Page 3 of 4 [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,505
Location: The 27th Path of Peh.

23 Jun 2017, 6:38 pm

GoonSquad wrote:
THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT HOW PEOPLE DEFINE POLITICAL CORRECTNESS!

What we think it is though is about as intimately tied as imaginable to what we would logically think will or won't work. It's only natural that if someone disagrees with Alain (or yourself) on this point, at least who wants to clarify their opinion, will have to return to why they don't think it will work and most often that's going to have something to do with what they think political correctness 'really' is. There really isn't any escaping that one.

GoonSquad wrote:
As a professional SJW my goal is to mind control rude, greedy as*holes so that I can make them help and give resources to my clients (homeless people, poor people needing medical care, Veterans with PTSD, people with physical disabilities, etc.).

This means I need to make those greedy shits feel empathy for my clients and make them want to treat my clients in a fair and just way! So yes, we evil SJWs are actually promoting Empathy, Justice, and Fairness (aimed at our clients)!

Ok, in that specific kind of instance I do think you'll do better with that being polite to the rich or whoever you see at the top of the hierarchy. You'll tend to attract more interest and funding from that sector with honey than with vinegar.


_________________
"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privelege of owning yourself" - Rudyard Kipling


jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

23 Jun 2017, 7:51 pm

GoonSquad wrote:
jrjones9933 wrote:
We have a dozen threads about DJT.

I like the conception of politeness in the video, but it does not match the reality of politeness as I learned it. Politeness consisted only of concealing bigoted speech from the objects thereof, while promoting in-group out-group beliefs privately. I think PC has helped people like me get more support for our race-traitordom. If I dispute a bigoted characterization as untrue and prejudicial, even without the presence of a member of that group, that's PC, and not politeness as I learned it. By the rules of politeness, I'm rude for starting a conflict.


I'd point back to this bit in the video:
Quote:
– Politeness focuses on Action rather than Thought

Politeness recognises we will naturally and inevitably sometimes have mean or dark thoughts about other social groups. The philosophy of politeness doesn’t panic, because it accepts that our brains are in many ways primitive. It doesn’t believe that such thoughts can ever be entirely removed. Instead, the effort is concentrated in the one area where it matters above all: how people actually behave towards one another day to day. This is where politeness directs all its attention – and gets strict. Our manners must be beyond reproach; our thoughts can be left to themselves.


One of the reasons people despise PC so much is because it wants to police people's thoughts.

Sure, ultimately we want to change people's attitudes/thoughts as well, but this needs to be addressed with a lot more sensitivity and tact. You cannot change hearts and minds with lectures and finger wagging.

That said, there's absolutely nothing wrong with calling out people who are being overtly racist and/or insensitive. What you don't want to do is treat someone acting this way as if they're Hitler or the grand dooda of the KKK. The other reason people hate PC folks is because of the gross overreactions some are prone to...

Take Bill Maher as an example. What he said was complete wrong and should not be tolerated, but Maher isn't some racist monster. He's just sort of a clueless douche, who mostly means well on issues of race.

There were/are a lot of people on the PC left who wanted to see him gone, but I think what actually happened was about right. He apologized, admitted his mistake, got chewed on by a few guests, and most have moved on.

I don't want to ban words, but I won't say it. I will substitute inanities in song lyrics.

Politeness should include equal hiring opportunities and a willingness to accept any color doctor or nurse, right? Politeness should include consideration for people who'd rather not hear someone quote their racist-ass grandpa? Practically, and as a matter of politeness, I'd probably ignore the grandpa.


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade


adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

24 Jun 2017, 12:28 am

GoonSquad wrote:

For the last motherfucking time: THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT HOW PEOPLE DEFINE POLITICAL CORRECTNESS!

I'm not saying the subject is off limits, just off topic. For f**k's sake...


For the first and only time: If you raise an argument which I disagree with, and regarding which I feel inclined to voice my disagreement, you may bet your ass I shall do so.

You may feel free to pout, to scream, to stamp and to swear, but you may be assured that it will grant you precisely zero power to control how I choose to address your own remarks.


Quote:
Quote:
The aim of political correctness is most certainly not "to spread empathy, justice and fairness". It is a tool, not a being with agency. It was conceived out of a desire to use herd psychology to control the masses, not out of peace and love and fluffy idealism.


You are not totally wrong. HOWEVER, you and others in this thread are conflating goals with methods and not really thinking things out...


You may also rest assured that I shall call out piss-poor ad hominem, such as the above, for what it is. Give me a single example to support your ridiculous claim.

Quote:
SJWs, me included, absolutely do want to effect mass mind control!! ! That is exactly what we want to do!


As a wise man once said: duh.

Quote:
-->THIS IS THE GODDAMN POINT OF THE THREAD!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !<--


And the "goddamn" point of my response is?

Quote:
What you're not really grasping is why...


That, dear Goon, is where you're completely wrong.

Quote:
This is conflict theory in action.


Take a moment to read my post history since, ooh, I don't know, 5 years back or so, and you will find numerous examples of my pointing out the Marxism for what it is, despite the unwillingness of SJWs and friends to admit such.

Quote:
As a professional SJW my goal is to mind control rude, greedy as*holes so that I can make them help and give resources to my clients (homeless people, poor people needing medical care, Veterans with PTSD, people with physical disabilities, etc.).


And as someone who understands the deep, inherent flaws of Marxist ideology, my goal is to make sure well-intentioned idealists don't screw up any more nations.

Quote:
This means I need to make those greedy shits feel empathy for my clients and make them want to treat my clients in a fair and just way! So yes, we evil SJWs are actually promoting Empathy, Justice, and Fairness (aimed at our clients)!


And universally oblivious to the cognitive dissonance required to believe you represent "Empathy, Justice and Fairness" while referring to anyone not in your in-group as "greedy shits", "nazis", etc.

Quote:
The problem is, our current methods are not working as evidenced the general hostility, opposition and contempt here, and else where, toward SJWs and all things PC.


Because if everyone just listened and believed instead of letting nuisances like critical thinking get in the way, the world would turn into a magical candy land full of sugar and sweetness!

:roll:

Quote:
So, its time for a change.


Unlikely. It's time for a new veneer and maybe a lick of paint again, in the vain hope that you'll manage to con enough people into believing you're peddling something other than Marxism. It's a tale that's older than you or I, and it's little more than a sideshow that occasionally gains a foothold in the mainstream.

Quote:
SJWs need to find new tactics (such as the one described in the video) to trick you rotten bastards into acting like decent, moral humans again, for a while at least...


Most SJWs will, inevitably, grow up and learn about this place the rest of us call "reality", which comes with responsibilities like mortgages, taxes and children, only to watch on helplessly as the latter fall foul of the few who cling to their lunacy long enough to become gender studies professors.

Quote:
:twisted:

Tricky, aren't we?
:wink:


The sad part is, I'm reasonably certain you actually believe that's true.

Now tell me all about how wonderful the world will be if we all just bend over for big momma government.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,505
Location: The 27th Path of Peh.

24 Jun 2017, 3:58 pm

A great analysis of what the current 'compassion' of the day looks like.


_________________
"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privelege of owning yourself" - Rudyard Kipling


naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,051
Location: temperate zone

24 Jun 2017, 4:58 pm

[quote="adifferentname"][quote="GoonSquad"]Again, this really isn't what this thread is about. If you want to debate what political correctness is, start another thread.



quote]

But...how can you discuss anything without first agreeing upon what that thing IS?



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

24 Jun 2017, 5:52 pm

PC advocates come across as offensive, because they tell people how they should think, and what words they should use.

PC advocates assume indirect, vague,"PC-speak" is right, and direct, potentially upsetting descriptive language is wrong.

PC advocates come across as hiding the truth with their suggestions of indirect, vague language.

PC advocates may insult the people they want to help, by suggesting that they are too "soft" to handle language that could be interpreted to be offensive.

PC advocates may insult people they want to help, by speaking and labeling these people for them.

PC advocates continually identify new "micro-aggression" language, which creates a language-minefield regarding what is considered offensive. [rhetorical] Is it "midget", "little people" or "dwarf"? Is it PC to refer to a black person as "black" now?

PC advocates may insult the person they want to help, because the PC-speak requires people to think of minorities people as other, needing special treatment, not equal.



Drake
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,577

24 Jun 2017, 6:17 pm

It all comes back to power. Microaggressions, you can literally twist anything into one. If you get someone under your thumb with those, you can do the kind of brain control Goonsquad was talking about. It's all about putting your group on the top and everyone else under your thumb.



jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

24 Jun 2017, 7:29 pm

Priming works.

We should use modern management strategies derived from social psychology. I agree with the video to that extent.


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade


GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

25 Jun 2017, 12:12 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
Once again, you're not really answering the question. You are pointing out what might well be the problems and solutions here, but you aren't telling me how you would actually convince people to change and adopt your ideas.

That would have to be different from issue to issue. I gave an example of science changing the minds of legislators on marijuana, clearly not everything quite fits that situation. I think just having the politics stay on message, not only on what's the rational choice but why, and rallying an idea like it's time has properly come helps. If I'm still being uselessly vague give me an example perhaps.

Here's an example of an ineffective and effective argument for a real world problem--chronic homellessness.

Most chronically homeless people suffer from untreated mental illness and many have comorbid SUD. These folks look like your stereotypical winos, concequently they are not very sympathetic, and they cannot qualify for traditional anti-homelessness programs that require sobriety and stable behavior before you get housing.

There's about 25 years worth of research that says giving these people unconditional housing first is the best way to deal with them. (Google pathways to housing and downtown emergency service center)

However, in spite of all this research, housing first for chronically homeless is an extremely hard sell for red state governments and religious nonprofits that deal with homeless people.

If you try to argue for housing first to these groups, with direct appeals to compassion and fairness, they counter with 'tough love' and assert that housing first will just enable and reward bad behavior. These people argue that housing is a reward for sobriety, etc.

Then, you produce research that shows most chronically homeless people simply cannot achieve sobriety while living on the streets and that housing does not increase substance abuse. But, they simply refuse to accept the research because it clashes with their intuitive world view.

So, your advocacy fails.

HOWEVER, research also shows that chronically homeless people cost society lots of money in jail stays and emergency room visits. Therefore advocates dropped their appeals to compassion and justice and concentrated on the financial impacts of leaving homeless people in the wild.

The research shows that a chronically homeless person can cost society $60,000.00/year when we just let police and hospitals deal with them. But, we can house them (with support) for about $20,000.00.

This proved to be such a compelling argument that (ruby red) Utah adopted housing first as a statewide policy with great success.

http://www.npr.org/2015/12/10/459100751 ... -heres-how

This was an effective argument, because it appealed to the values of the target, in this case red state fiscal conservatives.


So, I don't think UBI will ever work for a host of reasons--economic, sociological, psychological--but I'm not really the type of person you would need to convince...

The people you need to convince are conservatives and rich folks. So, tell me how you would convince some type A Radian as*hole like John Schnatter and working class conservatives who want work and not welfare.


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

25 Jun 2017, 12:27 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
Again, this really isn't what this thread is about. If you want to debate what political correctness is, start another thread.



quote]

But...how can you discuss anything without first agreeing upon what that thing IS?

Yes, this thread is about the idea in the video. In order to discuss that, we all need to agree on the video's definition of political correctness.

How people on the right and left define PC would be an excellent thread topic, but it is off topic here.

You should start that thread.... :wink:


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

25 Jun 2017, 12:31 pm

GoonSquad wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
Again, this really isn't what this thread is about. If you want to debate what political correctness is, start another thread.



quote]

But...how can you discuss anything without first agreeing upon what that thing IS?

Yes, this thread is about the idea in the video. In order to discuss that, we all need to agree on the video's definition of political correctness.


Marxism in microcosm.

That's what you need. We all need no such thing.



jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

25 Jun 2017, 12:39 pm

adifferentname wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
Again, this really isn't what this thread is about. If you want to debate what political correctness is, start another thread.



quote]

But...how can you discuss anything without first agreeing upon what that thing IS?

Yes, this thread is about the idea in the video. In order to discuss that, we all need to agree on the video's definition of political correctness.


Marxism in microcosm.

That's what you need. We all need no such thing.

No curiosity needed when a person has unassailable self-righteousness.


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade


GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

25 Jun 2017, 12:43 pm

Drake wrote:
It all comes back to power. Microaggressions, you can literally twist anything into one. If you get someone under your thumb with those, you can do the kind of brain control Goonsquad was talking about. It's all about putting your group on the top and everyone else under your thumb.

See, what you aren't getting is that it is not always a zero-sum game..

That notion is what has really poisoned politics and discourse in this country.

What does it actually cost you and yours to treat everyone with Politeness and Consideration?


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

25 Jun 2017, 12:46 pm

jrjones9933 wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
Again, this really isn't what this thread is about. If you want to debate what political correctness is, start another thread.



quote]

But...how can you discuss anything without first agreeing upon what that thing IS?

Yes, this thread is about the idea in the video. In order to discuss that, we all need to agree on the video's definition of political correctness.


Marxism in microcosm.

That's what you need. We all need no such thing.

No curiosity needed when a person has unassailable self-righteousness.


No argument needed when you're fluent in ad hominem.



GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

25 Jun 2017, 12:59 pm

jrjones9933 wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
jrjones9933 wrote:
We have a dozen threads about DJT.

I like the conception of politeness in the video, but it does not match the reality of politeness as I learned it. Politeness consisted only of concealing bigoted speech from the objects thereof, while promoting in-group out-group beliefs privately. I think PC has helped people like me get more support for our race-traitordom. If I dispute a bigoted characterization as untrue and prejudicial, even without the presence of a member of that group, that's PC, and not politeness as I learned it. By the rules of politeness, I'm rude for starting a conflict.


I'd point back to this bit in the video:
Quote:
– Politeness focuses on Action rather than Thought

Politeness recognises we will naturally and inevitably sometimes have mean or dark thoughts about other social groups. The philosophy of politeness doesn’t panic, because it accepts that our brains are in many ways primitive. It doesn’t believe that such thoughts can ever be entirely removed. Instead, the effort is concentrated in the one area where it matters above all: how people actually behave towards one another day to day. This is where politeness directs all its attention – and gets strict. Our manners must be beyond reproach; our thoughts can be left to themselves.


One of the reasons people despise PC so much is because it wants to police people's thoughts.

Sure, ultimately we want to change people's attitudes/thoughts as well, but this needs to be addressed with a lot more sensitivity and tact. You cannot change hearts and minds with lectures and finger wagging.

That said, there's absolutely nothing wrong with calling out people who are being overtly racist and/or insensitive. What you don't want to do is treat someone acting this way as if they're Hitler or the grand dooda of the KKK. The other reason people hate PC folks is because of the gross overreactions some are prone to...

Take Bill Maher as an example. What he said was complete wrong and should not be tolerated, but Maher isn't some racist monster. He's just sort of a clueless douche, who mostly means well on issues of race.

There were/are a lot of people on the PC left who wanted to see him gone, but I think what actually happened was about right. He apologized, admitted his mistake, got chewed on by a few guests, and most have moved on.

I don't want to ban words, but I won't say it. I will substitute inanities in song lyrics.

Politeness should include equal hiring opportunities and a willingness to accept any color doctor or nurse, right? Politeness should include consideration for people who'd rather not hear someone quote their racist-ass grandpa? Practically, and as a matter of politeness, I'd probably ignore the grandpa.

Well, yeah, I'd totally agree with you about racist grandpa....

Hiring and equal opportunities should be a matter of law, as far as I can see.

The willingness to accept a doctor or nurse is a bit more tricky. If we start trying to regulate that, we're slipping into the realm of overt thought policing and that isn't going to end well.

Again, thing like that need to be addressed with sensitivity and tact if we actually what to change hearts and minds... SJW mind control FTW!
:twisted:


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

25 Jun 2017, 1:02 pm

adifferentname wrote:
No argument needed when you're fluent in ad hominem.

While I don't see how I could criticize the basis for your grotesque oversimplification nicely, ADN, my comment went to a common type of b/w thinking.


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade