A hack piece, and what I'm beginning to think might be your style, oscfan17. If your style in the discussion about atheists is any indicator. We can continue with that discussion too, if you'd like.
Or we could have a discussion about this article, though that would require more than just a link.
Posted by oscfan17 (Member # 13377) on :
I assure you this is not a Rakeesh attack thread, though I can't help if you feel that way.
[ April 21, 2016, 07:23 PM: Message edited by: oscfan17 ]
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
The funny part, aside from your deeming that a burn, oscfan17, is that if one switched out a few words in your other discussion, the smug whining that this article, well, whines about, was entirely on your side. It's not cool to be an atheist-but atheism is growing-but I meant on parts of the Internet. They don't care about the need for meaning-but they do care-oh sure they care in a paragraph or two-but actually large portions of debate and books have referred to it-silence.
Of course if this *were* a Rakeesh attack thread, I would a) lament the quality of my antagonist and b) express my lack of surprise that you felt you needed another thread in which to attack.
Posted by Heisenberg (Member # 13004) on :
Don't do it to yourself, oscfan17.
Posted by oscfan17 (Member # 13377) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: The funny part, aside from your deeming that a burn, oscfan17, is that if one switched out a few words in your other discussion, the smug whining that this article, well, whines about, was entirely on your side.
You are quite right.If you changed my wording, you can also change the tone of what I said. What other brilliant insights do you have you who most definitely does not feel attacked by this thread?
quote:Of course if this *were* a Rakeesh attack thread, I would a) lament the quality of my antagonist and b) express my lack of surprise that you felt you needed another thread in which to attack.
Or you would come swinging with personal attacks in your first post as you already did. *shrugs*
Posted by oscfan17 (Member # 13377) on :
quote:Originally posted by Heisenberg: Don't do it to yourself, oscfan17.
Pardon?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Hey, I gave you like half a dozen chances in your other thread not to be a hack. You doubled down every time. Don't whine now, just stop being a hack, and you'll be treated seriously. Not just by me.
Note: what was there to discuss, exactly? That entire link was a series of personal attacks on a group, for starters, so you're whining that I'm being too personal? You haven't read the work of atheists, did you read the link you posted?
Posted by oscfan17 (Member # 13377) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Hey, I gave you like half a dozen chances in your other thread not to be a hack. You doubled down every time. Don't whine now, just stop being a hack, and you'll be treated seriously. Not just by me.
"I gave you a chance..." How generous. I really do believe that this dynamic where I care about your opinion and want to prove myself to you is in fact at play here. Posted by oscfan17 (Member # 13377) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Note: what was there to discuss, exactly? That entire link was a series of personal attacks on a group, for starters, so you're whining that I'm being too personal? You haven't read the work of atheists, did you read the link you posted?
Tell me: Are you someone more likely to favor boycotting a state because of its treatment of transexuals/gays (in the sense of not allowing transexuals to use women's restrooms and allowing bakeries to follow their religion) more than you are willing to boycott a state because its republican government denied medicare expansion? I think that point is worth thinking about. Smug liberals seem to lack a utilitarian perspective and favor bizarre causes that alienate the majority of the country rather than spending all that capital on causes that would make more people better off.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
No, I've got no illusions about *that*. But you are whining about personal attacks, and so I replied that I treated you seriously until you made it clear you weren't worth being taken seriously.
My pointing out that you're a hack isn't because I think you crave my good opinion of you and want to deny it. It's because I think you're a hack, and don't like you enough not to say it. Don't reach so much into it.
Also, you're free of course at any point to actually discuss the link you posted. Now that's asking a lot, I realize, any details at all, so a gentle reminder seemed in order.
Posted by Dogbreath (Member # 11879) on :
Are you Orson Scott Card?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Yes!
Posted by Dogbreath (Member # 11879) on :
Not you, silly.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
The ability of a bakery to follow its religion was never in threat. That is a manufactured boogeyman cooked up by people who have an unhealthy and un-American desire to blend their religion and politics.
Concerning transsexuals in bathrooms, I haven't ever heard any evidence that suggests would-be rapists have or are likely to use cross-dressing much less sex change surgery to rape women in bathrooms. If you've got anything demonstrating ofherwise, I'm all ears.
As for boycotting a state, speaking for myself I wouldn't for the insurance question. I would for the bigoted so-called bathroom law, yes. And I reject wholeheartedly the notion conservative republicans are trying to put forward that they are committed to protecting women. Pull the other one, it's got bells on it.
As for unpopular causes...my, goodness. Causes like gay marriage? Would-be moderates claimed for many years that it was too soon, that it alienated, that there were better causes. Here we are now. Kim Davis is rightly a laughingstock and gays can marry, and will be able to do so more and more.
Put that in your 'bizarre causes' pipe and smoke it.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dogbreath: Not you, silly.
Well I might be!
Posted by oscfan17 (Member # 13377) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: No, I've got no illusions about *that*. But you are whining about personal attacks, and so I replied that I treated you seriously until you made it clear you weren't worth being taken seriously.
My pointing out that you're a hack isn't because I think you crave my good opinion of you and want to deny it. It's because I think you're a hack, and don't like you enough not to say it. Don't reach so much into it.
Also, you're free of course at any point to actually discuss the link you posted. Now that's asking a lot, I realize, any details at all, so a gentle reminder seemed in order.
My statement mentioning the personal nature of your remarks were not a whine, just a description. It's a bit silly in 2016 to be whining about blowhards on the internet who use ad-hominems to buttress their empty headed notions.
Posted by oscfan17 (Member # 13377) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: As for unpopular causes...my, goodness. Causes like gay marriage? Would-be moderates claimed for many years that it was too soon, that it alienated, that there were better causes. Here we are now. Kim Davis is rightly a laughingstock and gays can marry, and will be able to do so more and more.
And perhaps this is why many "fly-over" whites are more eager to vote for Trump to vent their economic anxieties. There was a huge opportunity cost to spending so much political capital on pushing gay marriage that could have been spent on easing economic inequality, ending the drug war, fighting corporatism, etc, instead of alienating so much of the country for the benefit of 2% of the population who wanted their sexual predilections validated by the state as normal. This is why the Smug Liberal Elite are in part to blame for the rise of Trump and the divisiveness of our culture.
Posted by oscfan17 (Member # 13377) on :
The Smug Style of Liberalism responds with sarcasm and bewilderment to the notion that most people regard transsexuals using the same restroom as their women and girls as vulgar.
One possible solution to the Bathroom War is to allow transsexuals to use women's restrooms, but only if they are "committed" transsexuals who are post-op rather than men who merely put on women's clothing in order to be perverts. However, it remains to be seen how such a fair compromise could be carried out.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
That article was such a hack piece that you could change every instance referencing liberals to referencing conservatives and it would have the same dumb message (except then huff post would have posted it as an attack on conservatism)
No really
It's a dumb article
Posted by Dogbreath (Member # 11879) on :
quote:Originally posted by oscfan17: The Smug Style of Liberalism responds with sarcasm and bewilderment to the notion that most people regard transsexuals using the same restroom as their women and girls as vulgar.
One possible solution to the Bathroom War is to allow transsexuals to use women's restrooms, but only if they are "committed" transsexuals who are post-op rather than men who merely put on women's clothing in order to be perverts. However, it remains to be seen how such a fair compromise could be carried out.
Are you Orson Scott Card?
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
See, being a Smug Liberal Elite, I would like to think that providing you with information about why not all "committed" transsexuals are able to, should, or even want to have surgery would help keep you from making foolish suggestions. Clearly, though, that isn't the case.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:The Smug Style of Liberalism responds with sarcasm and bewilderment to the notion that most people regard transsexuals using the same restroom as their women and girls as vulgar.
For my own part, I AM baffled by this complaint. All else aside, why is it not a problem that transsexual men -- born with female genitalia -- might use the same restroom as my son?
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
quote:Originally posted by oscfan17: The Smug Style of Liberalism responds with sarcasm and bewilderment to the notion that most people regard transsexuals using the same restroom as their women and girls as vulgar.
This smug liberal finds the phrase "their women and girls" vulgar. Also the idea that anyone would be checking anyone else's genitalia in the restroom.
Posted by oscfan17 (Member # 13377) on :
Great, now hilarious comedy like this is politically incorrect.
I would like to take full credit for being the first Clive-spotter this iteration.
Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: [QB] The ability of a bakery to follow its religion was never in threat. That is a manufactured boogeyman cooked up by people who have an unhealthy and un-American desire to blend their religion and politics.
Ooh. Are we talking about bakeries? The biggest lesson learned is that if you are a defendant in a suit, do not post the plantiff's address on the internet and tell your facebook followers to harass said plaintiff.
Good lesson, that.
Posted by JanitorBlade (Member # 12343) on :
quote:Originally posted by oscfan17: Great, now hilarious comedy like this is politically incorrect.
Please stop posting, Saaed.
Posted by Veylon (Member # 13379) on :
Ah, smugness. Every time a southern accent is mocked, a Republican is born. The Left has become horribly classist and driven away many who would otherwise support it. It's easy, meaninglessly easy, to "Love and Tolerate" people like yourself. It's a lot harder - and a lot more rewarding - to do so when they look and sound differently. There wouldn't be so much of this toxic siege mentality if Liberals were willing to talk with people instead of to them. As a liberal myself, it infuriates me. The first big step on the road to disaster is believing oneself invincible.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:It's easy, meaninglessly easy, to "Love and Tolerate" people like yourself.
Which is why Republicans are so famously good at it, no doubt. Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Veylon: It's easy, meaninglessly easy, to "Love and Tolerate" people like yourself. It's a lot harder - and a lot more rewarding - to do so when they look and sound differently.
if anyone seriously suggests that the american left is doing a a worse job of this than conservatives, you can safely approach their arguments as being completely deluded
only one of these two ideological groups is presently jockeying with whether to elect a man who literally wants to build a 40 billion dollar wall between them and people who look and sound differently, or a different man who wants to turn america into a theocracy for the benefit of those who worship correctly. Posted by zlogdanbr (Member # 13374) on :
While I cannot really comment on the Left in USA, our Left is a complete waste of time.
This is the wonderful team "heading" Brazil in the last 13 years. Heading is a force of expression because what they did was to sink down the country in muddy waters. The very fact of mentioning of the Brazilian left means out of question in a sane world.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
It was a bloated article that really droned on and on... but there were a couple of nuggets of an idea there that the author danced around but really didn't get to enough.
The "smug tone" has contributed to the divide in this country, preventing people from really engaging with the ideas on the other side of the aisle - and yes, on both sides of the line. The Facebook echo chamber exists for both, whether it's "dumb hick" memes or "dumb librul" memes. The net is rife with ad hominem and straw man arguments that serve only to agitate the other side, rather than convince.
It also completely misses the role of social media... what it attributes to "smugness" can also be attributed to the narrative no longer being controlled by the talking heads on the news stations and in the newspapers. There used to be gatekeepers to the dissemination of information and opinion... but no longer. Post a funny image that strikes a cord with the id of a liberal or conservative person, and with a click that information is passed on to large spheres of people... whereas before, it might have been met with a chuckle and a "we can't run/print that".
The article didn't really make a point - at least not a strong one. It took a long (long) and circuitous route to present supporting points... and then didn't ultimately use that support to make a case for anything.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
i assume perhaps unfairly that the brazilian left is as 'fun' and 'capable' as the venezuelan left
aka a rolling ball of madness threatening the stability of an entire country
Posted by zlogdanbr (Member # 13374) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: i assume perhaps unfairly that the brazilian left is as 'fun' and 'capable' as the venezuelan left
aka a rolling ball of madness threatening the stability of an entire country
Definitely. Venezuelan and Brazilian lefts are not just aligned/allied philosophically but they are supporting each other both economically and internationally. Well, please add to the pack Bolivia, Equator and Uruguay.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
well at least you can take some comfort in that your guys's left isn't failing as absolutely spectacularly as the besotted, godawful mess in venezuela
but get real worried if toilet paper starts getting rationed
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: get real worried if toilet paper starts getting rationed
Good advice in general
Posted by Veylon (Member # 13379) on :
quote:if anyone seriously suggests that the american left is doing a a worse job of this than conservatives, you can safely approach their arguments as being completely deluded
This is a good chunk of why I am on the Left and why the Right has been in such trouble lately. But merely being somewhat less bad than the alternative is different than being good.
The Left has had a nasty habit lately of burning bridges with anyone a hair out of line on certain issues and is in danger of looking absurd and losing credibility much the same way the evangelicals did. Refusing to compromise is the same as refusing to have allies. And you need allies.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
You rather badly miss the point when you label 'the Left' as some sort of unified group like evangelicals. That's even more specific than saying 'the religious right' which is *itself* more specific than saying 'the Right' when discussing American politics.
So on the one hand for the purposes of criticism, 'the Left' is all lumped together and the comparison is evangelicals-which is two layers more specific, and thus much closer to being a unified group that can be discussed that way.
You should narrow your focus. For example we could talk about the left and Midwestern or southern poor or lower middle class voters, and the reasons why the freaking Koch brothers and Donald Trump, three people who for god's sake have no interest in advancing the rights and status of these voter groups and yet somehow have those same voters believing they do. How much has the left lost its way in terms of support for labor, for example, or investment in the poor? To what extent did this have to do with smugness over social issues?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Case in point/: which issues?
Posted by zlogdanbr (Member # 13374) on :
If the left means being a worker as in the French revolution connotation and that I care for the poor so I am left. If left means that I should laureate and glorify Marxism, Fidel Castro, old Soviet Union and all deluded theorists and empirical practitioners of this so I am not left at all.
Actually the very fact that I am part of a 35% minority in Brazilian society defined as middle class unequivocally defines me, according to my beloved government, as "the white elite" even though my heritages came from lots of different places and the real elite are the 1% richest. And if I dare to question the morality and ethics of a group of people loudly preaching that "we are stealing public money and accepting and paying bribes so we can save the poor and hell yeah we deserve a good share of what we steal because we are so good and human" so I am turned into their eyes, the wonderful Brazilian and Latin American left, into the vilest Right, a real enemy of the state and against the proletariat's revolution. Posted by Diane (Member # 13380) on :
This is a response to recent and not so recent opinions stated by Orson Scott Card regarding the supposed "hate" propaganda wielded by the politically correct left. In particular, I will be addressing gay marriage, the North Carolina bathroom issue and global warming.
All citizens should have the right to marry. Treating the union as a holy sacrament which should be denied to citizens based on sexual orientation is intolerant. If you have religious reasons for feeling otherwise, they should not be used to oppose what other citizens desire. Imagine not being allowed to marry the love of your life, or being told that your union is somehow not the same as real marriage. This is bigotry, pure and simple. In the future, I am sure that people will feel ashamed at how we denied same sex marriage in the same way we feel shame about the opposition toward inter-racial marriages.
This brings me to the North Carolina bathroom law. Orson Scott Card stated that women are somehow put in a position of not feeling safe, since any man, claiming to identify as being female can use the women's bathroom. Well, I don't really think there is going to be a surge of sexual predators dressing up as women lurking in public washrooms. As a woman, I do not feel in danger over this. However, someone who has changed sex, but does not yet have an updated birth certificate, or has not fully transitioned is now forced to use the wrong washroom. Is this sensible? I would be surprised to see a man with me in a public washroom. If he was born a woman, and changed sex, this is what is going to happen. It is already happening, as transgender people are being forced to explain to some confused fellow washroom goers why they are in the "wrong" washroom. But really, isn't this all a little silly? Is North Carolina going to have security people hanging around public washrooms, asking to see ID? This is an issue of tolerance and not one of "the Left" spewing hatred.
Finally, I would like to address the Global Warming issue. Orson Scott Card has stated many times that the issue is one of faith, not science. He has claimed that there is zero evidence that we are causing global warming. Every credible scientist says otherwise. The science is not complicated. We are pouring greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere, which is warming the planet. This began happening at the point industry and large amounts of cattle became the norm. It has been proven over and over again. Orson Scott Card often asks people to do more fact checking, but I'm afraid he is the one who needs to take a closer look at the science. The idea that we are being hoodwinked by environmentalists who want to take down the oil and gas industries is ridiculously paranoid. That would be quite the conspiracy. We cannot afford to ignore global warming. We can change things if we have the will, but stating that the problem does not exist is irresponsible, and dangerous. Orson Scott Card is a science fiction writer. He is an intelligent human being. I can't quite get why he vehemently opposes this issue.
Yes, the politically correct agenda can go too far. Holiday tree anyone? The above issues, however, are certainly not in this camp. I felt the need to refute Orson Scott Card on these ideas, as despite what he claims, his ideas on sexual identification are intolerant, and his stand on global warming is scientifically wrong-headed.
Posted by zlogdanbr (Member # 13374) on :
It didn't take me 4 seconds to find counter evidence to global warming at Google. Still I could find that 97% scientists agree that the issue exists. Still you have 3%.
Back in 19th century scientists believed in the ether and did not even have a clue that relativity and quantum physics would change our lives. Not that this proves anything it is that I simply do not think OSC is a lunatic because he opposes the idea.
I must tell you that it did quite offend me that OSC did hate School of Rock ( which I really love ) ( This is a joke people ;-) )
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
someone is not necessarily a lunatic because they oppose the idea, but there is a point at which some people's arguments against global warming become ridiculous in their incredulous and selective acceptance of scientific inquiry.
osc's arguments against the 'global warmists' - as has been established in a lot of concretely referenceable ways by his articles - are ridiculous and do seem stereotypically paranoid in the motives he ascribes to a worldwide consensus of climatologists.
it's not an issue of whether or not he has access to the information anymore, it's how he chooses to reject the scientific consensus and (most importantly) the denigrating things he says about the people who accept the scientific consensus.
so, yeah, you don't become a lunatic for not believing in global warming, but some people have lunatic arguments against global warming and just won't quit them even after a reasonable threshold of scientific confidence is readily available.
see also: creationists
Posted by zlogdanbr (Member # 13374) on :
Still in the topic "Weird and bizarre Communists taken seriously here in Brazil".
Mauro Iasi, a wonderful and sweet person. Former Communist candidate for Brazilian presidency has public advocated that "the Right and conservatives should be shot". It seems he quoted Brecht to an audience that went flabbergasted after the declaration and heavily applauded him.
Posted by zlogdanbr (Member # 13374) on :
Another sweet character is "beautiful soul" Maria do Rosario.
Currently a congresswoman who is a "strong" proponent of Human rights and was actually the Brazilian minister for Human Rights in the past. Back in 2003, a 16 years old lad, killed two kids who went camping in the mountains here in Sao Paulo. Well, the boy he has just beat him to dead and simply gave him some gunshots. Well, what he did to the girl makes me cry every time I think about. He has raped her for 6 days and once he found himself "pleased", he has stabbed and decapitated her. The beautiful Maria came to public to defend this killer because according to her he did not know what he was doing because he was a child and said publicly that she would sue anyone who felt rage against the "poor boy" who was 16. Now he is 27 and he has killed more 3 people. If one dares to question her she will use some adjectives like "bigot, racist, misogynist".
Beautiful Maria is the maximum example of human rights among the liberals here. Wonderful person. Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
i love political dysfunction dispatches from across the world because selfishly they make me feel way better about our own garbagefest.
like sure we have the NC law thing going on but meanwhile the philippine presidential frontrunner Rodrigo Duterte has vowed to pardon himself for murder, that's way cooler
also the for real probably going to happen Dilma Rousseff impeachment, wow
tony abbott made me feel better about george w bush because while bush was tragically empowered to do killing-millions-of-people shit on a worldwide scale, he was no tony abbott, who would have found a way to use chunks of the great barrier reef and ground up boats of refugees as bombs in Iraq
Posted by zlogdanbr (Member # 13374) on :
Right now, all the belligerent pack of militants are loudly trying to fight the impeachment process. Some of them gather in front public places and literally defecate on pictures of right wing politicians.
Another bunch of crazy and delluded warriors of the left, puts fire in the main highways here in São Paulo, because they don't want the impeachment. It is all worth if it is in their interest. Do hope that such a thing does not ever happen in USA.
Next chapter will focus on Jose Dirceu, the real leader of the pack, trained in Cuba to be the greatest revolutionary since che guevara ( I apologize for mentioning such awful and loathsome name )
Posted by Elison R. Salazar (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Originally posted by oscfan17: And perhaps this is why many "southern" whites are more eager to vote for secession to vent their economic anxieties. There was a huge opportunity cost to spending so much political capital on pushing abolition that could have been spent on easing economic inequality, ending the tariff war, fighting the Indians, etc, instead of alienating so much of the country for the benefit of 11% of the population who wanted their skin colour validated by the state as normal. This is why the Radical Republican Elite are in part to blame for the rise of the South and the divisiveness of our culture.
Posted by zlogdanbr (Member # 13374) on :
I have just had "wonderful" news from the front: the impeachment process against our beloved president Dilma was cancelled. The left here is in awe as it could be expected.
The ( now former ) president of the Brazilian parliament was last week legally removed from his duties as a congressman due to ( try a wild guess ) corruption - already proved - accusations. It happens that his substitute favors president Dilma so it was not a surprise at all.
The supreme court Judge, designated by Dilma not coincidentally some years ago, has accepted the accusation against the now former parliament chairman and the new guy took his place with a grin.
Not surprisingly the new guy is also accused of corruption, but right now he can stay as the chairman and do whatever he thinks better for the party, ops, for the people of Brazil.
To the local left, everything is acceptable if it is made in the name of the revolution, ops, in the name of people.
What could we expect from a president that usually brags to have been a terrorist fighting for the revolution?
A whole country utterly sunk on a deep ocean of mud. Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
So apparently April was a great month for membership growth here. I think the population just doubled.
Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
Oh good good. I've been looking to buy some counterfeit currency and whatever it is our spammers are selling these days.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
I saw this thread some time ago, not long after I had read the article in questions, and thought it thought provoking, and insightful. Being a smug liberal myself, I thought it was a good opportunity for self evaluation.
I had also found myself in an argument with a friend of mine from work. An really nice guy, who wants to vote for Trump. He mentioned this to me, saw the expression of dismissal on my face, and went over the edge, venting about how everyone thinks he's stupid, and he just sits there and takes it, but he's sick of it and... on and on... it had hit a nerve, and he just had to vent. And I realized there was nothing I could say, but that I just needed to listen, for as long as he needed to vent. It took a while.
As he was venting, I was thinking of the article, and thinking that I should mention it to him, because it was so relevant. But I also realized it was just one more example of my being "superior" or "smug" that my knowledge of what he needed was better than his. So I didn't mention the article. I just shut up and listened. The only thing I DID say was "I'm listening to you." I think that helped.
Anyway, today I saw this article, which is in the same vein. I personally think it is well worth the read. Trump: Tribune of poor white people Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
I think liberals are smug. So are conservatives. So is everybody who is convinced of their inherent correctness. It's why charges of hypocrisy stick so easily to partisans on both sides in the US.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I'm not smug.
I'm Smaug.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: I think liberals are smug. So are conservatives. So is everybody who is convinced of their inherent correctness. It's why charges of hypocrisy stick so easily to partisans on both sides in the US.
I would agree with this.
There's a certain righteousness that goes along with being an ideologue that makes smugness sort of an inherent quality.
But I also feel like smugness has a second component to it, which involves assuming your opposition is sort of stupid. I mean, I can think I'm right and not be a dick about it. But when I never leave myself open to listening to the other side and assume they must be stupid if they can't acknowledge how right I am, that's where you get into smug.
And most of that happens internally without much conscious thought.
Posted by PanaceaSanans (Member # 13395) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: But I also feel like smugness has a second component to it, which involves assuming your opposition is sort of stupid. I mean, I can think I'm right and not be a dick about it. But when I never leave myself open to listening to the other side and assume they must be stupid if they can't acknowledge how right I am, that's where you get into smug.
That perfectly sums up why I don't enjoy watching election duels (and why they are called "duel" instead of "debate").
Posted by Darth_Mauve (Member # 4709) on :
Smaug is a Liberal.
He believes in perfect equality--everyone is food regardless of race, creed, color, or lineage. Dwarf, elf, Beornling, goblin, they all taste good fried.
He believes in high tax rates--100% plus the horse (or Elk) you road in on.
He is anti-gun, well, anti-bow and arrow especially black arrows.
While he is tough on crime, he doesn't believe in long prison sentences. He would rather eat you now.
He is against the Military/Industrial Complex and believes that a small army is better than a large army, unless you are really hungry.
He legalized smoking pipe-weed, and smoking anything else he breathes on.
He believes that lethal injection is a cruel and unusual punishment, not to mention a tainting of tasty man-flesh.
Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
So I finally read the article. I have a lot of complicated reactions.
I agree that it is overly long, and offers little in the way of practical solutions, aside from listening more and being cognizant of when you are crossing a line (the Donald Trump statues discussed in the other thread come to mind).
But it does do a good job of conveying a certain mindset.
Some of it feels like the ramblings of twenty-two year old who is frustrated that mom and dad aren't treating them like an adult, so they act out, and behave like a child, whine and make things worse (see a previous post in this thread by someone who is most likely Clive). The kid gets treated like a child because they acted like one.
I have a deep dislike of the concept of "Good Facts", especially as a scientist. It implies that the facts themselves are a trifle, like what you need to do to fit into snob society. They are facts. And like the laws of physics they do not care a whit what people think of them. The world is round, it's definitely getting warmer, and getting your shots is essential to public health. Even though all ideas seem to have equal merit in philosophical discussions, especially because most people take them on faith. Still, some ideas are better than others. And yet this article inoculated itself against any dissenting opinion by predicting people would complain about its dismissal of facts, and dismissing them out of hand. Trump is doing the same thing with his dismissal of "expert" opinion.
There's a very wise thing that was said to me in the context of sexism and dating, which is that men fear being laughed at by a woman and women fear being murdered by a man. A lot of liberal ideas are like that. Behind the fight for gay rights and marriage is a very very real fear of rejection, persecution and murder (I have a story about this, but it's too much of a non-sequitur). The opposite is the fear of a destruction of an ideal of society that doesn't exist.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
( This is a joke people ;-) )
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)