On Extremism - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

User avatar
By mikema63
#14835292
but they really should not be a factor if people return to reasonable arguments like he is doing.


It's worthwhile to note that people with radically different ideologies tend to view reality in fundamentally different ways. I cannot convince someone who completely believes that they are part of a master race that can or should control or even kill off the lesser races. They can only be ground to dust and suppressed.
User avatar
By One Degree
#14835297
mikema63 wrote:It's worthwhile to note that people with radically different ideologies tend to view reality in fundamentally different ways. I cannot convince someone who completely believes that they are part of a master race that can or should control or even kill off the lesser races. They can only be ground to dust and suppressed.


Even though it is easy to agree with such a statement, it still allows for the distortion of reality. I don't think many would deny that racism on the level of the entire US is very wrong. Racism in one community however is not necessarily evil. It is reasonable and the preference of many from all races. Homogeneous communities are safer and that is most people's priority. It is simply easier for a lot of people. The problem is when we confuse choice with blind hatred and lump everything under one 'racist ' umbrella. It is not that racism is good, but that not all racism is bad. We create problems with oversimplification.
User avatar
By The Immortal Goon
#14835299
SolarCross wrote:Are they? Why?

On the one hand:
- they don't like usury, hedonism or porn.
- don't like individualism, free speech or thinking for yourself.
That's all liberal capitalist stuff and liberal capitalist stuff is "right wing".

On the other hand:
- they hate jews worse than Nazis do. Big fans of Hitler. Nazi are "right wing" apparently.
- and the nazis liked them back, literally wishing Christianity was bit more like Islam.

I don't think they fit that well in the rather contrived, arbitrary and excessively simplistic left-right political model. Then again nobody does.


Both of those are on your right hand.

One Degree wrote:Hate crimes are almost never attributed to minorities. If a black person kills 3 people, it is a crime. If a white person kills 3 people then it is likely it might also be listed as a hate crime and/or terrorism. This distorts the reality. White groups in the US are automatically listed as hate groups. Black groups are not. Now, why am I using race? Because white groups are always considered on the right and Black groups are considered on the left.


Provide examples.

If a white person kills three people, it's still a crime. If a white person creates a terrorist campaign to specifically target minorities, it's a hate crime. If a white person takes over a federal facility and holds the community hostage at the barrel of a gun, it's not a crime at all.

We can all say these things, but if you're going to make these statements--statements that go against statistical data that Rugoz (or any other user) provides, can we please agree to use something then your crying feelings?
User avatar
By mikema63
#14835301
Racism in one community however is not necessarily evil.


I disagree. Murdering people over their race would be wrong between any two people much less whole communities. As would any de jure racism.

It is reasonable and the preference of many from all races.


I don't particularly care what these people want. I very much am for a globalist project that advances humanity culturally, economically, and technologically. I have no interest in carving humanity up into little enclaves to degenerate into whatever horrific madness they damn well please.

Homogeneous communities are safer and that is most people's priority.


Arbitrary divisions can be made infinity small. You think people will just stop at skin color or religion? Not so long ago christians were murdering each other over the "correct" church before it was beaten out of them. Before that different greeks who identified with different city states (arbitrary geographic regions) were killing each other. People will always descend to that sort of tribalism unless they are unified.

It is simply easier for a lot of people.


Not only is easiness not a fundamentally necessary thing I don't think it's fundamentally important and indeed I think life would be completely pointless if it were completely easy. I have no interest in coddling people in communities that they think will be easy.

The problem is when we confuse choice with blind hatred and lump everything under one 'racist ' umbrella. It is not that racism is good, but that not all racism is bad. We create problems with oversimplification.


You want to talk about oversimplification when you believe we should just turn the earth into tiny city states and things will just magically be better and not infinitely worse?

What you want is something I view as an unfathomable dystopia.
User avatar
By One Degree
#14835306
mikema63 wrote:I disagree. Murdering people over their race would be wrong between any two people much less whole communities. As would any de jure racism.



I don't particularly care what these people want. I very much am for a globalist project that advances humanity culturally, economically, and technologically. I have no interest in carving humanity up into little enclaves to degenerate into whatever horrific madness they damn well please.



Arbitrary divisions can be made infinity small. You think people will just stop at skin color or religion? Not so long ago christians were murdering each other over the "correct" church before it was beaten out of them. Before that different greeks who identified with different city states (arbitrary geographic regions) were killing each other. People will always descend to that sort of tribalism unless they are unified.



Not only is easiness not a fundamentally necessary thing I don't think it's fundamentally important and indeed I think life would be completely pointless if it were completely easy. I have no interest in coddling people in communities that they think will be easy.



You want to talk about oversimplification when you believe we should just turn the earth into tiny city states and things will just magically be better and not infinitely worse?

What you want is something I view as an unfathomable dystopia.


Would a fair synopsis of your view be you don't care what people want because you know what is best for them? That is what I get from your responses. You want globalism under your conditions. You believe in some ideal right and wrong instead of understanding people just make choices that work for them. One size fits all requires totalitarianism. There won't be any freedom of choice in your world.
User avatar
By mikema63
#14835311
Would a fair synopsis of your view be you don't care what people want because you know what is best for them?


No, a synopsis of my view would be, essentially, that I am not interested in what they want. What they want hurts other people and I seek to prevent them from getting what they want. Whether or not the ability, even if they do not exercise that ability, to kill people based on race is what's best for them then I do not want them to have whats best for them.

That is what I get from your responses.


You are wrong, I do not care that every single individual may or may not get what's best for them. I care that fundamental needs are met and that the technological, cultural, societal, and economic progress of humanity as a whole improves over time. Someone is probably going to get fucked over in some way or another and that's unavoidable in any system including yours.

One size fits all requires totalitarianism.


That I have a pretty hardline stance on racism and mass murder does not mean that I don't think there should be no acceptance of any choice or variation on other issues.

There won't be any freedom of choice in your world.


There are always constraints on freedom of choice. You can't choose to not eat or drink water, you can't choose for 2+2=5, and I want to constrain certain choices like the ability to genocide people over their skin color.
#14835313
One Degree wrote:Why not just go to the Southern poverty law center and look at the groups listed?
https://www.splcenter.org/


An organization that exists to track rightwing hate groups is focusing on tracking rightwing hate groups! It must be a conspiracy! :lol:

@Kaiserschmarrn what is more important: acedemic[…]

Of course things are changable. But at first, the[…]

EU-BREXIT

Well here is a solution : if the people of Gibral[…]

Will it matter? Ultimately I doubt much will ch[…]