What we can learn from Ginsburg’s friendship with my father, Antonin Scalia

Slade3200

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
35,058
Reaction score
4,422
Points
1,140
What we can learn from the justices, though — beyond how to be a friend — is how to welcome debate and differences. The two justices had central roles in addressing some of the most divisive issues of the day, including cases on abortion, same-sex marriage and who would be president. Not for a moment did one think the other should be condemned or ostracized. More than that, they believed that what they were doing — arriving at their own opinions thoughtfully and advancing them vigorously — was essential to the national good. With less debate, their friendship would have been diminished, and so, they believed, would our democracy.
Eugene Scalia

I think there's a lesson here for all us. Just because we disagree on issues should not be a reason for disrespect and hatred. There is far too much of this in politics today and it makes us weaker, not stronger as a nation.

You can disagree without being disagreeable.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg


Are you ready to stop supporting false allegations of racism made against republicans, especially Trump?
But why should cordial and respective behavior between people be dependent on whether a person believes and supports allegations about the president? That really doesn't make much sense. It seems if any disrespect or discourtesy is due, it should be directed at the person responsible for those allegations not those that read and believe them. In fact, there is no reason to be disrespectful or discourtesy to anyone simply because they hold different political views. It certainly will not change their views and if anything it will make them stronger. Carried to an extreme as is on this board, people become so ridge in their beliefs that they can not share any common reality with the opposition so they can not agree on facts. Then debates are not debates, they are just a series of personal attacks punctuated by statements of beliefs.

When you support false allegations of racism, in the current culture, you create an environment of extreme toxicity, so that respect and courtesy become impossible. No lib is going to respect or be courtesy to any conservative, , if they have convinced themselves that that conservative is a racist.

We as a divided society do NOT share any common reality anymore. ON every issue, there is a huge gap in perceptions and constructive discussion is impossible.


If you are saying that you do not LIKE this situation, then I am telling you the first step is to stop supporting false allegations of racism.


IF there was a significant percentage of liberals that refused to support these false allegations, and especially if they made a point of calling them out, it would hit the perceptions of conservatives like a freight train.
Would you consider it a possibility that what you consider a False sense of racism is perceived by others as a Real sense of racism? Perhaps you have never felt it so you think it is false and they have felt it so they think it’s real. If you can acknowledge that then there should exist the ability to learn from eachother. By using phrases like “False sense of racism” you are automatically dismissing the entire premise behind the cause that millions of people are standing for. You can’t see the issue with that and how it perpetuates the problem?


The Charlottesville Lie is too clear to be honest. Trump was explicit and specific in his NOT including WS in his "good people" comment and the Left, almost Universally, lied about what he said, and judged and attacked and smeared Republicans based on an obvious lie, and continue to do so to this day.


We cannot have any "shared reality" when a good third to one half of the country, thinks that the other half is, if not WS themselves, at least sympathetic to them.


AND to be clear, it is your side that is choosing to be deluded.


AND, that is just one of the more clear examples of false accusations. There are uncounted less obvious lies, that poison the civil discourse of this nation.


You want to improve things? Stop supporting such vile lies and call them out.
I agree that many on the Left took the “good people” comment out of context and ran with it. I think a legitimate critique can be made at the tempered outrage and balancing of blame Trump displayed by his reaction. It was wrong for the Left to politicize that but can easily be countered by showing his full comment in context.

your telling me to stop supporting vile lies yet I don’t think I’ve supported any vile lies. Which ones do you think I’m supporting?
 

Slade3200

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
35,058
Reaction score
4,422
Points
1,140
There are people on Facebook saying they will unfriend people for disagreeing with them about Trump and BLM.
Trump supporters waving signs at a BLM march have been attacked. Fights have been breaking out in Portland between far right and far left groups. When people allow national politics to become a central part of their lives, the nation is in trouble.

If your community is anything like mine, the decisions made by the mayor and the city council have far more direct impact on daily life than those made by the president. Yet only 1/3 of the people in my city know the name of the mayor or the name of more than one city counsel member. Only about 20% will vote in an all local election yet over 70% will vote in a national election.
Look how much money and attention are spent in national elections vs local
That is due to the fact that so many Americans have gone crazy over national politics but why? Why, has America become fundamentally unglued? Why have otherwise rational people began to act irrationally? Why have Facebook and Twitter feeds turned into political battlegrounds? Why have so many people ended relationships or friendships over political disagreements? How did everything turn so upside down in a time of relative peace and prosperity in America?

In the grand scheme of things, the country has faced far more significant issues. Democrats are no more concerned over social issues than in the past Republicans ideology hasn't significantly changed in last 40 years and we’ve come a long way as a country when our national debate over equality has boiled down to which bathroom people who are changing their genders use.
Why you ask? Because we live in the digital age where entities have perfected the art and psychology of marketing and campaigning. Play off fear, demonize the enemy, use peoples insecurities to draw their support. Couple that with the 24/7 cable news cycle, editorial “news” shows like Rush and Hannity, social media bubbles, and a thirst for drama from our tabloid envying society... well it’s the perfect storm. And the result is the shittiest president in our history. An egomaniac who represents all of the above.
I say the only difference is due to technology which made possible the expansion of media and speed that information can be delivered. I believe the psychology of campaigning, dirty tricks, fear mongering, etc is much the same and people have always had a desire for information and drama. I also think there has been little difference in quality of people elected. You just know about thousand times as much about them and hear far more commentary both true and false. People really don't change that much. Media has always been biased and dishonest.

For most of American media history there was no concept of unbiased, neutral journalism. Newspapers endorsed political candidates and savaged their opponents in print. If you think politics is rough now, go read what was written about Andrew Jackson’s wife when he ran for president or what was said about Abraham Lincoln during his 1860 and 1864 presidential campaigns. Newspapers, which in their most basic business models are aggregations of advertisements surrounded by articles of interest designed to get people to buy the paper, were the first mass distributed method of political discourse in this country. Leaving aside pamphlets like Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense,” newspapers were our first mass distributed pop culture. And newspapers began as ribald, rollicking, bitterly partisan broadsides for or against particular candidates and policies.

Today, the media with it's huge foot print in America, foments conflict and angst and anger and fear because that’s what makes the media money. But the reason why our political media is broken isn’t because the political media is broken, it’s because we’re broken. Every time that Donald Trump gets attacked, his base likes him more and every time the left wing base attacks Donald Trump, the left wing’s base likes it more. The problem with this is self-evident, we’ve got two different media universes that don’t overlap. Both of these media bases are incredibly lucrative businesses. Why would the left wing and the right wing change its media direction when both sides are making so much money and the audiences keep consuming what’s being created so well? Abraham Lincoln famously said a house divided against itself cannot stand. But what if this media house divided against itself can stand up perfectly, even as the country falls apart around it?
Good points... I’d love to see a credible fact checking and rating entity enter the picture that can grow big enough and gain the trust of a large majority of citizens to keep these media personalities and politicians in check. They all need more transparency and accountability. I’d love to see all of them rated and forced to display that rating at all times
 

iceberg

Gold Member
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
28,602
Reaction score
7,277
Points
290
There are people on Facebook saying they will unfriend people for disagreeing with them about Trump and BLM.
Trump supporters waving signs at a BLM march have been attacked. Fights have been breaking out in Portland between far right and far left groups. When people allow national politics to become a central part of their lives, the nation is in trouble.

If your community is anything like mine, the decisions made by the mayor and the city council have far more direct impact on daily life than those made by the president. Yet only 1/3 of the people in my city know the name of the mayor or the name of more than one city counsel member. Only about 20% will vote in an all local election yet over 70% will vote in a national election.
Look how much money and attention are spent in national elections vs local
That is due to the fact that so many Americans have gone crazy over national politics but why? Why, has America become fundamentally unglued? Why have otherwise rational people began to act irrationally? Why have Facebook and Twitter feeds turned into political battlegrounds? Why have so many people ended relationships or friendships over political disagreements? How did everything turn so upside down in a time of relative peace and prosperity in America?

In the grand scheme of things, the country has faced far more significant issues. Democrats are no more concerned over social issues than in the past Republicans ideology hasn't significantly changed in last 40 years and we’ve come a long way as a country when our national debate over equality has boiled down to which bathroom people who are changing their genders use.
Why you ask? Because we live in the digital age where entities have perfected the art and psychology of marketing and campaigning. Play off fear, demonize the enemy, use peoples insecurities to draw their support. Couple that with the 24/7 cable news cycle, editorial “news” shows like Rush and Hannity, social media bubbles, and a thirst for drama from our tabloid envying society... well it’s the perfect storm. And the result is the shittiest president in our history. An egomaniac who represents all of the above.
I say the only difference is due to technology which made possible the expansion of media and speed that information can be delivered. I believe the psychology of campaigning, dirty tricks, fear mongering, etc is much the same and people have always had a desire for information and drama. I also think there has been little difference in quality of people elected. You just know about thousand times as much about them and hear far more commentary both true and false. People really don't change that much. Media has always been biased and dishonest.

For most of American media history there was no concept of unbiased, neutral journalism. Newspapers endorsed political candidates and savaged their opponents in print. If you think politics is rough now, go read what was written about Andrew Jackson’s wife when he ran for president or what was said about Abraham Lincoln during his 1860 and 1864 presidential campaigns. Newspapers, which in their most basic business models are aggregations of advertisements surrounded by articles of interest designed to get people to buy the paper, were the first mass distributed method of political discourse in this country. Leaving aside pamphlets like Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense,” newspapers were our first mass distributed pop culture. And newspapers began as ribald, rollicking, bitterly partisan broadsides for or against particular candidates and policies.

Today, the media with it's huge foot print in America, foments conflict and angst and anger and fear because that’s what makes the media money. But the reason why our political media is broken isn’t because the political media is broken, it’s because we’re broken. Every time that Donald Trump gets attacked, his base likes him more and every time the left wing base attacks Donald Trump, the left wing’s base likes it more. The problem with this is self-evident, we’ve got two different media universes that don’t overlap. Both of these media bases are incredibly lucrative businesses. Why would the left wing and the right wing change its media direction when both sides are making so much money and the audiences keep consuming what’s being created so well? Abraham Lincoln famously said a house divided against itself cannot stand. But what if this media house divided against itself can stand up perfectly, even as the country falls apart around it?
Good points... I’d love to see a credible fact checking and rating entity enter the picture that can grow big enough and gain the trust of a large majority of citizens to keep these media personalities and politicians in check. They all need more transparency and accountability. I’d love to see all of them rated and forced to display that rating at all times
weren't you in another thread chiding someone for going off topic and saying you were going to report them?

please, report yourself.
 
OP
Flopper

Flopper

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
24,839
Reaction score
5,177
Points
280
Location
Washington
What we can learn from the justices, though — beyond how to be a friend — is how to welcome debate and differences. The two justices had central roles in addressing some of the most divisive issues of the day, including cases on abortion, same-sex marriage and who would be president. Not for a moment did one think the other should be condemned or ostracized. More than that, they believed that what they were doing — arriving at their own opinions thoughtfully and advancing them vigorously — was essential to the national good. With less debate, their friendship would have been diminished, and so, they believed, would our democracy.
Eugene Scalia

I think there's a lesson here for all us. Just because we disagree on issues should not be a reason for disrespect and hatred. There is far too much of this in politics today and it makes us weaker, not stronger as a nation.

You can disagree without being disagreeable.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg


Are you ready to stop supporting false allegations of racism made against republicans, especially Trump?
But why should cordial and respective behavior between people be dependent on whether a person believes and supports allegations about the president? That really doesn't make much sense. It seems if any disrespect or discourtesy is due, it should be directed at the person responsible for those allegations not those that read and believe them. In fact, there is no reason to be disrespectful or discourtesy to anyone simply because they hold different political views. It certainly will not change their views and if anything it will make them stronger. Carried to an extreme as is on this board, people become so ridge in their beliefs that they can not share any common reality with the opposition so they can not agree on facts. Then debates are not debates, they are just a series of personal attacks punctuated by statements of beliefs.

When you support false allegations of racism, in the current culture, you create an environment of extreme toxicity, so that respect and courtesy become impossible. No lib is going to respect or be courtesy to any conservative, , if they have convinced themselves that that conservative is a racist.

We as a divided society do NOT share any common reality anymore. ON every issue, there is a huge gap in perceptions and constructive discussion is impossible.


If you are saying that you do not LIKE this situation, then I am telling you the first step is to stop supporting false allegations of racism.


IF there was a significant percentage of liberals that refused to support these false allegations, and especially if they made a point of calling them out, it would hit the perceptions of conservatives like a freight train.
We judge a person as being a racist, based of our beliefs of what constitutes racism which differs from person to person. So if I allege that Donald Trump is a racist that simple means his actions fit my belief as to what constitutes racism. So how can that allegation be false if it fits my definition racism?

I guess what I don't understand is why my belief that Trump is racist and your belief that he is not should have any bearing on our respect for each other. You have no way of knowing what I know and I have no way of knowing what you know and neither one of us can know what Donald Trump knows. Generalizing, I see no reason for disrespect or being uncordial based on difference of opinion.
 
OP
Flopper

Flopper

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
24,839
Reaction score
5,177
Points
280
Location
Washington
There are people on Facebook saying they will unfriend people for disagreeing with them about Trump and BLM.
Trump supporters waving signs at a BLM march have been attacked. Fights have been breaking out in Portland between far right and far left groups. When people allow national politics to become a central part of their lives, the nation is in trouble.

If your community is anything like mine, the decisions made by the mayor and the city council have far more direct impact on daily life than those made by the president. Yet only 1/3 of the people in my city know the name of the mayor or the name of more than one city counsel member. Only about 20% will vote in an all local election yet over 70% will vote in a national election.
Look how much money and attention are spent in national elections vs local
That is due to the fact that so many Americans have gone crazy over national politics but why? Why, has America become fundamentally unglued? Why have otherwise rational people began to act irrationally? Why have Facebook and Twitter feeds turned into political battlegrounds? Why have so many people ended relationships or friendships over political disagreements? How did everything turn so upside down in a time of relative peace and prosperity in America?

In the grand scheme of things, the country has faced far more significant issues. Democrats are no more concerned over social issues than in the past Republicans ideology hasn't significantly changed in last 40 years and we’ve come a long way as a country when our national debate over equality has boiled down to which bathroom people who are changing their genders use.
Why you ask? Because we live in the digital age where entities have perfected the art and psychology of marketing and campaigning. Play off fear, demonize the enemy, use peoples insecurities to draw their support. Couple that with the 24/7 cable news cycle, editorial “news” shows like Rush and Hannity, social media bubbles, and a thirst for drama from our tabloid envying society... well it’s the perfect storm. And the result is the shittiest president in our history. An egomaniac who represents all of the above.
I say the only difference is due to technology which made possible the expansion of media and speed that information can be delivered. I believe the psychology of campaigning, dirty tricks, fear mongering, etc is much the same and people have always had a desire for information and drama. I also think there has been little difference in quality of people elected. You just know about thousand times as much about them and hear far more commentary both true and false. People really don't change that much. Media has always been biased and dishonest.

For most of American media history there was no concept of unbiased, neutral journalism. Newspapers endorsed political candidates and savaged their opponents in print. If you think politics is rough now, go read what was written about Andrew Jackson’s wife when he ran for president or what was said about Abraham Lincoln during his 1860 and 1864 presidential campaigns. Newspapers, which in their most basic business models are aggregations of advertisements surrounded by articles of interest designed to get people to buy the paper, were the first mass distributed method of political discourse in this country. Leaving aside pamphlets like Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense,” newspapers were our first mass distributed pop culture. And newspapers began as ribald, rollicking, bitterly partisan broadsides for or against particular candidates and policies.

Today, the media with it's huge foot print in America, foments conflict and angst and anger and fear because that’s what makes the media money. But the reason why our political media is broken isn’t because the political media is broken, it’s because we’re broken. Every time that Donald Trump gets attacked, his base likes him more and every time the left wing base attacks Donald Trump, the left wing’s base likes it more. The problem with this is self-evident, we’ve got two different media universes that don’t overlap. Both of these media bases are incredibly lucrative businesses. Why would the left wing and the right wing change its media direction when both sides are making so much money and the audiences keep consuming what’s being created so well? Abraham Lincoln famously said a house divided against itself cannot stand. But what if this media house divided against itself can stand up perfectly, even as the country falls apart around it?
Good points... I’d love to see a credible fact checking and rating entity enter the picture that can grow big enough and gain the trust of a large majority of citizens to keep these media personalities and politicians in check. They all need more transparency and accountability. I’d love to see all of them rated and forced to display that rating at all times
I don't know if that's possible but it would be wonderful. When we can't agree on the facts, a meaningful discussion is unlikely and solving problems is impossible.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
69,771
Reaction score
13,557
Points
2,220
What we can learn from the justices, though — beyond how to be a friend — is how to welcome debate and differences. The two justices had central roles in addressing some of the most divisive issues of the day, including cases on abortion, same-sex marriage and who would be president. Not for a moment did one think the other should be condemned or ostracized. More than that, they believed that what they were doing — arriving at their own opinions thoughtfully and advancing them vigorously — was essential to the national good. With less debate, their friendship would have been diminished, and so, they believed, would our democracy.
Eugene Scalia

I think there's a lesson here for all us. Just because we disagree on issues should not be a reason for disrespect and hatred. There is far too much of this in politics today and it makes us weaker, not stronger as a nation.

You can disagree without being disagreeable.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg


Are you ready to stop supporting false allegations of racism made against republicans, especially Trump?
But why should cordial and respective behavior between people be dependent on whether a person believes and supports allegations about the president? That really doesn't make much sense. It seems if any disrespect or discourtesy is due, it should be directed at the person responsible for those allegations not those that read and believe them. In fact, there is no reason to be disrespectful or discourtesy to anyone simply because they hold different political views. It certainly will not change their views and if anything it will make them stronger. Carried to an extreme as is on this board, people become so ridge in their beliefs that they can not share any common reality with the opposition so they can not agree on facts. Then debates are not debates, they are just a series of personal attacks punctuated by statements of beliefs.

When you support false allegations of racism, in the current culture, you create an environment of extreme toxicity, so that respect and courtesy become impossible. No lib is going to respect or be courtesy to any conservative, , if they have convinced themselves that that conservative is a racist.

We as a divided society do NOT share any common reality anymore. ON every issue, there is a huge gap in perceptions and constructive discussion is impossible.


If you are saying that you do not LIKE this situation, then I am telling you the first step is to stop supporting false allegations of racism.


IF there was a significant percentage of liberals that refused to support these false allegations, and especially if they made a point of calling them out, it would hit the perceptions of conservatives like a freight train.
Would you consider it a possibility that what you consider a False sense of racism is perceived by others as a Real sense of racism? Perhaps you have never felt it so you think it is false and they have felt it so they think it’s real. If you can acknowledge that then there should exist the ability to learn from eachother. By using phrases like “False sense of racism” you are automatically dismissing the entire premise behind the cause that millions of people are standing for. You can’t see the issue with that and how it perpetuates the problem?


The Charlottesville Lie is too clear to be honest. Trump was explicit and specific in his NOT including WS in his "good people" comment and the Left, almost Universally, lied about what he said, and judged and attacked and smeared Republicans based on an obvious lie, and continue to do so to this day.


We cannot have any "shared reality" when a good third to one half of the country, thinks that the other half is, if not WS themselves, at least sympathetic to them.


AND to be clear, it is your side that is choosing to be deluded.


AND, that is just one of the more clear examples of false accusations. There are uncounted less obvious lies, that poison the civil discourse of this nation.


You want to improve things? Stop supporting such vile lies and call them out.
I agree that many on the Left took the “good people” comment out of context and ran with it. I think a legitimate critique can be made at the tempered outrage and balancing of blame Trump displayed by his reaction. It was wrong for the Left to politicize that but can easily be countered by showing his full comment in context.

your telling me to stop supporting vile lies yet I don’t think I’ve supported any vile lies. Which ones do you think I’m supporting?

You are the only liberal, I've heard admitting that. AND, that is only the most obvious abuse.

It is a constant stream of vileness.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
69,771
Reaction score
13,557
Points
2,220
What we can learn from the justices, though — beyond how to be a friend — is how to welcome debate and differences. The two justices had central roles in addressing some of the most divisive issues of the day, including cases on abortion, same-sex marriage and who would be president. Not for a moment did one think the other should be condemned or ostracized. More than that, they believed that what they were doing — arriving at their own opinions thoughtfully and advancing them vigorously — was essential to the national good. With less debate, their friendship would have been diminished, and so, they believed, would our democracy.
Eugene Scalia

I think there's a lesson here for all us. Just because we disagree on issues should not be a reason for disrespect and hatred. There is far too much of this in politics today and it makes us weaker, not stronger as a nation.

You can disagree without being disagreeable.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg


Are you ready to stop supporting false allegations of racism made against republicans, especially Trump?
But why should cordial and respective behavior between people be dependent on whether a person believes and supports allegations about the president? That really doesn't make much sense. It seems if any disrespect or discourtesy is due, it should be directed at the person responsible for those allegations not those that read and believe them. In fact, there is no reason to be disrespectful or discourtesy to anyone simply because they hold different political views. It certainly will not change their views and if anything it will make them stronger. Carried to an extreme as is on this board, people become so ridge in their beliefs that they can not share any common reality with the opposition so they can not agree on facts. Then debates are not debates, they are just a series of personal attacks punctuated by statements of beliefs.

When you support false allegations of racism, in the current culture, you create an environment of extreme toxicity, so that respect and courtesy become impossible. No lib is going to respect or be courtesy to any conservative, , if they have convinced themselves that that conservative is a racist.

We as a divided society do NOT share any common reality anymore. ON every issue, there is a huge gap in perceptions and constructive discussion is impossible.


If you are saying that you do not LIKE this situation, then I am telling you the first step is to stop supporting false allegations of racism.


IF there was a significant percentage of liberals that refused to support these false allegations, and especially if they made a point of calling them out, it would hit the perceptions of conservatives like a freight train.
We judge a person as being a racist, based of our beliefs of what constitutes racism which differs from person to person. So if I allege that Donald Trump is a racist that simple means his actions fit my belief as to what constitutes racism. So how can that allegation be false if it fits my definition racism?

I guess what I don't understand is why my belief that Trump is racist and your belief that he is not should have any bearing on our respect for each other. You have no way of knowing what I know and I have no way of knowing what you know and neither one of us can know what Donald Trump knows. Generalizing, I see no reason for disrespect or being uncordial based on difference of opinion.

1. Because when you use words, people will assume you are using them, as they are defined in dictionaries, not your own made up versions.

In your scenario, EXAMPLE, the people that have just decided that their view of racism, means that blacks can't be racist because racism requires power to inflict blah, blah, blah,.

Do you agree that that is valid? That blacks can't be racist?



2. Because these various ism and phobe accusations, especially racism, have become to toxic in our modern culture, that believing that the other person is such a ist or phobe, means that you or at least a society and people in general cannot respect that person or anything they say or do. Hell, more and more, society has to immediately "cancel" them is some form.


3. If you don't like it, step one is to stop supporting false allegations of racism. Otherwise, just look forward to ever increasing strife and hatred tearing this nation apart.
 

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
37,964
Reaction score
9,911
Points
1,330
There are people on Facebook saying they will unfriend people for disagreeing with them about Trump and BLM.
Trump supporters waving signs at a BLM march have been attacked. Fights have been breaking out in Portland between far right and far left groups. When people allow national politics to become a central part of their lives, the nation is in trouble.

If your community is anything like mine, the decisions made by the mayor and the city council have far more direct impact on daily life than those made by the president. Yet only 1/3 of the people in my city know the name of the mayor or the name of more than one city counsel member. Only about 20% will vote in an all local election yet over 70% will vote in a national election.
Look how much money and attention are spent in national elections vs local
That is due to the fact that so many Americans have gone crazy over national politics but why? Why, has America become fundamentally unglued? Why have otherwise rational people began to act irrationally? Why have Facebook and Twitter feeds turned into political battlegrounds? Why have so many people ended relationships or friendships over political disagreements? How did everything turn so upside down in a time of relative peace and prosperity in America?

In the grand scheme of things, the country has faced far more significant issues. Democrats are no more concerned over social issues than in the past Republicans ideology hasn't significantly changed in last 40 years and we’ve come a long way as a country when our national debate over equality has boiled down to which bathroom people who are changing their genders use.
Why you ask? Because we live in the digital age where entities have perfected the art and psychology of marketing and campaigning. Play off fear, demonize the enemy, use peoples insecurities to draw their support. Couple that with the 24/7 cable news cycle, editorial “news” shows like Rush and Hannity, social media bubbles, and a thirst for drama from our tabloid envying society... well it’s the perfect storm. And the result is the shittiest president in our history. An egomaniac who represents all of the above.
I say the only difference is due to technology which made possible the expansion of media and speed that information can be delivered. I believe the psychology of campaigning, dirty tricks, fear mongering, etc is much the same and people have always had a desire for information and drama. I also think there has been little difference in quality of people elected. You just know about thousand times as much about them and hear far more commentary both true and false. People really don't change that much. Media has always been biased and dishonest.

For most of American media history there was no concept of unbiased, neutral journalism. Newspapers endorsed political candidates and savaged their opponents in print. If you think politics is rough now, go read what was written about Andrew Jackson’s wife when he ran for president or what was said about Abraham Lincoln during his 1860 and 1864 presidential campaigns. Newspapers, which in their most basic business models are aggregations of advertisements surrounded by articles of interest designed to get people to buy the paper, were the first mass distributed method of political discourse in this country. Leaving aside pamphlets like Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense,” newspapers were our first mass distributed pop culture. And newspapers began as ribald, rollicking, bitterly partisan broadsides for or against particular candidates and policies.

Today, the media with it's huge foot print in America, foments conflict and angst and anger and fear because that’s what makes the media money. But the reason why our political media is broken isn’t because the political media is broken, it’s because we’re broken. Every time that Donald Trump gets attacked, his base likes him more and every time the left wing base attacks Donald Trump, the left wing’s base likes it more. The problem with this is self-evident, we’ve got two different media universes that don’t overlap. Both of these media bases are incredibly lucrative businesses. Why would the left wing and the right wing change its media direction when both sides are making so much money and the audiences keep consuming what’s being created so well? Abraham Lincoln famously said a house divided against itself cannot stand. But what if this media house divided against itself can stand up perfectly, even as the country falls apart around it?
I think you are missing a bigger point related to the corporate media. It’s clear to me much of the corporate media are controlled by a hidden cabal, that consists of deep state government forces colluding with the billionaires who own the media and numerous media personnel, to control the narrative for the benefit of the State and the ultra wealthy.

The CIA and NSA likely play a major role in this effort. CIA Director Casey let it be known in the 1980s, when he said paraphrasing, “when everything Americans know is wrong we will know we have succeeded.”

Second point; blaming the American people for the divisive nature of our political discourse, I find unacceptable. When you realize there is a covert effort by powerful forces to propagandize and divide Americans, which has existed for decades, you can’t expect the average Joe to realize he’s being duped.

We see these dupes on this forum every day.
 

Slade3200

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
35,058
Reaction score
4,422
Points
1,140
There are people on Facebook saying they will unfriend people for disagreeing with them about Trump and BLM.
Trump supporters waving signs at a BLM march have been attacked. Fights have been breaking out in Portland between far right and far left groups. When people allow national politics to become a central part of their lives, the nation is in trouble.

If your community is anything like mine, the decisions made by the mayor and the city council have far more direct impact on daily life than those made by the president. Yet only 1/3 of the people in my city know the name of the mayor or the name of more than one city counsel member. Only about 20% will vote in an all local election yet over 70% will vote in a national election.
Look how much money and attention are spent in national elections vs local
That is due to the fact that so many Americans have gone crazy over national politics but why? Why, has America become fundamentally unglued? Why have otherwise rational people began to act irrationally? Why have Facebook and Twitter feeds turned into political battlegrounds? Why have so many people ended relationships or friendships over political disagreements? How did everything turn so upside down in a time of relative peace and prosperity in America?

In the grand scheme of things, the country has faced far more significant issues. Democrats are no more concerned over social issues than in the past Republicans ideology hasn't significantly changed in last 40 years and we’ve come a long way as a country when our national debate over equality has boiled down to which bathroom people who are changing their genders use.
Why you ask? Because we live in the digital age where entities have perfected the art and psychology of marketing and campaigning. Play off fear, demonize the enemy, use peoples insecurities to draw their support. Couple that with the 24/7 cable news cycle, editorial “news” shows like Rush and Hannity, social media bubbles, and a thirst for drama from our tabloid envying society... well it’s the perfect storm. And the result is the shittiest president in our history. An egomaniac who represents all of the above.
I say the only difference is due to technology which made possible the expansion of media and speed that information can be delivered. I believe the psychology of campaigning, dirty tricks, fear mongering, etc is much the same and people have always had a desire for information and drama. I also think there has been little difference in quality of people elected. You just know about thousand times as much about them and hear far more commentary both true and false. People really don't change that much. Media has always been biased and dishonest.

For most of American media history there was no concept of unbiased, neutral journalism. Newspapers endorsed political candidates and savaged their opponents in print. If you think politics is rough now, go read what was written about Andrew Jackson’s wife when he ran for president or what was said about Abraham Lincoln during his 1860 and 1864 presidential campaigns. Newspapers, which in their most basic business models are aggregations of advertisements surrounded by articles of interest designed to get people to buy the paper, were the first mass distributed method of political discourse in this country. Leaving aside pamphlets like Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense,” newspapers were our first mass distributed pop culture. And newspapers began as ribald, rollicking, bitterly partisan broadsides for or against particular candidates and policies.

Today, the media with it's huge foot print in America, foments conflict and angst and anger and fear because that’s what makes the media money. But the reason why our political media is broken isn’t because the political media is broken, it’s because we’re broken. Every time that Donald Trump gets attacked, his base likes him more and every time the left wing base attacks Donald Trump, the left wing’s base likes it more. The problem with this is self-evident, we’ve got two different media universes that don’t overlap. Both of these media bases are incredibly lucrative businesses. Why would the left wing and the right wing change its media direction when both sides are making so much money and the audiences keep consuming what’s being created so well? Abraham Lincoln famously said a house divided against itself cannot stand. But what if this media house divided against itself can stand up perfectly, even as the country falls apart around it?
I think you are missing a bigger point related to the corporate media. It’s clear to me much of the corporate media are controlled by a hidden cabal, that consists of deep state government forces colluding with the billionaires who own the media and numerous media personnel, to control the narrative for the benefit of the State and the ultra wealthy.

The CIA and NSA likely play a major role in this effort. CIA Director Casey let it be known in the 1980s, when he said paraphrasing, “when everything Americans know is wrong we will know we have succeeded.”

Second point; blaming the American people for the divisive nature of our political discourse, I find unacceptable. When you realize there is a covert effort by powerful forces to propagandize and divide Americans, which has existed for decades, you can’t expect the average Joe to realize he’s being duped.

We see these dupes on this forum every day.
Americans have the choice to follow or think for themselves. When Americans act like sheep isolating their political news and social bubbles, they are absolutely responsible
 

initforme

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2011
Messages
14,070
Reaction score
1,645
Points
265
Ive never let political views interfere with friendship. None of my friends are politically active and like me we laugh and mock our officials more than anything. Life is too short not to see the humor in things. Getting all crazy about it is dumb really.
 

initforme

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2011
Messages
14,070
Reaction score
1,645
Points
265
I don't give a crap who they put in the SC it has no affect on me. As long as they don't always vote in favor of the wealthy things are ok.
 

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
37,964
Reaction score
9,911
Points
1,330
I don't give a crap who they put in the SC it has no affect on me. As long as they don't always vote in favor of the wealthy things are ok.
But they do always vote in favor of the wealthy.
 

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
37,964
Reaction score
9,911
Points
1,330
There are people on Facebook saying they will unfriend people for disagreeing with them about Trump and BLM.
Trump supporters waving signs at a BLM march have been attacked. Fights have been breaking out in Portland between far right and far left groups. When people allow national politics to become a central part of their lives, the nation is in trouble.

If your community is anything like mine, the decisions made by the mayor and the city council have far more direct impact on daily life than those made by the president. Yet only 1/3 of the people in my city know the name of the mayor or the name of more than one city counsel member. Only about 20% will vote in an all local election yet over 70% will vote in a national election.
Look how much money and attention are spent in national elections vs local
That is due to the fact that so many Americans have gone crazy over national politics but why? Why, has America become fundamentally unglued? Why have otherwise rational people began to act irrationally? Why have Facebook and Twitter feeds turned into political battlegrounds? Why have so many people ended relationships or friendships over political disagreements? How did everything turn so upside down in a time of relative peace and prosperity in America?

In the grand scheme of things, the country has faced far more significant issues. Democrats are no more concerned over social issues than in the past Republicans ideology hasn't significantly changed in last 40 years and we’ve come a long way as a country when our national debate over equality has boiled down to which bathroom people who are changing their genders use.
Why you ask? Because we live in the digital age where entities have perfected the art and psychology of marketing and campaigning. Play off fear, demonize the enemy, use peoples insecurities to draw their support. Couple that with the 24/7 cable news cycle, editorial “news” shows like Rush and Hannity, social media bubbles, and a thirst for drama from our tabloid envying society... well it’s the perfect storm. And the result is the shittiest president in our history. An egomaniac who represents all of the above.
I say the only difference is due to technology which made possible the expansion of media and speed that information can be delivered. I believe the psychology of campaigning, dirty tricks, fear mongering, etc is much the same and people have always had a desire for information and drama. I also think there has been little difference in quality of people elected. You just know about thousand times as much about them and hear far more commentary both true and false. People really don't change that much. Media has always been biased and dishonest.

For most of American media history there was no concept of unbiased, neutral journalism. Newspapers endorsed political candidates and savaged their opponents in print. If you think politics is rough now, go read what was written about Andrew Jackson’s wife when he ran for president or what was said about Abraham Lincoln during his 1860 and 1864 presidential campaigns. Newspapers, which in their most basic business models are aggregations of advertisements surrounded by articles of interest designed to get people to buy the paper, were the first mass distributed method of political discourse in this country. Leaving aside pamphlets like Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense,” newspapers were our first mass distributed pop culture. And newspapers began as ribald, rollicking, bitterly partisan broadsides for or against particular candidates and policies.

Today, the media with it's huge foot print in America, foments conflict and angst and anger and fear because that’s what makes the media money. But the reason why our political media is broken isn’t because the political media is broken, it’s because we’re broken. Every time that Donald Trump gets attacked, his base likes him more and every time the left wing base attacks Donald Trump, the left wing’s base likes it more. The problem with this is self-evident, we’ve got two different media universes that don’t overlap. Both of these media bases are incredibly lucrative businesses. Why would the left wing and the right wing change its media direction when both sides are making so much money and the audiences keep consuming what’s being created so well? Abraham Lincoln famously said a house divided against itself cannot stand. But what if this media house divided against itself can stand up perfectly, even as the country falls apart around it?
I think you are missing a bigger point related to the corporate media. It’s clear to me much of the corporate media are controlled by a hidden cabal, that consists of deep state government forces colluding with the billionaires who own the media and numerous media personnel, to control the narrative for the benefit of the State and the ultra wealthy.

The CIA and NSA likely play a major role in this effort. CIA Director Casey let it be known in the 1980s, when he said paraphrasing, “when everything Americans know is wrong we will know we have succeeded.”

Second point; blaming the American people for the divisive nature of our political discourse, I find unacceptable. When you realize there is a covert effort by powerful forces to propagandize and divide Americans, which has existed for decades, you can’t expect the average Joe to realize he’s being duped.

We see these dupes on this forum every day.
Americans have the choice to follow or think for themselves. When Americans act like sheep isolating their political news and social bubbles, they are absolutely responsible
It’s difficult for most. They can’t overcome a lifetime of indoctrination and propaganda by the ruling class.
 

whitehall

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
46,745
Reaction score
10,544
Points
2,040
Location
Western Va.
Hollywood cobbled a documentary together praising RBG. How much respect did they show for Scalia?
 

Slade3200

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
35,058
Reaction score
4,422
Points
1,140
There are people on Facebook saying they will unfriend people for disagreeing with them about Trump and BLM.
Trump supporters waving signs at a BLM march have been attacked. Fights have been breaking out in Portland between far right and far left groups. When people allow national politics to become a central part of their lives, the nation is in trouble.

If your community is anything like mine, the decisions made by the mayor and the city council have far more direct impact on daily life than those made by the president. Yet only 1/3 of the people in my city know the name of the mayor or the name of more than one city counsel member. Only about 20% will vote in an all local election yet over 70% will vote in a national election.
Look how much money and attention are spent in national elections vs local
That is due to the fact that so many Americans have gone crazy over national politics but why? Why, has America become fundamentally unglued? Why have otherwise rational people began to act irrationally? Why have Facebook and Twitter feeds turned into political battlegrounds? Why have so many people ended relationships or friendships over political disagreements? How did everything turn so upside down in a time of relative peace and prosperity in America?

In the grand scheme of things, the country has faced far more significant issues. Democrats are no more concerned over social issues than in the past Republicans ideology hasn't significantly changed in last 40 years and we’ve come a long way as a country when our national debate over equality has boiled down to which bathroom people who are changing their genders use.
Why you ask? Because we live in the digital age where entities have perfected the art and psychology of marketing and campaigning. Play off fear, demonize the enemy, use peoples insecurities to draw their support. Couple that with the 24/7 cable news cycle, editorial “news” shows like Rush and Hannity, social media bubbles, and a thirst for drama from our tabloid envying society... well it’s the perfect storm. And the result is the shittiest president in our history. An egomaniac who represents all of the above.
I say the only difference is due to technology which made possible the expansion of media and speed that information can be delivered. I believe the psychology of campaigning, dirty tricks, fear mongering, etc is much the same and people have always had a desire for information and drama. I also think there has been little difference in quality of people elected. You just know about thousand times as much about them and hear far more commentary both true and false. People really don't change that much. Media has always been biased and dishonest.

For most of American media history there was no concept of unbiased, neutral journalism. Newspapers endorsed political candidates and savaged their opponents in print. If you think politics is rough now, go read what was written about Andrew Jackson’s wife when he ran for president or what was said about Abraham Lincoln during his 1860 and 1864 presidential campaigns. Newspapers, which in their most basic business models are aggregations of advertisements surrounded by articles of interest designed to get people to buy the paper, were the first mass distributed method of political discourse in this country. Leaving aside pamphlets like Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense,” newspapers were our first mass distributed pop culture. And newspapers began as ribald, rollicking, bitterly partisan broadsides for or against particular candidates and policies.

Today, the media with it's huge foot print in America, foments conflict and angst and anger and fear because that’s what makes the media money. But the reason why our political media is broken isn’t because the political media is broken, it’s because we’re broken. Every time that Donald Trump gets attacked, his base likes him more and every time the left wing base attacks Donald Trump, the left wing’s base likes it more. The problem with this is self-evident, we’ve got two different media universes that don’t overlap. Both of these media bases are incredibly lucrative businesses. Why would the left wing and the right wing change its media direction when both sides are making so much money and the audiences keep consuming what’s being created so well? Abraham Lincoln famously said a house divided against itself cannot stand. But what if this media house divided against itself can stand up perfectly, even as the country falls apart around it?
I think you are missing a bigger point related to the corporate media. It’s clear to me much of the corporate media are controlled by a hidden cabal, that consists of deep state government forces colluding with the billionaires who own the media and numerous media personnel, to control the narrative for the benefit of the State and the ultra wealthy.

The CIA and NSA likely play a major role in this effort. CIA Director Casey let it be known in the 1980s, when he said paraphrasing, “when everything Americans know is wrong we will know we have succeeded.”

Second point; blaming the American people for the divisive nature of our political discourse, I find unacceptable. When you realize there is a covert effort by powerful forces to propagandize and divide Americans, which has existed for decades, you can’t expect the average Joe to realize he’s being duped.

We see these dupes on this forum every day.
Americans have the choice to follow or think for themselves. When Americans act like sheep isolating their political news and social bubbles, they are absolutely responsible
It’s difficult for most. They can’t overcome a lifetime of indoctrination and propaganda by the ruling class.
Would you consider Alex Jones as part of the ruling class?
 

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
37,964
Reaction score
9,911
Points
1,330
There are people on Facebook saying they will unfriend people for disagreeing with them about Trump and BLM.
Trump supporters waving signs at a BLM march have been attacked. Fights have been breaking out in Portland between far right and far left groups. When people allow national politics to become a central part of their lives, the nation is in trouble.

If your community is anything like mine, the decisions made by the mayor and the city council have far more direct impact on daily life than those made by the president. Yet only 1/3 of the people in my city know the name of the mayor or the name of more than one city counsel member. Only about 20% will vote in an all local election yet over 70% will vote in a national election.
Look how much money and attention are spent in national elections vs local
That is due to the fact that so many Americans have gone crazy over national politics but why? Why, has America become fundamentally unglued? Why have otherwise rational people began to act irrationally? Why have Facebook and Twitter feeds turned into political battlegrounds? Why have so many people ended relationships or friendships over political disagreements? How did everything turn so upside down in a time of relative peace and prosperity in America?

In the grand scheme of things, the country has faced far more significant issues. Democrats are no more concerned over social issues than in the past Republicans ideology hasn't significantly changed in last 40 years and we’ve come a long way as a country when our national debate over equality has boiled down to which bathroom people who are changing their genders use.
Why you ask? Because we live in the digital age where entities have perfected the art and psychology of marketing and campaigning. Play off fear, demonize the enemy, use peoples insecurities to draw their support. Couple that with the 24/7 cable news cycle, editorial “news” shows like Rush and Hannity, social media bubbles, and a thirst for drama from our tabloid envying society... well it’s the perfect storm. And the result is the shittiest president in our history. An egomaniac who represents all of the above.
I say the only difference is due to technology which made possible the expansion of media and speed that information can be delivered. I believe the psychology of campaigning, dirty tricks, fear mongering, etc is much the same and people have always had a desire for information and drama. I also think there has been little difference in quality of people elected. You just know about thousand times as much about them and hear far more commentary both true and false. People really don't change that much. Media has always been biased and dishonest.

For most of American media history there was no concept of unbiased, neutral journalism. Newspapers endorsed political candidates and savaged their opponents in print. If you think politics is rough now, go read what was written about Andrew Jackson’s wife when he ran for president or what was said about Abraham Lincoln during his 1860 and 1864 presidential campaigns. Newspapers, which in their most basic business models are aggregations of advertisements surrounded by articles of interest designed to get people to buy the paper, were the first mass distributed method of political discourse in this country. Leaving aside pamphlets like Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense,” newspapers were our first mass distributed pop culture. And newspapers began as ribald, rollicking, bitterly partisan broadsides for or against particular candidates and policies.

Today, the media with it's huge foot print in America, foments conflict and angst and anger and fear because that’s what makes the media money. But the reason why our political media is broken isn’t because the political media is broken, it’s because we’re broken. Every time that Donald Trump gets attacked, his base likes him more and every time the left wing base attacks Donald Trump, the left wing’s base likes it more. The problem with this is self-evident, we’ve got two different media universes that don’t overlap. Both of these media bases are incredibly lucrative businesses. Why would the left wing and the right wing change its media direction when both sides are making so much money and the audiences keep consuming what’s being created so well? Abraham Lincoln famously said a house divided against itself cannot stand. But what if this media house divided against itself can stand up perfectly, even as the country falls apart around it?
I think you are missing a bigger point related to the corporate media. It’s clear to me much of the corporate media are controlled by a hidden cabal, that consists of deep state government forces colluding with the billionaires who own the media and numerous media personnel, to control the narrative for the benefit of the State and the ultra wealthy.

The CIA and NSA likely play a major role in this effort. CIA Director Casey let it be known in the 1980s, when he said paraphrasing, “when everything Americans know is wrong we will know we have succeeded.”

Second point; blaming the American people for the divisive nature of our political discourse, I find unacceptable. When you realize there is a covert effort by powerful forces to propagandize and divide Americans, which has existed for decades, you can’t expect the average Joe to realize he’s being duped.

We see these dupes on this forum every day.
Americans have the choice to follow or think for themselves. When Americans act like sheep isolating their political news and social bubbles, they are absolutely responsible
It’s difficult for most. They can’t overcome a lifetime of indoctrination and propaganda by the ruling class.
Would you consider Alex Jones as part of the ruling class?
No.
 

Slade3200

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
35,058
Reaction score
4,422
Points
1,140
There are people on Facebook saying they will unfriend people for disagreeing with them about Trump and BLM.
Trump supporters waving signs at a BLM march have been attacked. Fights have been breaking out in Portland between far right and far left groups. When people allow national politics to become a central part of their lives, the nation is in trouble.

If your community is anything like mine, the decisions made by the mayor and the city council have far more direct impact on daily life than those made by the president. Yet only 1/3 of the people in my city know the name of the mayor or the name of more than one city counsel member. Only about 20% will vote in an all local election yet over 70% will vote in a national election.
Look how much money and attention are spent in national elections vs local
That is due to the fact that so many Americans have gone crazy over national politics but why? Why, has America become fundamentally unglued? Why have otherwise rational people began to act irrationally? Why have Facebook and Twitter feeds turned into political battlegrounds? Why have so many people ended relationships or friendships over political disagreements? How did everything turn so upside down in a time of relative peace and prosperity in America?

In the grand scheme of things, the country has faced far more significant issues. Democrats are no more concerned over social issues than in the past Republicans ideology hasn't significantly changed in last 40 years and we’ve come a long way as a country when our national debate over equality has boiled down to which bathroom people who are changing their genders use.
Why you ask? Because we live in the digital age where entities have perfected the art and psychology of marketing and campaigning. Play off fear, demonize the enemy, use peoples insecurities to draw their support. Couple that with the 24/7 cable news cycle, editorial “news” shows like Rush and Hannity, social media bubbles, and a thirst for drama from our tabloid envying society... well it’s the perfect storm. And the result is the shittiest president in our history. An egomaniac who represents all of the above.
I say the only difference is due to technology which made possible the expansion of media and speed that information can be delivered. I believe the psychology of campaigning, dirty tricks, fear mongering, etc is much the same and people have always had a desire for information and drama. I also think there has been little difference in quality of people elected. You just know about thousand times as much about them and hear far more commentary both true and false. People really don't change that much. Media has always been biased and dishonest.

For most of American media history there was no concept of unbiased, neutral journalism. Newspapers endorsed political candidates and savaged their opponents in print. If you think politics is rough now, go read what was written about Andrew Jackson’s wife when he ran for president or what was said about Abraham Lincoln during his 1860 and 1864 presidential campaigns. Newspapers, which in their most basic business models are aggregations of advertisements surrounded by articles of interest designed to get people to buy the paper, were the first mass distributed method of political discourse in this country. Leaving aside pamphlets like Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense,” newspapers were our first mass distributed pop culture. And newspapers began as ribald, rollicking, bitterly partisan broadsides for or against particular candidates and policies.

Today, the media with it's huge foot print in America, foments conflict and angst and anger and fear because that’s what makes the media money. But the reason why our political media is broken isn’t because the political media is broken, it’s because we’re broken. Every time that Donald Trump gets attacked, his base likes him more and every time the left wing base attacks Donald Trump, the left wing’s base likes it more. The problem with this is self-evident, we’ve got two different media universes that don’t overlap. Both of these media bases are incredibly lucrative businesses. Why would the left wing and the right wing change its media direction when both sides are making so much money and the audiences keep consuming what’s being created so well? Abraham Lincoln famously said a house divided against itself cannot stand. But what if this media house divided against itself can stand up perfectly, even as the country falls apart around it?
I think you are missing a bigger point related to the corporate media. It’s clear to me much of the corporate media are controlled by a hidden cabal, that consists of deep state government forces colluding with the billionaires who own the media and numerous media personnel, to control the narrative for the benefit of the State and the ultra wealthy.

The CIA and NSA likely play a major role in this effort. CIA Director Casey let it be known in the 1980s, when he said paraphrasing, “when everything Americans know is wrong we will know we have succeeded.”

Second point; blaming the American people for the divisive nature of our political discourse, I find unacceptable. When you realize there is a covert effort by powerful forces to propagandize and divide Americans, which has existed for decades, you can’t expect the average Joe to realize he’s being duped.

We see these dupes on this forum every day.
Americans have the choice to follow or think for themselves. When Americans act like sheep isolating their political news and social bubbles, they are absolutely responsible
It’s difficult for most. They can’t overcome a lifetime of indoctrination and propaganda by the ruling class.
Would you consider Alex Jones as part of the ruling class?
No.
Is his indoctrination and propaganda any different than the “ruling class” as you call them?
 

buckeye45_73

Lakhota's my *****
Joined
Jun 4, 2011
Messages
30,429
Reaction score
4,569
Points
1,130
There are people on Facebook saying they will unfriend people for disagreeing with them about Trump and BLM.
That's the thing, RWs don't care if you disagree, but LWs, holy shit, they cancel their parents or kids if they disagree, it's pathetic
 

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
37,964
Reaction score
9,911
Points
1,330
There are people on Facebook saying they will unfriend people for disagreeing with them about Trump and BLM.
Trump supporters waving signs at a BLM march have been attacked. Fights have been breaking out in Portland between far right and far left groups. When people allow national politics to become a central part of their lives, the nation is in trouble.

If your community is anything like mine, the decisions made by the mayor and the city council have far more direct impact on daily life than those made by the president. Yet only 1/3 of the people in my city know the name of the mayor or the name of more than one city counsel member. Only about 20% will vote in an all local election yet over 70% will vote in a national election.
Look how much money and attention are spent in national elections vs local
That is due to the fact that so many Americans have gone crazy over national politics but why? Why, has America become fundamentally unglued? Why have otherwise rational people began to act irrationally? Why have Facebook and Twitter feeds turned into political battlegrounds? Why have so many people ended relationships or friendships over political disagreements? How did everything turn so upside down in a time of relative peace and prosperity in America?

In the grand scheme of things, the country has faced far more significant issues. Democrats are no more concerned over social issues than in the past Republicans ideology hasn't significantly changed in last 40 years and we’ve come a long way as a country when our national debate over equality has boiled down to which bathroom people who are changing their genders use.
Why you ask? Because we live in the digital age where entities have perfected the art and psychology of marketing and campaigning. Play off fear, demonize the enemy, use peoples insecurities to draw their support. Couple that with the 24/7 cable news cycle, editorial “news” shows like Rush and Hannity, social media bubbles, and a thirst for drama from our tabloid envying society... well it’s the perfect storm. And the result is the shittiest president in our history. An egomaniac who represents all of the above.
I say the only difference is due to technology which made possible the expansion of media and speed that information can be delivered. I believe the psychology of campaigning, dirty tricks, fear mongering, etc is much the same and people have always had a desire for information and drama. I also think there has been little difference in quality of people elected. You just know about thousand times as much about them and hear far more commentary both true and false. People really don't change that much. Media has always been biased and dishonest.

For most of American media history there was no concept of unbiased, neutral journalism. Newspapers endorsed political candidates and savaged their opponents in print. If you think politics is rough now, go read what was written about Andrew Jackson’s wife when he ran for president or what was said about Abraham Lincoln during his 1860 and 1864 presidential campaigns. Newspapers, which in their most basic business models are aggregations of advertisements surrounded by articles of interest designed to get people to buy the paper, were the first mass distributed method of political discourse in this country. Leaving aside pamphlets like Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense,” newspapers were our first mass distributed pop culture. And newspapers began as ribald, rollicking, bitterly partisan broadsides for or against particular candidates and policies.

Today, the media with it's huge foot print in America, foments conflict and angst and anger and fear because that’s what makes the media money. But the reason why our political media is broken isn’t because the political media is broken, it’s because we’re broken. Every time that Donald Trump gets attacked, his base likes him more and every time the left wing base attacks Donald Trump, the left wing’s base likes it more. The problem with this is self-evident, we’ve got two different media universes that don’t overlap. Both of these media bases are incredibly lucrative businesses. Why would the left wing and the right wing change its media direction when both sides are making so much money and the audiences keep consuming what’s being created so well? Abraham Lincoln famously said a house divided against itself cannot stand. But what if this media house divided against itself can stand up perfectly, even as the country falls apart around it?
I think you are missing a bigger point related to the corporate media. It’s clear to me much of the corporate media are controlled by a hidden cabal, that consists of deep state government forces colluding with the billionaires who own the media and numerous media personnel, to control the narrative for the benefit of the State and the ultra wealthy.

The CIA and NSA likely play a major role in this effort. CIA Director Casey let it be known in the 1980s, when he said paraphrasing, “when everything Americans know is wrong we will know we have succeeded.”

Second point; blaming the American people for the divisive nature of our political discourse, I find unacceptable. When you realize there is a covert effort by powerful forces to propagandize and divide Americans, which has existed for decades, you can’t expect the average Joe to realize he’s being duped.

We see these dupes on this forum every day.
Americans have the choice to follow or think for themselves. When Americans act like sheep isolating their political news and social bubbles, they are absolutely responsible
It’s difficult for most. They can’t overcome a lifetime of indoctrination and propaganda by the ruling class.
Would you consider Alex Jones as part of the ruling class?
No.
Is his indoctrination and propaganda any different than the “ruling class” as you call them?
He is mostly a conspiracy theorist, as far as I know. Never listened to him and he has nothing to do with our debate. Why would you cite him?

It’s the corporate media, that’s the culprit.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top