#1 2018-10-30 02:27:04

I don't buy into the myth that both sides are equally responsible for the political dysfunction which has beset America. I reject this premise not because I favor one side over the other, but rather because it's simply not true. Watch the ten minute clip:

Admit it. Republicans have broken politics.

Neither party is perfect, but the GOP has moved to the extreme.



Source:

https://www.vox.com/2018/10/29/18037654 … larization

Offline

 

#2 2018-10-30 11:06:06

Smudge wrote:

I don't buy into the myth that both sides are equally responsible for the political dysfunction which has beset America. I reject this premise not because I favor one side over the other, but rather because it's simply not true. Watch the ten minute clip:

Admit it. Republicans have broken politics.

Neither party is perfect, but the GOP has moved to the extreme.



Source:

https://www.vox.com/2018/10/29/18037654 … larization

The GOP embracing authoritarianism, extremism, and fascism along with the already present religious zealotry has led to what Brother Malcolm once called, "The chickens coming home to roost."  So while most of the GOP continues to slurp Israel, its more extreme members want them wiped from the face of the earth.  Thus the first of what I'm sure will be many, many, mass shootings of Jews/Blacks/Non-Whites by people who believe that the current Administration has their backs.  Against anybody not with "the program", they are already attempting to shout them down soon followed, I'm sure, by beating them down.  This isn't even the least bit funny anymore.

Offline

 

#3 2018-10-30 13:31:13

We have no hope of solving a problem as long as we deceive ourselves about the cause.

After terror comes the media BS: No, lazy pundits, “both sides” don’t do this

It was a week that shocked America. Whatever talking heads and Republicans may claim, the responsibility is clear

https://mediaproxy.salon.com/width/972/https://media.salon.com/2018/10/synagogue-shooting.jpg

In the aftermath of at least a dozen attempted assassinations and one brutal hate crime in Pittsburgh, the Sunday shows were a conga-line of both-sides-ism this past weekend. Predictably, this appears to be metastasizing into the dominant D.C. media analysis of our harrowing political discourse, and it’s difficult to say which is worse: the wrongness or the laziness of it...

https://www.salon.com/2018/10/29/after- … t-do-this/

Offline

 

#4 2018-10-30 14:07:12

We need somebody other than the media saying this. I swear the DNC is so directionless they are fucking worthless.

Offline

 

#5 2018-10-30 14:14:33

I don't disagree, but that's a COMPLETELY different subject. I'm attempting to put a laser focus on a fundamental misconception which has become commonly accepted -- what the quote above calls "both-sides-ism". I'm not making a case for democrats generally.

Offline

 

#6 2018-10-30 14:57:35

Fair enough, then let's dig deeper into Polarization.  This nugget comes from, of all places, The National Review:  Rage Makes You Stupid.

Offline

 

#7 2018-10-30 15:39:27

I've posted stuff from National Review in the past. I don't generally agree with their slant, but who cares; they don't tend to agree with mine either. But they are a credible organization, and in an entirely different (and better) universe than Fox News or Breitbart.

Re: the NR article

I'm not sure I get your point. There is rage on both sides of the political divide? Yes, there is. And..?

Trump is a liar, but Obama told some lies too. If the extent of an aware, intelligent and reasonable pundit's analysis about liars in politics was "Well, what Trump does is okay because both sides do it" I would consider that to be journalistic malpractice and and a complete failure to represent and express the truth accurately. Why? Because Obama was thoroughly and completely grounded in fact based objective reality, while Trump completely ignores any inconvenient truth and acts from distortion.

I'm not interested in debating for the sake of debate. I've simply decided to point out the obvious inaccuracy in the all too frequent refrain that "both sides are responsible" when it simply doesn't either explain clearly or reflect reality in the larger context.

Offline

 

#8 2018-10-30 16:57:20

Smudge wrote:

I've posted stuff from National Review in the past. I don't generally agree with their slant, but who cares; they don't tend to agree with mine either. But they are a credible organization, and in an entirely different (and better) universe than Fox News or Breitbart.

Re: the NR article

I'm not sure I get your point. There is rage on both sides of the political divide? Yes, there is. And..?

Trump is a liar, but Obama told some lies too. If the extent of an aware, intelligent and reasonable pundit's analysis about liars in politics was "Well, what Trump does is okay because both sides do it" I would consider that to be journalistic malpractice and and a complete failure to represent and express the truth accurately. Why? Because Obama was thoroughly and completely grounded in fact based objective reality, while Trump completely ignores any inconvenient truth and acts from distortion.

I'm not interested in debating for the sake of debate. I've simply decided to point out the obvious inaccuracy in the all too frequent refrain that "both sides are responsible" when it simply doesn't either explain clearly or reflect reality in the larger context.

I think that you think that every time I respond to your post that I'm disagreeing with you.  ;-)  Honestly I don't see much outrage on the left with the exception of the "Uppity Niggers" that are always outraged.  Liberals seem to have a hard time even generating rage.  No, I'm interpreting the NR article as, yep, those stupid outraged people on the right aren't concerned with the facts any more than a three year old is when then throw a tantrum.  It's ugly, and it's ultimately dangerous if this somehow becomes acceptable behavior.

But, since you think we're in contention here, I could ask the same thing as you.  So, we have asymmetrical polarization.  And...?  Was I just supposed to read the article, watch the video, and go on with my life?  If it's important it's worth discussing and if that discussion leads to disagreement, then it does.

Offline

 

#9 2018-10-30 17:13:11

I don't know if we're in contention or not, but if I'm projecting that, it's not intentional. I'm simply working very hard to express myself clearly. It's not easy for me to do. I find writing to be very tricky, and I'm constantly falling into holes in my sentences. It's often hard to anticipate how the person at the other end is going to interpret what I say, and that's particularly true if I'm writing quickly (as I have been here) without a lot time to re-read and polish.

What are you (we) supposed to do? Become aware of what's going on at a deeper level; see the world more clearly and more accurately. Getting out of the false equivalency trap (both-sides-ism) is a huge step. First we become more aware, and then the awareness changes things. I still ascribe to that ancient New Age truism "If you want to change the world, change your mind." That's all I could hope for.

Last edited by Smudge (2018-10-30 17:26:13)

Offline

 

#10 2018-10-30 18:40:52

http://high-street.org/uploads/11_no-hooves-i-cant-wank-to-this-shit.jpg

Offline

 

#11 2018-10-30 18:45:43

Baywolfe wrote:

Liberals seem to have a hard time even generating rage.

Rage we do not need, Moderates and Independents don't take well to "rage".  Rage is impolite and not for sale nor marketing; when we, the average person rages you don't want to be there.

Currently only the extremists rage

Offline

 

#13 2018-10-30 22:31:25

Emmeran wrote:

Baywolfe wrote:

Liberals seem to have a hard time even generating rage.

Rage we do not need, Moderates and Independents don't take well to "rage".  Rage is impolite and not for sale nor marketing; when we, the average person rages you don't want to be there.

Currently only the extremists rage

Anytime I see rage, I smell fear.

Offline

 

Board footer

high-street.org