Trump

Anything not relating to the X-Universe games (general tech talk, other games...) belongs here. Please read the rules before posting.

Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum

User avatar
Morkonan
Posts: 2462
Joined: Sun, 25. Sep 11, 04:33
x3tc

Post by Morkonan » Wed, 12. Sep 18, 19:44

Chips wrote:You'd have paid your taxes and we'd have drunk our tea! ;)
I notice you didn't mention that we'd have eaten your food... 'cause that would have made rebellion a certainty. :)

You've got an interesting point that should be expanded, I think.

Do all activists see themselves as "righteous warriors?"

Let's take a common view of someone we'd define as an "activist." I don't mean people who volunteer as citizen scientists for Green Peace and never make the "front page." It's not about the lawyers who volunteer to defend someone's "Rights." I mean the wholly dedicated "activist" who makes "activism" their life in a more personally defining way. The women who burn their bras in public, the PETA people who throw blood on someone if they're wearing a leather jacket, the "One Percenters" that squat and crap on the grass, leaving garbage everywhere and destroying public and private property because they say it's "their right to do so."

We know what happens to people when they believe that they are a "righteous warrior," right? The "cause" becomes their lodestone on which their judgement of right and wrong is based. All for the cause and the cause for all... There come a point, the deeper down the rabbit-hole you go, where an "activist" could become a "fanatic."

It's not inevitable, of course. Many activists are level-headed and well-meaning people, right? But, the world creates ideas based on extremes. We're great at doing that. It's part of what I fell afoul of in an earlier post, pushing the meaning of "activists" to the extreme of... "extremist."

So, when is an activist a fanatic and when is a fanatic capable of actually doing good?

When "The Colonies" got pissed and dumped a bunch of tea into a harbor, was that extremist act "good." /shrug? And, once the American Revolution got started, mostly through the hard work of "activists" backed by some deep pockets and notable figures, was that good? Well, we seem to think so. But, what did those fanatics do while they were "doing good."

Loyalists were persecuted, sometimes even killed. Many had their property confiscated. Many were imprisoned. Eventually, those that remained Loyalists were deported with nothing.

ALL of these things were things that the "Founding Fathers" would have abhorred and they actively promoted laws to protect against such things... for their own people.

Sure, "revolutionaries" can do good things, but they have to ward themselves against committing atrocities while they're doing those "good things."

User avatar
clakclak
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun, 13. Jul 08, 19:29
x3

Post by clakclak » Wed, 12. Sep 18, 19:53

Morkonan wrote:[interesting stuff]
I would like to add that change even extreme social change does not necessarily need violence to happen.

The fall of east Germany to peaceful protests (and an economy in shambles) illustrates that.
Laugh and the world laughs with you,
Weep, and you weep alone;
The good old earth must borrow its mirth,
But has trouble enough of its own.

- Ella Wheeler Wilcox

User avatar
Santi
Moderator (DevNet)
Moderator (DevNet)
Posts: 3404
Joined: Tue, 13. Feb 07, 22:06
x4

Post by Santi » Wed, 12. Sep 18, 21:16

Have to say that East Germany also benefited from the violent unrest of other countries of the Soviet Union that weakened Moscow, and Western countries support, it was a combination of those forces that achieved change.

Similar but obviously not the same because of the outcome, was the Arab Spring, Western countries intervention in the Middle East coupled with a lack of advancement in living conditions and lack of democratic choices, made people demonstrate peacefully into the streets to demand change. They were meet with repression an death while western countries looked the other way. And being my own devil advocate, funny how suddenly those peaceful protesters turned into heavily armed brigades, may be that it is traditional to have a few dozens rocket propelled grenades in your cupboard.

Social change is down to people well being, the less we have to worry about money, the chances are that we can dedicate more time to think about what is around us and to change society. It is a constant in history, The Golden age, The Renaissance, The 80's.

My thoughts are if people is living well and their concerns are being addressed, then we do not have a need for people like Trump.
A por ellos que son pocos y cobardes

pjknibbs
Posts: 28676
Joined: Wed, 6. Nov 02, 21:31
x3tc

Post by pjknibbs » Wed, 12. Sep 18, 21:53

Morkonan wrote: Do all activists see themselves as "righteous warriors?"
As the late great George Carlin once said, "So, firefighters fight fires, and crimefighters fight crime. What do freedom fighters fight?". :wink:

User avatar
BugMeister
Posts: 4366
Joined: Thu, 15. Jul 04, 04:41
x4

Post by BugMeister » Wed, 12. Sep 18, 22:17

- he was joking..

Bob Dylan - Jokerman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XSvsFgvWr0

- best excuse going.. :wink: :wink:
- the whole universe is running in BETA mode - we're working on it.. beep..!! :D :thumb_up:

User avatar
Observe
Posts: 2793
Joined: Fri, 30. Dec 05, 18:47
xr

Post by Observe » Wed, 12. Sep 18, 23:37

I'm having a hard time finding out what actually is going on with Trump's agenda. Seems most news outlets are only interested in joining the hate Trump choir.

I understand Trump is a piece of work, the likes of which staggers the mind, but I wonder why the media isn't doing more to discuss policies, rather than just the personalities involved?

Anyway, not much news on the Trump front. Not to say the news isn't plastered with his orangeness.

Retiredman
Posts: 639
Joined: Fri, 4. Sep 09, 02:35
x3ap

Post by Retiredman » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 02:12

Observe wrote:I'm having a hard time finding out what actually is going on with Trump's agenda. Seems most news outlets are only interested in joining the hate Trump choir.

I understand Trump is a piece of work, the likes of which staggers the mind, but I wonder why the media isn't doing more to discuss policies, rather than just the personalities involved?
The media doesn't discuss policies because over the past 40 years they
have transformed themselves. They place op-ed above just reporting the news. In fact they have many morning and afternoon shows dedicated to opinions. None of them every balanced.
During the 2016 elections they threw their weight behind one person.
Trump made them look like fools. They have taken their journalism and
transformed it into pseudo nonsense. They place their product on the
stand next to the checkout counter with the rest of the tabloids.

I can understand non-US rants and raves. Their opinions have been
cultured by the US media and Hollywood for those 40 years. They have been
locked step into following the hype and not finding the real facts.

As far as a Trump policy.. I didn't like the tax law change. I think it sucks.
It isn't the taxes.. it's the damm overspending those bas...d are doing.
Sure Trump is a piece, so was old whats her name. But Trump doesn't have 20 plus national scandals under his belt. And that was before running for President.
You think a hero is some weird sandwitch and not a guy attacking a Xeno J with a kestrel.

Sir.. I said .. A guy attacking a J with a kestrel is the sandwitch.

Mightysword
Posts: 2476
Joined: Wed, 10. Mar 04, 06:11
x3tc

Post by Mightysword » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 03:09

Morkonan wrote: It's not inevitable, of course. Many activists are level-headed and well-meaning people, right? But, the world creates ideas based on extremes. We're great at doing that. It's part of what I fell afoul of in an earlier post, pushing the meaning of "activists" to the extreme of... "extremist."
I would like to consider myself as one of those level-headed activist but ... *shrug*, people tend to be more generous when judging themselves, so who know. For your other points, it's just human nature to be dramatic. Why people love to compare people they hate to Hitler? Because it's dramatic. And everyone does it, it's just like I said, it's easier to see other people do it, and harder to recognize when you are doing it yourself. Again let's look at this.
Social change is a large and heavy freight train coming down a hill at 200km/h there is no stopping it, no matter how much you try, you can hop in or stand aside and be left behind. History is not very kind to people that try to stop progress
Think about it, that quote has a very hyperbole statement, and followed by what can be seen as a thinly veil threat. Now, everyone takes a deep breath, clear your mind for one minute and think about it: isn't this something that Trump would normally say? Yes, it doesn't have the bell and whistle that Trump tend to have, but the style and gesture are definitely the same, to me at least. Of course I'm not talking about the content, but rather the technique that one decides to uses to express himself and get the point across to others.

I often hear people making claim like "I don't think understand how X, Y, Z can say that, or agree with that ...etc...". And a lot of time, I think the key to under others is ... simply understand yourself first, and put other people in your shoes, or imagine you were being in their shoes. What made you say the things that you said? Your fiery passion? Your unshakable belief? Now, apply those things to that other guys who you didn't agree with ... and I don't think it's hard to understand, at least I don't think it'll be hard ... if you actually try.


On other points I actually didn't mean something as far reaching or as grandeur as what you guys are discussing. Have no problem with that of course, but my original point is more simple. I don't like when people become too single-minded in their goal, and cast aside everything else just for the shake of that goal - no matter how good and noble that goal is. You will never have a society where everyone agree with each others, heck if that's the case than we wouldn't even need activism. Change, for good and for bad, will always create friction. Social change is not a process of elimination, it's about co-existence. The point of activism is to convince those who already there, to accept those who are still not there, it's not about telling those who are already there that their time is up, get out of the way so you can put something new at their place. That is why I had a very ... unkind look at that quote above.

Observe wrote:I'm having a hard time finding out what actually is going on with Trump's agenda. Seems most news outlets are only interested in joining the hate Trump choir.

I understand Trump is a piece of work, the likes of which staggers the mind, but I wonder why the media isn't doing more to discuss policies, rather than just the personalities involved?
Taking a guess? Probably they don't actually have a better or more concrete policy to talk about. Again, it's easy to tell everyone "hey can I make your life better!", I can say that, you can say that, Trump can say that, the people who hate him can say that. But get down to the "how" ... I doubt many people have a plan.

It's just the same thing with every election. I don't know how it was done in the 20th century, but for me the 21st century election has been largely a pissing contest. Candidates often have little good to talk about themselves, so they focus more on how the others are worse than them. So what you see right now is not exactly news, it's just a bit more fiery because the casts this time are certainly the most colorful bunch ;)
Last edited by Mightysword on Thu, 13. Sep 18, 03:50, edited 1 time in total.

Skism
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon, 22. Mar 10, 22:36
x3tc

Post by Skism » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 03:50

Observe wrote:
Masterbagger wrote:You can't force free people to obey your agenda or you become the bad guy.
Are you a skunk, aardvark, badger or one of the other solitary creatures? If not, then you are part of a social species. As such, you are NOT free of responsibility to your fellow-man. Perhaps you will be reborn as one or other of the animals who actually are 'free'. Let us know how that works out when some human has you on their dinner table or has you laying on the floor as a rug. :)
THAT assumes that Masterbagger believes in reincarnation which he may well not ;) not everyone is a Hindu/into eastern philosophy you know ;)

Btw on a personal note are you ok? because you made several sensible posts in a row (not this one) a few pages back and it had me wondering what on earth was going on with one of my detractors on this forum :)
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest."

-Thomas Paine-

Masterbagger
Posts: 202
Joined: Tue, 14. Oct 14, 00:49
x4

Post by Masterbagger » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 03:58

Observe wrote:
Masterbagger wrote:You can't force free people to obey your agenda or you become the bad guy.
Are you a skunk, aardvark, badger or one of the other solitary creatures? If not, then you are part of a social species. As such, you are NOT free of responsibility to your fellow-man. Perhaps you will be reborn as one or other of the animals who actually are 'free'. Let us know how that works out when some human has you on their dinner table or has you laying on the floor as a rug. :)
Did you even consider for a moment that I might already have felt a desire to give back to my nation and acted on it? Just because I agree with the founders of America that individual liberty is the most important ideal we have does not make me separate from society. I just reserve the right to disagree if whatever obligation you feel entitled to impose on me is inconsistent with my own values.
Who made that man a gunner?

User avatar
BugMeister
Posts: 4366
Joined: Thu, 15. Jul 04, 04:41
x4

Post by BugMeister » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 04:14

- and how do you feel about obligations imposed upon others, when they are inconsistent with their values ..? :roll:

meanwhile history on Kavanaugh:
Randi Rhodes AirForce - The dishonourable Brett Kavanaugh..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roEVepy1nOc

- the diversions continue - hunt the mole..!! :lol:
Last edited by BugMeister on Thu, 13. Sep 18, 04:22, edited 1 time in total.
- the whole universe is running in BETA mode - we're working on it.. beep..!! :D :thumb_up:

User avatar
Observe
Posts: 2793
Joined: Fri, 30. Dec 05, 18:47
xr

Post by Observe » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 04:21

Skism wrote:Btw on a personal note are you ok? because you made several sensible posts in a row...
I just call it how I see it. Sometimes I lean left and sometimes right. I try to walk a middle path most of the time, but I frequently fall off into an abyss of delusion. More often than not, I am probably wrong - especially when I start pointing fingers at others. Thanks for asking. :)

RegisterMe
Posts: 1209
Joined: Sun, 14. Oct 07, 17:47
x4

Post by RegisterMe » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 16:17

Trump on Puerto Rico.

Given the choice between trusting what Trump has to say on the matter, or trusting public health researchers at Harvard, I think I know who I'd go with....
Gavrushka wrote:The problem with 'freedom of speech' is it makes wackos think they have something of value to say.

*WE WANT THE amtct BACK*
Rapier's search

User avatar
fiksal
Posts: 3461
Joined: Tue, 2. May 06, 17:05
x3

Post by fiksal » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 16:26

RegisterMe wrote:Trump on Puerto Rico.

Given the choice between trusting what Trump has to say on the matter, or trusting public health researchers at Harvard, I think I know who I'd go with....
Here's another thing about Trump's presidency that should never be forgotten. Including his denial and prior inaction.
Masterbagger wrote:...individual liberty....
Individual liberty is quite important.

Which is why it's important to push against the religion trying to spread itself onto other people, science, education;

plus push against the mostly religious defining what a civil union is.

User avatar
Observe
Posts: 2793
Joined: Fri, 30. Dec 05, 18:47
xr

Post by Observe » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 17:34

At what point does the individual liberty of one person, become an infringement on the individual liberty of others?

For example: One person believes God has told them that they must shout their gospel on the street corner. A person walking nearby, may find this gospel objectionable, but they can't do anything about it, because to do so would deprive the preacher of his/her liberty.

Another: One person thinks they should be able to ride their loud, smelly dirt bike over remote hiking trails. Another person has worked hard all year, so they can take a month off work to walk this trail and to enjoy the greatness and wonder of nature.

Individual liberty is fine, as long as it doesn't harm others. The trouble we run into, is in defining harm. In neither example, was anyone physically harmed. However, there was emotional harm.

A big part of the social debate occurring in present times, involves deciding what is the acceptable threshold of emotional pain, one person can inflict upon another, in the name of personal liberty?

Post Reply

Return to “Off Topic English”