Personality Cafe banner

101 - 115 of 115 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,627 Posts
Yeah I don't understand because you didn't even make a point. Also you didn't explain why you think it's a whim
My point was that it's arbitrary. The reason was its whimsical nature. You not understanding the point, doesn't make it magically not exist. You simply didn't understand it.

You didn't ask for further explanation, so I assumed there was no issue. Clearly, I was mistaken. Next time you misunderstand an argument, it may be more productive to ask for clarification, as opposed to denying its existence through snark and impertinence.

It comes from whim because there is no basis for such a mindset outside of 'I want to'. What is the reason for simply deigning on your lonesome that majorities should not decide what racism is to minorities? Why make such a distinction at all? Why is it necessary? I doubt there is any sort of logical or ideological coherence to such a position.


In the police incidence you described you again gave no reason as to why you thought getting pulled over was racist.
For the whole "Majorities shouldn't decide what racism is to minorities" I was talking more about police brutality issues and white people who tell black people how to think about it.
Based on the idea you're proposing, my reasoning shouldn't matter. Majorities don't get to decide what it means to me, no?

You'll have to be more specific on your last statement. White people who tell black people to think what about police brutality?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
278 Posts
Yeah, I probably shouldnt have expected integrity from you.
It's gettin personal
Snif

Im not alone, its almost as if... You know... Other people can also hold such an opinion... And they would also no longer support him... Are you playing dumb or is it chronic?
Sniff sniff ......hurt....sniiiiiffff...

You havent provided shit either so I dont know why youre bringing this up.
Neither have you sniff


So holding an opinion means Im indoctrinated or is it only if my views are right leaning?
Sniff. Sniff sniff. No I'd say I'm part of the left wing doctrine. You described it earlier as the "sjw koolaid" as if only liberals can be indoctrinated when in fact anywhere on the spectrum has "doctrines"
I however chose to adopt the "doctrine" after being a conservative all my life but then I found it to be contradictory and not really helpful the societies other than first world countries. I can think of other people' lives and desire to help change them instead of just caring about how the American economy will affect me. Some people never consider alternate perspectives and just preach without actually hearing opposing arguments. I have argued for both sides but I find alt right ideology cruel and illogical.

s
n
I

f
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
425 Posts
Economic Left/Right: -0.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.62

View attachment 666442

I generally agree with the right. Voted green last election, I didnt have much of a clue about politics back then and their views seemed alright. Will probably vote for euroskeptics in future elections, if there is still something euro to be skeptical about then.

Most probably would have voted Trump back during the election if I was from the states. Definitely wouldve voted Trump knowing what I know now.
This is an political compass view of the US 2016 presidential election. Please help me understand why you would vote for Trump considering your position as a slightly libertarian centrist? I believe you were right to vote Green, in any country it's one of the best choices but going from that to Trump seems a bit Bi-polar. By the way, as I have said before I am a green so I voted for Jill Stein and the Green Party US.

us2016.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,309 Posts
This is an political compass view of the US 2016 presidential election. Please help me understand why you would vote for Trump considering your position as a slightly libertarian centrist?
View attachment 669145

First of all voting green is basically rebelling against the system, they dont have much of a chance to win with the deeply entrenched "two party" system so why bother. I dont like renewable energy and shit that much.

I believe you were right to vote Green, in any country it's one of the best choices but going from that to Trump seems a bit Bi-polar.
Eh? ...

I am in no way obligated to vote for the "closest match" to my political views so stop talking as if I am.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,309 Posts
I'm not saying you're forced to but isn't that a bit counterintuitive? Isn't that the whole point of a democracy is to vote for someone who best matches your views into office?
That is only one aspect of a democratic vote. Sometimes it is counterintuitive to vote for your Fave™ like, for example, in this case. How the fuck would Jill Stein become the next dictator? Best case the greens get a few seats somewhere and for what? Voting green wouldnt have prevented arguably the most important aspect of that election which was preventing Clinton and the DNC from getting to power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,627 Posts
I'm not saying you're forced to but isn't that a bit counterintuitive? Isn't that the whole point of a democracy is to vote for someone who best matches your views into office?
The point of a democracy is to vote what is best for the country and citizens in your eyes. Sometimes that involves voting for someone who shares your political views. Sometimes that doesn't. For example, here in the UK, the party that most matches my political beliefs would be the Libertarian Party. But there is close to no chance that party is ever gaining seats anywhere. So it is not productive to vote for them. We have a general election coming up and many people who would normally vote UKIP are going to vote Conservative, because UKIP is a mess right now, which sadly leaves the Conservatives as the sole party committed to Brexit. In order to accomplish this it is imperative to have someone in power who will get it done. That means voting for the ones who will and not the ones who can't, regardless of who you agree with ideologically.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
425 Posts
You know, if everyone who (believes in _ party) said they won't win so don't vote would actually vote for the group in question then they would have a lot better chance of winning or gaining more seats in Congress/Parliament. :dry: There is no point to me to vote for which cannidate who has a chance of winning but doesn't match my views. My vote goes to which person/party matches my views and morals, I vote with my heart and who I believe to be right and just. I am not going to vote for the shiniest of two turds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,627 Posts
You know, if everyone who (believes in _ party) said they won't win so don't vote would actually vote for the group in question then they would have a lot better chance of winning or gaining more seats in Congress/Parliament. :dry: There is no point to me to vote for which cannidate who has a chance of winning but doesn't match my views. My vote goes to which person/party matches my views and morals, I vote with my heart and who I believe to be right and just. I am not going to vote for the shiniest of two turds.
No they wouldn't.

I mean no disrespect, but that is at best hopelessly naive and at worst dangerously foolish. Actions are worth more than mere morals. If whatever party "matches [your] views and morals" is incapable of making them policy, then you voting for them isn't acting on those morals. It's merely a lame protest, with no end result. Justice and fairness manifest themselves in action, it isn't just the thought that counts. If you can have both just values and just action, great. But if you must choose one over the other, just action will always win out in my eyes. Whatever values the party you may vote for has, will amount to nothing, so too does your vote, so too does your conviction. That is weakness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
425 Posts
No they wouldn't.

I mean no disrespect, but that is at best hopelessly naive and at worst dangerously foolish. Actions are worth more than mere morals. If whatever party "matches [your] views and morals" is incapable of making them policy, then you voting for them isn't acting on those morals. It's merely a lame protest, with no end result. Justice and fairness manifest themselves in action, it isn't just the thought that counts. If you can have both just values and just action, great. But if you must choose one over the other, just action will always win out in my eyes. Whatever values the party you may vote for has, will amount to nothing, so too does your vote, so too does your conviction. That is weakness.
Honor Before Reason . What I did was an action. Again, what point would it be to vote for one of two candidates who are both liars, do the bidding of the wealthy, immoral, and warmongers? There are two parties who fight for power, both are identical, both are corrupt.
Is it a protest? Yeah, it is but that's not my main reason.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,309 Posts
You know, if everyone who (believes in _ party) said they won't win so don't vote would actually vote for the group in question then they would have a lot better chance of winning or gaining more seats in Congress/Parliament.
Theres also the question of who would make a better government. Honestly I have no idea what hippie mama Jill Stein would do as supreme leader, I havent looked into it. To be fair I dont think a green party would reach any sort of "victory" in the US at this time. Green ideology, to me, is the stage between the current Cold War-esque world and a singularity - AI, transhuman cybernetics, practical immortaility or no aging, Dyson spheres, planet sized computers, virtual universes, mind uploading; all of that shit. I think we will reach the singularity before the world calms down (thats a far fetched idea anyway), so the green ideology is rendered rather useless on the large scale.

Some people argue that voting doesnt matter anyway, that if the candidates or parties actually were against the zionist world order and the big banks that control everything then they wouldve been shut down long ago :D Im not quite sure of that (because Im not a 6) but its an interesting point of view, it would mean voting is just there to keep the peasants preoccupied and give them a false sense of control.

There is no point to me to vote for which cannidate who has a chance of winning but doesn't match my views. My vote goes to which person/party matches my views and morals, I vote with my heart and who I believe to be right and just. I am not going to vote for the shiniest of two turds.
Selfish.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,627 Posts
You can dress it up however you want, it's cowardice. You are just choosing to throw your clout behind someone who can't actually verify the justness or fairness behind your morals. Making a political statement in support of someone who can't enforce it or actually change anything. It's a waste of a vote.

The truest and strongest of morals, can weather all the necessary evils in the world and remain untainted. I have already given you an example of this. Brexit is the number one issue in British politics today. It is extremely important that this gets done. The Conservatives and Lib Dems are ideologically bankrupt whilst Labour has an insane leader who wants to destroy this country. What separates one of them from the others? The Conservatives are fully behind Brexit. The only way to get this done would be if they were in power (UKIP or the Libertarian Party aren't winning anytime soon). If you want Brexit, but choose to vote UKIP or the Libertarian Party out of 'honor' then you are a detriment to the cause. Period.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,472 Posts
I've heard that we as a generation are more conservative than any generation since World War II, which I definitely see signs of. You've got kids shouting "Build the Wall!" in middle school cafeterias, and some schools even had to cancel mock elections because Trump was doing too well.

Recently I found out that Gen Z begins with 1996 which to me feels like Christmas came early because I went so long thinking I was one of those pusscake millenials.

So, how about you guys? The nice thing about this place is that it's anonymous so no one has to care about being called a racist or any of that crap. I'm thinking my NT brothers especially will be nice intelligent conservatives, but if we get some NF centrists in here I'll also consider that a huge step in the right direction.
It makes sense. Gen Zers grew up in the 90's, when all of this identity politics, and pc culture exploded. I think a lot of young people, and a lot of people in general are getting tired of all the "White privilege", "patriarchy", and legislations like forcing people to use pronouns that don't actually exist in order to offend a small minority of people who identify as genders that don't actually exist. (Unless you are genetically abnormal, your chromosomes are either XX or XY, and your body either produces more testosterone than estrogen or more estrogen than test testosterone, which is the entire basis of "male" and "female"). People are getting tired of the idea of institutional racism, and members of black lives mattters killing or beating up white people for no other purpose than that they're white, and being excused by mainstream media, particularly CNN.

People are tired of being scared to own a business, or if they do own a business, of saying the "wrong thing", of making products a color that will offend people, of having a slogan that will offend people. It's a very hostile environment for business owners, right now, especially white male business owners, due to pc culture getting out of hand. When Razer made a JOKE, about "You can S my D", it was labelled as the "definition of sexism", and they got severely censured for it, and shame, and got all kinds of bad Pr, and were forced to apologize. Really? For a tweet where someone is making a joke, I mean yes, the pun was a play on SD slots and oral sex, but was is really "mysogynistic". It's this kind of idea policing that people are growing extremely weary of.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
425 Posts
I don't think schooling should focus on teaching kids about politics until well into High School, getting them started too early just leads to indoctrination (of which ideology the state endorses ) because they are at a point where they want to learn and need to learn so they would accept what is taught to them and then blindly stick to that. This thread is slowly turning into Yahoo Answers. :frustrating:
 
101 - 115 of 115 Posts
Top