Why can't people just admit when they are wrong?

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

For some people....message boards are a form of competition. That, coupled with very poor social skills leads to intransigence.

I'm sure the anonymity doesn't help any either.

I find that to be odd. The anonymity leads me to be more forthcoming and makes it easier to admit a mistake. But....for some....the opposite seems true.

It seems as though for many, the anonymity leads them to act more aggressively , which would include aggressively defending their positions no matter that they have thoroughly refuted.

I mean to me, I don't see the big deal. obviously no one could be an expert on every single subject. Mistakes happen.

Of course that leads to another thing, people on here tend to think they know it all, and if someone doesn't know something they are like "hahahahahhaha you dumb fuck you didn't know the GDP of Turkmanistan in 2008?" like a bunch of dorks, which leads people to just get even more defensive and protective of their opinions which are based on untrue facts that they refuse to let go of.

 

[saveliberty]

There is this concept that someone else's mistake was bigger and they didn't admit it, so on a relative scale of wrong, I don't have to admit it. Thing is, admitting it allows you to establish a level of trust with an opposing point of view. That is how problems begin to get solved.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

There is this concept that someone else's mistake was bigger and they didn't admit it, so on a relative scale of wrong, I don't have to admit it. Thing is, admitting it allows you to establish a level of trust with an opposing point of view. That is how problems begin to get solved.

And I'm convinced that 99% of posters I've came across here anyway have NO desire for trust or conversation. They simply want to scream at each other.

I mean how logical is to say " I HATE LIBERALS AND I'LL NEVER AGREE WITH THEM ON ANYTHING" or the same about conservatives? Given the multitude of situations out there only a freaking idiot wouldn't have one or things come up where they though "their side" was in the wrong.

Apparently , message boards are full of idiots.

 

[saveliberty]

Message boards are full of idiots??

I think not, I mean yes, there are a fair number. Do you have any idea how many people just read message boards, but don't post? It takes a large degree of self confidence to post on a big board especially. That confidence is bore out of being told by a fair number of people real life they are right. So it comes as a surprise to find out their opinion is not readily accepted here.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Message boards are full of idiots??

I think not, I mean yes, there are a fair number. Do you have any idea how many people just read message boards, but don't post? It takes a large degree of self confidence to post on a big board especially. That confidence is bore out of being told by a fair number of people real life they are right. So it comes as a surprise to find out their opinion is not readily accepted here.

Either that, or idiots are posting while drunk???

 

[Politico]

I find that to be odd. The anonymity leads me to be more forthcoming and makes it easier to admit a mistake. But....for some....the opposite seems true.

That is the opposite. For the majority the anonymity allows them to say shit that would get their ticket punched in real life.

 

[Mac1958]

Why don't people admit when they are wrong?

We have become a terribly narcissistic society, and no group is more narcissistic than partisan ideologues.

They simply will not give an inch, even though it's often the honest and obvious and adult thing to do.

This behavior is spreading more and more throughout our culture, and I have no idea how it might be reversed.

.

 

[LoneLaugher]

There is this concept that someone else's mistake was bigger and they didn't admit it, so on a relative scale of wrong, I don't have to admit it. Thing is, admitting it allows you to establish a level of trust with an opposing point of view. That is how problems begin to get solved.

And I'm convinced that 99% of posters I've came across here anyway have NO desire for trust or conversation. They simply want to scream at each other.

I mean how logical is to say " I HATE LIBERALS AND I'LL NEVER AGREE WITH THEM ON ANYTHING" or the same about conservatives? Given the multitude of situations out there only a freaking idiot wouldn't have one or things come up where they though "their side" was in the wrong.

Apparently , message boards are full of idiots.

Why don't people admit when they are wrong?

We have become a terribly narcissistic society, and no group is more narcissistic than partisan ideologues.

They simply will not give an inch, even though it's often the honest and obvious and adult thing to do.

This behavior is spreading more and more throughout our culture, and I have no idea how it might be reversed.

.

Mac says that I am a partisan ideologue. Yet....I easily admit when I am wrong. Have done it many times here.

Isn't that interesting?

Earmuffs!

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

There is this concept that someone else's mistake was bigger and they didn't admit it, so on a relative scale of wrong, I don't have to admit it. Thing is, admitting it allows you to establish a level of trust with an opposing point of view. That is how problems begin to get solved.

And I'm convinced that 99% of posters I've came across here anyway have NO desire for trust or conversation. They simply want to scream at each other.

I mean how logical is to say " I HATE LIBERALS AND I'LL NEVER AGREE WITH THEM ON ANYTHING" or the same about conservatives? Given the multitude of situations out there only a freaking idiot wouldn't have one or things come up where they though "their side" was in the wrong.

Apparently , message boards are full of idiots.

Why don't people admit when they are wrong?

We have become a terribly narcissistic society, and no group is more narcissistic than partisan ideologues.

They simply will not give an inch, even though it's often the honest and obvious and adult thing to do.

This behavior is spreading more and more throughout our culture, and I have no idea how it might be reversed.

.

Mac says that I am a partisan ideologue. Yet....I easily admit when I am wrong. Have done it many times here.

Isn't that interesting?

Earmuffs!

I don't think he applied his statement to ALL ideologues did he?

 

[LoneLaugher]

He left wiggle room. Will he use it?

 

[Mojo2]

Why don't people admit when they are wrong?

We have become a terribly narcissistic society, and no group is more narcissistic than partisan ideologues.

They simply will not give an inch, even though it's often the honest and obvious and adult thing to do.

This behavior is spreading more and more throughout our culture, and I have no idea how it might be reversed.

.

I noticed the level of divisiveness grow dramatically with the decision to attack Iraq in 2003.

Aside from the obvious downsides to waging any kind of war, for any reason, the major opposition to our actions in the Middle East stemmed from a lack of American understanding of Islam and its goals and tactics.

As we as a nation have gained in knowledge about the threat posed by even moderate and peaceful Muslims, (stealth and legal Jihad) we are also starting to recognize more clearly just what we have been alternately yet simultaneously, facing, ignoring, misunderstanding, fighting against and fighting for.

With this clearer understanding of the truth about Islam and Muslims I think we are poised for a national reunification of sorts between the RW'ers and the LW'ers.

It used to be that we all believed the Palestinians were poor, beleagured innocents who were being tortured and abused by the bad old Israelis.

But with time we have come to realize the Palestinians have work to do with regard to their position on peace. They have to want it. The conflict has had its crises and dramas play out before the eyes of the world and finally the American media has been able to show the Palestinian's complicity in their own bondage and misery.

American Libs and Leftists are just now waking up to this realization where Conservatives have known it for years.

The difference between Cons and Libs was the amount of information the Liberal had yet to learn about Islam.

Once he learned it the Lib and the Conservative began to get along better.

We were on the same page and seeing the same warning signs, finally.

With ISIS and Syria and Afghanistan and Iraq and Yemen and Somalia and Qatar and Libya and Egypt and the other Middle East nations fighting their various wars and conflicts we have seen that the cause of this violence has been overwhelmingly due to Muslims following the instructions of their religion.

And yet we know there are millions upon millions of innocent Muslims who just want to live their lives in peace, good health with their families and loved ones.

What about them?

Brigitte Gabriel says they are irrelevant to the evil being done by fellow Muslims just as the German people were irrelevant when it came to doing anything to help or stop Hitler's madness.

They just lived their lives as best they could.

Just as today's Muslims do.

Just as the Russian people were irrelevant when it came to changing the course of Stalin's madness or the Chinese people to Mao's or the Cambodian people's effect on Pol Pot's brutally lethal regime.

We should steer AROUND the moderate Muslims. They are irrelevant and as long as they can be made safe and rendered harmless to America, I'm all for it.

We must focus on the Jihadists, and not AS MUCH on the moderates

25% - 30% of all Muslims are estimated to fully support fundamentalist Islam and are ready to join in Islamist efforts like those being conducted by ISIS to capture and hold non-Muslims captive, force them to convert to Islam or to be killed.

And American liberals have slowly awakened to these realities and it has left them feeling much the same as we Conservatives have felt these past 13 (or so) years.

Angry and determined to stop their efforts.

Bottom line, as Americans all get caught up on the conventional wisdom regarding Islam and Muslims, the more likely it is that Americans will begin patching up our partisan differences and getting about pulling together against a common enemy.

It is about time!

And it hasn't been that we haven't tried to open your eyes all along.

But, whatever...

Time to come together.

Something is brewin.

 

[LoneLaugher]

What great threat is posed by moderate and peaceful Muslims?

 

[oldfart]

There is this concept that someone else's mistake was bigger and they didn't admit it, so on a relative scale of wrong, I don't have to admit it. Thing is, admitting it allows you to establish a level of trust with an opposing point of view. That is how problems begin to get solved.

And I'm convinced that 99% of posters I've came across here anyway have NO desire for trust or conversation. They simply want to scream at each other.

I mean how logical is to say " I HATE LIBERALS AND I'LL NEVER AGREE WITH THEM ON ANYTHING" or the same about conservatives? Given the multitude of situations out there only a freaking idiot wouldn't have one or things come up where they though "their side" was in the wrong.

Apparently , message boards are full of idiots.

BINGO. You are wrong about the 99% figure, but that's not an error; it's hyperbole. About two thirds of the posts I read are political cant where people make up their own "facts". I mainly post on CDZ, the Economy, and History. My posting is way down, mainly because I have no appetite for repeating the same material over and over. Try checking out how many threads there have been on measures of unemployment. Ditto for the money supply. If folks want to spend this amount of time nitpicking definitions, it doesn't bode well for any substantive discussion. About four people will actually go to the data sources and read the definitions and methodology, and a dozen will hoot that its all a conspiracy or a lie, and regurgitate some political blog.

In honesty, forty years ago 80% of the crap came from the left and the right (Bill Buckley, Milton Friedman, etc) were the were the ones meeting it with reasoned argument. I dumped on a lot of wannabe Marxists in those days. Today, most of the idiot Left is gone, the new Left is a combination of corporatists and pragmatists, and the looney stuff comes from the right. But is still looney stuff. And USMB is one of the favorite places for the loonies to hang out.

Once or twice a month a good discussion gets started and for a while we can fight off or ignore the trolls and have a decent discussion. But if I read every post on those threads, and responded, I would just be feeding the trolls. I don't think anyone can post responsibly here without being able to filter out the ideologues who turn every discussion into "Hurrah for our side!".

 

[Mojo2]

Just lost a post I spent an hour preparing.

Ugh.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Just lost a post I spent an hour preparing.

Ugh.

It didn't save as a draft?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Just lost a post I spent an hour preparing.

Ugh.

Outstanding effort!

 

[Mojo2]

What great threat is posed by moderate and peaceful Muslims?

The leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and the leaders of the other Jihadist groups around the world can ONLY achieve their goal through non-violent Jihad. Civilizational Jihad. Stealth Jihad. Legal Jihad.

Those leaders gain their political power to rise up, even in the 'belly of the beast' by virtue of the other moderate Muslims they can boast.

If they have enough followers the USA will make them bonafide US political power brokers and influential figures with their own power base and tentacles stretching out in all directions.

But without constituents, Muslim constituents, the plans for conquest go nowhere.

It is only the masses of Muslims, all being peaceful and moderate, if that's their wish, that is needed to empower the Islamist leadership. These leaders will direct the vanguard of Muslim Jihadists in their stealthy moves to undermine confidence in our Government and establish an alternative to our own rule of law.

What is a leader without followers?

The Muslims have figured out how to game our system.

Get enough warm bodies together and the American system of government will give Islamists the power they will leverage into eventually challenging loyal Americans for control of America.

Read it and weep.

THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD'S "GENERAL STRATEGIC GOAL" FOR NORTH AMERICA

In July 2007, seven key leaders of an Islamic charity known as the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) went on trial for charges that they had: (a) provided "material support and resources" to a foreign terrorist organization (namely Hamas); (b) engaged in money laundering; and (c) breached the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which prohibits transactions that threaten American national security. Along with the seven named defendants, the U.S. government released a list of approximately 300 "unindicted co-conspirators" and "joint venturers."

During the course of the HLF trial, many incriminating documents were entered into evidence. Perhaps the most significant of these was "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America," by the Muslim Brotherhood operative Mohamed Akram. Federal investigators found Akram's memo in the home of Ismael Elbarasse, a founder of the Dar Al-Hijrah mosque in Falls Church, Virginia, during a 2004 search. Elbarasse was a member of the Palestine Committee, which the Muslim Brotherhood had created to support Hamas in the United States.

Written sometime in 1987 but not formally published until May 22, 1991, Akram's 18-page document listed the Brotherhood’s 29 likeminded "organizations of our friends" that shared the common goal of dismantling American institutions and turning the U.S. into a Muslim nation. These "friends" were identified by Akram and the Brotherhood as groups that could help convince Muslims "that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands ... so that ... God's religion [Islam] is made victorious over all other religions."

Akram was well aware that in the U.S., it would be extremely difficult to promote Islam by means of terror attacks. Thus the “grand jihad” that he and his Brotherhood comrades envisioned was not a violent one involving bombings and shootings, but rather a stealth (or “soft”) jihad aiming to impose Islamic law (Sharia) over every region of the earth by incremental, non-confrontational means, such as working to “expand the observant Muslim base”; to “unif[y] and direc[t] Muslims' efforts”; and to “present Islam as a civilization alternative.” At its heart, Akram's document details a plan to conquer and Islamize the United States – not as an ultimate objective, but merely as a stepping stone toward the larger goal of one day creating “the global Islamic state.”

In line with this objective, Akram and the Brotherhood resolved to "settle" Islam and the Islamic movement within the United States, so that the Muslim religion could be "enabled within the souls, minds and the lives of the people of the country.” Akram explained that this could be accomplished “through the establishment of firmly-rooted organizations on whose bases civilization, structure and testimony are built.” He urged Muslim leaders to make “a shift from the collision mentality to the absorption mentality,” meaning that they should abandon any tactics involving defiance or confrontation, and seek instead to implant into the larger society a host of seemingly benign Islamic groups with ostensibly unobjectionable motives; once those groups had gained a measure of public acceptance, they would be in a position to more effectively promote societal transformation by the old Communist technique of “boring from within.”

“The heart and the core” of this strategy, said Akram, was contingent upon these groups' ability to develop “a mastery of the art of 'coalitions.'” That is, by working synergistically they could complement, augment, and amplify one another's efforts. Added Akram: “The big challenge that is ahead of us is how to turn these seeds or 'scattered' elements into comprehensive, stable, 'settled' organizations that are connected with our Movement and which fly in our orbit and take orders from our guidance.” The ultimate objective was not only an enlarged Muslim presence, but also implementation of the Brotherhood objectives of transforming pluralistic societies, particularly America, into Islamic states, and sweeping away Western notions of legal equality, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech.

Akram and the Brotherhood understood that in order to succeed in this endeavor, they needed to appeal to different strata of the American population in different ways; that whereas some people could be influenced by messages delivered from a religious perspective, others would be more responsive to messages delivered by educators, or bankers, or political figures, or journalists, etc. Thus, Akram's blueprint for the advancement of the Islamic movement stressed the need to form a coalition of groups coming from the worlds of education; religious proselytization; political activism; audio and video production; print media; banking and finance; the physical sciences; the social sciences; professional and business networking; cultural affairs; the publishing and distribution of books; children and teenagers; women's rights; vocational concerns; and jurisprudence.

By promoting the Islamic movement on such a wide variety of fronts, the Brotherhood and its allies could multiply exponentially their influence. Toward that end, the Akram/Brotherhood “Explanatory Memorandum” named the following 29 groups as the organizations they believed could collaborate effectively to destroy America from within – “if they all march according to one plan”:

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1235

 

[Mojo2]

Just lost a post I spent an hour preparing.

Ugh.

It didn't save as a draft?

I thought it would, too. But maybe I hit the back and/or fwd button too quickly for my slow ass computer to keep up with my panicked commands.

Oh well, it will be okay.

Most of it was just remedial education about Jihadists. Info that is crucial if someone is unaware of it and needs to get up to speed. But Lonelaugher sounds like he's already versed. This one aspect of it is all he asked for so in the revised post that's what I stuck to cutting & pasting.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Talk about wasting an hour.

 

[Vigilante]