America: My response to Love it or Leave it
19 Oct 2012, 1:49 pm
marshall wrote:
I don't think it is really the "whining" that conservatives don't like. What they don't like is questioning that challenges certain traditional lines of argument. Because they don't have a valid counter-argument they resort to the "whining" accusation which is really just a form of emotional manipulation. When you accuse someone of being a "whiner" what you are really doing is trying to puff yourself up and appear strong. There is a thing in the American conservative mentality of needing to appear tough. Sometimes it is grotesque to the point where they neglect their conscience because fear of being perceived as weak overpowers all other emotions. It's not rational. It's animalistic thinking. The same goes for their militant optimism, which is really a form of fake optimism to make themselves less vulnerable.
What's emotional manipuation? To be honest, my knowledge and wisdom is not that great. I simply have a buttload of questions and can come to conclusions based upon what I do know and understand. This is all I can do. When a conservative or someone says a statement I somehow think of the assumption it is based upon and if there assumption holds in all cases without exception then it would not be possible for me to come up with an argument that makes the null hypothesis true in certain cases as well.
When I ask people in which involves the null hypthesis to their assertions they get angry and curse me out, call me names like moron or douchebag, or say I'm being a manipulator. They'll say it is a stupid question as well. Why?
19 Oct 2012, 7:35 pm
cubedemon6073 wrote:
marshall wrote:
I don't think it is really the "whining" that conservatives don't like. What they don't like is questioning that challenges certain traditional lines of argument. Because they don't have a valid counter-argument they resort to the "whining" accusation which is really just a form of emotional manipulation. When you accuse someone of being a "whiner" what you are really doing is trying to puff yourself up and appear strong. There is a thing in the American conservative mentality of needing to appear tough. Sometimes it is grotesque to the point where they neglect their conscience because fear of being perceived as weak overpowers all other emotions. It's not rational. It's animalistic thinking. The same goes for their militant optimism, which is really a form of fake optimism to make themselves less vulnerable.
What's emotional manipuation? To be honest, my knowledge and wisdom is not that great. I simply have a buttload of questions and can come to conclusions based upon what I do know and understand. This is all I can do. When a conservative or someone says a statement I somehow think of the assumption it is based upon and if there assumption holds in all cases without exception then it would not be possible for me to come up with an argument that makes the null hypothesis true in certain cases as well.
When I ask people in which involves the null hypthesis to their assertions they get angry and curse me out, call me names like moron or douchebag, or say I'm being a manipulator. They'll say it is a stupid question as well. Why?
Your first mistake is assuming you are arguing with people that are rational like yourself. They ain't. They may even think they are but they still aren't. To them asking questions or challenging assumptions is considered rebellion or disrespect. They think you're being a "smart ass" even if you're just asking honest questions. Also, when someone accuses you of being a manipulator that's a pretty good sign that they are the manipulator. Name calling and ad hominem attacks are emotional manipulation.
Basically people don't like it when their cherished beliefs are thrown into question. The story is Socrates was eventually killed for being too much of a pain in the butt for the "love it or leave it" crowd of his time. It's amazing what human mentalities don't change over thousands of years.
19 Oct 2012, 7:39 pm
cubedemon6073 wrote:
YippySkippy wrote:
Quote:
What's emotional manipuation?
Manipulation of a person's emotions, I should think.
This is a tautological answer.
Emotional manipulation is saying things to piss you off because they don't have a legitimate argument to make. Trolling would be another term for it.
MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland
19 Oct 2012, 8:26 pm
First, off, you are correct, especially if you live in the deep south, San Francisco, or Manhattan. I live in Portland, it is socially unacceptable to be conservative, having a Romney/Ryan sticker is equivalent to wearing a swastika, free thought is only free thought if it is free of religion and conservative principles, pagan virtues permeate much of thinking, values, art, and culture, its a different world here. There is nothing wrong with asking questions. But in politics, we often answer first, and only look for what the questions might be IF asked about it later. The left and the right have a canned answer for everything, none of us the authors of those opinions, very often regurgitating what our side thinks on the matter with a heavy personal investment on the victory or loss of those positions. We are both ideological, though only the Right admits it. You are attacked when you ask those questions about rights because the people attacking you are uncomfortable with something they've never thought about themselves, and frankly, don't know the answer to.
God, And Our Rights.
We only have those inalienable rights if a creator exists. This creator is the unseeable mover of the world who we are all accountable to. If this creator exists, and makes the moral demands on us that it does, then those rights are not above everything else, including moral demands, and, we are accountable for our behavior to this unseeable creator, and this creator demands that we seek punishment and penitence for wrongdoers IN THIS LIFETIME, not the next (if one exists). If the state acknowledges this fact, as the US has, it limits the state from doing anything it wants. It is a limiting principle, and though it hasn't always been fairly applied, as with the case of blacks and women and immigrants for many generations, it is still the principle we are to adhere to and acknowledge even if we deviate from it.
This creator God is the God described in Genesis, and operates under the assumption that man knows good and evil, and has the choice to choose between them. This sense of natural rights owes its origin to the concept that we are created in the image of this God, and therefore have inherent worth. This God is where Americanism sources morality from. If God is not the author of Thou Shall Not Murder, we can still arrive at this point without a God or religion, but it will be subjective, and whose to say whether your opinion is better then another's who disagrees with you. It'll all just be opinion, mine versus yours, but you cannot say that it is objectively immoral to murder.
The Founding Fathers, And Spreading Freedom
The founding fathers were not perfect, but the conclusions they drew were revolutionary in human history, to found a country based on the moral principle that all people are created by the creator with inalienable rights, and introduced a system of checks and balances to protect those rights and provide accountability. That is why they are so praised by many on the left, just about everyone on the right, and everyone in between and we can see the founders in our own image regardless of party affiliation or doctrine.
It is not just about bringing freedom to that part of the world, it is about protecting basic human rights which are violated by the lack of freedom in this part of the world. If they can prove that women can be dehumanized via a veil, be not allowed to make her own personal choices without huge familial and societal reprocussions, be allowed to publicly engage in every social institution that allow men, and have all of her basic rights that liberty and equality provides, then great. But they can't, they haven't, and they won't, unless it is secured by someone beyond them who believes that all human beings deserve to be treated in that fairly. It is their unfree ways that creates this toxic environment that allows for Gays to be stoned or for women to be tortured.
So in the end, it is never just about Democracy. It is about Democracy, changing their Values, and creating a transparent representative government that respects basic human rights of the people it serves. The truth is that there are many in this part of the world who wish for more basic freedoms to be respected, this idea that the majority do not want more freedoms is a farce that we should not be repeating, especially if we all think that people everywhere should have access to basic human freedoms endowed by the creator.
_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.
MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland
19 Oct 2012, 8:38 pm
marshall wrote:
I don't think it is really the "whining" that conservatives don't like. What they don't like is questioning that challenges certain traditional lines of argument. Because they don't have a valid counter-argument they resort to the "whining" accusation which is really just a form of emotional manipulation. When you accuse someone of being a "whiner" what you are really doing is trying to puff yourself up and appear strong. There is a thing in the American conservative mentality of needing to appear tough. Sometimes it is grotesque to the point where they neglect their conscience because fear of being perceived as weak overpowers all other emotions. It's not rational. It's animalistic thinking. The same goes for their militant optimism, which is really a form of fake optimism to make themselves less vulnerable.
But what if they feel that what you are saying not only has not basis in reality, but that you will continue to call this country racist no matter what the conservative says... that means you have an agenda. I wouldn't say that calling America Racist or any other epithet of choice is necessarily whining. It does happen with too great a frequency though that it does began to get troublesome, and makes our questioning of your love this country perfectly legitimate. If it is all of those things you call it, what is it exactly then that you love about it, and why would you still love it in spite of all of those offenses you've just listed?
The left divides the world between the weak and the strong, the poor and the rich, the haves and the have nots. So your description of conservatives trying to appear "strong" is correct, from the Left wing view of the world. Absolutely.
_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.
MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland
19 Oct 2012, 8:56 pm
marshall wrote:
cubedemon6073 wrote:
marshall wrote:
I don't think it is really the "whining" that conservatives don't like. What they don't like is questioning that challenges certain traditional lines of argument. Because they don't have a valid counter-argument they resort to the "whining" accusation which is really just a form of emotional manipulation. When you accuse someone of being a "whiner" what you are really doing is trying to puff yourself up and appear strong. There is a thing in the American conservative mentality of needing to appear tough. Sometimes it is grotesque to the point where they neglect their conscience because fear of being perceived as weak overpowers all other emotions. It's not rational. It's animalistic thinking. The same goes for their militant optimism, which is really a form of fake optimism to make themselves less vulnerable.
What's emotional manipuation? To be honest, my knowledge and wisdom is not that great. I simply have a buttload of questions and can come to conclusions based upon what I do know and understand. This is all I can do. When a conservative or someone says a statement I somehow think of the assumption it is based upon and if there assumption holds in all cases without exception then it would not be possible for me to come up with an argument that makes the null hypothesis true in certain cases as well.
When I ask people in which involves the null hypthesis to their assertions they get angry and curse me out, call me names like moron or douchebag, or say I'm being a manipulator. They'll say it is a stupid question as well. Why?
Your first mistake is assuming you are arguing with people that are rational like yourself. They ain't. They may even think they are but they still aren't. To them asking questions or challenging assumptions is considered rebellion or disrespect. They think you're being a "smart ass" even if you're just asking honest questions. Also, when someone accuses you of being a manipulator that's a pretty good sign that they are the manipulator. Name calling and ad hominem attacks are emotional manipulation.
Basically people don't like it when their cherished beliefs are thrown into question. The story is Socrates was eventually killed for being too much of a pain in the butt for the "love it or leave it" crowd of his time. It's amazing what human mentalities don't change over thousands of years.
From the leftwing worldview, absolutely.
- The Conservative does not question authority, they rigidly stick to their constructed hierarchies to defend the system which has prospered them for so long, and has maintained the social inequalities that are at the root of all problems today.
From the Conservative worldview,
This is an utter mischaracterization of us. First, stop assuming our intentions. Second, calling us a Nazi does not emotionally manipulate us from our position, we simply ask ourselves what could have given off such a vibe and move on, but is that not emotional manipulation on your part? Calling this country racist so that can enact further programs that promote your idea of equality is not emotional manipulation? Calling conservatives intolerant and bigoted because they disagree with you on abortion and gay marriage is not emotional manipulation? Calling every scientist or businessman who doesn't tow leftwing claptrap greedy or on someones payroll is not emotional manipulation? PETA's usage of the Holocaust to try and get people to stop eating meat is not emotional manipulation? Telling a black child that the entire world is out fo screw you over so just now if you don't get anywhere in life and move drugs on the street, its because white people are racist is not emotional manipulation? Making people feel bad about what they are because of this bad society is the calling card of leftist evangelists. Maybe they are bad, maybe they shouldn't waste as much as they do, maybe they shouldn't pass a poor person off as deserving their position in life, there's a lot to be said about.
But let's not kid ourselves here... Leftism is the utter quintessence of emotional manipulation.
It is the politics of the Jealous, drugged up on good intentions.
_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.
19 Oct 2012, 9:34 pm
MarketAndChurch wrote:
But let's not kid ourselves here... Leftism is the utter quintessence of emotional manipulation.
It is the politics of the Jealous, drugged up on good intentions.
It is the politics of envy and what is worse, coveting.
The urge to Equalize is a retelling of the Greek myth of Procrustes.
ruveyn
19 Oct 2012, 9:54 pm
MarketAndChurch wrote:
The Founding Fathers, And Spreading Freedom
The founding fathers were not perfect, but the conclusions they drew were revolutionary in human history, to found a country based on the moral principle that all people are created by the creator with inalienable rights, and introduced a system of checks and balances to protect those rights and provide accountability. That is why they are so praised by many on the left, just about everyone on the right, and everyone in between and we can see the founders in our own image regardless of party affiliation or doctrine.
It is not just about bringing freedom to that part of the world, it is about protecting basic human rights which are violated by the lack of freedom in this part of the world. If they can prove that women can be dehumanized via a veil, be not allowed to make her own personal choices without huge familial and societal reprocussions, be allowed to publicly engage in every social institution that allow men, and have all of her basic rights that liberty and equality provides, then great. But they can't, they haven't, and they won't, unless it is secured by someone beyond them who believes that all human beings deserve to be treated in that fairly. It is their unfree ways that creates this toxic environment that allows for Gays to be stoned or for women to be tortured.
So in the end, it is never just about Democracy. It is about Democracy, changing their Values, and creating a transparent representative government that respects basic human rights of the people it serves. The truth is that there are many in this part of the world who wish for more basic freedoms to be respected, this idea that the majority do not want more freedoms is a farce that we should not be repeating, especially if we all think that people everywhere should have access to basic human freedoms endowed by the creator.
The founding fathers were not perfect, but the conclusions they drew were revolutionary in human history, to found a country based on the moral principle that all people are created by the creator with inalienable rights, and introduced a system of checks and balances to protect those rights and provide accountability. That is why they are so praised by many on the left, just about everyone on the right, and everyone in between and we can see the founders in our own image regardless of party affiliation or doctrine.
It is not just about bringing freedom to that part of the world, it is about protecting basic human rights which are violated by the lack of freedom in this part of the world. If they can prove that women can be dehumanized via a veil, be not allowed to make her own personal choices without huge familial and societal reprocussions, be allowed to publicly engage in every social institution that allow men, and have all of her basic rights that liberty and equality provides, then great. But they can't, they haven't, and they won't, unless it is secured by someone beyond them who believes that all human beings deserve to be treated in that fairly. It is their unfree ways that creates this toxic environment that allows for Gays to be stoned or for women to be tortured.
So in the end, it is never just about Democracy. It is about Democracy, changing their Values, and creating a transparent representative government that respects basic human rights of the people it serves. The truth is that there are many in this part of the world who wish for more basic freedoms to be respected, this idea that the majority do not want more freedoms is a farce that we should not be repeating, especially if we all think that people everywhere should have access to basic human freedoms endowed by the creator.
Actually I don't think many on the left disagree with those values. They just think the neo-conservatives are hypocrites who are motivated more by imperialism than an honest desire to spread freedom and democracy. Also the left (and libertarians as well) think the notion that America can use military force to impose freedom on the entire world is insanely misguided and stupid and that as a practical matter we should try to take care of our own people first. I'm not a radical pacifist as I do believe in bringing terrorists to justice and having enough military force to dissuade hostile nations. I consider myself a realist.
19 Oct 2012, 9:55 pm
Marshall wrote:
Quote:
There is a thing in the American conservative mentality of needing to appear tough. Sometimes it is grotesque to the point where they neglect their conscience because fear of being perceived as weak overpowers all other emotions. It's not rational. It's animalistic thinking. The same goes for their militant optimism, which is really a form of fake optimism to make themselves less vulnerable.
Weakness invites attack.
_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson
19 Oct 2012, 10:15 pm
MarketAndChurch wrote:
marshall wrote:
I don't think it is really the "whining" that conservatives don't like. What they don't like is questioning that challenges certain traditional lines of argument. Because they don't have a valid counter-argument they resort to the "whining" accusation which is really just a form of emotional manipulation. When you accuse someone of being a "whiner" what you are really doing is trying to puff yourself up and appear strong. There is a thing in the American conservative mentality of needing to appear tough. Sometimes it is grotesque to the point where they neglect their conscience because fear of being perceived as weak overpowers all other emotions. It's not rational. It's animalistic thinking. The same goes for their militant optimism, which is really a form of fake optimism to make themselves less vulnerable.
But what if they feel that what you are saying not only has not basis in reality, but that you will continue to call this country racist no matter what the conservative says... that means you have an agenda. I wouldn't say that calling America Racist or any other epithet of choice is necessarily whining. It does happen with too great a frequency though that it does began to get troublesome, and makes our questioning of your love this country perfectly legitimate. If it is all of those things you call it, what is it exactly then that you love about it, and why would you still love it in spite of all of those offenses you've just listed?
But neither I nor cubedemon6073 ever called anyone racist in this case so you're not even making sense. The thing we question is the economic views of those on the right and the whole rugged individualist social darwinism vibe. To be fair, not all conservatives have this mentality. A lot of church-going conservatives in my own area aren't that way.
Quote:
The left divides the world between the weak and the strong, the poor and the rich, the haves and the have nots. So your description of conservatives trying to appear "strong" is correct, from the Left wing view of the world. Absolutely.
No, there are definitely conservatives who hold the "responsible self-reliant rugged individual" as their personal identity, so it appears it isn't just about what they think is right, it's about how they view themselves. They also tend to view others as stupid or irresponsible in a lot of cases where they are completely ignorant.
19 Oct 2012, 10:28 pm
MarketAndChurch wrote:
marshall wrote:
cubedemon6073 wrote:
marshall wrote:
I don't think it is really the "whining" that conservatives don't like. What they don't like is questioning that challenges certain traditional lines of argument. Because they don't have a valid counter-argument they resort to the "whining" accusation which is really just a form of emotional manipulation. When you accuse someone of being a "whiner" what you are really doing is trying to puff yourself up and appear strong. There is a thing in the American conservative mentality of needing to appear tough. Sometimes it is grotesque to the point where they neglect their conscience because fear of being perceived as weak overpowers all other emotions. It's not rational. It's animalistic thinking. The same goes for their militant optimism, which is really a form of fake optimism to make themselves less vulnerable.
What's emotional manipuation? To be honest, my knowledge and wisdom is not that great. I simply have a buttload of questions and can come to conclusions based upon what I do know and understand. This is all I can do. When a conservative or someone says a statement I somehow think of the assumption it is based upon and if there assumption holds in all cases without exception then it would not be possible for me to come up with an argument that makes the null hypothesis true in certain cases as well.
When I ask people in which involves the null hypthesis to their assertions they get angry and curse me out, call me names like moron or douchebag, or say I'm being a manipulator. They'll say it is a stupid question as well. Why?
Your first mistake is assuming you are arguing with people that are rational like yourself. They ain't. They may even think they are but they still aren't. To them asking questions or challenging assumptions is considered rebellion or disrespect. They think you're being a "smart ass" even if you're just asking honest questions. Also, when someone accuses you of being a manipulator that's a pretty good sign that they are the manipulator. Name calling and ad hominem attacks are emotional manipulation.
Basically people don't like it when their cherished beliefs are thrown into question. The story is Socrates was eventually killed for being too much of a pain in the butt for the "love it or leave it" crowd of his time. It's amazing what human mentalities don't change over thousands of years.
From the leftwing worldview, absolutely.
- The Conservative does not question authority, they rigidly stick to their constructed hierarchies to defend the system which has prospered them for so long, and has maintained the social inequalities that are at the root of all problems today.
From the Conservative worldview,
This is an utter mischaracterization of us. First, stop assuming our intentions. Second, calling us a Nazi does not emotionally manipulate us from our position, we simply ask ourselves what could have given off such a vibe and move on, but is that not emotional manipulation on your part? Calling this country racist so that can enact further programs that promote your idea of equality is not emotional manipulation? Calling conservatives intolerant and bigoted because they disagree with you on abortion and gay marriage is not emotional manipulation? Calling every scientist or businessman who doesn't tow leftwing claptrap greedy or on someones payroll is not emotional manipulation? PETA's usage of the Holocaust to try and get people to stop eating meat is not emotional manipulation? Telling a black child that the entire world is out fo screw you over so just now if you don't get anywhere in life and move drugs on the street, its because white people are racist is not emotional manipulation? Making people feel bad about what they are because of this bad society is the calling card of leftist evangelists. Maybe they are bad, maybe they shouldn't waste as much as they do, maybe they shouldn't pass a poor person off as deserving their position in life, there's a lot to be said about.
But let's not kid ourselves here... Leftism is the utter quintessence of emotional manipulation.
It is the politics of the Jealous, drugged up on good intentions.
See, that's just the thing. When someone on the left see's genuine injustice it isn't enough to present an argument on why you disagree. Instead you must diminish their genuine held belief to something banal by calling it "Jealous". Perhaps I don't completely understand how the right thinks but you have equally demonstrated that you don't understand how people on the left think. So next time you get upset when someone falsely characterizes your views as racist, remember that people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
19 Oct 2012, 10:35 pm
Raptor wrote:
Marshall wrote:
Weakness invites attack.
Quote:
There is a thing in the American conservative mentality of needing to appear tough. Sometimes it is grotesque to the point where they neglect their conscience because fear of being perceived as weak overpowers all other emotions. It's not rational. It's animalistic thinking. The same goes for their militant optimism, which is really a form of fake optimism to make themselves less vulnerable.
Weakness invites attack.
Exactly. That's your mindset. Never mind it's intellectually and morally feeble.
20 Oct 2012, 1:20 am
ruveyn wrote:
MarketAndChurch wrote:
But let's not kid ourselves here... Leftism is the utter quintessence of emotional manipulation.
It is the politics of the Jealous, drugged up on good intentions.
It is the politics of envy and what is worse, coveting.
The urge to Equalize is a retelling of the Greek myth of Procrustes.
ruveyn
Oh, please, no one is demanding that we take the rich and chop their legs off... and stretch the poor on a rack!
20 Oct 2012, 1:23 am
AspieRogue wrote:
Complaining seems to run contrary to amurcan culture(with the exception of Jews who kvetch and their culture permits it). There is this blind faith in not just optimism, but positivism("positive patty")no matter what your political persuasion may be. It also seems to be a tool for enforcing the Status Quo by ridiculing and lashing out at those who complain about the way things are
If you are going to voluntarily join the armed forces you had really be ready to make a commitment to serve and particularly if you're in the Army or the Marines you are almost guaranteed to see combat.
If you are going to voluntarily join the armed forces you had really be ready to make a commitment to serve and particularly if you're in the Army or the Marines you are almost guaranteed to see combat.
I guess that's why Jews and Italians also were deported en masse after World War I as communists... too much questioning and complaining.
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Homeland Security tells L.A. immigration attorney to leave t |
26 Apr 2025, 2:37 am |
| Six Flags America Is Closing for Good |
07 May 2025, 12:17 am |
| Elon Musk is obsessed with America’s falling birth rate |
07 May 2025, 2:11 am |
| What Do You Love to Play? |
02 Jul 2025, 11:12 am |
