Modern political discourse?

A: u racist
B: no u racist
A: NOOOO U RACIST REPUBLICAN SHITBAG
B: NONOOOONONO UUUUU MOAR RAAACEEEIIISSSTTT BIGOT HATTERRRR!!!11 Herpity durr
A: NO DURR HERPITY WURRRR UR RACEE… CE… loses the ability to talk due to overwhelming stupidity

The comment section of a liberal video:

[tab][/tab]

I say we vote liberals to be braindead or at least clinically insane and forcibly euthanize them as an act of mercy.

Cant we just exile them to Canada and drop chemical weapons on them?

This post is offensive to women, I ask for the good of humanism it be banned and censored. Go back to the barn from whence you came, Arbiter of Christ, you evil backwards bible worshipper.

Arb, I think you have a very narrow and shallow view of the world. It seems that if you encounter something that doesn’t confirm your biases, that you make up a caricature that you can easily dismiss as absurd, some might call this a strawman. It’s a fallacy. Just letting you know.

If by this you are expressing surprise over people being stupid, well, yeah, I get that experience now and then, though so much evidence has arrived over the years, I am suprised I still get surprised. If you think the kind of stupidity you found there is restricted to liberals, you need to look at the sterling conversations of conservatives on the web and elsewhere and you find much of the same. Noticing the stupidy of people you disagree with is easy, I mean gener. Noticing it with people you agree with takes a little more guts. It should be minimal guts, but apparently not, in general. Oh, look, I am slightly surprised again.

No, the arb is really right. The world is saturated with these people.

For example, a famous scientist made a harmless sexist joke while in the lab. The public shaming on him was so great, that he quit his job. This was a noble prizing winning scientist, who gave up his entire career in science, because he was ostracized over one harmless sexist joke. The joke was, “women shouldnt be chemists because they are more liable to cry, and thus the tears will cause a chemical reaction in the beaker.” I dont remember the exact words, but something along those lines.

So people’s priority are irrationality and ostracizing over trivial things, the low priority is science. They are insane.

This is a valid criticism. I’ve noticed it myself, but it’s usually so obvious I assume it doesn’t need to be pointed out. Apparently it does.

Now that I think about it I could have just posted this in my ‘Humanism, Race-ism and other -isms’ thread, no need to create a new one.

Either way, as usual I see 2 people claiming my view of the world is narrow and shallow (and seeing who these 2 people are I know I won’t receive anything more than mere claims, like an explanation), and that I’m making up a caricature.

Well this isn’t a caricature I made up, I just posted the screen of two people arguing. What is sad is that modern politics have become a caricature of politics.

The masses have little capacity for reason and little control over their emotions, so politicians have noticed that any serious discussions about politics on a rational, objective level, is not going to appeal to the masses and if you don’t appeal to the masses in a democracy, you don’t get elected. It’s much easier to just use ‘good’ words and phrases to produce positive emotions in people (Humanity, unity, humble, we’re all in this together, humane…) and bad words and phrases to produce negative emotions (discrimination, -isms, -phobes, -paths, intolerance), thus training the masses to respond primitively to reward/punishment in a Pavlovian manner.

As Moreno pointed out in another thread in relation to this, I would agree this is not the problem exclusively with liberals, but also some conservatives (cuckservatives as they are called) who have also bought into and adhere to this nonsensical, shallow political standard where nothing more long-term and intellectually sophisticated is permitted than trained emotional responses to the environment, and then this primitiveness they glorify and elevate as ‘progressive’ and ‘enlightened’.

And Moreno, if you think you can point out the stupidity of people who I agree with (I assume you mean KT members), please come and do so. Iambiguous tried to do so, but only ended up exposing his own stupidity.

You need to grow up and stop using the phrase, “the masses”. You sound like a half-educated teenager.

Holy fucking shit. A grown, 30-something man who brags and posts about most insignificant and immature things, is telling me I am acting like a half-educated teenager for saying “the masses”.

Sometimes I’m not sure whether he really thinks he appears mature to others, or if he is himself in on the ruse and just enjoys the reactions of people when he acts like a dumb wigger and then gives others lectures on maturity.

Could be jar jar binks syndrome, for all we know he could be a secret sith lord who works for the jews, trying to troll any posts which threaten his agenda.

I dunno, it sure looks like one person said your view was narrow and shallow. Me, I was critical of you drawing a general conclusion from so little evidence. One idiotic discussion. Do you really need an explanation for why that is a limited, I can’t even call it, argument on your part. But I should respond with some explanation to back up my claim? Well, my explanation is that anecdotal evidence is often considered weak. Your OP amounts to an anectdote - I was looking at the internet and I saw discussion X - with an implict argument that this example demonstrates that liberals are brain dead or insane. Frankly, I agree. They are insane - the term I would prefer to use - but so are conservatives.

Since the person who introduced the word caricature was not accusing you of claiming originality, I am not sure what the point is of defending your actions in this way. Poor reading on your part? He mentioned fallacies. IOW your conclusion was not justified.

See this is good and I can agree. Not liberal politicians. Not liberal citizens. But the whole fucking lot.

Conservatives. Your OP implicly puts the insanity in modern political discourse on the liberal side, period. Or the OP, plus next post. Now, after my post you at least acknowledge that some conservatives are like this also. But here you now give me the task of demonstrating TO YOU the stupidty of KT people who do not generally write like the people you quoted in the OP. And neither do many liberals either. So I note the concession. I note that you expect me or us or others to respond to your slab dab posting here with some more complete explanation - rather than pointing out that what you did was slab dab and leads to no conclusions at all - and then somehow think that I have a burden of proof that deals with KT people. Note how you say ‘some’ conservatives, implying that less of them than liberals engage in discourse like that you cited in the OP - but when it comes to demonstrating it has to do with people you agree with, the sample size gets dropped down to KT members. So, you kinda know that conservatives in general are just as idiotic, and this is also implicit in your use of the term ‘masses’ (not that I share resonable’s problem with that term, it seems fine to me) the masses being made up of liberals and conservatives. Playing to the gallery of like minded? Hey, dad, Look what I did over at that liberal brain dead forum. [recieves pat on the head]

By the way, I actually did not find that KT had one position on things. I found some cultural habits, modes of communicating, that were held in common by a number of the regular posters, but beyond that it seemed more complicated than that. Of course, last I looked The Performer Now Called Turd and Magnus were there. But it would be a not good sign if you can simply refer to the KT people as agreeing with you.

It sounds like someone needs SAM. :sunglasses:

Could you unravel SAM for me?

Moreno, I was talking of mr reasonable and statiktech.

I don’t consider this thread an argument, I didn’t even mean to incite an argument, just to share this with the forum. Nor did I base my views on the issue from this one example.
I consider this one example representative of modern political discourse as I experienced it, in that there is a lot of emotionally charged words being thrown around with little understanding or care for the truth and long-term thinking.

Conservatives may be insane too, but mostly when it comes to different issues, such as religion.

However, this labeling of the opposition with an -ism, -phobe, -path etc., where everybody who is not a universalist/humanist/etc. has the moral low-ground and isn’t ‘humane’ enough, is characteristic of the socially liberal/leftist political spectrum, and it appears that it is becoming the default/majority according to which all other political positions are judged by, and conservatives are slowly accepting it (becoming cuckservatives) and thus pulling the rug from under their own feet.

I didn’t say they agree with me, but that I agree with them.
Saying that they agree with me would imply I asked them whether they agree, and I didn’t, also it would seem like I presented my own positions to them and they agreed, which also did not happen.
And yes, there are different viewpoints, of course, what I meant was simply that I agree with them on a lot of things when compared to most other people.

That is a typical internet-“talk” and especially a typical “talk” of liberals / socialists - both are racists. :laughing:

Racist A with 8 posts.
Racist B with 5 posts.