Politics, Mature and taboo > Political Pundits

The Progressive ideology exposed

<< < (2/30) > >>

odeon:
Is it wrong?

Calandale:
All I know is that I wanna learn mall ninjutsu.

Al Swearegen:

--- Quote from: odeon on December 25, 2017, 07:27:23 AM ---Is it wrong?

--- End quote ---

Yes, it is wrong. If Dinesh does anything wrong in his arguing approach, it is not being railroaded by minutiae and in presenting big picture and alternative and unconventional views to not back these things with much in the way of sources.

This is completely understandable. Why?

Because what happens is that there will be a belief and that belief is shared and aligned politically and gains power and bought to fit in with other beliefs and all further studies have this in-built belief factored to conform into their research. Now these studies give this believe more power and it is accepted as a truth to base other beliefs and researches on and to make attacks to others and such.

Then along comes Dinesh or someone like him and says something unbelievable and outrageous like "Its all bullshit, you know?"

Now someone doing this is not necessarily wrong. Their point may be really good BUT they are unlikely to have many (if any) studies to back them because all (or almost all) studies will be framed around some understood truths - some of which he will be exposing as bullshit. So to run to the incompleteness of his sourcing is completely stupid. But it is not to say he gets a free pass and can sell any old line. He needs to explain WHY it is all bullshit and how others before have got it so wrong and where their assumption were skewed? At what point in the process was the theory wrong and how did confirmation bias go alluded for so long?

Now if for nothing else Dinesh ought to allow a pause to reconsider some beliefs and wh we commonly hold them. For example, if we all know from history classes that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican and he was a good guy fighting for slaves to be freed and he won the civil war against the Democrats in the South and now Democrats are the ones who have the black vote and malign the Republicans as being bigots.....what gives? I never really understood this but conventional wisdom was that Democrats became Republicans and Republicans became Democrats. But see that did not make much sense to me either. Swapping parties. Not changing party names but 100% of both parties changing sides? Changing values? Maybe but even were that so then still the crimes bad actions need to be owned by both parties (what is to be owned by the Democrats for their history and what is to be owned by Republicans for theirs). If Democrats are nice to minorities today, that is fantastic, when did they start and what blood is on their hands up to that point? If Republicans are terrible to minorities now, that is awful, when did that start and what blood is on their hands? What is their history?

Obviously, there is ample of information and enthusiasm for pointing out the understood Democrat is caring and kind and virtuous and look after people and Republicans are greedy and corrupt and look after themselves and are traditional and uncharitable. Gun-toting bigots who want to shove their bible down everyone's throat. What there is not clear information about is the questions above. So we don't question them. Not really. We don't need to either. We accept "what is, is" and understand that there must be good reason and may even make assumptions on these things or find enough "facts" or data points to confirm our understanding.

Then in comes someone like Dinesh and says "Here are some of the answers you were thinking about but could not find".

It is not just Dinesh too. Nor just Conservative viewpoints but there are a lot of Libertarians and a number of different Liberals that often come up with stuff which is really new and compelling and opens my eyes to alternatives I had not considered.

Calandale:

--- Quote from: Al Swearengen on December 25, 2017, 04:09:03 PM ---

Now if for nothing else Dinesh ought to allow a pause to reconsider some beliefs and wh we commonly hold them. For example, if we all know from history classes that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican and he was a good guy fighting for slaves to be freed and he won the civil war against the Democrats in the South and now Democrats are the ones who have the black vote and malign the Republicans as being bigots.....what gives? I never really understood this but conventional wisdom was that Democrats became Republicans and Republicans became Democrats. But see that did not make much sense to me either. Swapping parties. Not changing party names but 100% of both parties changing sides? Changing values? Maybe but even were that so then still the crimes bad actions need to be owned by both parties (what is to be owned by the Democrats for their history and what is to be owned by Republicans for theirs). If Democrats are nice to minorities today, that is fantastic, when did they start and what blood is on their hands up to that point? If Republicans are terrible to minorities now, that is awful, when did that start and what blood is on their hands? What is their history?

 
--- End quote ---

Yes, but he is too simplistic in his dismissal of the established view. Even considering the black movement to the dems,
prior to the Civil Rights Act. There is a reason for the later shift, which comes from a confluence of Johnson's pushing
the Dixiecrats away and the Goldwater nomination. See, Goldwater's state's rights (especially when made explicit on
racial matters) played right into both a chance to relieve the burden of the CRA, as well as to the Lost Cause feelings -
there is no greater state's right than nullification and secession. That the Republican party slowly started to embrace
those views made for an easier home than following the Wallace banner.

The earlier shift is not merely economic either. FDR's non-discrimination order; Truman's integration of the army; Humphrey's
strong support for civil rights all factored in. They were bringing the dems into the palatable realm - at least nationally.

Equally though, other views motivated fairly conservative southern populations away, as the parties began to diverge more
on many issues. Some cultural, some economic.




--- Quote ---Then in comes someone like Dinesh and says "Here are some of the answers you were thinking about but could not find".

It is not just Dinesh too. Nor just Conservative viewpoints but there are a lot of Libertarians and a number of different Liberals that often come up with stuff which is really new and compelling and opens my eyes to alternatives I had not considered.
--- End quote ---


It's important not to be blinded by one ideological stance. But, he seems as unwilling to express the nuance of the reality
as do those hard on the other side of the issue.

odeon:
He appears to have made a career out of conservative conspiracy theories, successful only in preaching to the choir.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version