(August 21, 2017 at 7:05 am)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:

(August 21, 2017 at 1:17 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: The statues are going down.  They can be removed in one piece but they will be removed.

They don't have to go down, they just have to stop be supported by taxpayers' dollars.

Public or private, not just coming down, but those historical figures should have never been marketed as good or heros. 

I get really fucking tired of the apologists here confusing relocation as some sort of call to erase history when all we have been saying is that slavery is bad and the only way to keep that history is to put those men who fought to keep it in the proper context of WHAT NOT TO DO TO YOUR FELLOW HUMAN.

If everyone agrees that slavery is a dark part of our species behavior to each other, then what we are saying should be a no brainer. There was nothing good about slavery.

The statues don't convey any history other than the name (if that's even remembered) of the person portrayed.

And, of course, the statues are political in nature, much more so than historical. If by chance there is a plaque on the plinth the text is very likely to be written by a fan boi rather than a historian. Most of the statues were put up at the urging of the KKK, during its heyday in the US.

FYI Scott Adams on Hysteria

The basic idea:

Quote:...ask yourself which one of these versions sounds less crazy:

1. A sitting president, who is a branding expert, thought it would be a good idea to go easy on murderous Nazis as a way to improve his popularity.
or…
2. The country elected a racist leader who is winking to the KKK and White Supremacists that they have a free pass to start a race war now.
or…
3. A mentally unstable racist clown with conman skills (mostly just lying) eviscerated the Republican primary field and won the presidency. He keeps doing crazy, impulsive racist stuff. But for some reason, the economy is going well, jobs are looking good, North Korea blinked, ISIS is on the ropes, and the Supreme Court got a qualified judge. It was mostly luck.
or…
4. The guy who didn’t offer to be your moral leader didn’t offer any moral leadership, just law and order, applied equally. His critics cleverly and predictably framed it as being soft on Nazis.

One of those narratives is less crazy-sounding than the others. That doesn’t mean the less-crazy one has to be true. But normal stuff happens far more often than crazy stuff. And critics will frame normal stuff as crazy whenever they get a chance.

I am so glad I have Neo on ignore, cant imagine what nonsense apology and playing false victim he is posting.

I'm feeling like Scott Adams had a few other options he could have thrown out there, Neo. That is not to mention the fact that he injected bias into every single posited option other than his own.

(August 21, 2017 at 12:23 pm)Shell B Wrote: I'm feeling like Scott Adams had a few other options he could have throw out there, Neo. That is not to mention the fact that he injected bias into every single posited option other than his own.

Fair enough but you have to give him credit for having predicted, at a very early date, the election of PDT. When he's right, he's right and his characterizations do not seem to be too far from the mark. I believe the same critique would have applied to many people's over-reactions to Obama and George W.

Quote: But for some reason, the economy is going well, jobs are looking good, North Korea blinked, ISIS is on the ropes, and the Supreme Court got a qualified judge.

The economy is continuing trends that had been going on for years and the jobs numbers - although they don't address what kinds of jobs - are also continuing along the same trends they had been following for years.  Mainly because the WLB has not had a chance to fuck them up because he's off playing fucking golf.  North Korea always acts up when the annual US-SK war games are scheduled but they still have missiles and nukes, ISIS had been on the ropes long before the WLB came along and did nothing and the Supreme Court got another corporation loving fascist to further oppress the poor in the name of the "law."

Scott Adams is a good cartoonist.  I would not go to him for surgery.

(August 21, 2017 at 12:07 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: FYI Scott Adams on Hysteria

---

The basic idea:  

Quote:...ask yourself which one of these versions sounds less crazy:

1. A sitting president, who is a branding expert, thought it would be a good idea to go easy on murderous Nazis as a way to improve his popularity.
or…
2. The country elected a racist leader who is winking to the KKK and White Supremacists that they have a free pass to start a race war now.
or…
3. A mentally unstable racist clown with conman skills (mostly just lying) eviscerated the Republican primary field and won the presidency. He keeps doing crazy, impulsive racist stuff. But for some reason, the economy is going well, jobs are looking good, North Korea blinked, ISIS is on the ropes, and the Supreme Court got a qualified judge. It was mostly luck.
or…
4. The guy who didn’t offer to be your moral leader didn’t offer any moral leadership, just law and order, applied equally. His critics cleverly and predictably framed it as being soft on Nazis.

One of those narratives is less crazy-sounding than the others. That doesn’t mean the less-crazy one has to be true. But normal stuff happens far more often than crazy stuff. And critics will frame normal stuff as crazy whenever they get a chance.

---

I think that a big problem, that seems to be getting worse on both sides was captured in the following

Quote:5. The Insult without supporting argument

When people have actual reasons for disagreeing with you, they offer those reasons without hesitation. Strangers on social media will cheerfully check your facts, your logic, and your assumptions. But when you start seeing ad hominem attacks that offer no reasons at all, that might be a sign that people in the mass hysteria bubble don’t understand what is wrong with your point of view except that it sounds more sensible than their own.

It is getting more and more difficult to have actual discussions, it's easier and lazier to just label the other side, and avoid it all together.
Also, appreciate the link... I didn't realize Scott Adams had a blog, and it looks like I would enjoy following it.

(August 21, 2017 at 12:44 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote: But for some reason, the economy is going well, jobs are looking good, North Korea blinked, ISIS is on the ropes, and the Supreme Court got a qualified judge.

The economy is continuing trends that had been going on for years and the jobs numbers - although they don't address what kinds of jobs - are also continuing along the same trends they had been following for years.  Mainly because the WLB has not had a chance to fuck them up because he's off playing fucking golf.  North Korea always acts up when the annual US-SK war games are scheduled but they still have missiles and nukes, ISIS had been on the ropes long before the WLB came along and did nothing and the Supreme Court got another corporation loving fascist to further oppress the poor in the name of the "law."

Scott Adams is a good cartoonist.  I would not go to him for surgery.

The economy is doing better, in spite of the GOP and was improving prior to the orange fuckface taking office. 

But we are still bleeding off retail brick and mortar jobs. 45 lied also about Carrier, Ford and Boeing. And that fucker also knows coal is not coming back.

The GOP has not and will not address the pay gap, and are trying to double down on the very same horrible economic policies that left us with the Bush Jr triple whammy, car/housing/bank crash.

And how do they perpetuate Reagan's failed trickle down bullshit? Shout "commie" "identity politics" "Its everyone else's fault"... And for what? To protect corporate welfare.

(August 21, 2017 at 12:53 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote:

(August 21, 2017 at 12:07 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: FYI Scott Adams on Hysteria

---

The basic idea:  

---

I think that a big problem, that seems to be getting worse on both sides was captured in the following

Quote:5. The Insult without supporting argument

When people have actual reasons for disagreeing with you, they offer those reasons without hesitation. Strangers on social media will cheerfully check your facts, your logic, and your assumptions. But when you start seeing ad hominem attacks that offer no reasons at all, that might be a sign that people in the mass hysteria bubble don’t understand what is wrong with your point of view except that it sounds more sensible than their own.

It is getting more and more difficult to have actual discussions, it's easier and lazier to just label the other side, and avoid it all together.
Also, appreciate the link... I didn't realize Scott Adams had a blog, and it looks like I would enjoy following it.

Says the guy who refused to discuss things in his last thread, lol.