The Demonization of the Opposition
POSTED BY: SoupCatcher
UPDATED: Sunday, August 1, 2004 20:50
VIEWED: 35776
PAGE 7 of 20
umm.. define the word "spewed" and explain if, and how, it pertains to me.
heh heh heh
Sorry, I just couldn't resist! 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I really wish you would drop the act. If you don't know what a word means, pick up a dictionary.
Originally posted by SignyM:
So what about words that are abstract- like "freedom"?? How can we have a conversation when we can't discuss what those words mean?
But you see, I doubt your sincerity here and that is your real problem. Since we are talking about simple words, common every day words that I doubt you have not heard, I find it hard to believe that you don't know what I mean. You are playing a game here, and I have called you on it.
Considering my rather long winded response, and your position on "shades of grey" thinking, (or rather the lack of thinking brought about by employing this concept), I see this for what it is, an attempt to prove your point by acting like you are confused by the meaning of simple english words.
And I believe I made this clear. But I do thank you in one respect, for proving the flaws in exactly that manner of thinking. You are stuck, confused by simple words, unable to move forward, or make any kind of decision, or come to any resolution. Whether you believe I can or not, well, considering you confusion over such simple words, it is unimportant to me, and becomes less so the more you continue with this game of yours.
And since in politics, the welding of political power requires making decisions, you are proving better than I can just why folks who think like you should never be elected to office. Indecision is effectively a decision, with its own consequences, but one is less able to figure out beforehand what those consequences are. So much for your vaunted "shades of grey."
Perhaps this is what passes for clever in your circles, pretending to be an idiot. Fortunately, I don't travel in such circles. It just doesn't work with me, and I have no desire to play. You will have to inflict this on others instead.
I understand quite well the differences between the map and the territory, and that mental constructs such as memes, ideas and concepts are just that, maps, not the territory they describe. But the purpose of a map is to aid you to get where you want to go. A blank piece of paper is useless as a map, especially if it is all grey. You've illustrated that perfectly, and are bogged down in the meaning of the individual words, pretending to be the fool, and refusing to even make the attempt to address the issues at hand.
"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm not sure how we got here from there. But here's my summation of the responses to my original question. Drakon has proposed that members of the political party not in power demonize members of the political party in power because they feel helplessness and frustration. SPLibertarian has proposed that demonization is more a smoke screen put out by both sides to accentuate false differences and mask the similarities. (I hope that I have summed this up accurately). I tend to lean more towards SPLibertarian's explanation simply because I feel Drakon has only captured a portion of the demonization. For Drakon's explanation to be correct, we should have only seen demonization coming from the Republicans during the Clinton administration and demonization coming from the Democracts during the Bush administration. But from my perspective I have seen no real change in who is doing the demonizing. Liberal and neo-con are both used as swear words. People on all sides are throwing out the label "traitor" (which, in my mind, is a sure sign of demonization). Hell, this thread is headed in that general direction.
So that's what I've gleaned from this discussion in regards to the original question. Two answers is better than one, but not as good as three
. Thanks all.
I shaved off my beard for you, devil woman!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
But you see Drakon, I can and do make decisions, and my decisions are usually pretty damn good. My colleagues- who are themselves quite astute and politically aware, who come from all over the world and have done everthing from invading Iraq to having been jailed in Ethiopia as a student revolutionary - respect my views because I've predicted things that they didn't see.
We DON'T use words like "freedom" in our discussions. It means too many different things to different cultures and viewpoints. If you had simply said "We'll have to give up some privacy to fight terrorism" then we could have discussed what kinds of privacies and how much and whether it was likely to work.
Words create "things". In cultures where the counting system is "one- two- three- many" a hundred and a billion are the same "thing". Words are important. If you don't define them they'll define you.
Semantics aside, let's look at your logic.
Quote:
With emotions the way they were shortly after 9-11, it is reasonable to assume that after the death and destruction of that day, some rather angry folks might not have been too discriminating as to which bin Ladan they lynched. And so, it seems prudent to get his relatives out of harms way as soon as possible. Yet this is taken as an example of something bad, something that should not have been done.
Are you telling us that it would have been impossible for the Bush administration to hold 1200 people in protective custody??? If the administration is truly that incompetent, how do you suppose they can protect us from terrorists? You pose false "either-or" choices, Drakon. You live in a very little, urgent world full of extreme -and mostly irrelevant - choices and it's going to drive you crazy if you're not careful.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
OK< so now that I have a wee bit more time, I'm going to lay something in your head that should keep you awake at night.
Because of my DOD project I'm in touch with the coordinator of our highly populated county's anti-terrorism hazmat units. FYI they (and we) are seriously - very seriously- gearing up for the run-up to elections. One of the things that hasn't been banged out yet is the political reponse to a terror attack just before or during elections. What would George W do? Declare martial law? Invalidate the elections? Go with a 10% turnout?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, so far no answer from Drakon.
WHAAAAAAHHH!!!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SignyM:
I get to this board for an hour or two maybe once every 10 days, on average. I really, and I mean really, don't have much time for postings from Drakon et al. So I am puzzled by, but admire, the fact that you seem to take these things at face value.
I just recently read Drakon's newest posts and I did get a sort-of frantic, manic underlying mindset. Either 'THIS' OR ALL HELL'S GONNA BREAK LOOSE ! Patriot Act or DOOM! Invade Iraq or FACE DEATH ! And sometimes it was in nearly these words. I hope Drakon doesn't take offense, but it seems uncomfortable.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Mental health care professionals have three words to describe persistently splitting the world into black and white: "Borderline Personality Disorder," a.k.a., chronic inability to mature.
Just sayin'. Look into it.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sometimes Drakon doesn't come back for a day or two. I really really want to talk to that guy.
I mean, I'm trying my darndest to have a decent discussion- I'm really being fair and honest about my questions and Drakon just thinks I'm playing games!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Drakon:
"One side says at conception. The other side, well, I am not really sure."
I don't think the question here is where is the beginning of 'life'. An egg is 'alive' and a sperm is 'alive'. It is the old 'life generates life concept.' I think you are trying to get at where does a human individual come into existance.
http://www.biology.iupui.edu/biocourses/N100/2k4ch39repronotes.html
"The first 3 weeks are the most hazardous periods in your life. Roughly one third to one half of all fertilized zygotes never make it beyond this point."
Sometimes a placenta forms and an incipient fetus just - doesn't happen. I don't think you would consider a placenta a person, but in your scheme, while a single-celled fertilized egg is fully human, a later placenta is not. That is a self-contradictory definition.
On the other hand you said "You are either alive, or dead. You ... still have a functioning brain, as determinable externally .."
Why not apply the same definition (functioning brain) to 'human' life at both ends?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME