patrick.net

sbh says

I wrongly thought, back in the '70s, that these knuckledraggers would just die out as time went by. But I was sooo wrong. They teach their kids to be good little bigot soldiers, and then send them off to war.

I am grateful that, for all their goofiness, the Millennials are very socially permissive. They are our hope.

And, I'm grateful that the ugliness of conservatism is suffering at its crop source as America urbanizes. I rue the loss of the virtuous agrarian conservative individual....I deeply admire him/her. But their political leaders are swine. Witness the swine and their filth here on Patnet.

Arthur Conan Doyle wrote eloquently about how the bucolic agrarian environment can seethe with murderous divisions hidden just beneath the seemingly placid surface. The isolation makes people vulnerable to charlatans who arrive selling religion and its associated slanders against everybody else. People so easily divided against each other, and even against their own families, tend to elect the worst politicians.

That type tends not to flourish in a city environment, where people develop human intelligence in the most obvious way, i.e. the kids run around exploring different neighborhoods and within a couple of generations the Irish and the Italians who used to hate each other begin to have grandchildren in common, whom they adore. Cities can develop their own issues, e.g. racketeering, but they don't suffer the same ignorance.

turtledove says

Unfortunately, it doesn't seem limited to political affiliation. Two rabid sexists from this site, who shall remain nameless, couldn't be more opposite on the political spectrum. If likes are any indication, I got more support from our right leaning individuals in defense of women. I don't think hate cares which box you tick off on your voter registration.

Except, yeah. The liberals don't care that white people exist; they might even be one. They don't care that gun owners exist; they might even own one. They don't care that people believe in religion; they might even have one.

No, the liberals believe, as the founders did, that rights granted to some are to be granted to everyone. That justice is only justice if it is applied evenly and without prejudice.

The right has a strong propensity to believe, "If it ain't white, Christian, and straight, it should not exist".

They tend to support the power of the majority over the minority. They are the modern Pharisees and Sadducees. They disregard the downtrodden in favor of them what's got.

So, I don't buy the premise. The liberals I know, and the liberals here, will fight for every rightwinger's right to believe what he or she chooses, but not their ability or inclinations to make everyone else adhere to it.

Can you really say the same about the right?

edvard2 says

What is up with the rash of super right wing posts lately?

They are losing.

CL says

No, the liberals believe, as the founders did, that rights granted to some are to be granted to everyone. That justice is only justice if it is applied evenly and without prejudice.

Well said. +1

CL says

Can you really say the same about the right?

Absolutely not. The right-wing believes in privileges, not rights. Even when it comes to "gun rights", they believe that certain people shouldn't have guns, namely scary blacks, but that they should have this privilege and it should be unassailable.

The right only sees the world divided into two camps: us and them; Americans and commies; conservatives and liberals; my tribe and evil foreigners; Christians and heathens. It's a tribal, Stone Age mentality.

sbh says

Dan8267 says

They are losing.

Three words. BOOM.

Way to go, Dan.

Yep, that's really what it comes down to. We have a black president. Marriage equality is becoming reality. Anti-pot laws are being challenged. The Internet is making it impossible for small towns to stay culturally isolated.

The conservative culture is dying because it cannot exist in the modern, connected world. And all these right-wing posts and the recent renewal in bigotry brought out by Obama's election and the marriage equality movement is the death rattle of conservatism. Wounded animals can be loud as they die.

The grandchildren of the vocal conservatives of today will pretend that their grandparents were liberals who supported minority rights including gay marriage. This is just like the conservatives of today pretend that their ancestors were not slave owners; it was someone else's ancestors.

Dan8267 says

Even when it comes to "gun rights", they believe that certain people shouldn't have guns, namely scary blacks, but that they should have this privilege and it should be unassailable.

That's why I like to post this.

CL says

That's why I like to post this.

Fox News does that a lot, but for different reasons. They post pictures of blacks with guns with the implication that they are going to start a race war. It's funny how when it's a white guy holding the gun, he's a freedom fighter, but when it's a black guy, he's a thug.

By the way, thug is now code for "nigger". It's the socially acceptable way of saying that while trying not to appear racist. I guess the conservatives didn't think we could break their code.

Dan8267 says

The grandchildren of the vocal conservatives of today will pretend that their grandparents were liberals who supported minority rights including gay marriage

Hahah. But of course. And if ACA works, it will be BECAUSE it is a conservative idea! You've unlocked the mystery---they are always on the right side, after having been on the wrong side in the history books.

Because, you see, history books are written by lefty pinheads who promote homosexuality.

And if the economy is bad under a Republican, it is due to the Democrat before him. If the Democrat is from a generation ago---no problem, he is to blame anyway!

If a Democrat has a lousy economy, it is entirely his fault, even if it is terrible on inauguration day. Because, ya know, the markets were reacting to a Democratic victory in ADVANCE of the election! Maybe even YEARS before the election!

***Ultimately, it was the ending of redlining that caused this mess, because you should be allowed to fuck over black people! It's in the Constitution! Liberty!****

And remember, it was REPUBLICANS who supported Civil Rights, and freed the slaves. Which also was NOT necessary (because they would have been freed anyway because of capitalism or something). And Had it not been for the tyranny of Abraham Lincoln, who didn't really care about black rights, then the obviously good outcome would have been even better if conservatives had ruled entirely! And Lincoln was not a Liberal, but Hoover was.

So, you know, the gays.

komputodo says

Maybe this is a place where people can vent their frustrations and do no more damage than offend a few people. Which is miles apart from what we see on the news everyday with senseless shootings and whatnot.

Yes, but that's miles apart from the typical forum I'd have interest in participating in, especially given the low intelligence of such frustrations, which is again why I try to stick to Real Estate and sometimes Economics.

sbh says

that we dispense with the quotation marks

Good point. You are correct. The quotation marks were unnecessary, and I should not have used them. I gave in to the pressure from people being politically correct and having fake outrage and expected them to deliberately misinterpret my statement if I didn't quote the word.

It is, of course, asinine to try to avoid using the word nigger when talking about the word itself. It also defeats the purpose. The African American community uses that word in order to disempower it. Avoiding the word or calling it the N-Word is like referring to Voldemort as He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named. Dumbledore was right; it only empowers the word to be afraid to use it.

komputodo says

turtledove says

Unfortunately, it doesn't seem limited to political affiliation.

Unfortunately or fortunately? Why does every persons viewpoints have to be linked to a political affiliation. Does that imply that an apolitical person has no opinions?

I wrote "unfortunately" because I don't think that racist, sexist, homophobic comments are limited to right wing political views. Our reigning "progressive" was leading the charge against women earlier this week. The title of this thread suggests that the recent deluge of racist, sexist, and homophobic threads are right wing sentiments. I don't think it has anything to do with political affiliation; just lack of education and exposure.

I'm to the right of many issues. Equality isn't one of them.

turtledove says

I'm to the right of many issues. Equality isn't one of them.

So being pro Cracker parade is anti equality?

turtledove says

I'm rapidly tiring of this site. It has become a ranting ground for racists, sexists, and homophobes. Anonymity isn't license to spread hate and ignorance.

You can put people on ignore. How about putting selected threads on "ignore" too.
@Patrick

turtledove says

I wrote "unfortunately" because I don't think that racist, sexist, homophobic comments are limited to right wing political views.

Absolutely not. There are batshit crazy people on the left as well, just not as many of them. They are just as vocal as those on the right, but the mainstream Democrats don't listen to the nutjobs on the left whereas the mainstream Republicans do listen to their nutjobs.

komputodo says

It seems like you would be happier if these racist, sexist, homophobic comments were posted only by right wingers.

Tell me more about what I think. You don't know me from Adam, so spare me your insight into my soul. I'm not happy to hear it coming from ANY member of the human race. As a registered republican, I hardly think it would please me in any way to ascribe these ideas to republicans only. As a human being, it doesn't please me to hear it coming from anyone, irrespective of political affiliation.

For reasons that elude me, you seem to be trying to present my words as an attack on conservatism. My very point is in stark contrast to that. I don't believe it is a conservative ideal to promote racism, sexism, or homophobia. I don't believe it is a liberal ideal to promote racism, sexism, or homophobia. I think it's a sign of ignorance. The last time I checked, "ignoramus" isn't listed as a party choice on the voter card. Perhaps it should be.

Call it Crazy says

It turned into the dog pack mentality again, just like that other thread... One feeding off the other but making no clear points..

Pretty soon they'll start patting each other on the back, feeling good about their consensus.

Turtledove, you are one of the last remaining Republicans who does not fully support or stay silent, in the face of 'racism, sexism, or homophobia'. Good for you.

Buster says

Turtledove, you are one of the last remaining Republicans who does not fully support or stay silent, in the face of 'racism, sexism, or homophobia'. Good for you.

No she's just not an extremist or a troll like many of the right wingers that chime in around here. moderate republicans still exist. Ironically they are the ones who are republicans for reasons having to do with the actual republican policy differences (mostly taxes).

They'e less likely to be republican because of the three Gs (guns, gays and god), or for twisted nonsensical reasons that come from listening to too much Rush Limbaugh.

But they tolerate that nonsense (the Fort Wayne's and CaptainSUs of the world) because they know it gets republicans elected.

Unfortunately for them, now the lunatics they were just tolerating, run the party.

turtledove says

Anonymity isn't license to spread hate and ignorance.

Hatred is the emotional response to fear. Ignorance is only the lack of humility.

To end bigotry, we must stop talking about tolerance and start celebrating differences.

turtledove says

racism, sexism, or homophobia

Alas, I think equality is the wrong approach. The very essence of diversity is beautiful. In case of homosexuality, a conservative ought to embrace it out of the love for personal freedom and choice.

Peter P says

To end bigotry, we must stop talking about tolerance and start celebrating differences.

For me, celebrating differences makes sense for different cultures, for the other gender, for other age groups or professions, ideally even for differences of opinion (I'm not always good at that if I think the other opinion is based on ignorance or hate).

But tolerance is the right word for me regarding homosexuality. It's a sign of a problem of mine maybe, but tolerating,.. that is not objecting to their existence, or to their practices and believing that they have rights regarding marriage, and the right to not be discriminated against, is as far as I can go.

I'm not going to celebrate their gayness. But that's just me.

Peter P says

turtledove says

racism, sexism, or homophobia

Alas, I think equality is the wrong approach. The very essence of diversity is beautiful. In case of homosexuality, a conservative ought to embrace it out of the love for personal freedom and choice.

I guess when I think about equality, I don't think of it as suppressing others' differences. I think of it more as those differences don't matter with respect to how a person is treated within our society. I think that rewards, for example, should be based on performance. One's skin color, sex, or sexual orientation should have no bearing on the reward itself. Two people performing the exact same job should receive the same pay. Conversely, two people who aren't performing the same job shouldn't receive the same pay because it's politically incorrect to point out an objectively provable deficiency.

I too agree that racism, ignorance and so on are not exclusive to the right. As Turtledove mentioned I too was rather amazed at the trash being spewed by one of our resident left-wingers in last week's sexist posts. So it goes both ways.

Whether right or left, racism, sexism, homophobia and overall xenophobia is the worst human flaw. Its what has led to the majority of conflicts in the world.

I grew up in a very rural and homogenous area. Racism and xenophobia were fairly common. The reasons were the same as everywhere: Lack of exposure and experience with other cultures and people. Due to this lack of understanding the knee-jerk reaction is to simply reject the unknown and do so by making up bullshit about either a group of people or culture they know nothing about.

marcus says

I'm not going to celebrate their gayness. But that's just me.

That is fine too. I respect your opinion.

turtledove says

I guess when I think about equality, I don't think of it as suppressing others' differences. I think of it more as those differences don't matter with respect to how a person is treated within our society. I think that rewards, for example, should be based on performance. One's skin color, sex, or sexual orientation should have no bearing on the reward itself. Two people performing the exact same job should receive the same pay. Conversely, two people who aren't performing the same job shouldn't receive the same pay because it's politically incorrect to point out an objectively provable deficiency.

It is just that TOLERANCE has a negative connotation. CELEBRATION is more positive. It makes a difference in our mind.

edvard2 says

I grew up in a very rural and homogenous area. Racism and xenophobia were fairly common. The reasons were the same as everywhere: Lack of exposure and experience with other cultures and people.

Also, people TRY to be "moral" social animals. As a result, we are prone to group think.

If we become more selfish, there will be no place for prejudice. It will be either me, or not me.

turtledove says

Two people performing the exact same job should receive the same pay. C

That is in an utopian world. in the real world, there are other skills-kissing ass, willing to bob your head in endless meeting, pretending your boss' new idea is the next best thing to quantum physics etc etc. That person ought to receive more money-for willing to crush his soul that much. Then of course there are other situations-a young dude/dudette may perform an awesome job, but the senior good for nothing may outrank him etc etc. Which is why I am not in favor of mandates. The cream will always rise to the top-be that woman/man/gay/trangender/multiracial etc. back in the day-they could not-because laws specifically did not allow them to. Women could not even vote and blacks were property. Those things have changed -great. but mandating someone needs the same pay, just because they are a different gender-when people like meg Whitman have become billionaires on their own-that is just odd.

turtledove says

Two people performing the exact same job should receive the same pay.

The free market can sort this out. But we must all learn to love ourselves above all else. Gender biases came from people trying to do the "right" things.

"I just read the posts and comment. When someone says " Unfortunately, it doesn't seem limited to political affiliation", I interpret that to mean that they wish it was limited to political affiliation. Omitting the word "unfortunately" would have given the sentence a completely different meaning to me..Maybe I'm ignorant and need some help with english interpretation."

It would be easier if we could say that all bigots can be found under a particular affiliation, but as we've both pointed out, it doesn't work that way. I will try to be more clear in the future.

turtledove says

It would be easier if we could say that all bigots can be found under a particular affiliation, but as we've both pointed out, it doesn't work that way. I will try to be more clear in the future.

Bigots will be bigots, just like boys will be boys.

Also, labels are to be blamed.

"Once you label me you negate me."

-- Søren Kierkegaard

Peter P says

turtledove says

It would be easier if we could say that all bigots can be found under a particular affiliation, but as we've both pointed out, it doesn't work that way. I will try to be more clear in the future.

Bigots will be bigots, just like boys will be boys.

Also, labels are to be blamed.

"Once you label me you negate me."

-- Søren Kierkegaard

Kirkegaard's Fear and Trembling is a true masterpiece.

mell says

Kirkegaard's Fear and Trembling is a true masterpiece.

I like both Kirkegaard and Nietzsche. Very different, yet very similar.

It would be interesting if the two actually met.

Peter P says

turtledove says

Two people performing the exact same job should receive the same pay.

The free market can sort this out. But we must all learn to love ourselves above all else. Gender biases came from people trying to do the "right" things.

I have been in business 20 years, the amount of pay gap I have observed is exactly ZERO, across races and genders. And that's because it doesn't exist.

Peter P says

mell says

Kirkegaard's Fear and Trembling is a true masterpiece.

I like both Kirkegaard and Nietzsche. Very different, yet very similar.

It would be interesting if the two actually met.

Me too, both favorites. I like Epikur as well, a more recent would be Peter Sloterdijk.

mell says

I have been in business 20 years, the amount of pay gap I have observed is exactly ZERO, across races and genders. And that;s because it doesn't exist.

A lot of the perceived gaps come from comparisons across occupational/functional groups.

mell says

Peter P says

mell says

Kirkegaard's Fear and Trembling is a true masterpiece.

I like both Kirkegaard and Nietzsche. Very different, yet very similar.

It would be interesting if the two actually met.

Me too, both favorites. I like Epikur as well, a more recent would be Peter Sloterdijk.

Now I just pay attention to Nassim Taleb.

As some might guess I have strong feelings about this and I am certain it came from my personal experiences. Like I said I came from a rural area where xenophobia was more prominent. I'm not saying EVERYONE there were totally intolerant bigots. But it was definitely noticeable. I also had little experience with anyone else other than white, scotch-irish Southerners.

After moving first to the east coast and then to California I met people from all over. I worked with a guy who was gay and we became good friends as we still are to this day. I worked my first job at a lumber yard with Hispanics. In tech I work with people literally from everywhere.

My experience has shown me that we're all basically trying to do the same thing. Are there differences? Yes. But so what. We're also all different as well.

But after having those experiences I've had, whenever I hear people making anti-gay or racist or otherwise comments of that nature I feel sorry for them. They're only doing themselves a disservice by limiting their understanding of their world. That's a shame.

Peter P says

mell says

Peter P says

mell says

Kirkegaard's Fear and Trembling is a true masterpiece.

I like both Kirkegaard and Nietzsche. Very different, yet very similar.

It would be interesting if the two actually met.

Me too, both favorites. I like Epikur as well, a more recent would be Peter Sloterdijk.

Now I just pay attention to Nassim Taleb.

Yes, have been following Taleb for quite a while. Antifragile is on my list, have only read certain chapters so far. Great mind.

edvard2 says

But after having those experiences I've had, whenever I hear people making anti-gay or racist or otherwise comments of that nature I feel sorry for them. They're only doing themselves a disservice by limiting their understanding of their world. That's a shame.

Well said.

mell says

Yes, have been following Taleb for quite a while. Antifragile is on my list, have only read certain chapters so far. Great mind.

Have you read The Bed of Procrustes? It is a gem. Should not take you more than one hour. But you will read it over and over again.