No, that guy claims to be a communist, although it's clear he doesn't care about other people very much. This is my microbiologist friend.
Moral: don't trust people in the sciences.
No, that guy claims to be a communist, although it's clear he doesn't care about other people very much. This is my microbiologist friend.
Well, he IS a conservative libertarian. I just mean that he's interested in discussing opposing viewpoints (and seems swayable) without flying off the handle like so many of them do. He seems to be a little caught up in the fact that he wants to be able to discuss statistics with people but thinks he'll be totally shut down by "the left" and fears the oncoming cultural tyranny of "the left" that enforces silence (or firing you from your job) if you disagree. I think he's not paying attention to how social movements work. I could certainly cite the McCarthy era and see what he thinks of that. He says that he sees much more venom, threat, and lack of understanding of their own motivations on the left than he does on the right, which totally gives power to my theory that he's looking for stuff that satisfies what he already thinks. In addition to statistical analysis, he also cites interviews taken at BLM protests and the inability for the interviewees to express why they're there as ammo for himself, but I reminded him how easily that shit can be cherry-picked and edited. The right aren't going to show the eloquent interviews, are they?Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑04 Aug 2020, 6:52pmI'll just suggest that if your friend only considers statistical evidence valid, he isn't that open-minded. Which isn't to say that qualitative evidence is the here-all and be-all—a blend is almost always the best—but that a reliance on quantitative evidence is an eager abstraction of human experience that actively seeks to remove human beings from the story. Whenever I encounter stat people, I think of a speech Robert Kennedy gave in 1968 in which he rejected our reliance on statistics to tell the whole story:
Too much and for too long, we seemed to have surrendered personal excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things. Our Gross National Product, now, is over $800 billion dollars a year, but that Gross National Product - if we judge the United States of America by that - that Gross National Product counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage.
It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for the people who break them. It counts the destruction of the redwood and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl.
It counts napalm and counts nuclear warheads and armored cars for the police to fight the riots in our cities. It counts Whitman's rifle and Speck's knife, and the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children.
Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials.
It measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country, it measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.
And it can tell us everything about America except why we are proud that we are Americans.
It's kinda fascinating how pessimistic conservatives are. By nature they should be—Reagan conservatism is fla-out weird from a larger historical sense—but they've become more and more apocalyptic. It's telling that conversations with people on the right tend to be more about how they are victimized by the left (by which they actually mean the centre but it sounds better to paint all non-conservatives as "far left") than the virtues of their own principles. It wasn't always like that. In the 70s and 80s, conservatives put forward arguments about why their perspective was superior, but that's long past. They've decided to play defence, whether out of a genuine sense that the tide is turning and/or they aren't producing any serious proponents of their values. Conservatism has largely devolved into anti-liberalism/anti-socialism without an actual critique behind it, just fearmongering.Kory wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 2:26pmWell, he IS a conservative libertarian. I just mean that he's interested in discussing opposing viewpoints (and seems swayable) without flying off the handle like so many of them do. He seems to be a little caught up in the fact that he wants to be able to discuss statistics with people but thinks he'll be totally shut down by "the left" and fears the oncoming cultural tyranny of "the left" that enforces silence (or firing you from your job) if you disagree. I think he's not paying attention to how social movements work. I could certainly cite the McCarthy era and see what he thinks of that. He says that he sees much more venom, threat, and lack of understanding of their own motivations on the left than he does on the right, which totally gives power to my theory that he's looking for stuff that satisfies what he already thinks. In addition to statistical analysis, he also cites interviews taken at BLM protests and the inability for the interviewees to express why they're there as ammo for himself, but I reminded him how easily that shit can be cherry-picked and edited. The right aren't going to show the eloquent interviews, are they?
Indeed, "owning the libs" really seems to be the party followers' only platform at this point, which totally explains why Trump can do literally anything and they don't care. As long as it pisses off the libs, then it's a win.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 2:36pmIt's kinda fascinating how pessimistic conservatives are. By nature they should be—Reagan conservatism is fla-out weird from a larger historical sense—but they've become more and more apocalyptic. It's telling that conversations with people on the right tend to be more about how they are victimized by the left (by which they actually mean the centre but it sounds better to paint all non-conservatives as "far left") than the virtues of their own principles. It wasn't always like that. In the 70s and 80s, conservatives put forward arguments about why their perspective was superior, but that's long past. They've decided to play defence, whether out of a genuine sense that the tide is turning and/or they aren't producing any serious proponents of their values. Conservatism has largely devolved into anti-liberalism/anti-socialism without an actual critique behind it, just fearmongering.Kory wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 2:26pmWell, he IS a conservative libertarian. I just mean that he's interested in discussing opposing viewpoints (and seems swayable) without flying off the handle like so many of them do. He seems to be a little caught up in the fact that he wants to be able to discuss statistics with people but thinks he'll be totally shut down by "the left" and fears the oncoming cultural tyranny of "the left" that enforces silence (or firing you from your job) if you disagree. I think he's not paying attention to how social movements work. I could certainly cite the McCarthy era and see what he thinks of that. He says that he sees much more venom, threat, and lack of understanding of their own motivations on the left than he does on the right, which totally gives power to my theory that he's looking for stuff that satisfies what he already thinks. In addition to statistical analysis, he also cites interviews taken at BLM protests and the inability for the interviewees to express why they're there as ammo for himself, but I reminded him how easily that shit can be cherry-picked and edited. The right aren't going to show the eloquent interviews, are they?
It annoys me to no end that so many—not just on the right—conflate liberal and left. They're both to the left of the right, but that's it. It makes as much sense as leftists who lump liberals and conservatives as the right. There is a centre. On a whole shitload of issues, the centre sides with the right, but to that crude and defensive conservative mindset, they're all Trotskyites.Kory wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 3:09pmFunnily enough, we started talking about how we're in a lot of this mess right now because of how the rural poor have been ignored, dumped on, etc. and he was quite literally astounded that I took that viewpoint, being as I am, on "the left." In his experience, "the left" see themselves in a superior position over the rural poor, especially in the south. It became completely clear at that point that he was conflating liberals and leftists, and that, as you mentioned before, his statistics wouldn't account for that and are giving him a skewed vision of the country (not that liberals aren't a big part of it).
Propaganda is powerful as hell, there's no denying that. I don't recall that kind of categorization before Obama. And they called Obama a Nazi (well, the LaRouchies did, anyway)!Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 3:35pmIt annoys me to no end that so many—not just on the right—conflate liberal and left. They're both to the left of the right, but that's it. It makes as much sense as leftists who lump liberals and conservatives as the right. There is a centre. On a whole shitload of issues, the centre sides with the right, but to that crude and defensive conservative mindset, they're all Trotskyites.Kory wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 3:09pmFunnily enough, we started talking about how we're in a lot of this mess right now because of how the rural poor have been ignored, dumped on, etc. and he was quite literally astounded that I took that viewpoint, being as I am, on "the left." In his experience, "the left" see themselves in a superior position over the rural poor, especially in the south. It became completely clear at that point that he was conflating liberals and leftists, and that, as you mentioned before, his statistics wouldn't account for that and are giving him a skewed vision of the country (not that liberals aren't a big part of it).
Well, conservatives have tagged liberals with being leftists since FDR's time (but at that time the idea had a bit more merit), but for our time it really kicked in with Clinton. He and Hillary were New Left counter-cultural radicals and all that, determined to destroy families and decency. Since then, every Democrat running for president is "the most left-wing ever." I've even some people call Biden a far left radical. It's a good way to know when to put someone on Ignore.Kory wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 4:08pmPropaganda is powerful as hell, there's no denying that. I don't recall that kind of categorization before Obama. And they called Obama a Nazi (well, the LaRouchies did, anyway)!Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 3:35pmIt annoys me to no end that so many—not just on the right—conflate liberal and left. They're both to the left of the right, but that's it. It makes as much sense as leftists who lump liberals and conservatives as the right. There is a centre. On a whole shitload of issues, the centre sides with the right, but to that crude and defensive conservative mindset, they're all Trotskyites.Kory wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 3:09pmFunnily enough, we started talking about how we're in a lot of this mess right now because of how the rural poor have been ignored, dumped on, etc. and he was quite literally astounded that I took that viewpoint, being as I am, on "the left." In his experience, "the left" see themselves in a superior position over the rural poor, especially in the south. It became completely clear at that point that he was conflating liberals and leftists, and that, as you mentioned before, his statistics wouldn't account for that and are giving him a skewed vision of the country (not that liberals aren't a big part of it).
And Dukakis, too. The card carrying member of the ACLU and extremist liberal.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 4:19pmWell, conservatives have tagged liberals with being leftists since FDR's time (but at that time the idea had a bit more merit), but for our time it really kicked in with Clinton. He and Hillary were New Left counter-cultural radicals and all that, determined to destroy families and decency. Since then, every Democrat running for president is "the most left-wing ever." I've even some people call Biden a far left radical. It's a good way to know when to put someone on Ignore.Kory wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 4:08pmPropaganda is powerful as hell, there's no denying that. I don't recall that kind of categorization before Obama. And they called Obama a Nazi (well, the LaRouchies did, anyway)!Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 3:35pmIt annoys me to no end that so many—not just on the right—conflate liberal and left. They're both to the left of the right, but that's it. It makes as much sense as leftists who lump liberals and conservatives as the right. There is a centre. On a whole shitload of issues, the centre sides with the right, but to that crude and defensive conservative mindset, they're all Trotskyites.Kory wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 3:09pmFunnily enough, we started talking about how we're in a lot of this mess right now because of how the rural poor have been ignored, dumped on, etc. and he was quite literally astounded that I took that viewpoint, being as I am, on "the left." In his experience, "the left" see themselves in a superior position over the rural poor, especially in the south. It became completely clear at that point that he was conflating liberals and leftists, and that, as you mentioned before, his statistics wouldn't account for that and are giving him a skewed vision of the country (not that liberals aren't a big part of it).
Which led to him doing the tank thing.JennyB wrote: ↑06 Aug 2020, 11:00amAnd Dukakis, too. The card carrying member of the ACLU and extremist liberal.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 4:19pmWell, conservatives have tagged liberals with being leftists since FDR's time (but at that time the idea had a bit more merit), but for our time it really kicked in with Clinton. He and Hillary were New Left counter-cultural radicals and all that, determined to destroy families and decency. Since then, every Democrat running for president is "the most left-wing ever." I've even some people call Biden a far left radical. It's a good way to know when to put someone on Ignore.Kory wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 4:08pmPropaganda is powerful as hell, there's no denying that. I don't recall that kind of categorization before Obama. And they called Obama a Nazi (well, the LaRouchies did, anyway)!Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 3:35pmIt annoys me to no end that so many—not just on the right—conflate liberal and left. They're both to the left of the right, but that's it. It makes as much sense as leftists who lump liberals and conservatives as the right. There is a centre. On a whole shitload of issues, the centre sides with the right, but to that crude and defensive conservative mindset, they're all Trotskyites.Kory wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 3:09pmFunnily enough, we started talking about how we're in a lot of this mess right now because of how the rural poor have been ignored, dumped on, etc. and he was quite literally astounded that I took that viewpoint, being as I am, on "the left." In his experience, "the left" see themselves in a superior position over the rural poor, especially in the south. It became completely clear at that point that he was conflating liberals and leftists, and that, as you mentioned before, his statistics wouldn't account for that and are giving him a skewed vision of the country (not that liberals aren't a big part of it).
Same.revbob wrote: ↑06 Aug 2020, 11:09amWhich led to him doing the tank thing.JennyB wrote: ↑06 Aug 2020, 11:00amAnd Dukakis, too. The card carrying member of the ACLU and extremist liberal.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 4:19pmWell, conservatives have tagged liberals with being leftists since FDR's time (but at that time the idea had a bit more merit), but for our time it really kicked in with Clinton. He and Hillary were New Left counter-cultural radicals and all that, determined to destroy families and decency. Since then, every Democrat running for president is "the most left-wing ever." I've even some people call Biden a far left radical. It's a good way to know when to put someone on Ignore.Kory wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 4:08pmPropaganda is powerful as hell, there's no denying that. I don't recall that kind of categorization before Obama. And they called Obama a Nazi (well, the LaRouchies did, anyway)!Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑05 Aug 2020, 3:35pm
It annoys me to no end that so many—not just on the right—conflate liberal and left. They're both to the left of the right, but that's it. It makes as much sense as leftists who lump liberals and conservatives as the right. There is a centre. On a whole shitload of issues, the centre sides with the right, but to that crude and defensive conservative mindset, they're all Trotskyites.
But that was the first time I really recall the term liberal being used as a derogatory epithet. During the lead up to the 1988 election.
No not the same. Doc can give you the scholarly version but Libertarians in my experience are just Republicans who want legalized drugs.