Jump to content

Is Surly more Liberal than Shaggy?

Parliament

By Parliament
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

zork

zork 629

Posted
Posted (edited)

Do you believe 'Reality TV' is real life?  Ever heard the term:  NY Bullshitter?

9780691122946.png?itok=qjkjmV64
 

Spoiler

 

Quote

One of the most salient features of our culture is that there is so much bullshit. Everyone knows this. Each of us contributes his share. But we tend to take the situation for granted. Most people are rather confident of their ability to recognize bullshit and to avoid being taken in by it. So the phenomenon has not aroused much deliberate concern. We have no clear understanding of what bullshit is, why there is so much of it, or what functions it serves. And we lack a conscientiously developed appreciation of what it means to us. In other words, as Harry Frankfurt writes, "we have no theory."

Frankfurt, one of the world's most influential moral philosophers, attempts to build such a theory here. With his characteristic combination of philosophical acuity, psychological insight, and wry humor, Frankfurt proceeds by exploring how bullshit and the related concept of humbug are distinct from lying. He argues that bullshitters misrepresent themselves to their audience not as liars do, that is, by deliberately making false claims about what is true. In fact, bullshit need not be untrue at all.

Rather, bullshitters seek to convey a certain impression of themselves without being concerned about whether anything at all is true. They quietly change the rules governing their end of the conversation so that claims about truth and falsity are irrelevant. Frankfurt concludes that although bullshit can take many innocent forms, excessive indulgence in it can eventually undermine the practitioner's capacity to tell the truth in a way that lying does not. Liars at least acknowledge that it matters what is true. By virtue of this, Frankfurt writes, bullshit is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are.

 

 

 

 

https://press.princeton.edu/titles/7929.html

And there you have it:  Reality TV's finest AKA "The Bullshitter in Chief".

 

And a Primer:

https://www.esquire.com/lifestyle/a56632/how-to-bullshit/

 

Edited by zork
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NameAlreadyInUse

NameAlreadyInUse 5106

Posted
Posted

I don't think its more liberal.  Its definitely more reactionary.  But I understand why.

I used to be a Republican, and then one day I was attacked by the Republican president. A Republican president I had voted for, to be clear.  It opened my eyes and made me look at my positions in a way I had never been forced to look at them before.  I became a libertarian, mainly because that was the wing of the Republican party that best represented my views.  I posted some about how my political affiliations had changed, wherever I was posting at the time, but that was it.  In West Mall, and then Cloak Room I had bought into the "both sides" team, and remained firmly libertarian in my views, until life got in the way and I started to realize that there are definitely situations where government is necessary, over and above national defense and roads.  I was  still mostly libertarian in nature, with a few exceptions.  But my posting on West Mall and Cloak room, for most of the lives of those forums, was related to gay rights and both sidesisms.  

I will vote as a Democrat in the midterms, and for the foreseeable future, and that's not because my views have changed all that much.  I've adjusted my views some based on life experience, but mostly, I still want a government that is on the small side and that is sane.  What has gone off the rails for me is both sidesisms.  Yeah I don't like Republicans.  Yeah I don't like Democrats.  But, it is perfectly clear that the Republican party has been heading down this path for a long long time.  Evangelical leaders got us started, then guys like Limbaugh and Hannity put a political spin on this nihilism that's spread through that party like crazy.  You know things have gone off the deep end for a party when leaders in that party start taking Alex Jones seriously, and that has happened, repeatedly, in the last few years.  This is no longer a both sides situation, because the Republicans as they exist today are so much worse than the Democrats that both sides has no meaning.  

All those things that Brisket brought up are insane. But all of them are true. There is not another president in my lifetime who could have actually done all those things and survived it.  Hell, most of them wouldn't have survived the bullshit they put up with from the Okie EPA guy. The fact that this hasn't really changed the popularity of Trump says a lot of things about the Republican party as a whole, and none of them are good. It tells me I can expect more of the same for at least the next decade.  Maybe the Dems will get worse or the Reps will get better, and I will go back to my both sides arguments.  Or maybe one of them will actually become a center right party who cares about the rights of all people, and I can actually find a home.  But for now, its time to go with the lesser of two evils with full voice, and that means I will vote with the Dems for the first time. 

This is the legacy that is being left by this brand of Republicanism.  It's turned people who were happy enough just to throw away their vote and bitch on the sidelines into people who will actually cross the aisle and vote against them.  That's not because a change in ideology of the posters on this board, its because of a change in ideology of one of the parties.

And for the record, since I got the right to vote, I have voted for President this way - 1992: George Bush, 1996: Bob Dole, 2000:  GW Bush, 2004: Libertarian candidate, 2008: Libertarian candidate, 2012: Libertarian candidate: 2016: Gary Johnson (only one whose name I even remember).  

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Parliament

Parliament 14128

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Are there any Republicans with libertarian leanings out there?  I was a huge Rand Paul fan, until he proved himself to be a self-righteous twerp.  ND governor Doug Bergum probably is.  He's being sued by our (Republican) Legislature because he doesn't want to spend money fast enough.  Probably dislikes gun nuts like me, but supported Open Carry legislation.  And I bet he's Pro Choice.

There has GOT to be others out there, though.

Edited by Parliament
Link to comment
Share on other sites
936horn

936horn 910

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Parliament said:

Are there any Republicans with libertarian leanings out there?  I was a huge Rand Paul fan, until he proved himself to be a self-righteous twerp.  There has GOT to be others out there, though.

I'd call myself fiscally conservative with libertarian leanings for sure. Basically quit fucking spending so much money, get a balanced budget going, keep government out of as many things as humanly possible would be my conservative angle. Socially, I don't care if you are gay, lesbian, LGBTQBBQ or whatever. Gays getting married doesn't make one shit to me. You're a guy who was born a girl but is now a dude who likes men? I may not fully understand it but that's cool. I mostly just don't like people telling me how to feel or forcing their beliefs on me, but I'm pretty good with people doing what they want on the social front.

Edited by 936horn
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Parliament

Parliament 14128

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Socially, I don't care if you are gay, lesbian, LGBTQBBQ or whatever. Gays getting married doesn't make one shit to me. You're a guy who was born a girl but is now a dude who likes men? Ok, cool. I mostly just don't like people telling me how to feel or forcing their beliefs on me, but I'm pretty good with people doing what they want on the social front.

 

Income taxes of course, but in what other areas does the Federal Government care about marriage?  Not looking to argue it, but maybe we aren't that far from the Feds uninvolvement?  At the State level it's different of course, and that's good.  Oklahomans can marry their sister, Texas can marry Cholas, etc.  Doing it that way seems like a worthy compromise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
936horn

936horn 910

Posted
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Parliament said:

Socially, I don't care if you are gay, lesbian, LGBTQBBQ or whatever. Gays getting married doesn't make one shit to me. You're a guy who was born a girl but is now a dude who likes men? Ok, cool. I mostly just don't like people telling me how to feel or forcing their beliefs on me, but I'm pretty good with people doing what they want on the social front.

 

Income taxes of course, but in what other areas does the Federal Government care about marriage?  Not looking to argue it, but maybe we aren't that far from the Feds uninvolvement?  At the State level it's different of course, and that's good.  Oklahomans can marry their sister, Texas can marry Cholas, etc.  Doing it that way seems like a worthy compromise.

Should have been more clear - I mean less fed involvement in just about anything besides matters of national importance like trade, defense, etc. Basically, 9.9 times out of 10 either private citizens or corporations can do x, y, or z better, cheaper, and more efficiently than the government 

Edited by 936horn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NameAlreadyInUse

NameAlreadyInUse 5106

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, Parliament said:

Socially, I don't care if you are gay, lesbian, LGBTQBBQ or whatever. Gays getting married doesn't make one shit to me. You're a guy who was born a girl but is now a dude who likes men? Ok, cool. I mostly just don't like people telling me how to feel or forcing their beliefs on me, but I'm pretty good with people doing what they want on the social front.

 

Income taxes of course, but in what other areas does the Federal Government care about marriage?  Not looking to argue it, but maybe we aren't that far from the Feds uninvolvement?  At the State level it's different of course, and that's good.  Oklahomans can marry their sister, Texas can marry Cholas, etc.  Doing it that way seems like a worthy compromise.

Compromise? I think that ship has sailed, man. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29397

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, 936horn said:

I'd call myself fiscally conservative with libertarian leanings for sure. Basically quit fucking spending so much money, get a balanced budget going, keep government out of as many things as humanly possible would be my conservative angle. Socially, I don't care if you are gay, lesbian, LGBTQBBQ or whatever. Gays getting married doesn't make one shit to me. You're a guy who was born a girl but is now a dude who likes men? I may not fully understand it but that's cool. I mostly just don't like people telling me how to feel or forcing their beliefs on me, but I'm pretty good with people doing what they want on the social front.

You actually sound more like a fiscally responsible liberal or a libertarian progressive. Wanna guess when the last time the federal budget was balanced or actually produced a surplus?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Parliament

Parliament 14128

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for the link.

They say Republicans in Congress more favor social liberty than Democrats, if I read that right. (And it has to do with free speach.)  I will say Republicans, as a whole, get a bad rap for social liberty.  Seems our kooks get more attention than they warrant.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Parliament

Parliament 14128

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I kindly disagree.  They certainly shift over time.* And the 2 parties definitely circle around them.  But at the basic level, they are not meaningless.  With the 2 terms being so co-opted, perhaps "Liberal" and "Conservative" have MORE meaning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thrillhammer

thrillhammer 683

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

Compromise? I think that ship has sailed, man. 

i heard a conversation on pbs newshour where they were saying that because of the frustration people have with washington they elect people that won't compromise, creating further gridlock and frustration.  i hear people say we are more divisive now than ever, and i dont know if that's true, but it would be nice to see someone from either side reach across the aisle.  it's no secret that if a republican were to run today and say in his campaign "i'll work with democrats to fix the problems of this country", his run would be over before it started.  that's a non-starter.  i dont think it would be as bad a campaign promise to the democrats.  we need compromise.  we need to find common solutions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Parliament

Parliament 14128

Posted
  • Author
Posted
5 minutes ago, thrillhammer said:

i heard a conversation on pbs newshour where they were saying that because of the frustration people have with washington they elect people that won't compromise, creating further gridlock and frustration.  i hear people say we are more divisive now than ever, and i dont know if that's true, but it would be nice to see someone from either side reach across the aisle.  it's no secret that if a republican were to run today and say in his campaign "i'll work with democrats to fix the problems of this country", his run would be over before it started.  that's a non-starter.  i dont think it would be as bad a campaign promise to the democrats.  we need compromise.  we need to find common solutions.

And the same if a Democrat pledged to work with Republicans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NameAlreadyInUse

NameAlreadyInUse 5106

Posted
Posted

 

6 minutes ago, thrillhammer said:

i heard a conversation on pbs newshour where they were saying that because of the frustration people have with washington they elect people that won't compromise, creating further gridlock and frustration.  i hear people say we are more divisive now than ever, and i dont know if that's true, but it would be nice to see someone from either side reach across the aisle.  it's no secret that if a republican were to run today and say in his campaign "i'll work with democrats to fix the problems of this country", his run would be over before it started.  that's a non-starter.  i dont think it would be as bad a campaign promise to the democrats.  we need compromise.  we need to find common solutions.

I agree in general.  I disagree on marriage equality.  That issue has already been decided.  We don't need to do anything else with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tennesseehorn

Tennesseehorn 101

Posted
Posted
On 5/8/2018 at 11:50 AM, Hank Scorpio said:

It really is a shame that most of the nutjobs didn't make the migration over. The politics board is boring as shit. I need someone to come in and bomb threads about how eugenics has many modern day applications and always make sure to type out "Barack Hussein Obama". 

And none of the pizzagaters made it over either, which means that they must be too busy liberating child sex slaves from pizza joints to post. 

It's called an "echo chamber".

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spankytoes

Spankytoes 1736

Posted
Posted
On 5/8/2018 at 3:16 PM, Brisketexan said:

 

1 - tell me what I said in that list that’s false.

2 - you bet your ass that’s part of it. And you better watch your ass, because whatever “group” you’re a part of, Trump will demonize it and whip up a frenzy against it the instant he thinks it will earn him applause from his base.

I grew up in a country and state that was steadily moving away from stigma and prejudice against Hispanics. So, yeah, when I see us throw things into reverse gear, and my kids and I have folks doubt our loyalty to this country because of our last name, I damned well perk up.

Fucking Nazis are enabled by this fuckhole. Nazis, man. And he couldn’t even bring himself to condemn them. Come the fuck on, man. If Muslim terrorists had marched through our streets with torches, culminating in driving a car through the crowd, and Obama had said there were “good people on both sides,” you would be (justifiably) flipping your shit.

2 years ago: "Why can't Obama say ISLAMIC terrorists?!? We all know who is doing it!!!"

Every side has the same complaint. I despise Trump, but the country asked for him. We were tired of Presidents acting like royalty and not accomplishing anything. Whether you agree with his positions or not, Trump backs up exactly what he said that he was going to do. He didn't bullshit people to get elected. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NameAlreadyInUse

NameAlreadyInUse 5106

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

2 years ago: "Why can't Obama say ISLAMIC terrorists?!? We all know who is doing it!!!"

Every side has the same complaint. I despise Trump, but the country asked for him. We were tired of Presidents acting like royalty and not accomplishing anything. Whether you agree with his positions or not, Trump backs up exactly what he said that he was going to do. He didn't bullshit people to get elected. 

Lulz

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bernorange

bernorange 8348

Posted
Posted

Cross post from the windsock poll:

6 minutes ago, bernorange said:

So this thread is fading down the page.  The poll got 68 votes as of this post.  The last poll on Shaggy (also 2018 and posted two months ago) had 105 votes.  Is it an indication that the political forum on Surly is less active overall than Shaggy was a couple of months ago?  Perhaps.  Maybe folks just didn't feel like voting/participating.

As of this moment, Surly 2018 poll shows:

~26% Dem/lib vs. ~17% Pub/conservative

Shaggy 2018 poll showed:

~28% Dem/lib vs. ~13% Pub/conservative

It would seem that the results are similar, however, there is a a large contingent of folks self identifying as independent/moderate that, based upon their post history, I would consider left of center.  So far, I would say, yes, Surly politics forum does lean left of center.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...