patrick.net

Patrick says

some gays resent straights for their historically higher social status

I have yet to meet any, and that says a lot. Try to remember that most gays are born to straight parents, and have straight friends and relatives. You keep repeating your false assertion, even though Tim Cook and Peter Thiel (among others) have much higher status than you. So does Sir Elton John. Do you really believe you have higher social status than Sir Ian McKellen? You didn't even rate a Wikipedia page.

Patrick says

The Left knows that Muslims are also opposed to traditional American culture, and that they also feel resentment, and so the Left welcomes Muslims with open arms. Of course if they would have much worse problems if Islam takes control, because Islam hates the Left even more than it hates traditional American culture.

That is a much better point. If you are struggling against oppression and persecution, you make common cause where you can. The USA has millions of prisoners with nothing to lose, and many more who feel oppressed or persecuted. Of course they would be even worse off in a Muslim country, but they don't see that.

Patrick says

The current Left has abandoned its role as the voice of the working classes, and is now nothing but a collection of groups that all share resentment against traditional mainstream American culture

This is bs in my view. That would be like me saying the current right is obsessed with hate, hate of everything that in not white, and preferably anglosaxon protestant. Although with my claim, I am probably talking about a bigger part of the right, than you are of the left.

The truth is more complex. But I'm with you on the negative aspect of the fraction of the left that is obsessed with identity politics. And also that the left would do better to focus on the middle and working class, independent of other identities.

Patrick says

The Left knows that Muslims are also opposed to traditional American culture

You've got it wrong. If the left is wrong about Muslims, it's becasue they believe in our better angels prevailing (possibly naive) and they see an upside to helping create a large moderate and more secular Muslim culture, starting with the Muslims that live in the west. It's working pretty much in America so far.

We've had this argument before. There is a logic question embedded in the problem. I don't see that it's possible to punish Muslims into moderating and becoming more secular. So? Am I supposed to say, "oh well, at least I'll be long gone by the time the problem comes to a head with nuclear war ?" I think the left better understands both sides of the problem - and is perhaps guilty of seeing it as partly our problem. Rather than just shutting ourselves off and seeing them as the enemy - and deciding whatever that leads to, it's not my problem.

“But I'm with you on the negative aspect of the fraction of the left that is obsessed with identity politics.“

Does the left have anything else? Everything is group identity and intersectionality. I don’t see anything more to the leftist platform.

Goran_K says

Everything is group identity and intersectionality. I don’t see anything more to the leftist platform.

This is a lie, pure and simple. I don't see that on the left at all, except from sjws.. You should read Paul Krugman, that is if you were at all curious what the left is all about.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/25/opinion/trump-republican-hate.html

When it comes to substance, the modern conservative policy agenda, which centers on cutting taxes and tearing up the social safety net, is consistently unpopular. By large margins, voters want to raise, not lower, taxes on corporations and the wealthy. They overwhelmingly oppose cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Even self-identified Republicans favor preventing insurers from discriminating against people with pre-existing medical conditions — something Obamacare does, but Republican health proposals wouldn’t.

So how do Republicans manage to win elections? Partly the answer is that gerrymandering, the Electoral College and other factors have rigged the system in their favor; Republicans have held the White House after three of the past six presidential elections, despite winning the popular vote only once. And they will probably hold the House unless Democrats win by at least 6 percent.

Also, let’s not forget about voter suppression, which is putting an increasingly heavy thumb on the scale. Still, given how unpopular Republicans’ policy positions are, how do they even get close enough to cheat?

One way they have traditionally gotten there is with red-baiting, portraying any and all progressive policies as the next thing to Communism. More than half a century ago, Ronald Reagan warned that Medicare would destroy American freedom. (It didn’t.) A few days ago, the Trump White House issued a report equating Medicare for All with Maoism.

Another key tactic involves lying about both their own positions and those of their opponents. During the administration of George W. Bush, the lies were relatively subtle by current standards, involving things like pretending that tax cuts favoring the rich were actually aimed at the middle class. These days, the lies are utterly shameless, with candidates who have worked nonstop to dismantle protections for pre-existing conditions posing as champions of such protections, and accusations that Democrats are the ones trying to destroy Medicare.

But lies about policy, while they may confuse some voters, aren’t enough. Hate has always been part of the package.

marcus says

Patrick says

The current Left has abandoned its role as the voice of the working classes, and is now nothing but a collection of groups that all share resentment against traditional mainstream American culture

This is bs in my view. That would be like me saying the current right is obsessed with hate, hate of everything that in not white, and preferably anglosaxon protestant. Although with my claim, I am probably talking about a bigger part of the right, than you are of the left.
br>The truth is more complex. But I'm with you on the negative aspect of the fraction of the left that is obsessed with identity politics.

The number of white nationalists in the US is in the thousands. I am quite certain that the number of identity driven left number in the millions and perhaps tens of millions. Or perhaps all the nfl players taking a knee with no quantifiable goal in support of a shitty QB that can’t actually perform at that level are the only direct representatives of that sort of political thought.

APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says

Oh yeah, I was at a Sierra Club meeting and everyone was learning Arabic so they could pray the quran authentically. I was almost deafened by the inhuman shrieks of ALLAH! AKBAR! I couldn't get close to the bomb-vest making course. I reserved a spot for next week's DEATH! TO! AMERICA! meet up.

That sounds like a fun meet up. Can I join?

Every person resents every other person for some inane shit.
Whether you know it or not you resent something about your best friend.
The only point to make here is that the extremists on all sides are the car salesman of bottled resentment.

marcus says

I don't see that on the left at all, except from sjws

Kamala Harris, Corey Booker, and Obama are SJWs who don't represent the left in America? Pretty sure they represent (or represented) tens of millions of people. Not some "small sliver" like you're painting it out to be.

Patrick says

Having read the Koran, what struck me the most was how full of resentment it is as well. It is not a happy work, it is a work of blame and grievance against all non-Muslims for refusing to submit

Yes, and the Bible totally NEVER takes this position ?

Patrick says

The worst Jesus ever did was slapping around some money-changers in the Temple.

Truth.

Jesus was turn the other cheek, Mohammad was behead those who don't convert.

It's not even close.

My father was a lifelong bleeding heart lefty and it was interesting to converse with him when I came to live with him for a few years.

He wasn't a failure professionally nor financially, but he nonetheless felt we should all "help people". I told him the only problem with his view is he is in favor of my government forcing me against my will to help people whom I don't know. Further, the people who generally need "help" are just either 1. irresponsible 2. gaming the system 3. undeserving

Once I was extolling the virtues of Switzerland, and how they manage to have decent health care but also other services while enjoying a low tax rate. He asked me "how do they take care of their people?" I said "Maybe the Swiss like to take care of themselves?"

Muslims of course are full of envy, hate, distrust for all people, including themselves.

Muslims haven't created anything of value in their own history except ignorance, violence and oppression of others. It's a despicable belief system and we should not allow them among us as uncivilized zealots. They are anti-personal freedom, anti-human rights, anti-American, anti-American laws, anti-non muslims.

Muslims like liberal lefties want to tell us how to live our lives; both are anti-American because someone telling you how to live is not an American concept.

CovfefeButDeadly says

The number of white nationalists in the US is in the thousands. I am quite certain that the number of identity driven left number in the millions and perhaps tens of millions. Or perhaps all the nfl players taking a knee with no quantifiable goal in support of a shitty QB that can’t actually perform at that level are the only direct representatives of that sort of political thought.

The Identitarians actually create more White Supremacists, who were never larger and a few years ago were at their all time nadir.

The constant battering of Whiteness, Toxic Masculinity, the US, the Founding Fathers, blaming all Whites for something that was ended 150+ years ago and one of the first to do so, etc. contributes to it.

Evan F. says

Yes, and the Bible totally NEVER takes this position ?

Pure and naked example of “Whataboutism.” You’ve changed the subject, ignoring the point, and trying to reframe the argument with another argument that “other religions do it too.” I also like how you’ve offered no examples or concrete evidence for your statement, just conjecture of the most broad and unspecific nature.

Truly an inspired Leftist post! You should be ashamed.

Evan F. says

Patrick says

Having read the Koran, what struck me the most was how full of resentment it is as well. It is not a happy work, it is a work of blame and grievance against all non-Muslims for refusing to submit

Yes, and the Bible totally NEVER takes this position ?

The grievance against all non-Muslims is at a whole different level in the Koran. Islam is the only religion that is in never ending conflict with every other religion. Those fucking barbarians will never let anyone else live in peace.
If I could, I would nuke Mecca, just to let Muslims know that Allah the devil is dead.

It's a requirement that Muslims conquer the World for Allah, with the benefit of Slaves and Plunder for those who take up Jihad.

There is no such requirement or rewards n the OT or NT. In fact, the BIble provides examples of those who suffer for being down with God.

curious2 says

You keep repeating your false assertion, even though Tim Cook and Peter Thiel (among others) have much higher status than you. So does Sir Elton John. Do you really believe you have higher social status than Sir Ian McKellen?

He's talking about heterosexual men in general having higher social status than specific homosexual celebrities and it's been that way from time immemorial regardless of what the American Psychological Association decided in 1973 or thereabouts.

Patrick says

The worst Jesus ever did was slapping around some money-changers in the Temple.

Which only helped codify the building of the financial services district of every major city since modern times.

Think about it, as a carpenter, Jesus was able to help get jobs for his union buddies in Boston to help in building out the towers in the main downtown district, away from the churches. Here's to the local 327!

P N Dr Lo R says

from time immemorial

Definitely false. For example, Emperor Hadrian, considered by historians among Rome's "5 good emperors" (in a row from Nerva to Marcus Aurelius) was gay exclusively throughout his whole life. He founded a city, Antinopolis, to deify his beloved Antinous. Nobody had higher status than the Emperor of Rome. Hadrian rose through the ranks of the military, became emperor, and chose his next two successors, both of whom were also good emperors.

The only thing you could fault Hadrian for was Marcus Aurelius choosing a bad successor. Marcus Aurelius pressured his own son to take the job, thus eventually getting the son killed, in a story that gets distorted 180 degrees in the movie "Gladiator". (In reality, Marcus Aurelius tried to instill his own stoic work ethic in his mostly dissolute and unambitious son Commodus, appointing him co-emperor and successor. In the movie, Marcus Aurelius says Commodus must not become emperor, and Commodus murders him in order to get the job.) Hadrian should have made Marcus Aurelius promise publicly to follow the example of the other good emperors in not choosing a biological son as a successor, but the son had not been born at the time so the mistake wasn't foreseen.

Individual status varies from one person to another, and one context to another. If you assume all other things being equal, you run into the fallacy of that assumption: all other things are never equal. Does one compare Dan Choi to others born in California, or to other West Point graduates, or to other US Army combat veterans? These are all different comparisons with different results.

curious2 says

Does one compare Dan Choi to others born in California, or to other West Point graduates, or to other US Army combat veterans?

I don't worry about ancient history. I'm talking about America in the 20th and 21st century general population, which is the only place or time that counts. Heterosexual men are more highly regarded and valued by others in society than homosexual men whether this offends sensibilities or not. They're seen by extension as husbands and fathers, masculine, manly, productive, protectors either in uniforms of the services or law enforcement. I know there are exceptions, but the stereotype is usually accurate. I know this is heresy to those who want to remake society to conform to and accommodate the oddballs, but it's not going to be good for the society as a whole. If it's inconvenient for those minorities they'll just have to deal with it the best they can.

P N Dr Lo R says

curious2 says

Does one compare Dan Choi to others born in California, or to other West Point graduates, or to other US Army combat veterans?

I don't worry about ancient history. I'm talking about America in the 20th and 21st century general population, which is the only place or time that counts.

Dan Choi was born in 1981, and remains alive. Tim Cook, Peter Thiel, Sir Elton John, Sir Ian McKellen, Tom Ford, and Margarethe Cammermeyer were also born in the 20th century, and remain alive today. Sir John Gielgud was born in the 20th century and lived into the 21st, then died at 96, and Americans continue to watch his movies.

I disagree with your assertion that America in the 20th and 21st century is the only place or time that counts. We live in a world, and those who forget history are doomed to repeat its worst mistakes. The issue with American exceptionalism is an arrogant failure to learn the lessons that made the country great. The founders of the republic studied history and languages including ancient Greek and Latin and contemporary French, and learned whatever they could from wherever they could. They chose ancient Roman symbols for the new republic, and some principles of Roman law and democracy from the ancient Roman republic. Some people claim they don't need to know anything outside the KJV as told to them by their preacher in Texas, but that is a terrible mistake.

Good Men are so damn rare these days, I don't give a shit where they come from.

Gay Men can still be Uncle Figures.

Did we talk about one of the Bravest Men in WW2 yet?

curious2 says

The founders of the republic studied history and languages including ancient Greek and Latin and contemporary French, and learned whatever they could from wherever they could. They chose ancient Roman symbols, and some principles of Roman law and democracy from the ancient Roman republic.

☺

curious2 says

Sir John Gielgud was born in the 20th century and lived into the 21st, then died at 96, and Americans continue to watch his movies.

Of the same generation as Cecil Beaton, Noel Coward and Cole Porter, all gay and tremendous talents of the 20th century who added tremendously to our culture and in no way should be diminished. But they are still the exceptions and heterosexuality the norm.

curious2 says

I disagree with your assertion that America in the 20th and 21st century is the only place or time that counts.

America is the only bulwark in the world that prevents outright forced conversion to radical Islam and richly deserves its status as exceptional. No other nation was founded as an experiment in the idea that the individual is the most important component of society.

P N Dr Lo R says

they are still the exceptions and heterosexuality the norm.

In any area, the highest achievers and those of highest status are always, by definition, exceptional. The norm is merely average, or median.

P N Dr Lo R says

America is the only bulwark in the world that prevents outright forced conversion to radical Islam and richly deserves its status as exceptional. No other nation was founded as an experiment in the idea that the individual is the most important component of society.

I agree but some might not: since President Eisenhower decided unfortunately to inject "under God" into the Pledge of Allegiance, we have seen some ambiguity on this point. The insertion disrupted (both literally and figuratively) "one nation indivisible," and caused division almost immediately. The Supreme Court had to rule that a Jehovah's witness, whose religion prohibited him from saying "god," couldn't be kicked out of school for refusing to say it.

It's impossible to win a logical argument against people who hate you. The point is the hate.