That’s true! Just look at 19th century politics, for instance. Since the '60s, not one senator has been caned by a political enemy. World’s getting better, eh?
But there’s honestly no point in arguing with Starving Artist again. Wasn’t there a joke about this in America: The Book? Republicans are the party that wants to return to an imaginary 1950s that never actually existed. Starving Artist lives in a fantasy world, and he’s utterly convinced that people used to have “manners” and society wasn’t “permissive”, and he doesn’t really care if reality disagrees with him. I’ve seen it before. To him, the ultimate political argument boils down to how things used to be in the good ol’ days, and he simply doesn’t have the mental capacity to evaluate such beliefs and examine them against actual evidence.
As usual, you don’t have the faintest idea what you’re talking about. It so happens that I lived during that time and I know firsthand how things used to be as contrasted with the way they are now. You, or Steve MB, or anyone else can come up with some example where someone, somewhere, didn’t fit the description, and congratulate yourself for allegedly disproving the point, but the fact remains that I know how society was then because I lived in it as opposed to your view which was undoubtedly manufactured in the liberal halls of academe where any such mention of the good old days is equated with racial bigotry and dismissed…as though the one had anything at all to do with the other. :rolleyes: And it’s obvious from the ridiculous statement you made above to the effect that people only behaved better then because they were exploiting blacks that you’ve bought the university line hook, line and sinker.
I don’t think it’s me who’s showing an inability to look at actual evidence and arrive at the correct conclusion.
It’s a wonder you don’t tire of these silly attempts at self-aggragandizing intellectual superiority. You apparently don’t realize it only makes you appear to have psychological problems…which I guess is okay after all, given that you clearly do.
Starving Artist, you’re worried about the state of public decency, but you’re posting profanity and talking about 7 year-olds giving blow jobs on a public message board?
Yep, but around here it would hardly go noticed. And besides, like the guy who loves a car that couldn’t make it in the marketplace, I doubt that any ‘kids’ would have the patience and/or interest to follow the ‘seasoned’ discourse that takes place in this thread.
Given that, I have to say that I’m not really worried about the state of public decency; I simply view it with disgust and disdain. Then, when someone gets their panties all in a knot and becomes literally outraged because they didn’t get to hear the word “bullshit” on public t.v., I get a chance to lobby against that silly attitude and the permissiveness that would allow such language to be used. The fact is, however, the fucked up way things are now isn’t going to change…at least not very much nor very soon. I am pleased however, that the tide seems to be turning somewhat and I look forward to it continuing to do so.
Oh, come now. That’s simply sad, Starving Artist. You know quite well that personal anecdotes aren’t accepted as evidence in the real world. You only “know” so far as your judgment is accurate. Most people are not terribly inclined to think, and you’re certainly no exception on that point - and most people don’t have the capacity for self-evaluation required to recognize when they’re being confused by nostalgia. You, in your limitations, are so blinded by it that you’re unable to comprehend that anyone might not see it the way you do - unless the nasty liberal college professors have brainwashed them! But me, I’m not inclined towards lazy thought the way you are; it’s through consideration of issues and challenging my own perceptions that I’ve developed the ability to reject mindless nostalgia.
I’ve already explained to you that that’s not what I said. Do I need to use shorter words for you, or are you under some mistaken belief that you can win an argument by pretending that your opponent said things they didn’t?
Out of curiosity, have you even attended college? Because these laughable notions that you’re repeating, in almost exactly the same words as the right-wing talk radio hosts and other such demagogues you get your opinions from, are so far from reality that anyone who has actually attended college would have to recognize how utterly ridiculous they are. Is it so terrifying to you to imagine students at a university learning things that you have to invent stories about people being indoctrinated by evil liberals?
Perhaps you truly, honestly don’t think so. That makes it even sadder. But at the same time, it’s an interesting contrast to your refusal to examine the issue in any other context besides fantastical hypotheticals.
Ahh, you’re a psychologist, now? It’s not even that I’m smarter than you, Starving Artist (though, obviously, I am.) It’s that you repeat the propaganda you hear from media demagogues and in the exact same words they do! You haven’t ever had an original thought in your life, have you? You go around repeating the slogans you’ve been internalizing for years, but when you’re asked for evidence, the only thing you can do is say, in essence, “I know! I was there! You’re a liberal and you’ve been indoctrinated by all that book learnin’!” (Well, that and make shit up and claim your opponents said it, as noted above.) The trouble is that the shit you make up is such utter nonsense that no one who’s not also steeped in the same ferment of right-wing media believes it. That’s why the thoughtful, intellectual conservatives on the board never pop up to defend you, Starving Artist. The only folks who do are your fellow MPSIMS half-wits. If you had ever actually attended college, you’d recognize that this silly notion of “liberal indoctrination” is nothing but propaganda spread by people wishing to ignite class hatred and stir up the minds of the undereducated and get them all riled up at the “elitists” and “ivory tower liberals”. But you don’t have the life experience or the basic knowledge to recognize it, so instead, you’re the manipulated.
That’s why I have contempt for you, Starving Artist. I have personally given thought to all of my views - which is why I’m not a doctrinaire liberal or a doctrinaire anything. It’s so obvious, from the perspective of an amateur media-watcher, to see someone who continually repeats what he’s told by media figures rather than developing any real thoughts of his own. It’s obvious in the fact that you can’t find any evidence to support any of your claims; it’s obvious simply in the fact that you’re using the same keywords - “cesspool”, “permissiveness” - as those media demagogues you idolize. You’re much like a committed Creationist in that respect - you hold the views you do, and repeat the slogans you do, precisely because you don’t understand the matters in question at all, and it’s obvious from watching you attempt to justify your viewpoints.
I’ve seen you try to comfort yourself and pretend that my contempt for you is based upon some smug sense of superiority to others, or the notion that anyone who disagrees with me must be wrong. Except that, to anyone who’s watched me discuss such matters with others on the board, it’s obvious that I’m nothing like that. Many of my favorite posters are conservatives, and I feel like I gain a lot by talking with them and refining and challenging my own views on that basis. You, in contrast, are frightened to honestly consider your political beliefs, which is why you fail at every attempt to provide evidence for them. You clearly like to fantasize that I hold anyone who disagrees with me in contempt - but I don’t, as an honest examination reveals. I hold you, and you in particular, in carefully considered contempt - not because of your political beliefs, but because of the utter shallowness of them. It’s hard not to feel contempt for someone who has let himself so freely be programmed as you have, Starving Artist.
No, you need to just admit the ridiculousness of what you clearly said in earnest. Most people of that era gave almost no thought to race or issues of race and behaved in the polite, civilized, mature way they did because that’s how they were taught and because that was the way society functioned.
And it’s hard not to feel contempt for someone who speaks so authoritatively about something he hasn’t the vaguest idea about. I keep having to repeat this for dipsticks like you, but I come up with this stuff all on my own. I know how things were at one time; I saw how they were changing and railed against it at the time; and now that things are more fucked up than even I thought they would be, I rail against them even more now. I don’t listen to Limbaugh, Hanity, O’Reilly, etc., and no one is programming me. I suppose you’re so used to being programmed yourself that you find the notion that someone could come up with his POV solely on his own to be almost incomprehensible…but, sucks to be you! (In more ways than one, I might add.)
Oh, I agree that white people in the pre-Civil Rights era didn’t spend much thought on the racial situation in the U.S. Which is a particularly sad thing. On the other hand, I imagine black people thought about it quite a bit. I guess the luxury of being the beneficiary of the situation is that you didn’t really have to think about it.
But it was a great time to live, eh?
I take it you mean to sympathize with me? Now, if you showed any signs of growing beyond what you’ve been taught, I’d be sympathetic. But you haven’t - you come to these threads, you repeat the same slogans over and over, and you come up with excuses for why you won’t discuss them rationally, on the basis of evidence and fact. That’s how people who really understand these issues talk.
It’s funny that I’m apparently not the first to notice it. But you’re too frightened to confront what others have noticed. Why, if you came up with these ideas on your own, are you unable to justify your convictions? Why do you use exactly the same language used by the talk radio blowhards who spout this nonsense over the airwaves? Heck, you probably believe that you came up with these ideas on your own, but that doesn’t mean you did, and that’s why those ideas start to fall apart when subject to real scrutiny.
Uh-huh. Except that people lack the capacity to compare their memories of how things used to be with the reality of the world today. That’s what the word “nostalgia” means. That’s why those of us more empirical than you in our mindsets depend upon evidence rather than vague feelings that everything is falling apart.
I quoted Socrates on that point in another thread. It’s funny that there’s a quote from this philosopher, from over two thousand years ago, saying the exact same thing as people are saying today. The kids today have no manners. Society has been falling apart. If you had the knowledge to evaluate your beliefs on any terms other than the gut feeling you have, you’d recognize that people throughout history have been saying exactly what you have - and yet, with the perspective of being able to examine the past, we can see that (shockingly!) human civilization, despite it’s apparently continuous generational decline, has yet to collapse. Someone smarter than you would be able to objectively evaluate his nostalgia and recognize it for what it is - but you are so limited in your perspective that you are unable to step outside your beliefs long enough to subject them to real examination.
Someone is. I couldn’t guess exactly who, but the fact that you’re using the same code-words as everyone else demonstrates that your beliefs are not the product of your own thinking. And the fact that you’re repeating the same nonsense that folks like the above spew out - nonsense like the idea of university professors indoctrinating their students - demonstrates that you’re arguing something you don’t understand. Because if you really did know anything beyond what you hear from whatever media source or church group you get your beliefs from, you would realize how ridiculous the things you’re saying are.
Sorry, like I said - any examination of my participation on these boards reveals that I subject my beliefs to continual reevaluation. The shallowness of your thinking isn’t obvious to you - but it’s obvious to me, because I’ve subjected my nostalgia to the same rigorous examination that I have subjected all my beliefs to. The fact that my beliefs are the product of my own careful consideration is precisely why I’m able to engage in productive discussions with other like-minded people - even if their beliefs and opinions are different from mine. It’s possible for me to further understand my own beliefs and theirs through discussion; part of the advantage of subjecting your beliefs to this sort of analysis is that you don’t have to cling to the notion that you’re right and all who disagree are wrong. Having come to one’s opinions through rigorous thought means that the whole structure doesn’t come crashing down like a house of cards when you’re exposed to new perspectives. That’s the reason that all-right-wing media exist, after all - new, honest ideas are dangerous when your own are only the product of repetition. Whereas you have never been able to do that, at least not on the SDMB.
Hopefully, one day, you will develop the ability to think for yourself. But given how long you’ve lived without it, it seems rather unlikely. I will be ready for your apologies and thanks for the perspective I’ve offered you should that happen.
Yeah, it was. And once again, social mores of the time is a completely. seperate. issue. than race! Do try to get that throught your wonderfully superior, sad, contemptuous (and illogical) head won’t you? (And you might want to try to come up with some new descriptors; you’re starting to sound like a broken record.)
Gee, I dunno…maybe because we think the same way and…uh…share the same language?
And btw, who do you think programs the programmers? Someone has to come up with things on their own, and it just so happens that to a lot of us on the right, these things are all just common-sense observations and plain as the nose on your face.
Really? Do tell? And here I was just quoting Bubba from the trailer park the other day. Guess I need to be impressed, huh?
Do you remember when someone asked about GWB’s alleged ‘swagger’ when he walked, and he responded that in Texas, that’s called walking? Well, to you they’re code-words; to me it’s just talking.
“New”, “honest” ideas such as the right to have profanity broadcast freely to all and sundry, I suppose? (You do recall the OP, I take it?) Those kinds of ‘new’, ‘honest’ ideas?
Yes, with the likes of you spreading the word, enlightment for all is surely close at hand. :rolleyes:
I’m sure this goes without saying, but good luck with that.
And now I’m off to do a little work before settling down with my freshly purchased copy of A Movable Feast, which I shall read while listening to Corrine Bailey Rae and drinking a glass of wine beneath my prints by, among others, Picasso, Matisse and Van Gogh.
Really.
(You people need to get over the idea that conservatives are all mullet-wearing, beer-drinking, working-on-the-race-car-in-the-driveway, Limbaugh-listening good ol’ boys. T’aint so.)
So anyway, I’m gonna be busy; you’ll have to call yourself an idiot for the rest of the night.*
Cheers.
*Courtesy of Everybody Loves Raymond but rarely more apt than in this case.
Uh, did you miss that I was responding to something specific you said about race?
Why is it that you regard “social mores in relation to issues other than race” as a particular unit anyway? What makes you decide that that’s a valid thing to examine?
Well, that’s the point, isn’t it? These things seem “obvious” and “plain” to you because you don’t come to your conclusions through critical thinking or analysis. If you did, you would understand the complexity of the issues. The fact that they seem “obvious” and “plain” and “common-sense” is because you’re just repeating what you’re told, and the conclusion has been spoon-fed to you, so of course it’s obvious.
As to who comes up with the ideas that sell, a lot has been written about that subject; there’s a large network of think tanks mostly funded by large corporations that develop specific plans for how to turn issues into rallying points for the infantry like you. But you appear to think it’s people like you who come up with the content of talk radio programming. How cute!
And once again the point eludes you completely. Do try to read to the ends of the sentences in the future from now on, please.
Note that this technique doesn’t fool me either. Addressing tiny snippets of what I said and ignoring the points I’ve made is a typical response from the stupider members of the SDMB during debates. You’re not the first to do this. I doubt any of the onlookers are fooled, either.
Right, because you’ve heard these specific words for a very long time, and you’re not in the habit of questioning what you’re told. Doesn’t that seem sort of sad to you? The specific choice of “cesspool” is particularly interesting, because the word in most discourse nowadays seems only confined to people talking about the “filth” in our media; no one actually uses it for its original sense. That’s a sure sign that you didn’t come up with the thought yourself - because if you had, you would have compared the media to a term that still has some currency as a literal description of a pond full of shit, rather than one that’s only used in the particular metaphorical use you’re copying.
All of my ideas are the result of my thought and consideration. That’s why, unlike you, I’m not purely partisan, and I don’t sit around repeating the words of talk-radio hosts.
Funny you would choose the word “enlightenment”. Because, as we all know, becoming enlightened takes work and time. The fact that you’re not enlightened is your own failing, not mine.
It’s funny that you are still unable to conceptualize the world as anything but “liberals” versus “conservatives”, and you’re on one team, and they’re on another. It’s funnier yet that you insist on responding to things no one has said. The sadness comes when one stops to think of why - see, as the radio has been explaining for years, “liberal elitists” up in their “ivory towers” look down on conservatives. You’ve demonstrated quite clearly that you’ve bought into that silly us versus them view of politics, in your nonsense complaints about college professors. And your programming has been so effective that you’re responding to things no one has said, because the radio has assured you that liberals say those things, and so you respond to them, whether people have said them or not.
I’m confused.
We weren’t talking of race–where did race enter into this? JJ is black, but huh?
Your argument sounds awfully close, SA, to life was better when minorities knew their place–not a nice sentiment, if true. I am flummoxed as to where race entered this picture. As for liberal elitists–snobbery knows no political party. My Dad voted for Goldwater and is now a solid Democrat. He dislikes what he calls the “genteel racism” of the GOP. Not an implication to anyone here, just a remark. I know alot of beer swilling, peanut eating Dems, come to that–is there a point to any your post?
I lived during this so called nostalgia time–some of it, anyways. I wore petticoats and white gloves and my mother wore a hat etc. It was awful. Not all of it, but most of it. Women couldn’t get credit cards in their own name (my mother had a hell of a time, once divorced, in 1973!). Birth control was hard to come by, so alot of girls “went away to visit an aunt” for awhile. :rolleyes:
Was this such a good time? The Cold War and fear of nukes and racial tension? I find it hard to get nostalgic about any of that–toys of the time and early TV, ok.
There have been precious few times in my 6 years here that someone goes so far above and beyond the call of duty of the moron, presents him or herself as such a shining beacon of stupidity, and basks so eargerly in the warm glow of being a jerk, that I really take note and view all of that person’s future posts with one eyebrow raised. Most of the posters that have acheived this honor have since fallen by the wayside; either by their own volition or at the whims of The Powers That Be.
I just wanted to officially mark this date as one of those times.
Yeah, because if they want to read dirty words, all they have to do (instead of digging out that big, heavy dictionary like I had to when I was a kid) is go to dictionary.com or urbandictionary.com, and then they don’t have to bother reading any of these tedious discussion.
And if you really expect us to believe that, you’ll post a photo of you doing the same.
BTW, I’m not offended by you slapping the label “liberal” on me, but if you knew anything about me, you’d know that label doesn’t really fit. Not with me being pro-gun, pro-death penalty, opposed to the Kyoto treaty (since I believe that it’ll do more harm than good), in favor of a strong military, lower taxes, and smaller government, to name just a few things that I believe that liberals disagree with.
<----me, confused.