or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Labels...are they really helping us?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Labels...are they really helping us? - Page 2

post #41 of 68
Just an aside: what is it with all this reporting posts?

Is it merely an extension of Right-wing censorship? Sort of like a Nazi book burning or a quick furtive phone call to the Gestapo about Mrs Heidlebaum the neighbour you've never been quite sure about?

Or is it rather the Playground Bully Syndrome?

Or perhaps the Schoolyard snitch of the Teacher's Pet?

In any case, where I come from it is all unacceptable and would result in some form of summary action pretty damn quick visited on the informant.

It really is not playing the game.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #42 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Exactly.

It is no coincidence that labels are the first thing that any oppressive ideology addresses. The very first thing. The first thing the Nazis did was to make people wear Yellow stars.

Once the label is in place - like the 'pyschotic' label which is now being applied to Liberals (supported by false claims of Eugenics and violence etc) - then it is a fait accompli.

The thing in question is labelled. It is official. It is a "fact".

All that remains then is decisions as to what to do with the star-wearers. What to do with the 'psychotics'.

All in the name of being helpful, compassionate, purifying.

But the first step is always the label and the fight to implant it.

Are you now seriously using the beginning of the holocaust in Nazi Germany and forcing of Jews to wear a star of David on their clothes as a comparison to what a member of this forum has posted after getting worked up over a similar tactic you and others claim that a poster used earlier? Seriously?
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #43 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Just an aside: what is it with all this reporting posts?

Is it merely an extension of Right-wing censorship? Sort of like a Nazi book burning or a quick furtive phone call to the Gestapo about Mrs Heidlebaum the neighbour you've never been quite sure about?

Or is it rather the Playground Bully Syndrome?

Or perhaps the Schoolyard snitch of the Teacher's Pet?

In any case, where I come from it is all unacceptable and would result in some form of summary action pretty damn quick visited on the informant.

It really is not playing the game.

I see we have the reference to Nazi Germany again.

This being a public forum, it is read by adults and children alike. I for one report posts that I do not wish to have my children reading. I also report spam, such as Wormholes latest rants across multiple threads, which actually happened to fall in both categories of post types I report. that being said, I don't report very often and if that makes you see me as a teachers pet or bully, I could care less. There are forum rules to keep the rhetoric down to a low roar, and when things get out of hand we have moderators who make the final call.

This post was not reported, nor was the one previous. They did not meet my threshold, even if they did invoke my gag reflex.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #44 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Just an aside: what is it with all this reporting posts?

Is it merely an extension of Right-wing censorship? Sort of like a Nazi book burning or a quick furtive phone call to the Gestapo about Mrs Heidlebaum the neighbour you've never been quite sure about?

Or is it rather the Playground Bully Syndrome?

Or perhaps the Schoolyard snitch of the Teacher's Pet?

In any case, where I come from it is all unacceptable and would result in some form of summary action pretty damn quick visited on the informant.It really is not playing the game.

That's quite a few labels there Sego. As I noted for the U.S. but as is shown here as well, labels have been used to dismiss valid concerns.

Also how does one, in an honest fashion, put forward a solution that is the problem? Complaining that the way to stop claimed censorship is to impose a little mob censorship seems to hurt more than help.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #45 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

Are you now seriously using the beginning of the holocaust in Nazi Germany and forcing of Jews to wear a star of David on their clothes as a comparison to what a member of this forum has posted after getting worked up over a similar tactic you and others claim that a poster used earlier? Seriously?

No.

I am using to examples of the tendency to label people.

I have a question: are you really so literal or is it a tactic to score a point? Seems strange for someone interested in thew Gospels.

You can imagine it now, the voice in the crowd behind Nicodemus: "are you seriously suggesting a camel can go through the eye of a needle?"

Wait...what's that I hear?? It's typing..... I can make out the letters it's so furious... "are you seriously comparing yourself to Jesus Christ????"
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #46 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

This post was not reported, nor was the one previous. They did not meet my threshold, even if they did invoke my gag reflex.

Right...YOUR threshold.... almost time for another Nazi reference......
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #47 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

No.

I am using to examples of the tendency to label people.

I have a question: are you really so literal or is it a tactic to score a point? Seems strange for someone interested in thew Gospels.

You can imagine it now, the voice in the crowd behind Nicodemus: "are you seriously suggesting a camel can go through the eye of a needle?"

Wait...what's that I hear?? It's typing..... I can make out the letters it's so furious... "are you seriously comparing yourself to Jesus Christ????"

You might want to tone down your ESP. Apparently it is channeling some other poster. So it is ok when you use comparisons to make a point, but it is not ok when another poster does then?

Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Right...YOUR threshold.... almost time for another Nazi reference......

I am not allowed to have a threshold for what I consider to be a reportable offense?
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #48 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

You might want to tone down your ESP. Apparently it is channeling some other poster. So it is ok when you use comparisons to make a point, but it is not ok when another poster does then?

I didn't mean you...thought you might think that and thought of editing it but got distracted. I meant no-one in particular.

You're kind of on my respect list at the moment so if it looks like I'm insulting I'm probably not. I try to make it obvious on the rare occasions I venture into the personal! Hah!

Quote:
I am not allowed to have a threshold for what I consider to be a reportable offense?

Well..clearly one is allowed to because the function is there.

I find it a bit ignoble myself though having said that, I would use it but perhaps my threshold is high. I think I've only ever reported anyone for spam actually.

One thing though: I think these forums are actually great in terms of respect etc. I believe this is because there are a lot of US posters.

If you really want to see racism, abuse and general sickness you could try a UK board. It's unbelievable. I'd be clicking report all the time....there are several i used to post on (nothing to do with politics) that I just can't go on now. Not because I'm banned but because any topic seems to end in spouting Islamophobia and racism.

People should realize this place is quite civilized in the bigger picture. We should try to keep it that way...I know I don't always help but I don't agree with the way things have been going lately.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #49 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Is there some problem with the definition of connotate for you?

There is for me: it is an obsolete form of old English and is part of an current ongoing butchery of the English language by idiots in the US like Bush and Palin who have raised incorrect grammar and syntax to an altar-stone at which all must pay homage.

Last time I looked the Oxford English Dictionary is the benchmark for the English language and it is not in there. I have a large number of volumes of this work inches from where I sit now and it is conspicuous by its absence.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #50 of 68
no i jumped the gun, its still there ! sorry!


Quote:
Actually google searches link all sorts of things. The fact that it can find a link doesn't make it the definition though.
post #51 of 68
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post

Psychosis is associated in medical practice with violence.

That is a fact.

This is an interesting statement. This word "associated" means connected which merely suggests that there may be a connection between violence and psychosis. It doesn't tell us if all violence is based in psychosis or all psychosis leads to violence. I'd venture a guess that neither of those is true.

What I suspect is the case in this association is that someone who suffers from psychosis may be more disposed or inclined toward violence than someone who does not suffer from psychosis but it doesn't mean that someone who suffers from psychosis is automatically violent.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #52 of 68
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post

Sigh.

Read some of the links. There are firm and documented links between psychosis and violence.

<sigh>

What's interesting is that I didn't question that there is a link (or an "association") but you seem to be (deliberately it looks like now) trying to leave an unspoken implication hanging out there that psychosis means violence and/or that psychosis by definition leads to violence. I'm guessing that neither of these are true.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post

Trumptman used the word violence three times in the opening post of his psychosis thread. He made the connection, not me, so take it up with him.

Again, I'm not questioning that the connection exists. And I don't even doubt that someone who suffers from psychosis is likely to more inclined toward violence as a result of their psychosis. And this is a valid concern for anyone in which we discover what might be psychotic indications. In other words someone who is discovered to have symptoms of psychosis might, in fact, be psychotic and might, in fact, be more likely to engage in some kind of violence.

Getting back a little more on topic...this issue of defining a label is the kind of thing I was referring to in this thread. What is "psychosis?" Is someone either psychotic or not psychotic or are there degrees of psychosis? The multiple and varied symptoms suggest that there are degrees of psychosis.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #53 of 68
To be fair, 'Psychosis' refers to a state divorced from reality. It is 'Paranoid Psychosis' which infers violence.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #54 of 68
Thread Starter 
Back to the issue of defining labels, particularly centered around political position and disposition. I've found that the terms liberal, progressive, conservative, etc. to be either poorly defined, poorly applied or mis-applied.


It seems like you could classify someone using political position and disposition similarly to the combination and range of personality types:
  • introvert vs. extrovert
  • sensing vs. intuitve
  • perceiving vs. judging
  • thinking vs. feeling

The political "axes" or "spectrums" are probably along the following issues:
  • collective vs. individual
  • centralization vs. decentralization
  • government control vs. non-governmental control
  • coercive vs. voluntary

Certainly there are others. People could land on different points on a line between each end point, and on different, specific issues and categories of issues a person might land on different points on each line.

These are some images where others have tried to capture some of the about items:









Thought I'm not certain any of these capture everything adequately.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #55 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Thought I'm not certain any of these capture everything adequately.

Some of those are way off....I think the problem is one of European views vs American views...you have to factor those things in.

I don't know anything about US views really but in Europe anarchism would not even be on that chart. Anarchists here hate the Left as much as the Right - they do not have a place on the spectrum at all. They want to destroy the system as a whole and replace it with nothing. It's more akin to nihilism.

Leftist Revolutionaries want to destroy the system and replace it with a system of their own that is Left.

Also they should put some form of Islamists somewhere - some of them want to replace the system with a theocratic system of their own which, again, is neither Left or Right.

The Progressives may be near Neocons in the States but there is no equivalent of that in Europe.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #56 of 68
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Some of those are way off....

Indeed.


Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

I think the problem is one of European views vs American views...you have to factor those things in.

Actually I think we need to get away from that. I've seen some posters here try to describe American political positions in terms of European political spectrums. What I think the characteristics I'm suggesting do is to get away from that and try to position someone on a less relative spectrum


Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

I don't know anything about US views really but in Europe anarchism would not even be on that chart. Anarchists here hate the Left as much as the Right - they do not have a place on the spectrum at all. They want to destroy the system as a whole and replace it with nothing. It's more akin to nihilism.

I think the characteristics I'm suggesting (though maybe there are couple missing) might be able to capture them.


Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Leftist Revolutionaries want to destroy the system and replace it with a system of their own that is Left.

Also they should put some form of Islamists somewhere - some of them want to replace the system with a theocratic system of their own which, again, is neither Left or Right.

The Progressives may be near Neocons in the States but there is no equivalent of that in Europe.

See above comment about US vs. Europe.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #57 of 68
Thread Starter 
So for my list of characteristics:
  • collective vs. individual
  • centralization vs. decentralization
  • government control vs. non-governmental control
  • coercive vs. voluntary

Here are some definitions:

collective vs. individual
Here is what someone ranks as more important in society...the individual or the collective.


centralization vs. decentralization
In this we see whether a person favor more centralized control and decision-making vs. more distributed and de-centralized control and decision-making.


government control vs. non-governmental control
In this a person favor more control and power for government (I call these folks "statists") vs. someone who favor less government power and control over issues.


coercive vs. voluntary
Here a person favor the use of more coercive approaches to things vs. relying more on voluntary activities of people and groups.

Again, a person can likely fit on either extreme or on points in between each of these, and they might even be different on different specific issues or broad categories of issues.

But regardless of present-day commonly used labels (e.g., liberal, progressive, right, left, etc.) I think you could map people onto these axes and might even be surprised where some people who are considered very different might actually align.

So where would you fit on these? Where would present day major politicians fit based, first, on their actions and, second, on their words (where actions are absent or unclear)?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #58 of 68
Good thread MJ.

The problem with language is that it's only one component of effective communication. Reduced to written form, it loses yet another dimension, since the words we choose unavoidably connote differences in interpretation and evoke emotional responses. Such connotations also change over time - there's certainly nothing wrong with a "liberal" education, yet many consider the term a pejorative. Even the party affiliations "Republican" and "Democrat" have changed markedly over the years, and their actions have traversed many shades of grey. Only when extremists on one side or the other hijack and derail their party's alleged goals do any substantive differences emerge. I often use the term "collectivist" to describe the converse of individualism, but that's not precise either.

The two-dimensional charts you posted are a much better illustration of reality, yet even they are limited to two dimensions. Even engineering suffers a limitation in that most concepts must be reduced to paper. I believe that limitation may even constrain how we think. One day, Apple may invent holographic email or something, and we'll all be better off. Maybe that will be the twenty-third century ("... we've learned not to fear words." )

I endeavor to judge people on their actions. Someone else's "label" may not equal my conception of it.

Labels notwithstanding, words mean things, so I strive to communicate accurately. Spelling and punctuation matters too. Brevity is not one of my many talents though, so it's time to hit the submit button.
A is A
Reply
A is A
Reply
post #59 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by john galt View Post

I endeavor to judge people on their actions.

I would add illiteracy and profanity defines an individual as well.
A is A
Reply
A is A
Reply
post #60 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

We label things in order to classify them.

This helps us know what we are dealing with. It also enables us to add to the store of human knowledge in fact, from the first time a human applied a name to an object that signified its usage down to the classification of insects or the Periodic Table, labelling things has been the method of human progress and the development of civilization.

It helps us classify facts.

What we have in the last decade though is a new phenomena: one group of people (they will remain unclassified as they are obvious) does not like the labels applied to themselves and things they are concerned with.

They do not like facts. They do not like facts being labelled for what they are.

They do not like a spade being called a spade. Especially when a spade is a fascist. Or a racist.

Funny, because I think many people don't like BEING labeled things that they are clearly not.

Quote:

So they just change the labels.

Or, you do.

Quote:

If they are evil - why change? just change the label?

If a sinner can't renounce sin - hey...I know... just stick this label on yourself "Christian".

That was entirely uncalled for and shows your complete ignorance of Christians.

Quote:

Hate freedom and want to oppress people? No problem - here's a label "Freedom Lover".

Or, just stick with Islamofascist, socialist, or Democrat.

Quote:

Right-wing fascist? Have "Compassionate Conservative".

Freedom hating, America hating politician who wants to control every aspect of people's lives? Progressive!

Quote:

They think its clever.

They think no-one will know.

They think that even though it's a form of lying you'll get tired of having the label "Liar" stuck on YOU instead.

And they're right.

We're all fucking tired. That's one label you can put on me and we'll all agree: "Tired of the Fucking Morons"

Label me "sick of disingenuous people who attack faiths that are not their own, but excuse acts of extreme violence in other faiths."
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #61 of 68
Back OT: I have a theory that the labels issue stems from Marketing and Branding going out of control as it has done for a few decades now.

In the past, when someone wanted to get their business, art, music or whatever to the top of the pile they would have to spend a hell of a lot of money and invest a hell of a lot of time. And then they would need talent. And luck.

And even then they would possibly fail.

So some talentless goon somewhere had an idea: "what if we spend nothing on development???".

We would then:
  1. Save millions on research and development costs
  2. Be able to pay less as we could emply non skilled people
  3. Save on time - what took years will take no time at all

He pitched it to the board and they nearly bawled him out "wait....we will FAIL...how do we sell????No-one would buy a product like that!!"

And that's where he played his ace:

"But they will!!! Instead of spending 500 million on staff, research, production etc...we spend say 50 million. then we spend 200 million on marketing and convincing people this is the best most desirable product in the world..."

Et voila....

So the formula is no longer:

Make something you love to make....make it the best you can and give the best service at the best price..

But:

Find out what people want, make the cheapest approximation you can and convince them it is the best and most desirable....charge the highest the market will bear.

And this philosophy is now rampant in every aspect of our daily lives. If you want a classic example from recent politics lookat Obama's "Change" campaign.

1) People wanted change
2) they were given a slick advertising campaign convincing them Obama was that change
3) it turned out to be a cheap shoddy plastic toy and the wheels fell off.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #62 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Back OT:

Yes, back on topic. Here's today's ad hominem comment: those douchenozzles are going to Coventry if they fuck up one more thread with their ridiculous name-calling. Nobody has time for free babysitting.
--Johnny
Reply
--Johnny
Reply
post #63 of 68
So I was noticing this article today about the White House requesting help from Jon Stewart and I had the following thought, why do leftists pretend to stand for nothing and then claim the populace is ignorant and misinformed?

This thread is in part related to the group now (after massive losses by Democrats) suddenly pushing an agenda of "No Labels."


Then we remember that Stewart help a rally that wasn't really supposed to support anything, except for Sanity.


How sane is this thought process though. We want to stand for something, but won't use labels or words to describe it. We want to rally for something, but won't say what it is, just that those who are snarky enough to get the joke are the sane ones. Also if you don't agree with us, it is because all those hyperpartisans, defined as people who apparently will rally for actual named causes and who will use labels to describe what they believe and what actions they want to take, have somehow mislead or misinformed you.

The reason we label so many things and catagorize them is because it is part of how our brain works. It is part of the mechanism it uses to retain knowledge. How can these groups ignore this, claim to be helping people and at the same time be complaining people are ignorant?

It is a manipulation. When people refuse to assign words to their agenda, that is part of their agenda. When they claim to stand for nothing, the something is hidden and they are hoping to gain their goal via apathy rather than compete in the public sphere of influence and ideas.

I say call them out and lay their hypocrisy and agenda bare.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #64 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

So I was noticing this article today about the White House requesting help from Jon Stewart and I had the following thought, why do leftists pretend to stand for nothing and then claim the populace is ignorant and misinformed?

Err...because they don't?

I'm a Leftist and I don't pretend to stand for nothing. Nor do any Leftists I know. So that seems nonsensical.

Re uninformed populaces: some are, some aren't. Some don't want to be. Some refuse to be.

Still..the tools are out there to inform yourself...you need a brain but other than that it's do-able.

Quote:
This thread is in part related to the group now (after massive losses by Democrats) suddenly pushing an agenda of "No Labels.

Which group? Which agenda? Whatyoutalkingaboutwillis?

Quote:
How sane is this thought process though. We want to stand for something, but won't use labels or words to describe it. We want to rally for something, but won't say what it is, just that those who are snarky enough to get the joke are the sane ones.

Oh, I get it...it's the rally....right. That was funny actually...looks like it hit the mark too...

Quote:
Also if you don't agree with us, it is because all those hyperpartisans, defined as people who apparently will rally for actual named causes and who will use labels to describe what they believe and what actions they want to take, have somehow mislead or misinformed you.

Maybe people are just pissed off with wingers changing the definition of words to avoid dialogue?

That's how I read it.

Quote:
The reason we label so many things and catagorize them is because it is part of how our brain works. It is part of the mechanism it uses to retain knowledge. How can these groups ignore this, claim to be helping people and at the same time be complaining people are ignorant?

Some people are ignorant. Or they behave in an ignorant manner more properly.

I would class this ignorant behaviour as not debating the issues.

Person A produces an alleged fact.

Person B changes the definition of the words.

This is ignorance. Both should work to prove the truth...there will be a 'loser' for want of a better word but you move on to the next alleged fact. And maybe learn something.

Some people don't want to play like that though: they want to widen the goals, rewrite the rulebook, run the replay cam, buy the referee and control the scoreboard.

Quote:
It is a manipulation. When people refuse to assign words to their agenda, that is part of their agenda. When they claim to stand for nothing, the something is hidden and they are hoping to gain their goal via apathy rather than compete in the public sphere of influence and ideas.

Heehehheh I get it now!!! Wow!!

Your stage one was "change the meaning of the words"

Then they responded with not labelling!! So that tactic was out!!

Now we're at "they refuse to define things!!!!!"

It's classic!!!

Quote:
I say call them out and lay their hypocrisy and agenda bare.

Won't work...you'd have to use facts, reason and debate...ain't gonna happen.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #65 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Err...because they don't?

I'm a Leftist and I don't pretend to stand for nothing. Nor do any Leftists I know. So that seems nonsensical.

The rally cited, the website and movement attempting to be cultivated by them are not figments of my imagination. The links are there.

Quote:
Re uninformed populaces: some are, some aren't. Some don't want to be. Some refuse to be.

Still..the tools are out there to inform yourself...you need a brain but other than that it's do-able.

As you note, the tools are there. So why then does one side of the political spectrum continually claim ignorance and misinformation is the reason their agenda isn't supported by the broad populace? They should stop insulting people and start trying to convince them on merits.

Quote:
Which group? Which agenda? Whatyoutalkingaboutwillis?

Did you click any of the several links in the post?

Quote:
Oh, I get it...it's the rally....right. That was funny actually...looks like it hit the mark too...

The mark it hit was standing for nothing as a measure of sanity and/or fear. Please feel free to elaboration on your contention.

Quote:
Maybe people are just pissed off with wingers changing the definition of words to avoid dialogue?

That's how I read it.

There it is, the misinformation argument. Perhaps when people disagree, they haven't been fooled or mislead, perhaps they actually encounter all the same information, process it, and wait for it.....................come to a different conclusion.

Hard to believe I know, but it is more believable then people are pissed because these bad guys keep changing the definitions of words, so let's just avoid words.

Quote:
Some people are ignorant. Or they behave in an ignorant manner more properly.


This is true. Like when the delegates at the last conference signed petitions to ban water, that is behaving in an ignorant manner. Too bad they are supposedly the informed ones.


Quote:
I would class this ignorant behaviour as not debating the issues.

Person A produces an alleged fact.

Person B changes the definition of the words.

This is ignorance. Both should work to prove the truth...there will be a 'loser' for want of a better word but you move on to the next alleged fact. And maybe learn something.

What if person B cites the definition of the word and is proclaimed by person A to be ignorant since their conclusion is different, even while using official definitions?

Quote:
Some people don't want to play like that though: they want to widen the goals, rewrite the rulebook, run the replay cam, buy the referee and control the scoreboard.

They also want to exert power by alleging those actions even when they aren't happening. False allegations are a form of violence and power too, are they not?

Perhaps the definitions aren't being changed. Perhaps one party has blinders on and only want to see limited information presented in a limited fashion in hopes of limiting the conclusions that can be drawn. Classic GIGO.

Quote:
Heehehheh I get it now!!! Wow!!

Quote:
Your stage one was "change the meaning of the words"

My stage one was starting a thread by Roubini noting that Dems were toast in 2010 due to Democratic lies and lack of economic growth.

Quote:
Then they responded with not labelling!! So that tactic was out!!

They responded by being delusional and losing 63 House seats or having half of Europe face default and bond rating downgrades while watching their currency be destroyed.

Quote:
Now we're at "they refuse to define things!!!!!"

Now that people have figured out who to point the finger at, they want a new identity but first, they want to engage in some nice double-talk/double-think whereby we say, how about no one has an identity anymore.

Quote:
It's classic!!!

It is indeed classic. It's called how you can manage to keep advocating the wrong solution again even while being so wrong the first time. Sort of like communism and socialism everywhere it has been tried. Another example is something like changing Global Warming to Climate Change. They've definitely widened, the goal posts (cooling is warming, warming is warming, weather is warming except for when you use it, etc.)

Quote:
Won't work...you'd have to use facts, reason and debate...ain't gonna happen.

Yes because the group that wants to stand for nothing and use no labels is the one actually tossing out all the labels, like you are ignorant, sexist, hateful, greedy, etc. The fact is they want apathy instead of engagement. The reason is because they've been found out, tossed from office and now want to be credible to bring back the same failed worldview again and debate, they don't want that because it is "hyper-partisan" which is of course another nice label they are using while opposing them.

Peaceful protest is burning, looting and harming others. Peace is attacking your own country as a "revolutionary". If you end up killing half the poor to help the remaining half, that is just the price to be paid. Just ask Mao, Stalin or any other egg breaker out there.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #66 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Yes because the group that wants to stand for nothing and use no labels is the one actually tossing out all the labels, like you are ignorant, sexist, hateful, greedy, etc.

So do you think that sexists, racists, greed etc do not actually exist?

Or that they cannot exist on the RIght?

If you think they DO exist a priori then is it calling attention to it you object to? Perhaps you think there is no problem with these things and therefore they do not need to be pointed out?
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #67 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

So do you think that sexists, racists, greed etc do not actually exist?

Or that they cannot exist on the RIght?

If you think they DO exist a priori then is it calling attention to it you object to? Perhaps you think there is no problem with these things and therefore they do not need to be pointed out?

You call attention to concerns and priorities with LABELS. That is sort of the point. Labels as a tool are amoral. When one group is claiming all should give up a tool that is neither good or bad, while claiming it is bad, that really is an agenda itself. It is a dishonest agenda.

Break down your little note from above.

What would you think if all the sexists wanted us to give up the term sexism claiming it was more harmful than helpful?

What would you think if all the racists wanted us to give up the term racism claiming it was more harmful than helpful?

Likewise, why do those doing all the labeling want everyone who is not them to give up labels? They claim the desire but of course will gladly keep the tool.

Looking at your own reasoning, as you note. Things do exist and do need attention called to them. What can be the real motivations and outcomes to a group declaring labels as harmful then?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #68 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

You call attention to concerns and priorities with LABELS. That is sort of the point. Labels as a tool are amoral. When one group is claiming all should give up a tool that is neither good or bad, while claiming it is bad, that really is an agenda itself. It is a dishonest agenda.

Break down your little note from above.

What would you think if all the sexists wanted us to give up the term sexism claiming it was more harmful than helpful?

What would you think if all the racists wanted us to give up the term racism claiming it was more harmful than helpful?

Likewise, why do those doing all the labeling want everyone who is not them to give up labels? They claim the desire but of course will gladly keep the tool.

Looking at your own reasoning, as you note. Things do exist and do need attention called to them. What can be the real motivations and outcomes to a group declaring labels as harmful then?


I'm a simple man who does not like to complicate things Trumpy...I tend to see things in a mundane down to earth sense.

Seems to me that if someone's a racist then it's good to tell them and other people. We should know where we stand. But it also goes without saying they will deny it.

It's natural but the Courts do not dismiss the case every time the accused pleads Not Guilty.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Labels...are they really helping us?