Subversion Part Two

Subversion Part Two

Postby Nolidor » Sun May 25, 2014 10:29 am

This goes off what I said about objective categorical reason before.

Below is a paradigm which illustrates the different types of liberals and conservatives:

Image

Now to be fair, all conservatives aren't bad people. There are some who are openminded to the gracious nature of humanity, so they don't bully others around for no reason.

On the other hand, many liberals are bad people. They're lazy bums and wise guys. They leech off others who apply themselves to become successful.

The problem is that modern liberalism hasn't gotten over this lazy bum problem. The obsession of equality has bled into the transformation of liberalism into an anti-intellectual movement that doesn't care so much for creative thinking as much as it cares about libertinism. It has denied the value of culture because culture was occasionally oppressive in history such as how Judeo-Christian tradition oppressed women and minorities. It also prohibited people from living lifestyles that were deemed unacceptable as in the case of folk community common sense...

...but there's a difference between prohibiting that which is emotionally versus thoughtfully different. Again, we see that relativism has allowed liberalism to become subverted from the inside out because of its confusion of culture with ethics. No longer is liberalism an ideology that expects people to be respected for who they are as individuals on the inside that counts, but instead, social democracy has been used as an excuse for traditional conservatism where people are expected to conform to norms. The definition of what's "normal" has changed, but it's still normal.

Those who are unwilling to conform are told they're imposing their values onto others, but in reality, the victim is being blamed behind rugged individualism. Heck, it can even get to the point of being told that people who have individual issues are blaming society for their laziness when they actually aren't lazy.

I don't know what labels to give this dimension of politics, but there is definitely some cross-ideological dimension at hand. I'd call it idealism and pragmatism except those who often stand up for ideals are the pragmatic ones in society, and those who stand up for what's pragmatic have nothing really to stand on except for hot air.
Nolidor
Citizen
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 1:54 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Subversion Part Two

Postby Kane » Tue May 27, 2014 11:13 pm

Nolidor wrote:This goes off what I said about objective categorical reason before.

Below is a paradigm which illustrates the different types of liberals and conservatives:

Image

Now to be fair, all conservatives aren't bad people. There are some who are openminded to the gracious nature of humanity, so they don't bully others around for no reason.

On the other hand, many liberals are bad people. They're lazy bums and wise guys. They leech off others who apply themselves to become successful.

The problem is that modern liberalism hasn't gotten over this lazy bum problem. The obsession of equality has bled into the transformation of liberalism into an anti-intellectual movement that doesn't care so much for creative thinking as much as it cares about libertinism. It has denied the value of culture because culture was occasionally oppressive in history such as how Judeo-Christian tradition oppressed women and minorities. It also prohibited people from living lifestyles that were deemed unacceptable as in the case of folk community common sense...

...but there's a difference between prohibiting that which is emotionally versus thoughtfully different. Again, we see that relativism has allowed liberalism to become subverted from the inside out because of its confusion of culture with ethics. No longer is liberalism an ideology that expects people to be respected for who they are as individuals on the inside that counts, but instead, social democracy has been used as an excuse for traditional conservatism where people are expected to conform to norms. The definition of what's "normal" has changed, but it's still normal.

Those who are unwilling to conform are told they're imposing their values onto others, but in reality, the victim is being blamed behind rugged individualism. Heck, it can even get to the point of being told that people who have individual issues are blaming society for their laziness when they actually aren't lazy.

I don't know what labels to give this dimension of politics, but there is definitely some cross-ideological dimension at hand. I'd call it idealism and pragmatism except those who often stand up for ideals are the pragmatic ones in society, and those who stand up for what's pragmatic have nothing really to stand on except for hot air.


This looks like some sad attempt at game theory utilizing rampant cliches based on entirely irrelevant generalizations of political ideologies according to an 8th grade understanding of contemporary politics.
Stephen Jay Gould wrote:When people learn no tools of judgment and merely follow their hopes, the seeds of political manipulation are sown.

These users thanked the author Kane for the post:
Philly
User avatar
Kane
Governor
 
Posts: 7138
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:09 pm
Location: The Yay
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 281 times
Been thanked: 490 times
Political Leaning: Rockefeller Republican

Re: Subversion Part Two

Postby Philly » Wed May 28, 2014 7:08 am

Sonned into oblivion.

THE RETURN OF KANE.
User avatar
Philly
Governor
 
Posts: 9407
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 6:36 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 947 times
Been thanked: 1111 times

Re: Subversion Part Two

Postby Professor » Wed May 28, 2014 7:21 am

Kane wrote:This looks like some sad attempt at game theory utilizing rampant cliches based on entirely irrelevant generalizations of political ideologies according to an 8th grade understanding of contemporary politics.


rampant cliches . . . irrelevant generalizations . . . 8th grade understanding of politics

In other words . . . our modern electorate?
Image
User avatar
Professor
VIP
VIP
 
Posts: 7553
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 2:42 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 54 times
Been thanked: 570 times
Political Leaning: Rockefeller Republican

Re: Subversion Part Two

Postby broken robot » Thu Jun 05, 2014 6:26 pm

Kane wrote:
Nolidor wrote:This goes off what I said about objective categorical reason before.

Below is a paradigm which illustrates the different types of liberals and conservatives:

Image

Now to be fair, all conservatives aren't bad people. There are some who are openminded to the gracious nature of humanity, so they don't bully others around for no reason.

On the other hand, many liberals are bad people. They're lazy bums and wise guys. They leech off others who apply themselves to become successful.

The problem is that modern liberalism hasn't gotten over this lazy bum problem. The obsession of equality has bled into the transformation of liberalism into an anti-intellectual movement that doesn't care so much for creative thinking as much as it cares about libertinism. It has denied the value of culture because culture was occasionally oppressive in history such as how Judeo-Christian tradition oppressed women and minorities. It also prohibited people from living lifestyles that were deemed unacceptable as in the case of folk community common sense...

...but there's a difference between prohibiting that which is emotionally versus thoughtfully different. Again, we see that relativism has allowed liberalism to become subverted from the inside out because of its confusion of culture with ethics. No longer is liberalism an ideology that expects people to be respected for who they are as individuals on the inside that counts, but instead, social democracy has been used as an excuse for traditional conservatism where people are expected to conform to norms. The definition of what's "normal" has changed, but it's still normal.

Those who are unwilling to conform are told they're imposing their values onto others, but in reality, the victim is being blamed behind rugged individualism. Heck, it can even get to the point of being told that people who have individual issues are blaming society for their laziness when they actually aren't lazy.

I don't know what labels to give this dimension of politics, but there is definitely some cross-ideological dimension at hand. I'd call it idealism and pragmatism except those who often stand up for ideals are the pragmatic ones in society, and those who stand up for what's pragmatic have nothing really to stand on except for hot air.


This looks like some sad attempt at game theory utilizing rampant cliches based on entirely irrelevant generalizations of political ideologies according to an 8th grade understanding of contemporary politics.


you've clearly never seen a doctoral program. just throw in a bunch of bizarre misreadings of obscure authors to justify some of the above assertions and you might have a passable conference paper...

otherwise though, dead on.
The Subversives
User avatar
broken robot
VIP
VIP
 
Posts: 2017
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 2:11 pm
Location: CA
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 206 times
Been thanked: 234 times
Political Leaning: Socialist

Re: Subversion Part Two

Postby Nolidor » Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:26 am

Kane wrote:This looks like some sad attempt at game theory utilizing rampant cliches based on entirely irrelevant generalizations of political ideologies according to an 8th grade understanding of contemporary politics.


Actually it's called using the English language to describe a model...

...but shame on those who make a mistake against "an 8th grade understanding". You'd expect them to be more sophisticated than to make such a fundamental error.

broken robot wrote:you've clearly never seen a doctoral program. just throw in a bunch of bizarre misreadings of obscure authors to justify some of the above assertions and you might have a passable conference paper...

otherwise though, dead on.


Yea, a lot of academia seems to be that way. The obsession with sources and "evidence" allows people to utter nonsensical values by equating correlation to causation. It's like the goal is to never get over the addiction of Occam's Razor ever since its usage for intelligent design. The only difference now is academics claim to be pragmatists instead as if it's blatantly obvious what people ought to do by synthesizing emotions with facts, and getting things wrong on purpose by overloading people's attention spans and expecting others to correct them or else "academics" are correct by default.

In other words, that attitude allows people to behave like religious conservative empiricists who expect people to perform good works to satisfy work ethic a la psychological behaviorism where it's assumed what behaviors correlate to what attitudes. That way people don't have to be openminded to the diversity of human nature in how intentions can yield many consequences as well as how consequences can come from many intentions. Yea, academia claims to have liberal tendencies, but when you really look at it, it's composed of wise guy jerks who enjoy being abusive and hiding behind plausible deniability just like conservatives do in real life. Academics will claim liberal positions on issues, but their fundamental ideology on personal interaction is incredibly conservative. You usually see this when discussing justice. Academics will behave like rugged individualists in tolerating people being abused, but then doing little to nothing to rectify it. Instead, they hide behind "moral emotivism and relativism" which is really just anti-intellectual prejudice.

After all, that's what conservatives do - abuse people for being different and hide behind plausible deniability while blaming the victim. For example, isn't that why liberals are supposed to regulate the "free" market - to check how people can be abusive and hide behind plausible deniability through office politics, buyer beware, the iron law of oligarchy, and the Peter Principle?
Nolidor
Citizen
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 1:54 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 2 times


Return to Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron