Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
It would be nice if someone could resurrect Mr. Rogers and set him on the adults.
One of the best films I've seen in the last year. Strongly recommended.
|
|
yanqui
climber
Balcarce, Argentina
|
|
I don’t think a big group of people are fundamentally against facts. I think they have emotional needs that are met by the identity labels of “conservative” and/or “Republican” that overpower their perception of a need for facts (notwithstanding their need for cars, air conditioning, heaters, smartPhones, Internet, and other stuff associated with science and engineering). People have a vested interest in not changing their team, especially in a society that rewards loyalty and rooting for the underdog. An altered version of this goes for “liberals”/“Democrats” who feed off of divisive memes.
Recently I read about a study where a sample of Americans, divided into two groups: "liberals" and "conservatives" were presented with bald-faced lies and then and asked about whether or not those lies were morally reprehensible. It turns out for both groups, if the participants felt: 1) that the lie in question referred to a circumstance that could have been true had certain conditions been realized (even though those conditions were in fact not realized) and 2) that the lie reinforced their basic ideological beliefs about how the world works, then people from either group tended to judge the lie as morally acceptable.
Researchers, building a bridge about the acceptance of lies!
|
|
Yury
Mountain climber
T.O.
|
|
AntiChrist:
So you are saying the deep down the Taliban, Isis, and white supremacists (mr trump, sessions, bannon, and their supporters included) are good people and their ideology is okay because it makes sense to them? AntiChrist, following the spirit of this thread I would like to provide an alternative version of your question:
Are you saying that Stalin, Mao, Pol-Pot, BLM, antifa and their supporters are good people and their ideology is okay because it makes sense to them?
|
|
NutAgain!
Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 8, 2018 - 07:49pm PT
|
So you are saying the deep down the Taliban, Isis, and white supremacists (mr trump, sessions, bannon, and their supporters included) are good people and their ideology is okay because it makes sense to them?
Yes and no. Deep down they are mostly good people, or had the potential to be. And no, the ideology is not ok. Anger is a disease that spreads like a virus. You don't cure a disease by killing everyone who has it, unless you are a very primitive culture. You try to understand how the disease works and you figure out how to stop it from hurting people.
I'm saying that if you disagree with the ideologies, then the way to fight it is to understand the reason that so many people embrace it, and deal with THAT. If you just fight the people who embrace the ideology as a crutch to solve their other problems, then you are not making the problematic ideology go away. It is here because it solves a problem. What problem is that?
As for Taliban/ISIS/white supremacists... the common thread is frustration and anger and a sense of powerlessness. Teach people to understand and articulate their own emotions, and create circumstances in the world where people can prosper when they make a positive effort, and stop spreading hate and anger, and much of the world's problems would go away. Bullets and missiles and drones and dead blood and expanding waves of emotionally destroyed people, families, societies, are expensive solutions to a failure to emotionally educate and support people in their childhoods and to create the conditions for individuals to prosper through their own hard work.
If America had a way to measure investments across 20-50 years, we would see a wildly better return on investment (as compared to military, policing, and prison investments) for free education pre-school through university, make emotional literacy and healing a part of public education, social welfare programs that addressed people with mental health issues and people with drug addictions, create a mandatory civil service corp working on projects that renew our nation's infrastructure, or perform some valuable service for society, to create opportunities for societal development at the same time as creating meaning for people who might not find employment opportunities in a competitive shrinking labor market. We need a government that has the vision to create the circumstances for sustainable civilization rather than stoking the flames that will burn us all.
In terms of international threats from terrorist groups around the world: invest in alternative energies to reduce dependency on oil; create a comprehensive set of laws to hold international corporations accountable for their actions if they want to do business in USA- this includes all subsidiaries and subcontractors adhering to the same environmental and human rights standards and payscale that are expected (or at least used to be expected) in USA. This stops the motivations for corporations to seek out arbitrages in other countries, and reduces the pressure for US military intervention to disrupt the region for the benefit of corporations that help elect politicians in USA. Further, negotiate trade agreements with other countries to give them incentives to comply with these standards. The hidden agenda of "nationalist/populist" campaigns is to fragment international civilization to create more chances for companies to find the arbitrages that expand profits. Trade agreements might not start out perfect but they create a framework for moving in a direction to close out loopholes and march toward very difficult long term international goals that favor people and sustaining our limited natural resources around the planet.
Further, there should be a widespread recognition of the trade-offs of corporate growth: larger and consolidated companies deliver economies of scale to offer lower prices to consumers, but it comes with numerous costs that are not common knowledge at the time of purchase transactions, and if we had full transparency on those costs, the transactions wouldn't happen as frequently. Given the relative weakness/vulnerability of individuals who feel compelled to make purchase decisions based on what is cheapest... I think governments have an important responsibility to to rein in the power of large corporations. Instead of "too big to fail" we should have the mantra "too big to exist". By reducing the power of corporations, we increase the freedoms and rights for people.
But no, we are impatient, and greedy, and we want to see quarterly returns on our corporate and government investments. So we keep doing the things that screw our kids and don't recognize how our parents making the same weak decisions is what created most of our problems. And it wasn't their fault either- they were digging out of the hole created by their parents, and so on ad infinitum.
Many of you might disagree with my world view and provide plenty of counter-examples or proofs of why I'm wrong, why it won't work, etc... but more of you are just plain not open to rationally considering it because of deeply ingrained emotional needs and programming for how to fill those needs, that precludes the honest access to rational consideration. We all have emotional blind spots, and I am no exception. But I do actively try to make myself aware of them, and learn to account for them to improve the clarity with which I can observe the world around me.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
It ain’t hard y’all. The Norskies can show you. Just build the damn bridge and put a picnic table in the middle, dammit! Then get together and break bread. Simple, huh?
|
|
ExfifteenExfifteen
climber
|
|
Antichrist:
Just not that liberal sciency crap and conspiracy theories about glbal warming.
Dude, you obviously are not speaking from real experiences, but from your biased view of others'... you are ignorant in your stupor.
|
|
ExfifteenExfifteen
climber
|
|
Antichrist:
so they latch onto fairytales of an all powerful controller who created all their frustrations as a test.
Brahjirahji, you're one big drunken fairytale...
Nawmean?
Ciao...
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
AntiChrist,
In the video you posted, Fred Rogers seemed to be talking about coming to see and deal with one's own feelings, not others’ behaviors.
NutAgain!,
Your long recent post about fixing the disagreements among ideologies all seem to be modern approaches to social problems: systems, laws, more education, programs, limiting corporate degrees of freedoms, projects, and so forth.
I’d say there is something very important missing there, although I cannot articulate what it is, nor can I say how any of it could be brought into usage. What you suggest seem to be technical interventions. IMO, something big and important is missing. Maybe more than one thing.
You’re a smart person. There are many smart people here on this thread. I’m not sure that “smart” is actually getting us anywhere that’s decidedly better. I’m not sure that “better” is something that we have an affect on.
I can’t say for sure, but one response might be to do what Tony Soprano would often say in the show: “Hey, hey, hey! Take it easy.” (Of course, then he would later kill the character.)
Be well.
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
I’d say there is something very important missing there
A common goal or interest is needed. Something more compelling than the causes of the divide. What that may be. Who knows?
For me, it's an interest in the long term health of this country. The divisiveness causing our social fabric to decay. Animosity is on the rise. I don't see how we can reveres this trend.
When Obama won in '08, he had the gravitas to be a uniter. He won over the swing voters. A number of moderate Republics thought he was okay. But then, in his first major order of business (the stimulus plan), he told the GOP to piss off. And the two sides stepped apart. Granted, Mitch & Co. were against him from the start. But if he'd passed a bipartisan bill, I doubt the Tea Party movement would've taken off like it did.
So, who's the next Obama? Is it even possible to elect a POTUS who can champion bipartisanship?
|
|
guyman
Social climber
Moorpark, CA.
|
|
XCon and Antichrist.... I think you boys are delusional, but carry on.
|
|
Yury
Mountain climber
T.O.
|
|
MikeL:
I’d say there is something very important missing there ... Yes, Marxist theory is missing in this thread.
I would like to inject a bit of Marxism in this discussion because otherwise the root cause of the current social unrest may be also missed.
When we look at statistical numbers, we can notice correlation between growing disparity between reach and poor and growing social unrest and growing dysfunction of the US parliament.
Assuming current trend continues, I can see only two potential outcomes:
1) Political parties start to cooperate, emulate Roosevelt and decrease the gap between rich and poor to acceptable level.
We need more cooperation between Left and Right elites to accomplish this.
There are some signs (like this thread by NutAgain!), that this is possible.
2) In case elites do not start cooperating, social unrest won't stop until full blown revolution destroys the current American democracy.
There are some signs (like posts of some left agitators on this thread) that this is also possible.
To realize option #1 both right and left elites need to agree that well being of underprivileged Americans (regardless of their gender, race, etc.) is more important than anything else (including rights of extra wealthy Americans and progressive agendas like the right of biological males to pee in girls bathroom).
Without such agreement option #2 becomes unavoidable
I still believe that option #1 is more likely (after a more substantial social unrest); at the same time I can't guarantee that option #2 won't happen.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2018 - 09:12am PT
|
Hi, Yuri,
I'd welcome some theory in the discussion beyond the specific complaints. It's somewhat obvious to me that (other than how two posters see things here so black and white) our situation in this country is complex. We could use some other "handles" on the situation of why we aren't together as a society, culture, or people.
Marx said some other things that he was noted for. One, due to a capitalist organization, labor (Man) felt disconnected from his or her labors. That situation alienates him. Alienation is a big thing for Marx; and there would be class struggles. Hence, the need co-ownership in order to facilitate more sharing of productive resources and their fruits. Marx has been seen primarily as an economic theorist, but alienation he got from Hegel, who employed it as spiritual concept. Psychologically, we are all--and can't help but be--alienated (thanks, Freud!). Robust community ameliorates alienation because there is a place and purpose for people and individuals.
I'd suggest, however, that the general public's view on individualism and autonomy undermines past notions of traditional community. From a very early age, many of us come to feel that we can eschew history (family, local community, religion, work heritage of our fathers or mothers, nations, cultures) and do whatever or be whoever we wanted. The price, however, is alienation because we are groundless--no longer parochially oriented and educated.
|
|
NutAgain!
Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 10, 2018 - 09:17am PT
|
MikeL:
I’d say there is something very important missing there, although I cannot articulate what it is, nor can I say how any of it could be brought into usage. What you suggest seem to be technical interventions. IMO, something big and important is missing. Maybe more than one thing.
EdwardT:
A common goal or interest is needed. Something more compelling than the causes of the divide. What that may be. Who knows?
I've been mulling this over, wrote a bunch of stuff... but I'll shorten it. edit: and expand it again ;)
Best I can come up with is "Faith." Not necessarily in religion... I'm talking about a sort of expectation, an unshakable belief not anchored in evidence or reason, that if we try all try our best to live in a way that makes the world a better place for more than ourselves, that if we seek to give as much or more than we receive, that things will work out.
The loss of this faith, the loss of hope, is a short road to perdition and terrible behavior. When I lost hope in the continuance of my first marriage (honestly, I lost this hope every time we fought from the beginning), lost hope that my positive efforts would result in anything positive, then I was not proud of my behavior in the wake of that. When I didn't see a solution to a problem, I gave up and unwittingly made the problem worse. What did it matter? Everything was going to sh!t anyways. It couldn't get any worse....
I think in our society, we have that magnified across a huge population interacting with each other, giving up on the idea of resolving problems and not caring about making it worse and then all these negative behaviors just reinforce the collective belief that everyone is screwed up and nothing is worth saving and there is no point in trying.
Perhaps this is just a hiccup, a growing pain in the evolution of our society... sort of like what is happening with the institutions of marriage and child-raising, where we recognize some short-comings of an institution and try to make radical changes and suffer the side-effects in pursuit of a bigger long term goal.
For a long time, women surrendered their hopes, dreams, goals, in the service of keeping marital peace. As they claimed their power, the uncertainty of division of power and areas of responsibility in a marriage led to new challenges- the need to communicate effectively to decide who handles what, and how to signal when things aren't working, and a mutual commitment to compromise to make it work. With these changing circumstances and unmet needs, the rate of divorce skyrocketed. Now people are less quick to hop into a marriage because they recognize these additional requirements and the fact that it can be really hard to find the right fit. To be sure, we are not yet collectively through that societal hiccup. Many seek the comfort and security and peace of traditional ways with clear lines of responsibility. Many think it is impossible and eschew the institution of marriage and either seek out or stumble into baby-mamas and baby-daddies or seek out a life without children. Many are pressing onward, identifying and honoring the new rules that lead to greater fulfillment and happiness for all parties (whether they are the same or different sexes, two or more people, etc.) as part of an equality-based marriage with lines of responsibility collectively drawn, customized to their respective strengths and weaknesses.
Also with child-raising: our society recognized that children have feelings and child abuse is bad, and in trying to give that up, we've had a few generations where many are raised with insufficient boundaries, raised with a hollow idea of self-esteem not anchored in personal responsibility or accomplishment. More people are now learning how to raise children with positive and effective discipline without it being anchored in abuse. Overall, it is a lot of side-tracks but ultimately taking us a step closer toward an ideal of how to be.
So perhaps we are also in this space with church and religion and morality... our society recognized some problems with the institution of church and organized religions, and our society is experimenting with ways to live in a society that is not based around a church. We are now struggling with the loss of the good things that came with the church: a shared sense of right and wrong, a common anchor for our sense of belonging and community, a way to have hope/faith in our future when we can't logically see it.
Like with the evolution of marriage, and the evolution of child-raising, perhaps this evolution of society to not depend on a church is a good thing in the long term and we have to be patient to let the kinks get worked out. Change is difficult, it is scary, and it often feels like maybe we would have been better off not starting it if we knew ahead of time how hard it would be. Sometimes I felt that way about parenthood! But I'm very happy for the relationship I have with my children, what kind of people they are turning out to be, and it is a joy to see what has blossomed.
Key to the advancement of the institution of marriage, and the practices of child-raising, have been the massive development of our emotional faculties: learning concepts and language to describe the dynamics and the patterns; learning the sources of energy that support or limit us; learning how to create space between our thoughts, impulses, and actions. I see the same needs for advancing our society, to keep the benefits that came from church-centric communities without the short-comings that cause friction in our global melting-pot of humanity.
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2018 - 04:54pm PT
|
Yanqui on July 8 mentions a "study" where a sample of Americans, divided into two groups: "liberals" and "conservatives" were presented with lies... if they like the outcome, then people from either group may judge the lie as morally acceptable.
This is not an accurate conclusion.
Several studies show that conservatives are MORE likely to lie.
"misinformation is currently predominantly a pathology of the right, and extreme voices from the right have been continuously attacking the mainstream media (Benkler et al., 2017). As a result, some conservative voters are even suspicious of fact-checking sites (Allcott and Gentzkow, 2017). This leaves them particularly susceptible to misinformation, which is being produced and repeated, in fact, by those same extreme voices."
https://shorensteincenter.org/combating-fake-news-agenda-for-research/
https://www.cjr.org/analysis/breitbart-media-trump-harvard-study.php
"The New York Times cataloged no less than 117 clearly false statements proclaimed publicly by Trump in the first six months of his presidency, with no evident loss in his supporters’ faith in him."
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2017/11/why_conservatives_are_more_susceptible_to_believing_in_lies.html
" Of the 20 top-performing false election stories identified in the analysis, all but three were overtly pro-Donald Trump or anti-Hillary Clinton." https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/viral-fake-election-news-outperformed-real-news-on-facebook?utm_term=.shPBgyJgO#.sf4QLExL7
https://cmpa.gmu.edu/study-media-fact-checker-says-republicans-lie-more/
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2013/05/29/study-reveals-republicans-lie-moreor-politifact-has-serious-liberal
https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/partisan-fb-pages-analysis?utm_term=.vjJD3W93L#.tpexn92nD
https://www.alternet.org/media/why-conservatives-opt-propaganda-over-reality
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201003/why-liberals-are-more-intelligent-conservatives
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2018 - 06:11pm PT
|
Could the crux of the problem be our entitlement mentality? It seems everyone (or at least the majority) has embraced a selfish, "what's the government gonna do for me" mindset.
My grandfather volunteered during WWI. Both he and my father volunteered during WWII. They did so because it was their duty as Americans, knowing full well of the potential downside. This was about their core values. They were not the exception. Those values were fairly mainstream at the time.
JFK famously said "ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country."
We've flipped that phrase on it's head. Now, it's about what's in it for me? What benefits can be obtained for my tribe?
If we tried to be less selfish... more giving... as a way of life, the issues that divide would become less important... and the divisiveness would ebb.
Just something to ponder.
|
|
Roadie
Trad climber
moab UT
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2018 - 05:46pm PT
|
I am pretty certain that it was BUSH who did nothing to prevent 9-11. Obama was in the Illinois state house then.
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2018 - 08:16pm PT
|
trump is the OPPOSITE of Christian but thanks for your fake news about his great uniting trollisms.
Russia bots and the NY mafia love him.
He has publicly announced he would join whatever party would make him king.
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2018 - 08:22pm PT
|
How many lies in the trumpy's tally so far?
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2018 - 08:32pm PT
|
bragmoran posted:
"The day after 9-11 I went directly to the military recruiter so that I could join the army. They told me I was perfectly qualified because of my courage, commitment, and humility. Although I waited years for the right time to join, I was told I could not enlist because I was 39 years old.
Not only did Obama do nothing to stop the attacks of 9-11, his regulations prevented some of our finest citizens from defending our freedom."
You already posted that same lie about Obama on June 21 and were already corrected. Clearly your ability to absorb facts is as limited as trumpy.
Did your brain lose oxygen for too long while you were shouting benquazi, benkooky, benqueasy, benquacky, benkaki, bencookoo?
|
|
NutAgain!
Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 13, 2018 - 08:38pm PT
|
For folks who have a life and don’t spend too much time here, Bragman is someone on an extended deep water trolling mission to parody Cragman. I don’t quite spend enough time here to know who it is though. In any case, don’t take what he says too seriously.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!