[Hong Wu]

Most modern ideologies are just costumes. Pro-wealth Christians, college communists who want to exterminate the working class, any person who thinks a quote they pulled from somewhere is more authorative than the situation on the ground.

A good example of this is gun control. Someone who is prepared to defend themselves at the possible cost of another human life doesn't care what criminals, incompetents or even the misfortunate might end up doing with weapons. The entire point of being willing to defend yourself is that you don't care about and aren't afraid of the other person. None of the dialogue around the issue really matters.

I think it is a good thing that the internet provides us with "bubbles" because the consensus we were told to believe in is a myth.

[stephen50right]

I see conservatives out there making the sound judgments with solid reasoning. It's the left who take radical stands with views that aren't even logical.

It's a major reason why conservatives should always be in charge of government. Leftists are simply incapable of properly running government because they are predisposed to "arguments" that history has proven to be miserable failures such as Marxism.

[Zagadka]

I see conservatives out there making the sound judgments with solid reasoning. It's the left who take radical stands with views that aren't even logical.

"People are predisposed to certain kinds of arguments"

Thread confirmed.

"People who think like me are right, everyone else are horrible people."

[stephen50right]

"People are predisposed to certain kinds of arguments"

Thread confirmed.

It's just too bad that leftists out there don't wish to "confirm" our beautiful Constitution. They think a new constitution with ideas from Karl Marx or Muhammad would be better...THAT is being predisposed in an unacceptable manner.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Zagadka added this to his post after I commented:

<<< "People who think like me are right, everyone else are horrible people." >>>

That is a very silly generalization, and you know it.

[Zagadka]

I would be happy to re-write the constitution. Though not with Marxist overtones as you assumed.

I still have no idea how you people think liberalism lines up with Islam in any way. They are way, way conservative. Just because some people are squirmish to point out problems with Islam does not mean the ideology fits at all.

[Pants-of-dog]

It's just too bad that leftists out there don't wish to "confirm" our beautiful Constitution.

Lol.

The US government (either party) routinely ignores or violates the rights delineated in your constitution. They do it in the name of money.

As far as I can tell, you can choose to have equal civil liberties for everyone, or choose capitalism, but not both.

They think a new constitution with ideas from Karl Marx or Muhammad would be better...THAT is being predisposed in an unacceptable manner.

One of the things I like about your posts is that there is almost always an opportunity to point out the following: Leftists do not support Islam. This is true for true leftists and for leftists as you use the term (progressives of any sort). Progressives simply support freedom of religion, which is one if the rights in your constitution. This is true even if they do not agree with the inherent discrimination in any religion.

Zagadka added this to his post after I commented:

<<< "People who think like me are right, everyone else are horrible people." >>>

That is a very silly generalization, and you know it.

Yes, Zagadka almost certainly knows that that is a silly generalisation. Moreover, I believe that was his point.

[stephen50right]

Lol.

The US government (either party) routinely ignores or violates the rights delineated in your constitution. They do it in the name of money.

As far as I can tell, you can choose to have equal civil liberties for everyone, or choose capitalism, but not both.



One of the things I like about your posts is that there is almost always an opportunity to point out the following: Leftists do not support Islam. This is true for true leftists and for leftists as you use the term (progressives of any sort). Progressives simply support freedom of religion, which is one if the rights in your constitution. This is true even if they do not agree with the inherent discrimination in any religion.



Yes, Zagadka almost certainly knows that that is a silly generalisation. Moreover, I believe that was his point.

<<< Yes, Zagadka almost certainly knows that that is a silly generalisation. Moreover, I believe that was his point. >>>

[Mod edit: there are more mature ways to make your point]

As far as the Leftist/Islam alliance. It's the enemy of my enemy is my friend thing, that dictates the left's ridiculous friendship with Islam. Leftists are mostly atheists and agnostics. They were brought up Christians or Jews, but wound up for whatever reason loathing their religion and totally rejecting it. They blindly hate Christianity or Judaism so much that they will align themselves with the historical enemy of their rejected religion. What makes it so ridiculous is that if Islam ever took supreme power, then leftists would be among the first to be exterminated because Islam considers them to be among the most incorrigible infidels.

Leftists get a historical cue such as this from those like Malcolm X, who was both a leftist and a Muslim. So leftists if they succeed in their quest, better get ready to convert to Islam, or they are all in dire trouble.

[Rapperson]

It's true, certain people are predisposed to certain kinds of arguments.

Idiots, for example, are unable to think more than one move ahead. They may get the notion into their heads, for example, that if you take guns away the shooting will stop. Simple as that. Bada bing. They are unable to grasp nuances such as that only legally owned firearms may be in the government's grasp when it comes to taking guns away from people or stopping them buying more guns. They can't understand the dynamic, that when a society is already awash with guns, you can't block someone who really wants to get their hands on a gun - like a killer or a terrorist. Then again, the crowning glory of the idiot's argument is that only he/she and like-minded people care about other people, when the fact is that deeper arguments may entail just as much empathy, only they are opaque to the idiot.

[Pants-of-dog]

<<< Yes, Zagadka almost certainly knows that that is a silly generalisation. Moreover, I believe that was his point. >>>

Thank you Mr Polly Parrot. You want a cracker now?

No, the whole exchange has already been sufficiently rewarding!

As far as the Leftist/Islam alliance. It's the enemy of my enemy is my friend thing, that dictates the left's ridiculous friendship with Islam. Leftists are mostly atheists and agnostics. They were brought up Christians or Jews, but wound up for whatever reason loathing their religion and totally rejecting it. They blindly hate Christianity or Judaism so much that they will align themselves with the historical enemy of their rejected religion. What makes it so ridiculous is that if Islam ever took supreme power, then leftists would be among the first to be exterminated because Islam considers them to be among the most incorrigible infidels.

Not really. My mother is a Marxist and a Catholic. She is, obviously, a big fan of liberation theology. We also have friends who are Friends.

All this to say that I do not see Christianity or Judaism as inherently at odds with Marxism.

Leftists get a historical cue such as this from those like Malcolm X, who was both a leftist and a Muslim. So leftists if they succeed in their quest, better get ready to convert to Islam, or they are all in dire trouble.

There are many types of Muslims and many types of leftists. It is possible to be both.

[mikema63]

That people are predisposed to certain arguments is certainly true, but at the root of that is that people are predisposed to certain values and beliefs due to upbringing, circumstance, and temperament.

Arguments are justifications for beliefs, but all beliefs are ultimately unfounded. Whether it's right or wrong to shoot someone in defence of your property is more opinion and culture than anything else. I for instance wouldn't want to kill someone over my stuff, but I have no greater justification for that than my feeling that it's wrong. I also haven't heard any justification to shoot someone in defense of your property that wasn't rooted in some sense of violation or anger. (I purposefully made it about property rather than life because robbery is more common than murderers and it's simpler to explain how I feel about it).


Coupled with the cognitive biases involved (confirmation bias, etc.) People actually changing their point of view or admitting they are wrong about anything in these types of political/value driven debates is nearly miraculous.

[stephen50right]

No, the whole exchange has already been sufficiently rewarding!



Not really. My mother is a Marxist and a Catholic. She is, obviously, a big fan of liberation theology. We also have friends who are Friends.

All this to say that I do not see Christianity or Judaism as inherently at odds with Marxism.



There are many types of Muslims and many types of leftists. It is possible to be both.

Karl Marx stated, "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people."

You stated, "All this to say that I do not see Christianity or Judaism as inherently at odds with Marxism."

Karl Marx it seems would disagree with you. That is unless Marx believed that using opium is healthy.

[Pants-of-dog]

Karl Marx stated, "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people."

You stated, "All this to say that I do not see Christianity or Judaism as inherently at odds with Marxism."

Karl Marx it seems would disagree with you. That is unless Marx believed that using opium is healthy.

No, you are misunderstanding Marx if you think he was 100% anti-religion. But you also think Obama was a Marxist, and you also think that Marxists support Islam, which is a religion, so your understanding of Marxism is crappy at best.

But anyway, your idea that Marxists support Islam because they hate Christianity is obviously wrong.

[stephen50right]

No, you are misunderstanding Marx if you think he was 100% anti-religion. But you also think Obama was a Marxist, and you also think that Marxists support Islam, which is a religion, so your understanding of Marxism is crappy at best.

But anyway, your idea that Marxists support Islam because they hate Christianity is obviously wrong.

You can try to refute my comments and that's OK. However you are refuting Marx's own words about his belief, and that really is silly...and to put it mildly, a little bit bizarre.

[AFAIK]

So when the Marxist-Leninist gov't of the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan and forced secularism on the population they were actually promoting an Islamic theocracy? And when Reagan invited the Taliban to The White House and offered them funding, weapons and logistical support he was acting against Islamic theocracy?

I wonder how many people will be pre-disposed to that argument.

[MistyTiger]

Leftists are simply incapable of properly running government because they are predisposed to "arguments" that history has proven to be miserable failures such as Marxism.

Oh if only people would learn from past failures. Both sides do not seem to pay much attention to history, they do what suits them.

Stephen seems predisposed to believe that leftists are evil and responsible for every failure in Western government. But who got us into the Iraq war and Afghanistan war...wars that we are not winning? Answer: a rightist administration. All those young men and women have to die because rightists believe that we can defeat terrorism. One of my classmates died in Afghanistan leaving behind a young wife and baby, he would have been 30 by now. It is a fucking shame! We are no closer to winning than we were back then.

[Drlee]

A good example of this is gun control. Someone who is prepared to defend themselves at the possible cost of another human life doesn't care what criminals, incompetents or even the misfortunate might end up doing with weapons. The entire point of being willing to defend yourself is that you don't care about and aren't afraid of the other person.

This is incorrect. These people feel powerless and fearful so having the power of a firearm gives them a sense of potency. Though they universally claim the weapon is for self defense it is not. It is associated with their power fantasies of being the hero of some situation but all but the most deeply stupid of them realize that the chances that they will ever deploy their weapon is tantamount to winning the lottery.

They can't understand the dynamic, that when a society is already awash with guns, you can't block someone who really wants to get their hands on a gun - like a killer or a terrorist.

Australia did. 650,000 of them. And no it is not a 100% solution. But it would deter crazy people like the kids shooting up our schools. It is a start. (I am a conservative republican and gun owner who can carry a concealed weapon. I very rarely (almost never) do. I have been trained to use my guns for offense and defense. But I am good at math so I realize that carrying a gun is stupid at a number of levels.

As far as the Leftist/Islam alliance. It's the enemy of my enemy is my friend thing, that dictates the left's ridiculous friendship with Islam.

There is no such alliance and believing that there is or even could be given the conservative nature of typical Islamic religious expression is just stupid.

It's just too bad that leftists out there don't wish to "confirm" our beautiful Constitution. They think a new constitution with ideas from Karl Marx or Muhammad would be better...THAT is being predisposed in an unacceptable manner.

This is laughable in every one of its assertions.

Our original constitution is a massive compromise with which almost none of the founders was particularly pleased.

The first thing they did with it was start to amend the shit out of it.

We have very very few Marxists in the US. Certainly they are not Democrats; a center right party. I know a lot of democrats and a few Marxists and I have never heard them even mention Islamic ideas in the context of US politics. I do, however, know several (many of the Marxists I know) who are devout Christians.

[Rapperson]

This is incorrect. These people feel powerless and fearful so having the power of a firearm gives them a sense of potency. Though they universally claim the weapon is for self defense it is not. It is associated with their power fantasies of being the hero of some situation but all but the most deeply stupid of them realize that the chances that they will ever deploy their weapon is tantamount to winning the lottery.

Please tell me what lottery you play!!

The US crime rate where a firearm in the victim's possession could be relevant is about 1% per year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_ ... ted_States

Australia did. 650,000 of them. And no it is not a 100% solution. But it would deter crazy people like the kids shooting up our schools. It is a start. (I am a conservative republican and gun owner who can carry a concealed weapon. I very rarely (almost never) do. I have been trained to use my guns for offense and defense. But I am good at math so I realize that carrying a gun is stupid at a number of levels.

@Drlee

This figure corresponds to a 3% ownership rate. That is not "awash".

There is no such alliance and believing that there is or even could be given the conservative nature of typical Islamic religious expression is just stupid.

@Drlee

It's as stupid as the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact. Nobody could be so twisted as to enter an alliance of convenience with a hated and despised enemy!

I wonder how many people will be pre-disposed to that argument.

A person who is unintelligent and suffers from a victim mentality is predisposed to arguments that involve conflating issues and concepts.

[Rapperson]

...

[Nonsense]

Most modern ideologies are just costumes. Pro-wealth Christians, college communists who want to exterminate the working class, any person who thinks a quote they pulled from somewhere is more authorative than the situation on the ground.

A good example of this is gun control. Someone who is prepared to defend themselves at the possible cost of another human life doesn't care what criminals, incompetents or even the misfortunate might end up doing with weapons. The entire point of being willing to defend yourself is that you don't care about and aren't afraid of the other person. None of the dialogue around the issue really matters.

I think it is a good thing that the internet provides us with "bubbles" because the consensus we were told to believe in is a myth.

The American Constitution guarantees the, "Right to 'bear' arms", which is somewhat more nuanced than the 'gun lobby' of that country would have you believe.

The right to 'bear' arms, is NOT a 'right' to 'use' arms to usurp the rights of other innocent people, by killing or injuring them.

Taking that 'right' out of it's proper context is false, the 'Law' is the determinant on whether such use is legal or otherwise.

We see such distortions around many issues in society, often brought about by commentators misquoting or substituting rational debate with polemical rhetoric.

Misusing language with the intent to subvert established facts or truths is just pure cynicism overlapping rhetoric.

[Rapperson]

The American Constitution guarantees the, "Right to 'bear' arms", which is somewhat more nuanced than the 'gun lobby' of that country would have you believe.

Good point!

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Now, where did this well regulated militia go to? It must be the longest maneuvers in history. The right to keep and bear arms is tied to this militia thing, so how can a saturday night special further the cause of a well regulated militia?