What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

POTUS 45.29: Eggs and Tweet Storms for Breakfast

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: POTUS 45.29: Eggs and Tweet Storms for Breakfast

rufus said:
I doubt if you see China take any side in a US-Russia conflict. They'll happily sit back and watch until the dust settles, and then quietly move into the power vacuum.
Click to expand...

”Siamese fighting fish; fascinating creatures. Brave but on the whole stupid. Yes they're stupid. Except for the occasional one such as we have here who lets the other two fight. While he waits. Waits until the survivor is so exhausted that he cannot defend himself.”
 
Re: POTUS 45.29: Eggs and Tweet Storms for Breakfast

MaizeRage said:
He's just a coward that doesn't want people to call him out on what a piece of **** he is as a human being.
Click to expand...

No call for that, Maize.

The tragedy of Joe is there are good people who let bad people operate, and even support them, for... reasons.
 
Re: POTUS 45.29: Eggs and Tweet Storms for Breakfast

rufus said:
I doubt if you see China take any side in a US-Russia conflict. They'll happily sit back and watch until the dust settles, and then quietly move into the power vacuum.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's almost certainly how it would play out.
 
Re: POTUS 45.29: Eggs and Tweet Storms for Breakfast

MaizeRage said:
After a genocide, joe will bravely say that he's maybe thinking about reconsidering his position, but needs to see a little more evidence.

He's just a coward that doesn't want people to call him out on what a piece of **** he is as a human being.
Click to expand...

But the little babies!!!!! The defenseless, innocent little babies!!!!
 
Re: POTUS 45.29: Eggs and Tweet Storms for Breakfast

jerphisch said:
At some point you have to re-evaluate.
Click to expand...
Why do that when you can just double down?

I know I reevaluated my libertarian stances after the financial crisis. I also know at least one guy who just doubled down on that ideology. There are people who are willing to change their positions but they're not super common unfortunately.
 
Re: POTUS 45.29: Eggs and Tweet Storms for Breakfast

trixR4kids said:
I know I reevaluated my libertarian stances after the financial crisis. I also know at least one guy who just doubled down on that ideology.
Click to expand...

Same thing happened with me when I got a family and started to view life as more than a cloud of atomized individuals, but I had a friend who just went out even farther along the limb.

Our ideas probably aren't really rational. They choose us, we don't choose them. So that's why I say you can't say a guy with evil ideas is evil. What he is is just vulnerable to evil; something went wrong with his immune system.

When I talk to Joe I don't get the evil vibe (and believe me there are people here that I do). I hear a guy trying to do right who has a few axioms which allow him to justify causing great suffering. But... I also think he would say exactly the same about me. According to Joe, I'm literally abetting mass murder.

I'm not saying don't judge: Aristotle was wrong, humans are the judging animal, and that's good -- that introduction of values is what makes us interesting in Nature. But I'm saying don't condemn. By all means, contain. Joe's ideas are not the sort of sh-t we need spreading pain in the world. But the people who carry those ideas are for the most part unwitting.
 
Last edited:
Re: POTUS 45.29: Eggs and Tweet Storms for Breakfast

trixR4kids said:
Why do that when you can just double down?

I know I reevaluated my libertarian stances after the financial crisis. I also know at least one guy who just doubled down on that ideology. There are people who are willing to change their positions but they're not super common unfortunately.
Click to expand...

After establishing an opinion or position, most find ways to contort themselves into maintaining their previous position rather than adjust to new facts. It's something that knows no party boundary, just human nature.
 
Re: POTUS 45.29: Eggs and Tweet Storms for Breakfast

St. Clown said:
After establishing an opinion or position, most find ways to contort themselves into maintaining their previous position rather than adjust to new facts. It's something that knows no party boundary, just human nature.
Click to expand...
I definitely agree with this and Kep's post as well. I get that you're not realistically going to change peoples' minds on a message board but name calling and all that garbage isn't really helping and basically just gives ammo to the BSABSVR.
 
Re: POTUS 45.29: Eggs and Tweet Storms for Breakfast

St. Clown said:
After establishing an opinion or position, most find ways to contort themselves into maintaining their previous position rather than adjust to new facts. It's something that knows no party boundary, just human nature.
Click to expand...

Perhaps after the opinions are formed, but one side of the political spectrum is quite possibly more prone to believing crap.

Far-right voters are more likely to believe fake news, a study of the German electorate found. And conservatives are more apt to believe lies.

So while we may all be susceptible to so-called "confirmation bias" the average republican starts from a distinct disadvantage in that they believe stuff that isn't true to begin with.
 
Re: POTUS 45.29: Eggs and Tweet Storms for Breakfast

St. Clown said:
After establishing an opinion or position, most find ways to contort themselves into maintaining their previous position rather than adjust to new facts. It's something that knows no party boundary, just human nature.
Click to expand...

There are tendencies towards or away from this behavior. I don't think the tendencies are themselves partisan. However, a receptivity to the fallibility of our viewpoint and the ubiquity of bias, and the knowledge of the tools that counter-balance that, has become partisan. Forty years ago it was conservatives who had the better bullsh-t detectors. Now it's liberals. Part of this is how the magical thinking of religion and Austrian economics came to paralyze the right's brain. That happened to the left in the 50s and 60s with the spread of Marxism. Part of it is just basic human nature: the powerful get lazy, put their feet up, and set their mind in neutral.

So while doubling down is not leftist or rightist per se, it also isn't always equal: there's a long multi-generational oscillation between the poles of one side being stagnant and reactionary and the other side being questioning and revolutionary, and at the present time it is the right that is more frozen and getting worse while the left is thawing out.

In part the battle on the left is that while the kids are free of the chains of the old authoritarian hierarchical views of the 60s-90s our leadership and its flunkies are so physically old that it is a millstone of obsolete doctrinaire categories. We are a living being encased in dead skin and you people under 40 need to take out a cheese grater and start scraping and peeling.
 
Last edited:
Re: POTUS 45.29: Eggs and Tweet Storms for Breakfast

trixR4kids said:
I mean we have certain people on this site on the left doubling down on failed positions/candidates so you're probably right about that ;)
Click to expand...

As I said, the left is not monolithic and we are dealing with tendencies. We are emerging from a period in which a smug, sedentary Groupthink pervaded Democratic leadership. That period coincided with a long slide from dominance to minority at every level of government, from the 60s through the teens. But this is a normal Hegelian pattern: the grandchildren will ritually (well, presumably ritually, although now you mention it social security makes a more literal solution look attractive) slay their grandparents and smash their obsolete ideological structures.

And then in fifty years the kids of today will likewise get shot into the sun by their grandkids. Circle of life.
 
Re: POTUS 45.29: Eggs and Tweet Storms for Breakfast

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The torture of detainees in U.S. custody during the last decade was one of the darkest chapters in American history. The Senate must do its job in scrutinizing the record & involvement of Gina Haspel in this disgraceful program. <a href="https://t.co/p2eZfMDF5N">https://t.co/p2eZfMDF5N</a></p>— John McCain (@SenJohnMcCain) <a href="https://twitter.com/SenJohnMcCain/status/973643361922895872?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 13, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Let's all watch McCain pee into the wind. What a joke. Why even bring it up? Nobody listens to you anymore, John. You sold out.
 
Re: POTUS 45.29: Eggs and Tweet Storms for Breakfast

trixR4kids said:
Why do that when you can just double down?

I know I reevaluated my libertarian stances after the financial crisis. I also know at least one guy who just doubled down on that ideology. There are people who are willing to change their positions but they're not super common unfortunately.
Click to expand...

That's when I started evolving as well. I used to be a center-right libertarian and now... Not so much.
 
Re: POTUS 45.29: Eggs and Tweet Storms for Breakfast

Kepler said:
Same thing happened with me when I got a family and started to view life as more than a cloud of atomized individuals, but I had a friend who just went out even farther along the limb.

Our ideas probably aren't really rational. They choose us, we don't choose them. So that's why I say you can't say a guy with evil ideas is evil. What he is is just vulnerable to evil; something went wrong with his immune system.

When I talk to Joe I don't get the evil vibe (and believe me there are people here that I do). I hear a guy trying to do right who has a few axioms which allow him to justify causing great suffering. But... I also think he would say exactly the same about me. According to Joe, I'm literally abetting mass murder.

I'm not saying don't judge: Aristotle was wrong, humans are the judging animal, and that's good -- that introduction of values is what makes us interesting in Nature. But I'm saying don't condemn. By all means, contain. Joe's ideas are not the sort of sh-t we need spreading pain in the world. But the people who carry those ideas are for the most part unwitting.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Joe, I definitely don't think you're a bad person. I just very much disagree with your opinions. Maybe we'll find a happy medium someday.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top