First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
Post Reply Social justice losers
13127 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 4/15/16

megahobbit wrote:


sundin13 wrote:


Its difficult for me to really respond to something so vaguely presented. Could you elaborate a bit?


Okay.

Democracy is an ideology. The founding fathers were dedicated to democracy as an ideology. By your logic they were irrational because of that.


Not irrational, but I believe that if you think that Democracy is perfect, you are simply being ignorant to the ways of the world. Democracy runs into a lot of issues which are highly visible in the problems that we are seeing today, from rampant ignorance within the populace to well...ideologies running rampant in politics.

I guess I could say that ideology as I speak of it is something that evolves after time goes by. Often ideologies emerge as a solution to a problem. Democracy could be said to be the result of the analysis of governing bodies worldwide and their relations to the populace. Feminism was a result of the analysis of the treatment of women vs males in law, society, etc.. The problems with ideology come from when they stop being scrutinized at the same level as they were when they started, including the analysis of changing circumstances. I think this is in many ways inherent to ideologies due to some of the things I discussed earlier, but I suppose it could be true that the problems don't arise immediately.

I think the clearest place to see that in relation to this discussion are the people who hold onto the Constitution as if it is sacred and do not continually re-evaluate it. Times and conditions have changed, and this strict adherence to the Constitution as the central point of the ideology of US democracy is a problem with our political system born out of the flaws of ideologies.
9551 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M
Offline
Posted 4/15/16

sundin13 wrote:

Not irrational, but I believe that if you think that Democracy is perfect, you are simply being ignorant to the ways of the world. Democracy runs into a lot of issues which are highly visible in the problems that we are seeing today, from rampant ignorance within the populace to well...ideologies running rampant in politics.

I guess I could say that ideology as I speak of it is something that evolves after time goes by. Often ideologies emerge as a solution to a problem. Democracy could be said to be the result of the analysis of governing bodies worldwide and their relations to the populace. Feminism was a result of the analysis of the treatment of women vs males in law, society, etc.. The problems with ideology come from when they stop being scrutinized at the same level as they were when they started, including the analysis of changing circumstances. I think this is in many ways inherent to ideologies due to some of the things I discussed earlier, but I suppose it could be true that the problems don't arise immediately.

I think the clearest place to see that in relation to this discussion are the people who hold onto the Constitution as if it is sacred and do not continually re-evaluate it. Times and conditions have changed, and this strict adherence to the Constitution as the central point of the ideology of US democracy is a problem with our political system born out of the flaws of ideologies.


...Okay democracy is not a perfect system as it exists in america. First off thats largely because they didnt create a perfect democracy they created a republic built to service rich white people. And frankly thats because we abandoned the ideology of democracy not because of it. We should strive to create a perfect democratic system.

Are you suggesting all ideologies will always eventually be taken to far? So therefore ideologies are bad? If so thats what they call the "slippery slope fallacy".

The constitution thing is a bad example given that most of the time thats just an excuse people use not a cohesive ideology. Nor for that matter does the constitution when it was first drafted actually concern much about democracy or how to run a government in it with the exception of the 10 amendment which secures states rights (which similar to what I mentioned above is rarely ever used as a cohesive ideology but as an excuse)
6073 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 4/15/16 , edited 4/17/16
Can we just agree that 90% of everything is negative/retarded and move on with our lives? K, thx.
Posted 4/15/16

D4nc3Style wrote:

https://youtu.be/e3ofna1Mtl0

This video is great. It shows the hypocrisy, the stupidity, the irony of the "Social Justice Warrior" As well as the black lives matter movement.

Social Justice Warriors claim you have to be tolerant of everyone, yet they are intolerant of people who think differently than them. And yet, somehow, the people who think differently than them are the bigots. I'm beginning to believe a lot of people don't know what that word means.

Everyone can be racist. Doesn't matter if you're white, black, brown, yellow, blue, purple or whatever. I've seen plenty of people from Black Lives Matter claim that white people have never been oppressed, therefore you can't be racist against them. Which, as you know, is total bullshit if you know your history. The ignorance of the entire movement is just amazing.


Funny you mention racism OP. I just went to a highschool theatrical play which had majority of the cast white and maybe 1 black guy out of 50 which I found rather odd. Then I went to the boys bathroom and in big black bold letters on the wall said "I hate niggers." Nuff said...
5019 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 4/15/16

bethos30 wrote:


D4nc3Style wrote:

https://youtu.be/e3ofna1Mtl0

This video is great. It shows the hypocrisy, the stupidity, the irony of the "Social Justice Warrior" As well as the black lives matter movement.

Social Justice Warriors claim you have to be tolerant of everyone, yet they are intolerant of people who think differently than them. And yet, somehow, the people who think differently than them are the bigots. I'm beginning to believe a lot of people don't know what that word means.

Everyone can be racist. Doesn't matter if you're white, black, brown, yellow, blue, purple or whatever. I've seen plenty of people from Black Lives Matter claim that white people have never been oppressed, therefore you can't be racist against them. Which, as you know, is total bullshit if you know your history. The ignorance of the entire movement is just amazing.


Funny you mention racism OP. I just went to a highschool theatrical play which had majority of the cast white and maybe 1 black guy out of 50 which I found rather odd. Then I went to the boys bathroom and in big black bold letters on the wall said "I hate niggers." Nuff said...


Racism can go every which way.

13127 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 4/16/16 , edited 4/16/16

megahobbit wrote:


sundin13 wrote:

Not irrational, but I believe that if you think that Democracy is perfect, you are simply being ignorant to the ways of the world. Democracy runs into a lot of issues which are highly visible in the problems that we are seeing today, from rampant ignorance within the populace to well...ideologies running rampant in politics.

I guess I could say that ideology as I speak of it is something that evolves after time goes by. Often ideologies emerge as a solution to a problem. Democracy could be said to be the result of the analysis of governing bodies worldwide and their relations to the populace. Feminism was a result of the analysis of the treatment of women vs males in law, society, etc.. The problems with ideology come from when they stop being scrutinized at the same level as they were when they started, including the analysis of changing circumstances. I think this is in many ways inherent to ideologies due to some of the things I discussed earlier, but I suppose it could be true that the problems don't arise immediately.

I think the clearest place to see that in relation to this discussion are the people who hold onto the Constitution as if it is sacred and do not continually re-evaluate it. Times and conditions have changed, and this strict adherence to the Constitution as the central point of the ideology of US democracy is a problem with our political system born out of the flaws of ideologies.


...Okay democracy is not a perfect system as it exists in america. First off thats largely because they didnt create a perfect democracy they created a republic built to service rich white people. And frankly thats because we abandoned the ideology of democracy not because of it. We should strive to create a perfect democratic system.

Are you suggesting all ideologies will always eventually be taken to far? So therefore ideologies are bad? If so thats what they call the "slippery slope fallacy".

The constitution thing is a bad example given that most of the time thats just an excuse people use not a cohesive ideology. Nor for that matter does the constitution when it was first drafted actually concern much about democracy or how to run a government in it with the exception of the 10 amendment which secures states rights (which similar to what I mentioned above is rarely ever used as a cohesive ideology but as an excuse)


A perfect democratic system is impossible unless every citizen is completely knowledgeable about all goings on within the system that they are participating in, but that is beside the point.

I'd say that if you follow an ideology, as opposed to following the process used to create an ideology, that ideology has been "taken too far". As soon as you say "I believe in democracy" as opposed to "I believe in creating a governmental system which best serves the people's needs", you have lost the ability to accurately assess whether the former does the latter (hat isn't to say that democracy becomes a bad thing, or those who chase it are "irrational").

Is this inevitable? I'd say in a lot of ways, if an ideology grows to a certain size, there will a large number of people who start following the ideology instead of the process, so I'd say it probably is inevitable. I don't see much of a way that it wouldn't be. With the tendency of humans to cling to the past, cognitive biases, greed/selfishness, ignorance etc, I don't think it is possible to have a large number of people believing something deeply who would just change their mind as soon as new information came in.
9551 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M
Offline
Posted 4/16/16 , edited 4/16/16

sundin13 wrote:


A perfect democratic system is impossible unless every citizen is completely knowledgeable about all goings on within the system that they are participating in, but that is beside the point.

I'd say that if you follow an ideology, as opposed to following the process used to create an ideology, that ideology has been "taken too far". As soon as you say "I believe in democracy" as opposed to "I believe in creating a governmental system which best serves the people's needs", you have lost the ability to accurately assess whether the former does the latter (hat isn't to say that democracy becomes a bad thing, or those who chase it are "irrational").

Is this inevitable? I'd say in a lot of ways, if an ideology grows to a certain size, there will a large number of people who start following the ideology instead of the process, so I'd say it probably is inevitable. I don't see much of a way that it wouldn't be. With the tendency of humans to cling to the past, cognitive biases, greed/selfishness, ignorance etc, I don't think it is possible to have a large number of people believing something deeply who would just change their mind as soon as new information came in.


So basically I assumed correctly you made the slippery slope fallacy.

Also how has democracy as an ideology been taken to far the example you used is bunk but you have nothing other than "it is an ideology therefore it will inevitably be corrupted" which is circular logic. You have no evidence to show it has been taken to far.


I'd say that if you follow an ideology, as opposed to following the process used to create an ideology, that ideology has been "taken too far". As soon as you say "I believe in democracy" as opposed to "I believe in creating a governmental system which best serves the people's needs", you have lost the ability to accurately assess whether the former does the latter (hat isn't to say that democracy becomes a bad thing, or those who chase it are "irrational").


Also this is some of the most measly mouthed backwards rationalization I have ever read in my life. No one is interested in an ideology for that ideologies sake but the affect that ideology would have on the world.
13127 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 4/16/16

megahobbit wrote:


sundin13 wrote:


A perfect democratic system is impossible unless every citizen is completely knowledgeable about all goings on within the system that they are participating in, but that is beside the point.

I'd say that if you follow an ideology, as opposed to following the process used to create an ideology, that ideology has been "taken too far". As soon as you say "I believe in democracy" as opposed to "I believe in creating a governmental system which best serves the people's needs", you have lost the ability to accurately assess whether the former does the latter (hat isn't to say that democracy becomes a bad thing, or those who chase it are "irrational").

Is this inevitable? I'd say in a lot of ways, if an ideology grows to a certain size, there will a large number of people who start following the ideology instead of the process, so I'd say it probably is inevitable. I don't see much of a way that it wouldn't be. With the tendency of humans to cling to the past, cognitive biases, greed/selfishness, ignorance etc, I don't think it is possible to have a large number of people believing something deeply who would just change their mind as soon as new information came in.


So basically I assumed correctly you made the slippery slope fallacy.

Also how has democracy as an ideology been taken to far the example you used is bunk but you have nothing other than "it is an ideology therefore it will inevitably be corrupted" which is circular logic. You have no evidence to show it has been taken to far.


I'd say that if you follow an ideology, as opposed to following the process used to create an ideology, that ideology has been "taken too far". As soon as you say "I believe in democracy" as opposed to "I believe in creating a governmental system which best serves the people's needs", you have lost the ability to accurately assess whether the former does the latter (hat isn't to say that democracy becomes a bad thing, or those who chase it are "irrational").


Also this is some of the most measly mouthed backwards rationalization I have ever read in my life. No one is interested in an ideology for that ideologies sake but the affect that ideology would have on the world.


First of all, I disagree with your assertion that my argument is fallacious. The things that I am describing I believe have happened to many ideologies in the past and there are many reasons for this which I did mention, although I didn't go into great detail with (because my posts are already long enough). I'd say the primary factor playing into what I am discussing are cognitive biases, such as confirmation bias and belief bias, which lead people down the road of not critically evaluating information which doesn't fit into their current world view. This is exactly what I have been talking about since the beginning.

As for democracy as an ideology, I dropped it once you said that when you speak of democracy, you are not speaking of the current governing system of the USA and instead of pure democracy. I am personally not aware of any group or movement which says "down with the democratic republic, up with the democracy". As such, I don't believe it is really possible for me to evaluate them when I'm not even sure if they exist.

Finally, I find it fairly ridiculous that you believe that no one fits into the description I stated. Every time someone points at the constitution and says that it is infallible is demonstrating a greater belief in the Constitution than the process used to create the Constitution. Every time someone denies statistics and asserts that the Wage Gap means that women get paid 77c on the dollar for equal work, they are demonstrating that they hold a greater belief in feminism than in facts. Every time a feminist holds up flawed college rape statistics, they are showing that they believe in the ideology and not the process. Every time someone argues "you are wrong because you are a feminist" is showing that they put a greater worth on the ideology than on the ideas.

It seems tremendously ridiculous that you would argue that people don't blindly follow ideologies, so I believe you are misunderstanding me. I am not saying that these individuals do not care about, for example, equal rights for women. It simply means that they have stopped questioning "is this ideology the best means to that end" and to some extent, have stopped questioning feminism.
Posted 4/16/16
Hypocrites high on their own sense of self-righteousness. They are everything bad in the world and they need to be exterminated.
5276 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M
Offline
Posted 4/17/16
Considering sjw pretty much only used to described people who are asses about it. Saying that sjws are asses, isn't remarkable.

These issues still exist even in the first world. There's nothing wrong with protesting that.
15947 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Cold and High
Offline
Posted 4/17/16 , edited 4/17/16

Jean104 wrote:
There's nothing wrong with protesting that.
who said there was anything wrong about protesting rather then the protesters acting wrong and being misleading?


she even turned her own son in to the police when he committed a crime.
While that is what they protest about.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnZb4FgJqUQ
Even though she has been teared up in some of the later bits in the video, well the mother did go through some shit though (feeling, value related)
5072 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M
Offline
Posted 4/17/16


Bigot

noun:
1.a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.
2.a person who is intolerant of any ideas other than his or her own, esp on religion, politics, or race

So every SJW is a complete and total bigot. And now you know!


Also, just because I tolerate your opinion doesn't mean I have to agree with you.
md4124 
47303 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/17/16

D4nc3Style wrote:

https://youtu.be/e3ofna1Mtl0

This video is great. It shows the hypocrisy, the stupidity, the irony of the "Social Justice Warrior" As well as the black lives matter movement.

Social Justice Warriors claim you have to be tolerant of everyone, yet they are intolerant of people who think differently than them. And yet, somehow, the people who think differently than them are the bigots. I'm beginning to believe a lot of people don't know what that word means.

Everyone can be racist. Doesn't matter if you're white, black, brown, yellow, blue, purple or whatever. I've seen plenty of people from Black Lives Matter claim that white people have never been oppressed, therefore you can't be racist against them. Which, as you know, is total bullshit if you know your history. The ignorance of the entire movement is just amazing.


Boring conservative bigot is a boring conservative bigot. Yawn. Breitbart.com is that way ------>
33510 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / U.S.A.
Offline
Posted 4/17/16

Rivenhelper wrote:



Bigot

noun:
1.a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.
2.a person who is intolerant of any ideas other than his or her own, esp on religion, politics, or race

So every SJW is a complete and total bigot. And now you know!


Also, just because I tolerate your opinion doesn't mean I have to agree with you.

Ok?
5019 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 4/17/16

md4124 wrote:


D4nc3Style wrote:

https://youtu.be/e3ofna1Mtl0

This video is great. It shows the hypocrisy, the stupidity, the irony of the "Social Justice Warrior" As well as the black lives matter movement.

Social Justice Warriors claim you have to be tolerant of everyone, yet they are intolerant of people who think differently than them. And yet, somehow, the people who think differently than them are the bigots. I'm beginning to believe a lot of people don't know what that word means.

Everyone can be racist. Doesn't matter if you're white, black, brown, yellow, blue, purple or whatever. I've seen plenty of people from Black Lives Matter claim that white people have never been oppressed, therefore you can't be racist against them. Which, as you know, is total bullshit if you know your history. The ignorance of the entire movement is just amazing.


Boring conservative bigot is a boring conservative bigot. Yawn. Breitbart.com is that way ------>


"triggered"

First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.