Definition of the Day

[Chops]

Is that because of my genetics?

I don't know but you've clearly practiced in the mirror

 

[Quack]

I don't know but you've clearly practiced in the mirror

Great response very valid

 

[Chops]

Great response very valid

thanks!

 

[Leek]

???

 

[Mythic Al]

It's one thing to have an opinion. It's something else entirely to spend years doubling down on your conservative views to convince a bunch of internet nerds how much of an edgy republican you are, simply because it's an unpopular option in today's charged climate. There's nothing wrong with being a progressive or a conservative, however if you're foaming at the fingertips to prove that you are right and everyone else is wrong, well I don't think politics are the real issue of these discussions.

Me? I'm doubling down on cake. Can't disappoint internet nerds' assumptions!

P.S.: Same could be said about liberals trying to convince everyone to sing Kumbaya by the bonfire on the beach.

 

[Quack]

It's one thing to have an opinion. It's something else entirely to spend years doubling down on your conservative views to convince a bunch of internet nerds how much of an edgy republican you are, simply because it's an unpopular option in today's charged climate. There's nothing wrong with being a progressive or a conservative, however if you're foaming at the fingertips to prove that you are right and everyone else is wrong, well I don't think politics are the real issue of these discussions.

Me? I'm doubling down on cake. Can't disappoint internet nerds' assumptions!

P.S.: Same could be said about liberals trying to convince everyone to sing Kumbaya by the bonfire on the beach.

if its a fact and u admit its a fact it doesn't make u a conservative or a liberal, right or left a republican or a democrat.
It means you're not braindead. Why is any of this an issue of left or right also?

 

[Goesid]

if its a fact and u admit its a fact it doesn't make u a conservative or a liberal, right or left a republican or a democrat.
It means you're not braindead. Why is any of this an issue of left or right also?

Because a few years ago the left took over the "you can't say that" movement from the right. Into the 2000s the right were the ones censoring speech etc. (No cursing, that kinda of stuff) most of the time on a religious argument or of decency. Then the left became louder and took over the censorship movement so now any argument involving censorship is gonna involve the left because they are the ones currently in charge of what youre allowed to say and not to say.

 

[Iild]

I dunno man, asserting that there's a genetic difference that causes black people to have a lower IQ than white people is pretty racist, even by his own provided definition.

But I'm not a brain genius so maybe he's actually being super clever and not just incredibly disingenuous.

im not being super clever, you're just being super dense.

i didn't mention black people once in the IQ debate, infact i don't believe i mentioned any race specifically at all, i simply posted a map of average IQs and you took that as me demeaning black intelligence when i could've easily been praising Asians, in fact the only people I criticised was Irish people and praised mongolians and people from Sierra Leone.

the fact you took that as me insulting black people was your judgement not mine, so by your own logic you're the racist here not me :/

 

[Mythic Al]

if its a fact and u admit its a fact it doesn't make u a conservative or a liberal, right or left a republican or a democrat.
It means you're not braindead. Why is any of this an issue of left or right also?

When people constantly remind everyone of how conservative they are while making their points, they are just playing the other side of identity politics. Liberals are a lot more obvious because majority of their platform is driven by emotion. Conservatives like to think that majority of them are driven by common sense, but it's pretty apparent they get rather emotional on sensitive topics too.

To answer your question: If you come into a discussion without recognizing your bias, you inadvertently are influencing that discussion towards your pre-conceived point of view, which you and other members of many politically charged discussions have shown to lean to the conservative side. So it's not a question of whatever current topic is correct or not, it's just a question of motives for stirring up conversation on an online forum.

Or did you just want everyone to always pretend that you're right because your view points come from the right?

 

[Chops]

im not being super clever, you're just being super dense.

i didn't mention black people once in the IQ debate, infact i don't believe i mentioned any race specifically at all, i simply posted a map of average IQs and you took that as me demeaning black intelligence when i could've easily been praising Asians, in fact the only people I criticised was Irish people and praised mongolians and people from Sierra Leone.

the fact you took that as me insulting black people was your judgement not mine, so by your own logic you're the racist here not me :/

Roboartist posted an article about a guy who lost jobs and titles because he said there was a genetic difference that causes black people to have lower IQs than white people.

You then posted your map with the caption "he's not wrong".

Surely you can see how this would imply that you agree with him? Though if that's not what you were intending, mea culpa.

 

[jwl]

Please define the word ignorant. Its a term so commonly misused

 

[Chops]

Lild posted an agreement with a man who claims black people are just genetically dumber than white people.

Unless "he's not wrong" has a meaning I'm unfamiliar with

 

[Dreams]

It's something else entirely to spend years doubling down on your conservative views to convince a bunch of internet nerds how much of an edgy republican you are, simply because it's an unpopular option in today's charged climate.

Being socially conservative seems like the norm in gaming communities so not very edgy

 

[Chops]

Also incredibly redundant.

On this we can agree

 

[Goesid]

That's generally a good thing, though. Politics and PR should be handled professionally. Not only does it look bad to our citizens when a leader swears profusely, but to our foreign allies and enemies. Also the left is very hypocritical of this. Example. Trump is also to blame for embarrassing language.

Now I'm not huge on religious agenda in politics, but I do think certain traditional values should be upheld. When I see political leaders name-calling and cursing each-other out with threats, I certainly think we may be in end-times. That or nearing a large shift in American values. And I do not welcome this shift.

The thing I think should not be overly-enforced is political correctness.

There’s a rising idea that a nation has to blindly abandon traditional values and come up with new ones on a hunch. This does not work. I’m not religious, and would even argue against notions regarding banning abortions, and stifling certain fields of scientific research. But it’s pretty obvious to realize we are where we are because of traditional and modern Christian ideology, with other influences like Greek philosophy and national pride. Do not pretend we can suddenly abandon those and have a functioning society. A functioning society requires a culmination of functioning individuals who know the consequences of irrationally. I’d personally love a world free of religion with the sole passion of scientific exploration and pursuit of happiness. But abandoning something that has helped us get there, instead of working with it and fixing its kinks, will sink us into an abyss of confusion. Forcing multiculturalism will not work. Multiculturalism is a lengthy process of common understanding and civil discourse with the willingness to respectfully disagree and/or abandon a habit to get along. Not finger-pointing, yelling and shaming.

I hope this doesn't get deleted, since I'm doing my best to keep this civil. Also hope that others do so as-well. Last thing I want is to back someone's post, only for them to turn around and post something disgraceful.

Sure in politics a friendly tone and calm manner is preferable and that is easily countered by doing something like swearing. But just like the left now the rights censorship wasnt limited to politics.

I am reminded of this

when discussing the topic.


Anyways christianity, christianity has very little to do with why we are we are. For example Northern Europe surpassed the asian countries in scientific discoveries because they started drinking wine, and when they started to drink wine they needed to invent something to store wine in. They invented glass, glass in turn led to lenses and a bunch of other stuff and Gailelio could gaze upon the solar system simply because the europeans drank wine while the asians settled for their tea.

Not sure if this is what you're getting at but if it isn't I'm guessing it's coming so I will deal with it aswell. Christianity also has nothing to do with why we now have democracies in most christian countries and dictatorships in most muslim countries, christianity was simply around and followed the democracies not the other way around. The main reason the early democracies started to sprout out was the north Atlantic coast, some argued that protestant countries were also more likely to become democracies because they are so plentiful in that area but consider Belgium which wasn't protestant but had a prime position at the north Atlantic coast while protestant Prussia was further from the North Atlantic and remained an absolute monarchy. European countries primarily Britain, France, Spain, Portugal and The Netherlands expanded their countries and amassed vast colonial empires across the world, Britain in effort to deal with prisoners started sending their to North America because the climate was very similar to that of Europe so they started to make it a colony to be populated instead of simply being drained for it's resources and even set up local governments with a lower house and an upper house reporting to an executive in the form of a governor who in turn reported to the Crown. In the 1780s the british could no longer send their prisoners to North America but they instead turned to another place, Captain Cooke reached Eastern Australia a vast island uncolonized except for a few Dutch trading outposts on the western coast. Australia became the new solution for the British and they began populating the coast.

Now these countries all did well and some others joined them, but why? And why are so many countries where the people have another religion still ruled under a dictatorship? Oil. Well not only oil, I'm actually going to start with a different example. Gold. In the 1500s when the Spanish colonized half of South America and most of the middle they found alot of gold. This gold was an absolute goldmine. Gold like oil and rare gems and a few other resources have a common trait, they are all valueable right away, it takes no industrial process or other complex proccesses for them to reach their full value. This means that when the Spanish got their hands on that gold, guess what happend? Spain turned more absolute, the king dissmissed parlament because he no longer needed anyone else, he had gold.

Guess what nobody had around the north Atlantic coast in the first half of the 1800s? Goldmines.

Now that that is out of the way, we can move onwards, multiculturalism. Now I agree multiculturalism can't be forced and it is a proccess that will take time but the problem doesn't only lie with those that come to the more developed countries. Sure they have made misstakes and some of them probably aren't trying hard enough to adapt. However, it is not fair to blame them for things that isn't theirs to bear, christianity isn't some rescuer of democracy it was just the leech that found the best pony.

Think that's pretty much it for now.

 

[Dreams]

Not entirely sure of the validity of these studies, but it's interesting. I've read multiple sources claiming similar things to this.

Not trying to make any claims about any particular generations, but gaming communities specifically. A lot of them seem to be jordan peterson / ben shapiro / sargon of akkad etc. fans in my experience

 

[Quack]

Or did you just want everyone to always pretend that you're right because your view points come from the right?

a lot of bloviating, feel like you didn't read my post at all.
If the fact is fact no matter whether im left right centre backwards or middle its still a fact.

 

[Goesid]

One side will win eventually, but it won't be pretty.

The conversation will evolve and the other side will take over, consider Newton's Cradle.

 

[Goesid]

Implying our government and politics are as balanced as such a device. I really don't think they are. The only balance is in the will of the people, and over history it's proven their wills are swayed.

People will change when something they care about is "under attack". In America for example right now the left cares about the disenfranchised and the right cares about christmas, the left wants to include more people but the right want to keep their tradition. At some point, it might be in 10 years it might be 60 if society lasts that long. The tables will turn and the right will be protecting something they care about by saying that the left cant call something they care about such and such because of such and such and the left will want to involve such and such by calling something such and such. I'm gonna take a break now, this got pretty lazy at the end but who knows, another shift might come similar to when the republicans and the democrats switched bases or maybe one party will collapse and another take it's place, lots of stuff can happen but someone will always be telling someone they can't say or do something until the other side takes over and say they can't say or do something else.

 

[Stunar]

thanks d