Now That Trump's President... (not any more!)

  On 2/9/2017 at 3:47 PM, olo said:

People want Black and White...sorry, sorry... White and black outcomes for everything. THAT DOES NOT EXIST!!! Well, rarely anyway when it comes to socio-economic solutions.

Hah, I literally said "it's not black and white, it's more complicated than tha-" once to the reply of "WELL IT SHOULD BE BLACK AND WHITE"

lol

Thanks for sympathizing, it's nice knowing I'm not alone.

I might add the high road is fucking hard. It's hard to try to get past the fact that people you empathize with refuse to do the same. I guess pity is the only appropriate response for people who dismiss, mock, and belittle everyone but themselves and their problems.

  On 2/9/2017 at 4:13 PM, joshuatx said:

 

  On 2/9/2017 at 3:47 PM, olo said:

People want Black and White...sorry, sorry... White and black outcomes for everything. THAT DOES NOT EXIST!!! Well, rarely anyway when it comes to socio-economic solutions.

 

Hah, I literally said "it's not black and white, it's more complicated than tha-" once to the reply of "WELL IT SHOULD BE BLACK AND WHITE"

 

lol

 

Thanks for sympathizing, it's nice knowing I'm not alone.

I might add the high road is fucking hard. It's hard to try to get past the fact that people you empathize with refuse to do the same. I guess pity is the only appropriate response for people who dismiss, mock, and belittle everyone but themselves and their problems.

 

I'd share my "Safe Space" with you. I love that one... :/

i once told a very good friend i pitied him for supporting gw bush...he never spoke to me again after that...not worth it most of the time

fb sucks...wish there was a better way to stay in touch

  On 2/9/2017 at 4:13 PM, joshuatx said:

  On 2/9/2017 at 3:47 PM, olo said:

 

I might add the high road is fucking hard. It's hard to try to get past the fact that people you empathize with refuse to do the same. I guess pity is the only appropriate response for people who dismiss, mock, and belittle everyone but themselves and their problems.

 

The high road is only hard if you enjoy the low road

Edit:

And if the people you pity already had the necessary information required to act differently

Then (by definition) they'd already be acting differently

Maybe instead of pity/resentment/etc we should figure what information they would need to act differently, and give it to them

  On 2/9/2017 at 6:34 PM, LimpyLoo said:

Edit:

 

And if the people you pity already had the necessary information required to act differently

Then (by definition) they'd already be acting differently

Maybe instead of pity/resentment/etc we should figure what information they would need to act differently, and give it to them

I've tried. I rather not elaborate it's tied with other non-political personal stuff in my situation.

I understand what you are saying though. It varies greatly - some people rather believe their own delusions, some are attracted to polarizing political figures out of desperation, some are privileged in some manner that lets them stay steadfast in a certain mindset. 

EDIT: Also there's the other course of simply not bringing up politics at all. I can do that. There are plenty of other things to talk about. It's a bit frustrating when such a 'ceasefire'  is broken but I can deal with it. The kicker is just about everyone I know IRL who likes Trump really don't reflect his persona, ethos, or poltical views in their own actions and interactions with strangers and others. It's more of a hobby they divulge into conversationally. 

  On 2/9/2017 at 7:23 PM, joshuatx said:

 

  On 2/9/2017 at 6:34 PM, LimpyLoo said:

Edit:

 

And if the people you pity already had the necessary information required to act differently

Then (by definition) they'd already be acting differently

Maybe instead of pity/resentment/etc we should figure what information they would need to act differently, and give it to them

I've tried. I rather not elaborate it's tied with other non-political personal stuff in my situation.

 

I understand what you are saying though. It varies greatly - some people rather believe their own delusions, some are attracted to polarizing political figures out of desperation, some are privileged in some manner that lets them stay steadfast in a certain mindset.

Well, more and more I try to avoid such moral evaluations of people

And simply focus on possible solutions

Because once we're convinced that someone is (e.g.) deluded, privileged, or desperate

Then we get to wash our hands of them

Meanwhile, the problem remains

To me, that looks like the ultimate Anti-Solution

(i.e. All the satisfaction of solving the problem

Without the actual problem-solving;

When the tsunami comes

Just tell it it's acting immoral

and then hey, it's no longer our problem...)

It's all gonna be okay, guys.

  On 2/9/2017 at 6:34 PM, LimpyLoo said:

Edit:

 

And if the people you pity already had the necessary information required to act differently

Then (by definition) they'd already be acting differently

Maybe instead of pity/resentment/etc we should figure what information they would need to act differently, and give it to them

This is unfortunately not how people operate. The information is widely available, and you have people who are educated, intelligent and quite literate, jamming their fingers in their ears and going "LA LA LA LA FAKE NEWS!!!!!" as loudly as they can.

This has been widely shown by two of the most prominent behavioural psychologists around.

Earlier this week the president revealed that he supports civil asset forfeiture (of course he does) when he told a sheriff that he would "destroy" a state senator fighting to rein in civil asset forfeiture. Another state senator who opposes civil asset forfeiture, Daylin Leach of Pennsylvania, dared the president to try to destroy him:

If humans weren't so politically stubborn then the world would surely be a better and at the very least, more of a factual and respectful place. IIRC whenever someone's political beliefs are contradicted then our brain takes it as a personal attack and goes into a total selective information mode. Also IIRC This bias is also way more apparent in conservatives as well.

  On 2/9/2017 at 9:03 PM, Joyrex said:

Earlier this week the president revealed that he supports civil asset forfeiture (of course he does) when he told a sheriff that he would "destroy" a state senator fighting to rein in civil asset forfeiture. Another state senator who opposes civil asset forfeiture, Daylin Leach of Pennsylvania, dared the president to try to destroy him:

 

HA!

  On 2/9/2017 at 8:39 PM, chenGOD said:

 

  On 2/9/2017 at 6:34 PM, LimpyLoo said:

Edit:

 

And if the people you pity already had the necessary information required to act differently

Then (by definition) they'd already be acting differently

Maybe instead of pity/resentment/etc we should figure what information they would need to act differently, and give it to them

This is unfortunately not how people operate. The information is widely available, and you have people who are educated, intelligent and quite literate, jamming their fingers in their ears and going "LA LA LA LA FAKE NEWS!!!!!" as loudly as they can.

This has been widely shown by two of the most prominent behavioural psychologists around.

1) Maybe I'm talking about interpersonal/moral information, not factual political information (i.e. Carl Rogers, not Snopes.com)

2) I'm gonna assume you're referring to 'motivated reasoning'

And not the ~100-year old concept of 'cognitive dissonance' (which is riddled with outmoded assumptions)...

So, what do you think is happening in the 'la la fake news!' person?

Because here's the beautiful thing about 'motivated reasoning', Chen:

Motivational states can be modulated by cognition! (It's a miracle!)

So if the motivational state is 'avoid/reduce anomalies'

(e.g. political information we don't like)

And obstacles to that motivational state cause negative emotion

Well, yeah they are gonna avoid negative emotion

(Maybe Google 'predictive coding' and 'free energy principle')

But check it out:

We know how to change that...

(while we're playing this condescension game:)

You should Google 'exposure therapy'

Because it's kind of a big deal

Oh and also: human beings are not static fixed-in-stone things

(Obviously!)

You can feed information into them and change their behavioral patterns

(Again: a miracle!)

Maybe also Google 'fixed mindset' vs 'growth mindset'

Because it's also kind a big deal

Maybe Google 'cognitive behavioral therapy' too

Also a big deal

^lol

Trump wants to improve relationships with Russia and reduce expenses for NATO.

So why doesn't he withdraw the 20 US nuclear bombs that are placed in Germany and aim to Russian cities? Wouldn't it be in his interest (less NATO expenses, appeasement with Russia)?

I would also feel more safe if there weren't Russian nuclear arms targeted on Germany as a consequence.

  On 2/9/2017 at 9:23 PM, darreichungsform said:

Trump wants to improve relationships with Russia and reduce expenses for NATO.

So why doesn't he withdraw the 20 US nuclear bombs that are placed in Germany and aim to Russian cities? Wouldn't it be in his interest (less NATO expenses, appeasement with Russia)?

I would also feel more safe if there weren't Russian nuclear arms targeted on Germany as a consequence.

Technically those are NATO shared and IIRC it's an arrangement that's generally considered outdated by all parties but been stalled out for years, probably decades at this point, in terms of figuring out how to remove them.

Defense systems, i.e. anti-ballistic missiles are things NATO countries still want. Also the US / NATO has stepped up deployments an exercises in the Baltics and Poland. Scandinavian debate regarding joining NATO is also back on the table. Trump of course has been dismissive of all of this which is really fucking short-sided. You can't be iffy on this with leaders like Putin on the other side.

All nuclear disarmament and de-esclating treaties between the US and Russia have been put on hold BTW, it occurred before Trump took office but amidst all the related decline in relations. Stuff that has been signed is still enforced for now of course but in terms of the slow progress since the first treaties in the 70s things are essentially on hold again.

Google a dick.

  On 2/9/2017 at 10:29 PM, usagi said:

Google a dick.

Hey, I forgot to ask:

What did you end up buying on Bleep?

(Or is it a secrete?)

I bought a little 2-track single under one of Boxcutter's new aliases. what I didn't buy was the sudden inability to comment on irrelevant/annoying/sophomoric garbage where it isn't relevant. josh told you about his real-life experiences trying to discuss what is going on under this new administration and the problems of trying to start any sort of dialogue in this current climate, and you swooped in with your usual. don't you have a personal subforum for that now?

  On 2/9/2017 at 11:02 PM, usagi said:

I bought a little 2-track single under one of Boxcutter's new aliases. what I didn't buy was the sudden inability to comment on irrelevant/annoying/sophomoric garbage where it isn't relevant. josh told you about his real-life experiences trying to discuss what is going on under this new administration and the problems of trying to start any sort of dialogue in this current climate, and you swooped in with your usual. don't you have a personal subforum for that now?

And what did I try to offer Joshua?

Was it a petty sarcastic criticism?

Or did I (perhaps?) try to offer a constructive way to look at/solve the problem?

(I mean, I guess if you think all my ideas and opinions are rubbish then I guess I never offer anything useful to anyone, ever...)

So maybe this would be a good idea:

-screw NATO

-make a new defense system with EU, Russia and North America

-bind all parties on disarmament / a minimum defensive army should be kept though

-invest in South America more, there will be a need of good and strong allies in order to keep the balance with regimes like China after the disarmement of North America and Europe

-Marshall plan for the African continent along with the annulment of exploitative EPAs in order to give African countries the opportunity to develop functioning economies, Chinese neocolonianism won't work if the surrounding countries are strong and free and not being exploited

-then force China to disarm by global econimical sanctions

-once all forces are militarily neutralized there must be global bills to democratize organisations and to prevent monopolization

-set a global minimum wage

-set a global maximum fortune

-set a global basic income

Only problem is it won't work.

insinuating that a person who finds reasoning with the opposition/taking the high road difficult because they like mudslinging/taking the low road... is not "constructive criticism". man works in public service, nobody who does shit in the real world to combat this needs to hear those sorts of smug underhanded remarks from some self-declared professor of internet bloodclartery.

  On 2/9/2017 at 11:09 PM, LimpyLoo said:

(I mean, I guess if you think all my ideas and opinions are rubbish then I guess I never offer anything useful to anyone, ever...)

I can't say for sure about the first bit but you're definitely proving the second bit.

  On 2/9/2017 at 11:47 PM, usagi said:

insinuating that a person who finds reasoning with the opposition/taking the high road difficult because they like mudslinging/taking the low road... is not "constructive criticism". man works in public service, nobody who does shit in the real world to combat this needs to hear those sorts of smug underhanded remarks from some self-declared professor of internet bloodclartery.

 

 

  On 2/9/2017 at 11:09 PM, LimpyLoo said:

(I mean, I guess if you think all my ideas and opinions are rubbish then I guess I never offer anything useful to anyone, ever...)

I can't say for sure about the first bit but you're definitely proving the second bit.

Yeah by 'you' I meant specifically JoshuaTX

--one of the most consistently reasonable people on watmm--

We all know he loves to roll around in the filth and indulge petty bullshit

And I was attacking his character

I didn't at all mean we almost always take the low road

Because we don't tend to see it as a better strategy...

Like 'eat your vegetables' or take your pick

Of course I'm not subtle at all

I love to jump in and arbitrarily piss on (e.g.) Joshua

I've also been waiting for ZoeB and A/D to come back so I can call them idiots and tear them down too

I make no such distinctions

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/09/judges-deny-trump-travel-ban-enforcement-uphold-order

nice