Utopia Talk / Politics / Youre a cherry-picking, lying loony

williamthebastard Member	Mon Jun 27 06:03:47 It says that, "Levels of approval for both scenarios were slightly higher for Democrats than Republicans, driven largely by the approval of younger Democratic men." in response to two specific forms of violence, threatening or harming a president or politician, dems were slightly higher than reps, driven by young male dems, while the right were higher in general response to less specific forms of political violence: "Those on the right appear more likely to approve of political violence. When asked whether they believed that “some violence might be necessary to protect the country from radical extremists,” 41% of Republicans agreed, compared to 34% of Democrats and 29% of independents. "
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Jun 27 06:05:45 You are a fucking idiot. You even posted it right there, you goddamned idiot: "dems were slightly higher than reps, driven by young male dems,"
williamthebastard Member	Mon Jun 27 06:07:23 And the last paragraph?
williamthebastard Member	Mon Jun 27 06:10:29 This is what the postmodernists mean by people living in their own realities that they cannot let go of, even when bashed in the face with contradictions
williamthebastard Member	Mon Jun 27 06:11:06 To a person like this, physical reality might feel like a Panopticon
Habebe Member	Mon Jun 27 06:12:38 Gonna make some popcorn....:)
williamthebastard Member	Mon Jun 27 06:13:17 Im already out. Shes a lying nutter
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Jun 27 06:15:55 Jesus fucking Christ, you're pathetic. You're someone who has supposedly achieved at *least* a solitary bachelor's degree, but your incompetence is pushing me to explain to you the difference between.. • the approving of *threats* ( https://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/partisanship-violence-2.png ) versus • the approving of *violent actions* ( https://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/partisanship-violence-3.png ) And, if you had bothered to read my complete post ("Mon Jun 27 05:37:28" in http://uto...hread=89974&time=1656327448729 ), I was specifically talking about violent political *action* against political figures, which is supported by the second graphic (violence-3.png). That was the very limited application of my citation of this study. You either get it at this point, or you're a fucking idiot.
Habebe Member	Mon Jun 27 06:45:51 William has this idea in his head that left wing European liberals are the elites of the world, and everyone else is inferior. This notion taints all of his world views, he literally struggles to accept basic knowledge that flys against that and he will do.mental gymnastics or bury his head in the sand when confronted.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Jun 27 07:08:06 He does come from the old-school error that "reality has a liberal bias". Many people of this error believe that by simply obeying the party of "reality", that they too are of the Party-elect intelligentsia. These are people who believe that they need never do research, deep thinking, or close-reading because they must be correct already by virtue of their tribalist decrees. They believe the confidence games of their professors and comfort themselves with the belief that the postmodern texts must be robust simply because they were plentiful and as all-encompassing as a Gesamtkunstwerk. They look past the illusory teachings of the postmodernists, not realizing that it was the postmodernists themselves who were trafficking in illusions — not reality. This is why it was so easy for wtb to commit to an error and believe that it was an example of him correctly defeating an enemy of postmodernism. His belief in being correct defeated his ability to simply look closely at the information that I had presented. I had looked closely at those words and presented a specific meaning directly supported by the text (the text: "total approval for 'assassinating a politician who is harming the country of democracy'"), but he, simply wanting to be right, tried to weasel past this truth by not paying attention to the words to which I *had* paid attention.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Jun 27 07:09:59 *"the country [or our] democracy"
Habebe Member	Mon Jun 27 07:10:38 CC, I see your well versed in him.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Jun 27 08:03:30 One common effect of the pathology CC is describing, is WTBs habitual and unwitting usage of arguments from authority. You can see it in the other thread about Postmodernism and the matrix, where he quote Richard Dawkins and frames it as "if even one of the worlds most famous bla bla bla". Because that is how WTBs brain works.
Jesse Malcolm Barack Member	Mon Jun 27 10:05:17 What the fuzz happened to CC she now spends her days making giant crazy essays nobody reads
Dukhat Member	Mon Jun 27 11:26:39 Usually people that feel the need to bend reality that much have some kind of trauma they can't reconcile and spend time massively overjustifying their pre-existing beliefs. For example, it's like when a devoted Catholic walks in on his/her priest raping a little boy. 90% of such people do everything they can to cover it up and justify their actions because they can't deal with the natural conclusion a sane person would make: that their institution is corrupt and they need to protect the little boy. Same goes for any religous nutter or someone who has strong beliefs not based on the scientific method.
williamthebastard Member	Mon Jun 27 11:47:19 Btw, 2002 movies: Mad God: Recommend. Pretty cool, must admit I have almost as pessimistic a view of the universe, some cool shots, some needless overindulging in gore, stop motion is fun; Doctor wazzisname multi: Yawn, exactly what you'd expect, zero feeling of mystery, lots of explosions Men: Recommend. Some gory scenes nobody here has seen before, som decent acting, the sort of punchline very near the end made me laugh out loud Beavis n Butthead: Have to say I enjoyed it for being very faithful to the original, this could have been made 20 years ago.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Jun 27 22:16:33 "Because that is how WTBs brain works." Yup. "[I must be right because smrt persun peripherally agrees with me. Owned, owned, owned.]" .. "Usually people that feel the need to bend reality that much have some kind of trauma they can't reconcile and spend time massively overjustifying their pre-existing beliefs." I wouldn't presume that wtb has suffered trauma. I think he's just a poor academic who felt empowered by being in the room with his betters but did not even learn the basic lesson of establishing arguments via direct textual evidence. I think you're right about there being a religiosity to his beliefs, though. This is consistent with the postmodern woke: it is a belief structure centered around the original sin of "privilege" which must be disbanded through perpetual works on behalf of Marxist praxis, eventually leading to Marxist useful idiots digging their own graves to make the work of their executioners easier. (And yes, I know that Projection Bot was projecting onto me again; that's the joke.) .. "CC she now spends her days making giant crazy essays nobody reads" *Now*? Realize that I've been writing lengthy movie reviews since 2002, and "nobody" reads those either. If an audience were my motivation, I probably would have stopped writing those reviews years ago. I'm not doing it for you. It's also again very sad that people here are so illiterate. That is likely more evidence of social media conditioning wherein people can barely keep a concept in mind if it exceeds the character limit of a Tweet. This is ironic also about Dukhat's projection; he has claimed that *I* need to read a book, when I'm probably one of the few people here who actually *does* read books still rather than just looking at Reddit memes and Twitter screen shots for my political ideology.
murder Member	Mon Jun 27 22:19:52 How long does it take you to make a damn sandwich?
nhill Member	Mon Jun 27 22:23:18 >when I'm probably one of the few people here who actually *does* read books Heh, nice virtue signal. "one of the select few that read books" Surround yourself with better people. Reading books isn't as rare and special skill as you think it is. Being able to pad word count is a special skill. People get bored with you repeating what has been said already, except doing it with a whole page instead of a few paragraphs. ;) The issue isn't reading ability, it's your lack of original contributions and myopic sense of view (which, consequently, is why you write movie reviews nobody reads... it's not that you crave an audience, more that you have accepted you'll never have one). You have a few gems in your tw mocking thread series, where there appears to be a bit of originality, nice work there!
nhill Member	Mon Jun 27 22:25:43 I do credit CC for being both right-wing and supporting pronoun political correctness. That's a fresh perspective (an instance of CC going beyond dogma). <- I mean that sincerely, anything for a bit of novelty in the NPCs.
williamthebastard Member	Tue Jun 28 04:27:37 Also, mad props for being a looney right-winger that can spell "you're"
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Jun 28 04:50:59 I wish I could give you "mad props" for being a "looney [left]-winger" who can actually address an argument rather than obfuscate, distort, misrepresent, and evade.. but.. well.. here we are. You're at least in good company with the person above you. Weak-minded automatons are mass-produced.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Tue Jun 28 06:03:25 Nhill I feel like there is a natural alliance here over common issues. Cherub Cow You can be a little hot on the nuke option in these threads. While I understand where that is coming from and why, I think we all understand it gets in the way of the message. Maybe CC has forgotten, maybe she hasn't, *I* was the first person to start ranting about post modernism here. This was likely at the same time that CC was reading this stuff and I distinctly remember an interaction with the three us where, funny enough, CC and WTB agreed *I* was the lost cause on this :) boy do times change eh? This was around the same time where I asked CC what to read from Foucault, Punishment and Discipline. My story on how I ended up reading any of this stuff, is that I was an innocent engineer and that all this woke stuff was imposed on me, here in Sweden, far earlier that anyone in the anglosphere. It forced me to figure out where these ideas come from. Picked up a copy of "Explaining Post modernism" by Stephen Hicks and off to the races we were! Just sayin' that there is common ground.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Tue Jun 28 06:26:44 CC "I wouldn't presume that wtb has suffered trauma." He actually did suffer a kind of trauma, he used to work as the operator of a fancy night club in Stocholm, he had several threads about his disillusionment with the depravities and decadence he witnessed. There is thus a straight line from his mid-life existential crisis to going back to school and ultimately his current stage 4 resentment.
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Jun 28 07:16:29 [Nimatzo]: "He actually did suffer a kind of trauma, he used to work as the operator of a fancy night club in Stocholm, he had several threads about his disillusionment with the depravities and decadence he witnessed. There is thus a straight line from his mid-life existential crisis to going back to school and ultimately his current stage 4 resentment." Yikes D: [Nimatzo]: "You can be a little hot on the nuke option in these threads. While I understand where that is coming from and why, I think we all understand it gets in the way of the message." Definitely, but, yeah, to "where that is coming from and why", this wtb thread was preceded by him making claims in the Totalitarians thread ( http://uto...hread=89974&time=1656327448729 ). There, he quoted me, then said that he checked my source and did not see how I sourced my claim. He said, "Please post the quote from that source you are referring to." Meanwhile, the exact spot that he stopped quoting me was followed by me quoting the source. That is, he only read one out-of-context claim within my comment, did not even read the very next sentence that substantiated the claim with a direct quotation, and then accused me of misrepresenting my source. I then re-posted that direct quotation (likely, he still did not read it), and he then started this thread, that title calling me "a cherry-picking, lying loony". In other words, he began this thread after approaching me in extreme bad faith. He did not even read my full post much less the much longer article from which I was posting (he likely just ran a ctrl+f search), he lazily asked for evidence that I had already supplied, then ignored the content of my response, making this thread to further insult me and backhandedly question my citation. nhill is another example of this. Complete bad faith. Even his mini-bio in the totalitarians thread was more of it. It's just mindless trolling designed to waste the time of others and so is not worth a response. How can you have a productive conversation with someone who does not even apply the minimal brain-power required to represent correctly your actual arguments before responding to them? I am fully willing to engage without going nuclear, but when people begin with that kind of malicious bad faith it feels like a waste of time to hold back, especially knowing how much these sort of bad-faith users exploit additional good faith. My recent strategy has been to cauterize and end the dialogue. I think that ending the dialogue at least gives room for future good faith attempts. [Nimatzo]: "This was likely at the same time that CC was reading this stuff and I distinctly remember an interaction with the three us where, funny enough, CC and WTB agreed *I* was the lost cause on this :) boy do times change eh?" I won't pretend that I haven't changed my mind on some of this, for sure. Still, it's hard for me to speak to exactly where the disagreements were without reviewing that thread, especially since wtb at that time was more willing to discuss actual sources rather than just making assertions. I think I would probably agree with my former claims, especially if I was citing Lyotard. Like I've mentioned in the other wtb thread ( http://utopiaforums.com/boardthread?id=politics&thread=90078&time=1655992634888 ), postmodernism is functional as a critique system at confined levels. There is still a baby in that bathwater, it just requires looking at individual postmodern works. Where postmodernism attempts to inform social movements and reject individualism is where it becomes straight Marxism. But if you were reading Stephen Hicks, then you were likely on the right track. When I read about «ressentiment» and slave morality, it was clear that academia was attempting to position students under slave morality. Hicks picks up on this in "Nietzsche and the Nazis" (2010; full audiobook here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2C90l7YlT8 ), though I don't know if Hicks has overtly stated that postmodernism and the Nu-Left have been weaponizing slave morality. James Lindsay, too, has gotten very close to this connection, but he seems to prefer more recent examples (e.g., academics of the '60s and '70s). But yeah, lots of work to be done.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Tue Jun 28 08:00:21 CC "but when people begin with that kind of malicious bad faith it feels like a waste of time to hold back" Bad faith changes everything as Bret Weinstein says. We are not different, it may actually be partly the reason we have bumped heads. "Still, it's hard for me to speak to exactly where the disagreements were without reviewing that thread" I was most likely (100%) using very animated language to describe Post modernism, it was not in line with any acadmic guidelines and your feedback was along the lines of baby and bathwater. It was totally fair that I got pushback and it made my consider that there is something to be rescued from the garbage heap. Since it was a civilized conversation and in light of WTBs tantrum style of discourse (then as now) you came off as the far less dogmatic option :D which is why I asked what you recommended reading. I took your position as more ambivalent back then, yet even at the time in question, you did a rebuke using slave morality to dress down third wave feminism on the interwebs. I have not heard anyone point that out, as you say Lindsay goes pretty deep on this stuff. Don't get me wrong, all the pieces of what you are doing now, were there, you were just (in my good faith reading) being much more academically measured. And fair enough you know, it makes the things you are saying now more convincing. You went deep into the rabbit hole and reasoned your way out. Stephen Hicks appealed to my sensibilities precisely because he is from the analytical tradition and has classical liberal ideals.
nhill Member	Tue Jun 28 08:04:52 Yes, it’s smart and totally normal to categorize someone as “bad faith” when you insult them and they defend themselves. Hope that works out for you ;) Remember, CC, you started calling me a gas lighter solely because I explained what I meant by a post, and it didn’t agree with what you thought it meant. As if there’s no time where text can come of different than intended. Just a pathetic and lazy argument style. Bad faith, indeed, is how I would categorize it. My mini bio was a parody of how one has to act because once CC interprets your post you are a “gas lighter” for explaining later what you meant. Simple problem, just started to provide explanations. But it does get monotonous. I agree, Nim, that he/she/it is aligned with our views, just have to walk delicately as she’s easily offended. I dealt a lot with managing women at work, and they tend to be the most high maintenance, work relationship wise.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Tue Jun 28 08:24:42 Well this place has a tendency to draw out our worst behavior. I am guilty of that as well. Hopefully we can all do better and press the breaks when a conversation is rapidly going down hill. I really like what CC said about "caturizing", it resonates with my own attempts of letting the conversations go, because we will inevitably return to them.
nhill Member	Tue Jun 28 08:30:19 >Well this place has a tendency to draw out our worst behavior. I am guilty of that as well. True that, it's a strange phenomenon, probably the accumulation of psychology baggage posting here for decades and the culture being toxic. I'm one of the worst for it, fall into it a lot here. IRL the steel man technique is my favorite way of building consensus (whether on a team when at work, or in a group of friends). That...doesn't translate here well, as when it is attempted, people tend to be like "oh person X is on my team, I was right! now I can insult everyone with my new team member". I haven't decided if the culture here is quaint and nostalgic, or simply toxic and bad energy. There is a high probability of me disappearing (as an active poster) for a decade or more, just tends to happen.
Habebe Member	Tue Jun 28 08:39:12 Culture being toxic =4chan lite
nhill Member	Tue Jun 28 09:12:18 Pretty much. As I get older, I gain less tolerance for 4chan (or this 4chan lite). It's a matter of whether or not something brings positivity and value in my life, and this is mostly not it. :) But I enjoy our safe haven in the crypto threads, just have to ignore the troll multis that interject.
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Jun 28 10:18:26 [Nimatzo]: "yet even at the time in question, you did a rebuke using slave morality to dress down third wave feminism on the interwebs." That's good, then. I've been complaining about slave morality feminism for a long time. Equality requires responsibilities, and slave morality feminism (e.g., matriarchal feminism) grants powers without responsibilities. That's part of the "equity" of the DIE movement. I had a lot of complaints in my feminist college classes for this reason. My version of feminism was that women must become strong if they insist on carrying the traditional virtues of men, but most of the postmodern theorists were pushing for women to simply be accommodated, making immoral slaves of men. [Nimatzo]: "Bad faith changes everything as Bret Weinstein says. We are not different, it may actually be partly the reason we have bumped heads." That's what's frustrating sometimes. When I see my position being misrepresented, I see an argument being wasted. It's just people talking over each other instead of talking about an actual subject. And when you see that you probably agree with someone but no one wants to get past the vitriol.. that's not fun. And Weinstein is a great source too, yeah. I've been pretty amazed by how even-tempered they've been. Even now, nhill is misrepresenting mine and his argument to lay total fault at my feet. I certainly could have handled our argument differently, but his revising what happened to further troll me here is not exactly going to lead to the proper corrective rhetoric — it just solidifies division. It forces me to ask if he *really* thinks those things (in which case, his comprehension is at fault) or if he's further trolling for retribution (in which case, his morality is at fault). If it's comprehension, a person who does not measure their own words well will likely not be able to measure well the words of another, so conversations may not be possible. If it's trolling, then anything he says is even more easily dismissed. So, anyways, I'm always willing to reset, even after saying completely mean things to people. If I see a possibility for good faith, I'll re-engage.
nhill Member	Tue Jun 28 10:22:05 >nhill is misrepresenting mine and his argument to lay total fault at my feet Hilarious how you did the same thing by the end of that paragraph. Pot meet kettle :)
nhill Member	Tue Jun 28 10:28:13 Btw, to be clear (watch this will be considered gas-lighting), I don't and never intended to lay any fault at your feet. I'm explained what happened (quite obviously from my perspective, where else?). You can feel free to interpret my explanation into your personal guilt, or me implying you are at fault. Whether or not you appreciate intent isn't really up to me. The takeaway I've gotten is you are very sensitive and need to be handled delicately.
Pillz Member	Tue Jun 28 10:32:19 It's too bad CC doesn't play Utopia actively (at least in any meaningful public capacity). I we need more long answer style posters for the dead forums. Also I don't understand why you're all still using so many words to call wtb stupid.
nhill Member	Tue Jun 28 10:35:34 Where can you play Utopia?
Pillz Member	Tue Jun 28 15:51:52 Http://www.utopia-game.com Currentlt owned my an old player (or 2, nor sure now). It's been rough. They're supposed to launch a mobile app and knew forums etc next year for a relaunch to try and keep it alive, assuming they keep it up that long. It.... Disgustingly small at this point. Earth has more active accounts (across 6 servers) than we do (on 2).
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: