[Aptorian]

death rattle, on 11 February 2017 - 07:55 PM, said:

your goal shouldn't be to reason with them, but to humiliate them. For having so much faith, so much confidence in an incompetent president, a grifter who's making a fool out of them and himself.

And this is the reason why America has the president it deserves.

You'd rather dig trenches and throw mud than try to bridge the gap in understanding.

Keep going, the people you humiliate and dehumanize will vote Trump again in four years.

[amphibian]

There's no reasoning with a Nazi or a big chunk of the GOP. The framework they use for defining things and their parameters for "winning" are not even close to those you or me use. The very meaning of words is different. The dogwhistling is the easiest example to point to, as it shows how the words used by prominent politicians are very clearly signals and hidden promises, rather than what they mean in the dictionary.

I'm not saying to go ahead and dehumanize people. I'm saying that bridging gaps to Jeff Sessions is completely useless. The GOP success has come by digging those trenches and engaging in racist flavored obstructionism.

Punch Nazis. You cannot engage in a dialogue with someone who genuinely believes in committing genocide.

This post has been edited by amphibian: 11 February 2017 - 09:23 PM

[HoosierDaddy]

Apt, on 11 February 2017 - 09:00 PM, said:

death rattle, on 11 February 2017 - 07:55 PM, said:

your goal shouldn't be to reason with them, but to humiliate them. For having so much faith, so much confidence in an incompetent president, a grifter who's making a fool out of them and himself.

And this is the reason why America has the president it deserves.

You'd rather dig trenches and throw mud than try to bridge the gap in understanding.

Keep going, the people you humiliate and dehumanize will vote Trump again in four years.

We've bridged gaps for a long time.

I have no reason to bridge a gap to hatred, prejudice, and sexism.

You have no idea what we are dealing with. So, either educate yourself or shut up. You are ignorant of these things, Apt.

[Aptorian]

I agree with your frustration but when you then end your post with:

Quote

Punch Nazis. You cannot engage in a dialogue with someone who genuinely believes in committing genocide.

Who are you talking about? The guys in the White House Administration or the little guy on the street with the MAGA hat? Because if you're reducing every single person who voted Trump, and by proxy every Republican, to Nazis, you've hit rock bottom in terms of dialogue and you're still digging.

You might now say that the people who voted for Trump are to blame but if you think all 50 million or what ever people voted Trump because they hate muslims and mexicans, you're as delusional as the people you're degrading.

The anti-Trump movement has reached a point now where I am losing interest in listening to them, because everything is so rabid and shrill that it's just annoying. You can't go on social media, listen to podcasts, read a newspaper (Even in Denmark), etc. without hearing about how the sky is falling, the government is being run by Nazi Lizard people and we're all going to die now. And, you know, the sky might actually be falling but I'm already so disgusted with both sides of that mess that I'd rather just tune it all out now.

Hyperbole and panic loses its power when it's non-stop 24/7.

Earlier today two clips from Bill Mahers show aired on Reddit where Piers Morgan was arguing Trumps side of the topic and Maher and Jim Jeffries chose to argue their side of the debate by shouting Nazis! and flipping Pierce Morgan the bird. We're in a special kind of hell when I'm watching a TV-show and Pierce Morgan is the one that comes off level-headed and sensible.





Unless Trump dies of a heart attack, we're in for 4 years of this bullshit. It's exhausting.

HoosierDaddy, on 11 February 2017 - 09:38 PM, said:

Apt, on 11 February 2017 - 09:00 PM, said:

death rattle, on 11 February 2017 - 07:55 PM, said:

your goal shouldn't be to reason with them, but to humiliate them. For having so much faith, so much confidence in an incompetent president, a grifter who's making a fool out of them and himself.

And this is the reason why America has the president it deserves.

You'd rather dig trenches and throw mud than try to bridge the gap in understanding.

Keep going, the people you humiliate and dehumanize will vote Trump again in four years.

We've bridged gaps for a long time.

I have no reason to bridge a gap to hatred, prejudice, and sexism.

You have no idea what we are dealing with. So, either educate yourself or shut up. You are ignorant of these things, Apt.

I think this is the second or third time you respond to me this way on the Discussion board, Hoosier. Why not try to actually argue the merits of your standpoint in stead of just lashing out?

Have you moved to Canada yet?

This post has been edited by Apt: 11 February 2017 - 09:48 PM

[worry]

Frankly, this is largely hypothetical to you, and your insistence that there are gaps to be bridged exposes that since it's predicated on people in your imagination. (I'm not making this any more personal than that though, I promise, this isn't flaming you). There's no bridge to be built to people who think NYT and WaPo -- as flawed as some of their editorial decision can be -- are "fake news" and Breitbart and Alex Jones -- or better yet, Trump himself (as actual Chair of the House Science Committee argues: http://www.vox.com/s...ump-lamar-smith) -- are the only reliable sources of truth.

On the other hand, I don't have to invent anything. It is inherently humiliating to esteem Trump as a leader or a hero. I'm not talking about sweeping into flyover country on a Let's-Mock-Strangers Tour. I'm talking about glibly unreasonable people you can hold accountable to some appropriate degree in your public and private life. It's not "dehumanizing" to point out to a lickspittle that you're not falling for their dimwit arguments for whatever monstrous EO Trump signed that day, or to point out that they're siding with the silverback because it's simple and easy, not because it's right. Actual dehumanization includes calling Mexicans criminals and rapists, or destroying actual human beings' actual access to life-saving health care, or telling Muslims they're not welcome here because they are more prone to violence, or raiding neighborhoods and breaking families apart because they make an easy scapegoat. It's dehumanizing to send tanks into tipis, and it's dehumanizing to poison a city's drinking and bathing water with lead. The hurt feelings of deliberately vile people just doesn't cut it, Apt.

Look at this Jason Chaffetz town hall from a couple days ago: http://www.motherjon...trump-conflicts
See the genuine anger and disappointment of his constituents.

Now look at his response: http://talkingpoints...-paid-protestos
"Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) said that the thousands of protestors who swarmed his town hall on Thursday night were not actually from his state and were "paid" to protest, the Deseret News reported Friday."

Do you really think he believes that? Do you think any argument with him will succeed on merit? Cuz that's looney tunes. He's not interested in your point of view. Period. There's no bridge to be built there. There's letting him know that you know what kind of man he is. There's letting Trump know -- and anyone you know who supports him fawningly -- that you know he's a fraud, he's an incompetent, he's surrounded by toadies and one or two Rasputin-types (read: Bannon) who are making a fool of him and them daily.

If you want a more palatable way to say it, "pick your battles". If you feel there's some common ground, make your arguments, obviously. Even agree to disagree, fine. Except you draw the line at those salivating at erosion of human rights. If someone's already sold their soul, no argument you make is going to be good enough, so (aside from ignoring them, which you might be able to do w/ strangers on the net, but much less possible w/ acquaintances, family, and those in power) your recourse is exposure. Vivisect their easy, facile anti-human cheerleading. Guilt free.

[Aptorian]

death rattle, on 11 February 2017 - 09:54 PM, said:

Frankly, this is largely hypothetical to you, and your insistence that there are gaps to be bridged exposes that since it's predicated on people in your imagination. (I'm not making this any more personal than that though, I promise, this isn't flaming you). There's no bridge to be built to people who think NYT and WaPo -- as flawed as some of their editorial decision can be -- are "fake news" and Breitbart and Alex Jones -- or better yet, Trump himself (as actual Chair of the House Science Committee argues: http://www.vox.com/s...ump-lamar-smith) -- are the only reliable sources of truth.

On the other hand, I don't have to invent anything. It is inherently humiliating to esteem Trump as a leader or a hero. I'm not talking about sweeping into flyover country on a Let's-Mock-Strangers Tour. I'm talking about glibly unreasonable people you can hold accountable to some appropriate degree in your public and private life. It's not "dehumanizing" to point out to a lickspittle that you're not falling for their dimwit arguments for whatever monstrous EO Trump signed that day, or to point out that they're siding with the silverback because it's simple and easy, not because it's right. Actual dehumanization includes calling Mexicans criminals and rapists, or destroying actual human beings' actual access to life-saving health care, or telling Muslims they're not welcome here because they are more prone to violence, or raiding neighborhoods and breaking families apart because they make an easy scapegoat. It's dehumanizing to send tanks into tipis, and it's dehumanizing to poison a city's drinking and bathing water with lead. The hurt feelings of deliberately vile people just doesn't cut it, Apt.

Look at this Jason Chaffetz town hall from a couple days ago: http://www.motherjon...trump-conflicts
See the genuine anger and disappointment of his constituents.

Now look at his response: http://talkingpoints...-paid-protestos
"Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) said that the thousands of protestors who swarmed his town hall on Thursday night were not actually from his state and were "paid" to protest, the Deseret News reported Friday."

Do you really think he believes that? Do you think any argument with him will succeed on merit? Cuz that's looney tunes. He's not interested in your point of view. Period. There's no bridge to be built there. There's letting him know that you know what kind of man he is. There's letting Trump know -- and anyone you know who supports him fawningly -- that you know he's a fraud, he's an incompetent, he's surrounded by toadies and one or two Rasputin-types (read: Bannon) who are making a fool of him and them daily.

If you want a more palatable way to say it, "pick your battles". If you feel there's some common ground, make your arguments, obviously. Even agree to disagree, fine. Except you draw the line at those salivating at erosion of human rights. If someone's already sold their soul, no argument you make is going to be good enough, so (aside from ignoring them, which you might be able to do w/ strangers on the net, but much less possible w/ acquaintances, family, and those in power) your recourse is exposure. Vivisect their easy, facile anti-human cheerleading. Guilt free.

I don't think there's any doubt, especially from an outside perspective, that the Trump administration and the politicans and government officials connected to it, are really scary, and they're doing some crazy, reality twisting shit. You can't say enough bad things about the people in charge but I think there is a problem with the public discourse.

I want to say it comes from a position of fear. Rational, understandable fear, but fear non the less. And that fear is making the anti-trump side of the political discussion sound desperately angry and slightly crazy.

You make sensible, understandable arguments for why Trump is a disgusting piece of shit by pointing out the people who are getting hurt but then you take it a step further and compare the administration to some of the worst warcrimes and crimes against humanity possible, like The Trail of Tears. Now, it could be that this really is a case of "First they came for the Muslims and the Mexicans and I said nothing..." but there is an exaggerated level of hate and distrust levelled at Trump right now that goes past the guys actual actions.

You're Goodwin'ing every discussion on Trump, thus ensuring that there will never be any agreement.

It's spread shot out across the globe, not just in the US, and it's in every discussion about politics I see now. Before the election people talked about the discourse becoming ugly. About the sides being more extreme than ever. And I can understand why that is. But how the hell are you going to change this? How are you going to make the old white factory worker take off his MAGA hat, if you're saying he's the walking scum of the Earth? How are you going to arrange protests and town hall meetings, if you're getting ready for a ideological civil war that calls for people to punch Nazis, there in implied Trump supporters?

In Denmark we let the Nazis march down our street every year and we laugh at them and shake our heads. We don't single them out, belittle them and fuel their ignorant persecution complex because you'll never move past that divide if you don't smother them with facts and logic, rather than fists and shouts.

This post has been edited by Apt: 11 February 2017 - 10:24 PM

[EmperorMagus]

So Apt is telling us to go "discuss" stuff with r/The_Donald and smother them with facts and logic?

All that's going to result from that is "heh, Libtard tears"

It's not godwinning if they are actually Nazis.

[amphibian]

You do know that Trump deliberately brought as much Andrew Jackson iconography into his office as he could?

Bannon, Sessions, Conway, and several other key figures in the Trump administration absolutely would do a Trail of Tears level atrocity if they could. They have a long and documented history of being racist shots who are ideologically on the same level as the KKK and Nazis.

I don't believe in punching everyone who disagrees with me, but when there's decades of racist and xenophobic conduct right there for anyone to read, watch, and/or hear? They're getting punched.

The "smothering with facts" logic doesn't work with this crowd because they believe everything you say is automatically a lie. The books, the research, the vetting? It's meaningless to them.

The problem with comparing Nazis in Denmark to Nazis here or racists here is that the systemic power associated with the Denmark groups is far lower than it is here. Jeff Sessions has been a Senator for 20 years. That's one of the most powerful positions possible to achieve and it's driven by local government and officials being very similar to him.

[Mezla PigDog]

I dunno Apt. I get where you are coming from as a rational perspective but a part of me reads your posts and thinks "Says the guy living in a Nordic utopia". I know Denmark has it's far right problems but the isolationism doesn't feel like it is creeping into the mainstream for you as much as the US and UK.

[worry]

This is what dehumanization looks like: http://www.seattlepi...ay-10924413.php

But also I would like to note I didn't say "dehumanize" in my original post, that was an inference (and a bad one, imo). Largely when I say humiliate them re: civvies, I mean make it clear how their insistence on being aloof to or (yeah, sadly) cheerful about human suffering AND also how their willingness to sign on with a nakedly, already-exposed Bernie Madoff-style huckster is already humiliating, they're just not recognizing it (out of ignorance, defensiveness, or something else -- I don't really care).

Also, yah: Do punch Nazis if you want. Don't pepper spray every person you see wearing a MAGA hat. These aren't mutually exclusive. We're past the debate portion re: Nazism. Richard Spencer should be scared of daylight because it means his face is exposed to any and all righteous fists.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I refreshed the page here and saw your response.

I can see why, if a small group of Nazis walks down your street, it's a laughing stock. That has happened in the US too (I'm sure you remember that KKK march with the tuba player).

But it's more than that. Steve Bannon is a xenophobe with white supremacist and fascist tendencies, and he's the President's chief strategist. Jeff Sessions is a literal white supremacist with a documented history of anti-civil rights advocacy -- in his very powerful professional capacity, not merely in the comments section of new articles -- and he is now Attorney General. These aren't fringe positions, these aren't one-off marches down Main Street in a one-street town, Apt, these are extremely powerful roles in our government. What do you think that tells America's white supremacists? You don't have to wonder, because they'll tell you:

Richard Spencer: "Hail Trump!" -- https://www.theatlan...ech-npi/508379/
David Duke (who was a KKK Imperial Wizard and an elected Louisiana State Rep after that): https://twitter.com/...513407648899072

And with Jeff Session as AG, who do you think that favors here: https://boingboing.n...ement-infi.html
They may still be the fringe, they aren't the majority, but they have positions of power and they use them ruthlessly when they get them.

[Aptorian]

EmperorMagus, on 11 February 2017 - 10:32 PM, said:

So Apt is telling us to go "discuss" stuff with r/The_Donald and smother them with facts and logic?

All that's going to result from that is "heh, Libtard tears"

It's not godwinning if they are actually Nazis.

Why would anybody go to r/donald. It's the 4chan of political discourse. It's for troll politics and any attempt to swerve that discuourse will just be seen as bait. It's like pissing in a sea of piss.

But there are other venues and other forums. Why bring up r/donald when the rest of Reddit is open for that discussion. That's like being surprised nobody wants to have a neutral discussion about the Holocaust on Stormfront. EDIT: SHit now I goodwin'ed myself.

amphibian, on 11 February 2017 - 10:34 PM, said:

You do know that Trump deliberately brought as much Andrew Jackson iconography into his office as he could?

Bannon, Sessions, Conway, and several other key figures in the Trump administration absolutely would do a Trail of Tears level atrocity if they could. They have a long and documented history of being racist shots who are ideologically on the same level as the KKK and Nazis.

I don't believe in punching everyone who disagrees with me, but when there's decades of racist and xenophobic conduct right there for anyone to read, watch, and/or hear? They're getting punched.

The "smothering with facts" logic doesn't work with this crowd because they believe everything you say is automatically a lie. The books, the research, the vetting? It's meaningless to them.

The problem with comparing Nazis in Denmark to Nazis here or racists here is that the systemic power associated with the Denmark groups is far lower than it is here. Jeff Sessions has been a Senator for 20 years. That's one of the most powerful positions possible to achieve and it's driven by local government and officials being very similar to him.

All salient arguments but beyond feeling satisfied that you held your ground and stood up for what you believed in, in what ever forum you might encounter a Trump supporter, how are you going to move forward from there?

Look at it from the perspective of a "true believe" on the Trump side. What are the odds that these people aren't just as convinced they are right and that the liberals or the "Alt-left" are unwilling to listen? What makes your facts more right than their facts? That's a really annoying and frustrating position to hold but Trump and co have pretty much destroyed the sanctity of the word "facts" now. There is no truth any longer, just mistrust. How the hell are you going to move beyond that and "make America great again" if you're not willing to try some diplomacy and "alternative" tactics to try and reason with Trumps side of this business?

The next 4 years is a marathon, not a sprint. If every single argument is going to start with an accusation of the other party being either a Nazi or a Libtard, then nothing will have changed in 2020 and you're probably going to get 4 more years of Trump.

This post has been edited by Apt: 11 February 2017 - 10:48 PM

[Aptorian]

Mezla PigDog, on 11 February 2017 - 10:37 PM, said:

I dunno Apt. I get where you are coming from as a rational perspective but a part of me reads your posts and thinks "Says the guy living in a Nordic utopia". I know Denmark has it's far right problems but the isolationism doesn't feel like it is creeping into the mainstream for you as much as the US and UK.

Denmark's political landscape, much like the rest of Europe, has begun to veer towards the right. We're having a lot of the same debates America has now, just in a smaller format. Especially regarding Muslims and Eastern Europeans.

It's actually one of the reasons why the Trump debate is so popular in Denmark. We're basically seeing our own internal struggle writ large and, like a deterrent hopefully we're seeing what could go wrong.

Only problem is the most Nationalist party we have is only growing stronger.

I'm going to bed so I wont reply if any one else descends upon my posts and want to chew me out.

This post has been edited by Apt: 11 February 2017 - 10:55 PM

[worry]

I think maybe you're arguing with the Internet, and not necessarily the individuals you're talking to here. Calling Richard Spencer a Nazi or Jeff Sessions a white supremacist is an accurate description of their positions, not name-calling. I don't think Betsy DeVos, as much as I despise her opinions, is a Nazi. I think maybe YOU (here I am getting personal again ) should cut out assuming that everyone talking about these issues is being hyperbolic or hysterical. I think it's a perfectly fine strategy to emasculate Trump, drive ego-driven wedges between him and his advisors. I think humiliating or shaming the otherwise-irredeemable, the unprincipled, is tactically sound -- because so many of them are 100% ego-stuffed suits, and that's the only way to get through to them.

I don't disagree with the marathon analogy. I do think principled conservatives -- though still more likely to be inwardly focused and small-tribe -- will come around more and more as things get personal, as policy changes hit them.
This will only become more common: https://www.rawstory...-gop-town-hall/

[Malankazooie]

[amphibian]

Apt, on 11 February 2017 - 10:46 PM, said:

Look at it from the perspective of a "true believe" on the Trump side. What are the odds that these people aren't just as convinced they are right and that the liberals or the "Alt-left" are unwilling to listen? What makes your facts more right than their facts? That's a really annoying and frustrating position to hold but Trump and co have pretty much destroyed the sanctity of the word "facts" now. There is no truth any longer, just mistrust. How the hell are you going to move beyond that and "make America great again" if you're not willing to try some diplomacy and "alternative" tactics to try and reason with Trumps side of this business?

The next 4 years is a marathon, not a sprint. If every single argument is going to start with an accusation of the other party being either a Nazi or a Libtard, then nothing will have changed in 2020 and you're probably going to get 4 more years of Trump.

1) I already think we'll get eight years of Trump. I do not want it, but opposition is incredibly weak and the record of their campaign strategists/runners has been very weak for the last six years (Obama losing the Democratic majority in Congress being the first big sign of this).

2) Trump and the others are not the ones who've made facts have diluted impact. That's Fox News, that's Murdoch, that's (mostly older white) people realizing that the world is more complex and difficult than they thought and choosing to believe supplied narratives by extremely shitty people over doing the work to figure things out themselves. This is exacerbated by the prosperity of the last 30 years being extremely unevenly distributed.

Diplomacy and bridging gaps work when both sides are playing the same game. You can't use conflict resolution systems of "in good faith" actors when the real life actors involved have frameworks that have as a main goal the total invalidation of your own.

Many people, including me, thought the GOP and associated organizations were playing the same game. Turned out they're not and basically have not been since the Southern Strategy of Nixon and one of the main goals has been indeed the total invalidation of any social progress in terms of medical coverage, less discriminatory policing and laws, food/water/air/environmental safety, financial speculation industry control, and more. Some of the larger Democratic successes in terms of campaigning have been because the Democrats pushed a candidate so nearly a Republican that they became palatable to this crowd of people. The success of Obama's campaign, now that we have more context, looks like it was a "unique to that specific candidate" phenomenon and the subsequent major campaigns put together by the Democrats have mostly failed (because the GOP rigged it by superb obstructionism, constant gerrymandering, and frankly, playing the language battle much more successfully).

This country has economic, historic, social, and moral issues that mean that the specific ways that big business and systemic institutions have warped government in ways that make real life here is a place of tremendous opportunity for the at least moderately wealthy and a scary place for the poor.

This post has been edited by amphibian: 12 February 2017 - 01:51 PM

[worry]

Which in large part is why any notion of "compromise" from Democrats -- any notion of meeting GOPers "in the middle" -- should be put out of its misery immediately. Collaborators should be primaried from the left and launched out of town with a catapult, Simpsons-style. I don't necessarily think Trump has a second term in him -- and like Obama, I'm fairly sure there's no plug-and-play replacement for him -- but that doesn't mean I have faith in spineless Dems to catch on. The people have surpassed their representatives on every issue, clearly, and so far they're doing most of the legwork. If Ellison does beat Perez, though, and the left wing of the party actually builds some muscle to flex, I don't mind saying I'd be happy to feel some optimism.

Then again, Republicans cheat. They're not playing better chess, they're lighting the board on fire. So who knows? It's impossible to exaggerate how cartoon supervillain-level awful GOP officeholders can be: http://www.wmcaction...timate-children

[Cause]

http://www.getdjtrum..._wont_win_trump

https://www.getdjtrump.com/

[HoosierDaddy]

Apt, on 11 February 2017 - 09:44 PM, said:

HoosierDaddy, on 11 February 2017 - 09:38 PM, said:

Apt, on 11 February 2017 - 09:00 PM, said:

death rattle, on 11 February 2017 - 07:55 PM, said:

your goal shouldn't be to reason with them, but to humiliate them. For having so much faith, so much confidence in an incompetent president, a grifter who's making a fool out of them and himself.

And this is the reason why America has the president it deserves.

You'd rather dig trenches and throw mud than try to bridge the gap in understanding.

Keep going, the people you humiliate and dehumanize will vote Trump again in four years.

We've bridged gaps for a long time.

I have no reason to bridge a gap to hatred, prejudice, and sexism.

You have no idea what we are dealing with. So, either educate yourself or shut up. You are ignorant of these things, Apt.

I think this is the second or third time you respond to me this way on the Discussion board, Hoosier. Why not try to actually argue the merits of your standpoint in stead of just lashing out?

Have you moved to Canada yet?

It's not lashing out. It's calling a spade a spade. It's always the Democrats that have to negotiate, because Republicans WON'T. It's why Obama's supermajority failed to do what they could have. Now that the Republicans have a supermajority look at them go!

Trump's cabinet has mysognists, racists, and genuinely bad people. Not all, but a lot. His Sec of Ed has never once held a position in a school. Bannon is a white supremacist wishing for a holy war on Islam. Flynn blatantly defied the law and wants to be friends with Russia. Feel like being the next satellite state? I could go on.

At what point do you stop building bridges? These people aren't someone I'd invite to a get together, let alone represent me on the international level.

FYI: I'm American. I'm going to fight for America inside America. We are better than this.

[amphibian]

Flynn wants a multi generation war with the entire religion of Islam.

The sheer cost of that in terms of human impact, environmental destruction, and financial cost is a lunatic's dream.

[Una]

I want to apologize if I've been sounding really angry. I know there are Americans here who are generally reasonable and not completely crazy. I am not mad at them.

The reason I still read and post on this thread is that US politics is a very frequent topic of conversation here these days. Among my social circle, the conversations usually boil down to:

-"Did you hear about that crazy racist/sexist/fascist/war-mongery/corrupt thing that just happened today?"

-"Yeah. I heard about that. WTF?"

-"Right? WTF!"

-"Americans are nutjobs. They're kinda weird at the best of times, but this is really crazy. I don't know why the hell they can go along with this. "


What we are missing is the perspective of the people on the ground, so to speak. There are actual Americans on this board. Sometimes they say things that give me a little insight.

I'm sorry if my frustrations are boiling over though. Can't help it. It's a bad situation.