, people are not compassionate because of bigotry. It is the refusal to be compassionate on the basis of bigotry which is the bad bit.
Click to expand...
I think the two bits are inseparable. "For those inside the party everything, for those outside the party nothing" is not a moral good, no matter how compassionate you are towards the people inside the party.

angrysoba said:
“Doing moral good in a bigoted way” is your formulation, not mine. That’s why you find the idea so risible.
Click to expand...
How else would you formulate it? Again, I'm asking if arth's moral goods are still moral goods when they're applied conditionally, according to bigoted conditions. I don't think they are.

To be clear: I'm not talking about people who apply the principles of compassion and empathy imperfectly. Nobody's perfect. I'm talking about people who espouse a bigoted ideology (or who express one in practice), that picks and chooses who gets compassion and empathy based on bigoted criteria. Hitler's National Socialism was not a partly-good, partly-bad ideology. It was all bad, in its conditional application of goods.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
I see a lot of misanthropy on this forum, from the left, directed at the right. You* express hatred for those on the right who don't express empathy to your satisfaction, but the moment someone votes differently from you, all that empathy goes out the window. People transform before your eyes, from human beings making flawed choices, into subhuman monsters who deserve everything their oppressors do to them, and deserve none of the moral goods you have in store for the real humans who agree with you.

*The rhetorical you*, obvs.
Click to expand...
Yeah, some people are frustrated and angry and use hyperbole. And a few may actually feel that way.

But I also know that irl I specifically keep getting accused of personally being hateful and dehumanizing towards politicians I don't like, which gets right up my nose because I'm literally the 'don't dehumanise anyone, ever, that's how you forget good people can do bad things' person. Maybe because I said something stronger than I remember? 'but you hate RFK.' 'I don't LIKE that RFK is in a position where he's going to get people killed. I don't hate RFK! He's just a guy! A guy with part of a putrefying whale on his car, sure, but still just a guy!' 'but why should you hate him?' 'I just said I don't hate him!' 'I dunno, sounds like you doth protest too much!'
 
Lithrael said:
Yeah, some people are frustrated and angry and use hyperbole. And a few may actually feel that way.
Click to expand...
Cool.

Lithrael said:
But I also know that irl I specifically keep getting accused of personally being hateful and dehumanizing towards politicians I don't like, which gets right up my nose because I'm literally the 'don't dehumanise anyone, ever, that's how you forget good people can do bad things' person. Maybe because I said something stronger than I remember? 'but you hate RFK.' 'I don't LIKE that RFK is in a position where he's going to get people killed. I don't hate RFK! He's just a guy! A guy with part of a putrefying whale on his car, sure, but still just a guy!' 'but why should you hate him?' 'I just said I don't hate him!' 'I dunno, sounds like you doth protest too much!'
Click to expand...
Wow, that sucks. You have my sympathy.
 
AmyStrange said:
Nope. Wrong. People who take advantage of you are the real problem.

IOW, those without empathy are the real problem.
Click to expand...
Empathic judges who release career criminals again and again to terrorize the public are the problem.
 
Trausti said:
Empathic judges who release career criminals again and again to terrorize the public are the problem.
Click to expand...

People who believe lies are more of a problem, especially when their egos demand they always be right, and thus, lie to themselves to achieve that goal.

Now, let me ask you this: Do you really believe everything the fat clown says, or are you more intelligent than that?

I don't really expect an answer, because you always seem to somehow avoid the really important questions.

Good luck with all that and have a Happy New Years anyway.
 
Last edited:
AmyStrange said:
Now, let me ask you, do you believe everything the fat clown says, or are you more intelligent than that?
Click to expand...
Are you really that incapable of having a discussion without mentioning Orange Julius? Get out and take a walk or something. Good grief.
 
Trausti said:
Are you really that incapable of having a discussion without mentioning Orange Julius? Get out and take a walk or something. Good grief.
Click to expand...

Thank you, but as usual, you ignored my question:

Do you really believe everything the fat clown says, or are you more intelligent than that?


BTW, wasn't it the fat clown who said what you said, almost word for word?

And that's what makes it relevant.
 
Last edited:
AmyStrange said:
Thank you, but as usual, you ignored my question:

Do you really believe everything the fat clown says, or are you more intelligent than that?
Click to expand...
No, I don't. So, what? Do you always resort to Orange-Man-Bad when you can't formulate an argument?
 
Trausti said:
No, I don't. So, what? Do you always resort to Orange-Man-Bad when you can't formulate an argument?
Click to expand...

When you quote the fat clown almost word for word, that's why he becomes relevant.

Anyway, thanks for actually answering my question.
 
Last edited:
Trausti said:
Where did I do that? Are you confusing me for someone else? Go take that walk and get some fresh air. Sheesh.
Click to expand...

Sigh, Post #91:

"Empathic [woke] judges who release career criminals [who rule against the fat clown] again and again [so he can continue] to terrorize the public are the problem."
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom