I must be the oldest and wisest poster on the SDMB for me to see the dilemma of all political thread posters.
I started this new thread because my point(s) seem to just get lost in all the noise in the political debates. The thread “Why can’t we all just get long… w/o hating? ” Why can't we all just get long... w/o hating? - Great Debates - Straight Dope Message Board
prompts me to speak out clearly and thus the title.
A stereotype is a simplified and/or standardized conception or image with specific meaning, often held in common by people about another group. For individual people there can be both positive and negative effects of a stereotype which is seen to apply to them. The overall effects of stereotyping are seen by many to always be negative.
Possible prejudicial effects of stereotypes are:
Justification of ill-founded prejudices or ignorance
Unwillingness to rethink one’s attitudes and behavior towards stereotyped group
Self-fulfilling prophecy for both stereotyping and stereotyped group
Preventing some people of stereotyped groups from succeeding in activities or fields
I have observed in the threads that proponents of either side of the argument digress to a negative stereotype. They and I do this automatically without thinking. I have not yet mastered my practice. And I have observed that there is a whole lot of debate but not much altering of positions and that is the dilemma of the posters.
Postings can fall along the Allport’s Scale, a measure of the manifestation of prejudice in a society.
Scale 1, Anti locution Anti locution means a majority group freely make jokes about a minority group. Speech is in terms of negative stereotypes and negative images. This is also called hate speech. It is commonly seen as harmless by the majority. Anti locution itself may not be harmful, but it sets the stage for more severe outlets for prejudice.
Scale 2 Avoidance People in a minority group are actively avoided by members of the majority group. No direct harm may be intended, but harm is done through isolation.
Scale 3 Discrimination Minority group is discriminated against by denying them opportunities and services and so putting prejudice into action. Behaviors have the specific goal of harming the minority group by preventing them from achieving goals, getting education or jobs, etc. The majority group is actively trying to harm the minority.
Scale 4 Physical Attack The majority group vandalise minority group things, they burn property and carry out violent attacks on individuals or groups. Physical harm is done to members of the minority group. Examples are lynchings of blacks, pogroms against Jews in Europe, tarring and feathering Mormons in 1800s and British Loyalists in the 1700s.
Scale 5 Extermination The majority group seeks extermination of the minority group. They attempt to eliminate the entire group of people (e.g., Indian Wars to remove Native Americans, Final Solution to the Jewish Question in Germany, Ethnic cleansing in Armenia).
Hate speech is a term for speech intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a person or group of people based on their race, gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, moral or political views, socioeconomic class, occupation or appearance (such as height, weight, and hair color), mental capacity and any other distinction-liability.
In the thread **“Why can’t we all just get long… w/o hating? ” **having 47 posts I have identified 17 posts containing “hate speech” which included some anti locution in the OP. Recognizing this the MOD in post #31 went TWEEEEET,.
[QUOTE=tomndebb]
TWEEEEET!
Likewise, I see no need for any of the personal shots in this thread that demonstrate the point of the OP without actually discussing the point of the OP.[ /Moderating ]
[/QUOTE]
I have bolded the ‘hate speech’ and I have scaled them according to the Allport’s Scale. I have added comments to explain the scaling. Some posts contain more than one instantiation of “hate speech” . In which case I have scaled the entire post to the level of the highest prejudice found.
You will note that ‘hate speech’ even continued after the TWEEEEET.
Scale 1, Anti locution
[QUOTE=smiling bandit]
Something has been bothering me an awful lot in the modern world, and it’s something which has essentially never changed since humans were around. It seems like groups of humans cannot disagree without imputing insanity, smallness of character, gross stupidity, the most flagrant accusations of evil, and . In many of these cases, I think the accuser is either projecting or simply making the worst possible reading.
And yes, that applies both to the “asshole” right and the “pseudo-intellectual” left. This is not a partisanly exclusive problem, although it tends to flow back and forth every 20-30 years. The worst of the worst tend to join one party as it ascends in power, then causes its decline, then some the new jerks go into the other party, dragging it down, and so on.
[/QUOTE]
This thread then devolved into manifestations of prejudice as illustrated below:
Scale 1, Anti locution (HATE SPEECH)
[QUOTE=Jackmannii]
I think your political opinions are are moronic and despicable, yet you strike me as an intelligent and decent poster.
Now that we’ve got that out of the way,
[/QUOTE]
Scale 1, Anti locution
[QUOTE=Whack-a-Mole]
However I think she is as much a part of the machine that makes** Bush so bad.**
[/QUOTE]
Scale 3 Discrimination (is an attempt to prevent the other from being heard.)
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
One of the problems with “lets stop hating each other”, is that some things and some people deserve to be hated.
They (republicans) clearly aren’t interested in the country as a whole, don’t grasp the concept of good statesmanship, and are as a group firmly in the camp of people who can’t be gotten along with.
[/QUOTE]
Scale 3 Discrimination (is an attempt to prevent the other from being heard.)
[QUOTE=RedFury]
But of course, smiling bandit, we could obviously all get along if we’d only agreed with your paternalistic, nationalistic, rah rah USA #1, political outlook – as in supporting the status quo via the shameless McSame. But that’s beyond naive. Stop the wholesale butchering, torturing and invading nations for no other reason than you can, and then we’ll talk civics and morality. You (in the general sense) are really in no position to ask for any sort of universal accord for as long as you act that way.
[/QUOTE]
Scale 1, Anti locution (Replacing We’ve with I’ve then there would have no anti locution)
[QUOTE=Onomatopoeia]
We’ve become so cynical that we automatically expect, and have come to accept, the worst in everything and everyone, especially our leaders, so much so that we ridicule idealism and scoff when someone says, with a straight face, that we can be better.
[/QUOTE]
Scale 3 Discrimination
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
To be blunt, I see no reason to even suspect, much less believe that the Republicans in Congress care in the slightest about any of those things.
[/QUOTE]
Scale 3 Discrimination ( De Milo agreed with Trihs)
[QUOTE=Intravenus De Milo]
Well, granted,
[/QUOTE]
Scale 1, Anti locution (Replacing We’re with I’m then there would have no anti locution)
[QUOTE=Love Rhombus]
Honestly, I think it’s because we’re animals at heart, and the first instinct of an animal is self-preservation.
[/QUOTE]
Scale 5 Extermination (hanged)
[QUOTE=elucidator]
It isn’t merely that I disagree with the people who have buggered our country for the last eight years, it is that I despise them. I have ample reason. Jesus will forgive them, no doubt, but I’d prefer to wait until they are hanged.
[/QUOTE]
Scale 5 Extermination (If it is evil it must be exterminated according to Judeo-Christian-cultural expectations)( Should we exterminate politics? What would be its replacement?)
[QUOTE=bump]
Basically, politics is a necessary evil, and it taints those who get caught up in it, regardless of their beliefs.
[/QUOTE]
Scale 2 Avoidance (I should have said west coast and candidate to not be prejudiced. I apologize for my lack of mastery of my practice.)
[QUOTE=focusonz]
the left coast cities,
Emotional investment in Obama
[/QUOTE]
Scale 2 Avoidance
[QUOTE=Zoe]
I would still save Bush and Cheney if a bulding were on fire, but they would be the last ones – right after Charles Manson and Rush Limbaugh.
[/QUOTE]
Scale 5 Extermination (If it is evil it must be exterminated according to Judeo-Christian-cultural expectations)
[QUOTE=Shodan]
**“It’s not just rhetoric - your candidate really is evil, and if you won’t admit that, then you must be evil too!” **
The demonizing process is happening mostly on one candidate, because that candidate is running against the SDMB’s Chosen One.
And so on, and so on, world without end, amen.
[/QUOTE]
Scale 1, Anti locution
[QUOTE=Hamlet]
I think many Americans have become emotionally stunted; never growing out of the emotional stability of a 3 year old.
[/QUOTE]
Scale 2 Avoidance
[QUOTE=Oy!]
But then, the press is driven by the tastes of the people, who seem to enjoy World Wide Wrestling and want the general technique to be extended throughout society.
it never seemed to have iinfected the regular people so much as now.
Is there anything so satisfying as that feeling of “Gotcha!” that tells you that not only are you correct, but you are morally right?
[/QUOTE]
Scale 2 Avoidance
[QUOTE=smiling bandit]
In the US, I generally think essentially every idea a Democrat espouses on, say, trade or economics is going to be counterproductive and flawed from the start. (Republicans are only 90% always counterproductive and flawed from the start! )
[/QUOTE]
The questions for discussion are:
Is the point of the political debate of the threads to alter a political position?
Has anyones political position been changed by any poster using hate speech?
Do you agree or disagree with my scaling of the manifestation of prejudice for each post?
Is there anything worthwhile in being prejudiced?
How do you intend to affirm not to use hate speech in your postings?
What should a poster using ‘hate speech’ expect from you in reply?
But I try to consider both sides of the issue and avoid it, because once the vitriol in a discussion starts rising, the odds of anybody achieving understanding or learning anything starts decreasing rapidly.