Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
It's not a good idea to talk about politics in most social settings, isn't it?
People with similar opinions seem to rarely discuss it in massive depth I find. In conclusion get better friends.
I should've just lied and said I am a Liberal Democrat supporter
I think tax evasion is a bigger problem than benefits fraud
and that killed the atmosphere.
Then you have to argue a little bit lest your silence be mistaken for agreement.
Of course this depends on one's definition of obnoxious and wrong.
Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but what if their opinion is fueled by the Daily Mail?
"Everyone's entitled to their own opinions" =/= "all opinions are equally valid". If someone's opinion is bullshit, tell them. Or don't, and just inwardly seethe about it, that's fine too.
and the people you're arguing against are so convinced that their ironic working class Tory opinions are correct, I find it impossible to say to their faces that their opinion is bullshit without coming across as a jittery nervous wreck as soon as I realise the damage I've just done to my social life.
seriously, don't fret about it too much.
A lot of confused people, who would otherwise be baffled by the layers of complexity and removedness and interconnections of political concepts....... can be hoodwinked into taking in sophisticated 'wrapping ups' of their own disparate ideas, into an bundle of joined up shit (by evils like Melanie Phillips).
There is a common misunderstanding that the verbal reasoning that we are taught en masse (most people get it through their 'english comprehension' at school), IS properly logical....for a large part it is....but it is nowhere nearly as tied down and and as logical as say mathematics, or say boolean algebra......the rules in verbal reasoning are not as clearly defined......one of the reasons for this is that a lot of verbs or nouns or adjectives are in fact variables, whereas in most usage people employ them as something more distinct, this gives rise to some common traps and misnderstandings and totally false logic.......the daily mail writers often use these to create what appears, to a wider (than is acknowledged) (than we joke about daily mail readers having narrow viewpoints) set of opinions, a logical clearcut point of view......so we end up with a large group of people nodding their heads to a wide ranging cluster of ideas that seem to hang together and are shared by a large group........the overall daily mail pov's are only stable in that the words and phrases they use are variable enough to allow many people to agree with them (but for completely different reasons)........the danger is that people are unaware of this......another danger is that the people who are hoodwinked by this are also introduced to other concepts (because they now trust the source, and that source...the daily mail, provides a join up of disperate ideas that the confused reader had, to provide them simplistic guidance in what would otherwise be a confusing political world)
introduced to other concepts that are sometimes dangerous and harmful.....some people may conclude (after following daily mail illogic) that it is only sensible to blame or persecute some aspect of humanity, for a problem that actually has roots in something else far less easy to grasp, but which 'shows' itself most obviously in some aspect of humanity.
This problem of words being variable and the problems that then manifest from this.....and THE POWER that these words 'traps' then have over reason, is most easily demonstrated by considering something like the word 'Christianity'.
There seem to be a lot of christians, we might all know of some people who fly under the banner of 'Christian' who are humble, non preachy, accepting of others and their belief system that leads to the conclusion of 'love for all peoples and the world in general, they are compassionate and relatively selfless and appear to have taken this from the teachings of jesus as relayed in the bible..............on the other hand there are other sorts of people who describe as christians, who seem to have an opposite agenda, their 'faith' seems to inform them to use the bible to find justification for hate and persecution and racism and facism and non considering of lots of humanity..........Now really to describe with one or two words these different types as 'Christian' is really unhelpful, because they are almost completely opposite, their only commonality is that they have focussed on something that they have found from 'the bible'.......concepts can be found in the bible thay are completely different......so, dependant upon the particular preacher encouraging their 'flock' to focus on particular aspects, you can end up with an enormously variable super set of 'christian belief'
So, the description 'Christian Person' is actually as variable as saying 'English speaking person' the definition and boundaries being 'a person who identifies as using the bible as a source' and 'a person who can be identified as using an english dictionary as a source'..........OK this isnt exact, but its a damn sight closer than most definitions of the word 'christian'
AND even though the above is sooooo fucking obvious when put like that, our(human societies) arguments and discussions are still unable to handle this (sort of) evident obviousness..
THUS it is the same for other useage of words and phrases and concepts..........try to have a go with other concepts and words 'intelligence' 'society' 'morality' for example
anyway, my point being, that.....people and freinds can be hoodwinked/trapped relatively easily, by words, people like Melanie Phillips are particularly skillful at doing this, making me suspect she knows exactly what she is doing and is therefore cupable of 'evil-doing?' :D (define that.....you cant, because if you thing my saying evil is incorrect, it isnt, its just that you are applying a different interpretation to the concept than I am using.....it is after all, only a variable :D )
You sometime therefore have to go with your gut instincts with your freinds.....if you feel that your raising an argument against what they have regurgitated from the mail, would be ineffectual and not serve to improve their pov, then you should not feel bad by holding back, just say that you disagree but cant explain why yet, as you are not as sophisticated enough yet, in wordsmithery, to unpick the expertise of arch wordsmith decievers such as Melanie Phillips (who is formidable, have no doubt....even if she dont convince you.....she aint aiming for you, she is aiming to entrap a majority, that is all she wants or aims for, and she achieves that with aplomb, because her remit allows her more freedom......to not to have to be compassionate about some humanity)
Your duty is to try to learn techniques to help your freinds disentangle themselves from the web of mistaken logic.......its not easy, because to do that you have to use the things that cause the problems.......'WORDS' and to do that you have to change the meaning of the concept of 'WORDS' so you will have to be damn clever ('words' being both the 'operators' and the 'operands' (also the 'parameters' as well if you like, althoug this is more like a subset))
With great power (SHOULD) come great responsibility.
People are given bugger all incentives or encouragement to realise that responsibility, politicians and influencers everywhere are quite prepared to shrug off any burden of responsibility of their words, Unless it is enshrined in a legally binding contract.
........because that is our society and progress has become.....built on words of power without responsibility.....we kind of know this and so our systems of society have to mollify and distract our morality and souls with 'desirable 'Things''
the thread title is 'politics'
the forum shows that the last poster is creakyknees
talk about 'thread killing'
thats not going to fool anyone, everyone knows you are creakyknees
and it didn't make any difference because it will be a case of 'tldr' because people are conditioned to simplistic shortening cos it allows greater leeway, more variability, to allow their understanding to slip in effortlessly, without any adjustment, i.e. why the Melanie Phillips and soundbiters will always have a headstart
Everyone is just wrong all the time, and people are complete and total utter cunts about the whole thing.
For a while there the leader of our wee country supported a man who called Islam 'satanic' and not everyone was outraged. Utterly fucked.
Unless there's been some massive political news I've missed of late.
and is a cock.
Define everyone. The vocal minority sure, and most of the politicians.
Just feels like there is very little hope when the two largest parties are who they are, and the assembly is the way it is.
variable definition of the word 'christian' (see my second para above for an explanation).......but yeah, 'Muslim' is also a hugely variable (like 'Christian') you can get almost polar opposites in their attitude to humans, 'from without their 'classification''