The Trumperium 2: Caesar by the Pussy

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Jon, Jun 15, 2017.

  1. ScottPress

    ScottPress The Horny Sovereign Prestige

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2013
    Messages:
    2,190
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Holy Moose Empire
    High Score:
    1,826
    Maybe no one should, but it's just another pebble added to the gianormous heap of Trump's stupidity. He has no self awareness. People are tired of giving a shit about this kind of thing because he does it every week. But that doesn't mean it's not dumb. Trump has to take every little thing and make it about himself.

    #WerewolfLivesMatter

    That's speciest.
     
  2. Psychotic Cat

    Psychotic Cat Order Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    868
    If it's too late for a skilled vet to re-attach the steak to the cow it's too overdone for me.
     
  3. Invictus

    Invictus Fourth Champion

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,218
    Location:
    Cidade Maravilhosa
    The "controversy" regarding Trump and his supposed saying Haitians all have AIDS is a great example of why no one gives a fuck about the media. Fucks sake, since the WashPost didn't find anyone credible to corroborate the story they're now running stories that some people find it believable, just so they can keep it alive for more time.

    I said that about Trudeau again and again. Trudeau doesn't fucking correspond to 1/10th of what he speaks.
     
  4. pbluekan

    pbluekan High Inquisitor DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2014
    Messages:
    531
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Dancing in the Mindfield
    The sad thing is, it’s exactly this sort of scandal and reporting that brought FOX news to prominence and it’s what keeps them there. Emulating it is understandable, even if we would rather they not.
     
  5. Arthellion

    Arthellion Ban(ned) Arthellion

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2017
    Messages:
    992
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    High Score:
    0
    America has reached the last stage of collapse

    Interesting article by James Staub.

    The origins of Trump can be found in the liberal adherence to moral relativism though Staub never states such.

    Because liberal education rejected moral objectivity, it has allowed for the cry of fake news to possess merit which has created our current decadence.
     
  6. Silens Cursor

    Silens Cursor The Silencer DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2008
    Messages:
    2,041
    Location:
    The other side of reality
    Oh, fuck off with that nonsense. In a multi-cultural and multidimensional modern society, there is such a thing as evolving social norms (especially when those of the past where contradictory, hypocritical, or flew in the face of modern society - see the 'prosperity gospel', blue lives matter, and the modern death cult of fundamentalist evangelicalism), and if 2017 has proven anything, it's that liberals actually hold people accountable for serious ethical and moral lapses while "conservatives" (or whatever bastardization of the term the GOP uses) desperately try to look the other way or utilize their propaganda outlets to spew borderline libelous horseshit. You might have issues with CNN, but they haven't been giving Trump the protracted sloppy blowjob FOX and co have delivered.

    Or to put it simply, Al Franken was drummed out of office and a slew of Hollywood types lost their careers - Trump has only profited. Republicans might claim at the end of all this that 'Trump was never one of us', but you certainly owned him and utterly failed to hold him accountable.
     
  7. Arthellion

    Arthellion Ban(ned) Arthellion

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2017
    Messages:
    992
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    High Score:
    0
    Oh fuck off with that nonsense unless you consider islam to be a death cult as well. Just as Islam has its extremists so too does fundamentalist evangelicalism. And just as with Islam, the majority condemn the extremists.

    Liberals holding Franken and hollywood types accountable is just as hypocritical as the conservatives not holding Trump and Moore accountable.

    Liberal education teaches that morality is subjective and evolving. Don't be surprised when the majority start using that belief system to screw over what is fundamentally true.

    Liberals made their bed with their philosophy. The modern tea party, republicans, etc. just took it to the logical end of relativism.

    To quote Assassin's Creed:

    "Nothing is true. Everything is permitted."

    Both sides suck btw. I'm in no way saying Republicans and conservatives are not being hypocritical and idiotic, but when these philosophies were first being taught it was the liberals who were supportive and the conservatives who attempted to fight back and hold onto some sort of objective truth.
     
  8. fontisian

    fontisian Fifth Year

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2011
    Messages:
    148
    Gender:
    Female
    I'm sorry, what?
     
  9. Arthellion

    Arthellion Ban(ned) Arthellion

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2017
    Messages:
    992
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    High Score:
    0
    Liberals performed hackett jobs on anyone who accused Clinton of sexual harassment back in the day. Conservatives raised a big stink.

    It's hypocritical for conservatives to now not do the same to Trump/Moore. It's also hypocritical for the Liberals to suddenly care about sexual harassment. I'm happy they now do, but its still hypocrisy.
     
  10. VanRopen

    VanRopen Unspeakable

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
    Messages:
    765
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Truly, there's no better term to encapsulate society's current problems than bothsides.

    Like here:
    The end result of one hypocrisy is sexual assault being covered for. The end result of the other is sexual assault not being covered for.

    But woops, they're the same, everything is terrible forever~ [insert meme quote here].
     
  11. fontisian

    fontisian Fifth Year

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2011
    Messages:
    148
    Gender:
    Female
    It's really not. Realizing that your previous attitudes were crappy and taking steps to fix the problem is the opposite of hypocrisy. Do some politicians not really believe in holding sexual predators to account? Absolutely, and those people likely are hypocritics. But tarring the entire group or equating it to the systematic overlooking of stated moral values evidences by the GOP's support of Moore and Trump is insane.
     
  12. Arthellion

    Arthellion Ban(ned) Arthellion

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2017
    Messages:
    992
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    High Score:
    0
    Hypocrisy: "the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense."

    Liberals adhere to a relative standard of morality. If morality is evolving, It is hypocritical to state that (at the time the harassment was occuring because it could have been morally right at that time) that it is wrong and that Franken should resign.

    Conservatives adhere to a objective standard of morality. They state that is always wrong to engage in sexual harassment but support moore and trump. That is also hypocritical.

    Both, according to the definition of hypocrisy, are being hypocritical. At least insofar as it relates to party platforms.
     
  13. VanRopen

    VanRopen Unspeakable

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
    Messages:
    765
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Alternatively, talking about "liberal evolving morality" as if it is more than commentary about how society itself changes and influences a shared understanding of what is acceptable and what isn't doesn't actually somehow mean harassment wasn't wrong back then. The "evolving morality" is just an acknowledgement that the social pressures of yesteryear made it easier not to admit it.

    On other words, they were just being shitty. They are presently, in light of new social pressures, being less shitty. The GOP decided not to become less shitty.



    Out of curiosity, how do you square away the supposed moral justifications for slavery? Conservatives (of the standard small c meaning, not any modern political usage) argued that it was of course moral to keep blacks in bondage. It was part of their "objective standard of morality" - as good Christians it would actually be immoral for them to do otherwise.

    We of course now just say they were full of shit. Slavery was wrong then too, the people justifying just didn't acknowledge that. But they would have argued for their "objective standard of morality" it to the hilt.

    Saying morality evolves is just acknowledging that there were changes in society that shifted what people were willing to label right and wrong. That doesn't necessarily really put forward any opinion on what right and wrong are, and you seem to be rejecting the entire concept of society changing in favor of getting to just call everyone hypocrites and bask in your present enlightenment, which seems pretty pointless.


    Like, you don't seem to disagree that a society's labels inform the development of personal codes of morality:
    What people were willing to call right and wrong in his early years helped your grandfather embrace an "objective standard of morality". It's just that in the present day, more people are willing to point out that parts of his objective standard were probably pretty ass. There isn't really much of a value judgement there, it just is. It's not uncommon. My maternal grandfather was pretty Islamophobic between his upbringing and time in the Indian army. By modern standards, some of his behavior was pretty fucked up. Acknowledging that there has been a difference in the those standards is...

    Apparently some great liberal lie responsible for FAKE NEWS?
     
  14. Chengar Qordath

    Chengar Qordath The Final Pony Prestige

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2008
    Messages:
    887
    High Score:
    1,802
    Yeah, I'm not really seeing any evidence of hypocrisy.

    I mean, I could certainly buy that there's an element of realpolitik to it all. Pretty much every article I saw about Franken's scandal mentioned that if he'd resigned he'd be replaced by another Democrat, and I imagine some of the people calling on him to resign wouldn't have been pushing so hard if his replacement would've been a Republican. By the same token, it's not exactly shocking some Republicans tried to call Fake News on the allegations against Moore when anything else would've meant conceding the election.

    But then, saying "both political parties play politics" isn't exactly a shocking revelation.
     
  15. Oment

    Oment The Betrayer

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    1,853
    Liberals are responsible for everything, hadn't you heard? Forget millennials, liberals are the true root of all evil today. I'm honestly not sure why we're discussing this as if this is some kind of morally ambiguous opinion - it is morally objective fact. Democrats were Wrong in the past, y'know.

    More important question: what's the over/under on Trump firing Mueller at some point before Hawaii hits 2018?
     
  16. Arthellion

    Arthellion Ban(ned) Arthellion

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2017
    Messages:
    992
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    High Score:
    0
    See if that is the stance that is taken then I fully agree, but it isn't. According to the education I received from progressive leftists both in elementary and university level, what determines whether something is moral or not is whether society accepts it and this changes from the ages.

    If you're simply agreeing that society discovers objective moral truth similar to new scientific truths then we have no disagreement, but that is not what liberal education has done.

    Also, I'd never state that liberals are solely responsible for the decadence. It takes both sides. The article did a good job of explaining the conservative contribution. I was primarily offering the liberal contribution.

    I'd say improper interpretation of a scripture and moral objective truth.

    That does ignores that there were far more Christians arguing against slavery at the time globally (see William Wilberforce/Charles Spurgeon) and for a proper interpretation of scripture. And ultimately, those christians won out.

    It could be argued that the pro-slavery "christians" were in actuality less conservative because they twisted scripture to support their economic needs.
     
  17. Triliro

    Triliro Second Year

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2016
    Messages:
    51
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Flagstaff, AZ, US
    High Score:
    0
    Im not entirely sure what you’re trying to say here, how does someone “discover objective moral truths” other than by society taking a look at something and deeming it acceptable or not. We aren’t digging up artifacts that are revolutionizing our ideas of what is right and what is wrong, we didn’t find some ancient tome that said “Homosexual marriage is legal”, that is people deciding that something that wasn’t acceptable is now acceptable.
     
  18. Arthellion

    Arthellion Ban(ned) Arthellion

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2017
    Messages:
    992
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    High Score:
    0
    Well, my own personal answer would be God tells us what objective moral truth is. However for those who do not believe in God I recognize this is not a sufficient answer.

    People are capable of discovering objective moral truth without society recognizing it as true. For example, several pastors in Nazi Germany such as Dietrich Bonhoeffer protested against the third reich. Bonhoeffer believed the Reich was morally wrong even if the rest of his society did not.

    Society is not a good authority for determining objective moral truth because society has been wrong numerous times before.
    -Earth is flat
    -Earth is center of the universe
    -slavery is acceptable
    -genocide is acceptable

    etc.

    My question for you is, what do you define as good? From there you can begin to determine what is morally true. Numerous philosophers have examined what the good is since Plato.

    Hedonism
    Utilitarianism
    Egalitiarianism

    Etc. Numerous examples of determining what is morally good from philosophy.
    If you believe that it is good for society to determine as a whole what is good and what is wrong, you have no right to object when that society determines all immigrants should leave the country or all blacks should be enslaved etc. That is if you are allowing society to be the determining factor in what determines to be good and true.

    Or you can rely on other philosophical/religious definitions of the good.
     
  19. Triliro

    Triliro Second Year

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2016
    Messages:
    51
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Flagstaff, AZ, US
    High Score:
    0
    First off, the Nazi example is BS, people weren’t learning that genocide is bad for the first time or anything like that, though you could probably make an argument that that was the first time where anti-semitism began to be seen as bad.

    What im asking more specifically is what do you mean by “Discovering a moral truth”, do you mean that people’s beliefs then started becomin what we believe today? If euenics and racism becomes commonplace in a century, is there some point bewtween bow and then where we’ve “Discovered a moral truth?”

    Edit: this doesn’t take into account any thing about religion as I feel its kind of counterproductive to start a discussion/argument/whatever about what religion is superior/true/etc.
     
  20. The Iron Rose

    The Iron Rose Death Eater

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    Messages:
    981
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    United States
    Dude just because broader society determines what is considered morally right doesn't make it actually morally right. Things like gay or interracial marriage, or transgender rights sure as fuck weren't considered morally right by broader society while liberals fought for them. Just because something is a social construct doesn't mean you can't disagree with it. I don't need to think my beliefs are always right and always appropriate for all eternity, I think that they can evolve over time into something I might find incomprehensible or horrifying. That doesn't mean that I can't advocate for what I believe to be right for the world in the hear and now. I just accept that what I believe to be right won't always be right and isn't considered right by everyone.

    And since I think this is your stumbling block, let me sum up the basic mainstream liberal position as I see it on the matter. Everyone and every society has a right to have their own moral truths. But just because everyone has equal claim to moral truth, doesn't make their truths right or worthy of value. A massive number of people in the world think that cutting the clitoris off of a young girl so she can never experience sexual pleasure in her life to be good, proper, and just. The fact that liberals reject the idea of a universal arbiter to determine right from wrong is how we fight for what we believe to be right regardless of whoever the fuck thinks otherwise.

    And if you're questioning the source of that belief, absent a higher power? Well then your problem isn't moral relativism, it's a problem with moral atheism. I'm not an atheist by a long shot, but even I can concede that it's perfectly possible to go all the way back to basic axioms without invoking a deity.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads
  1. fire
    Replies:
    2,071
    Views:
    245,697