4 ms·

Assholes always win, because people who don't win consider the winners assholes. It's a tautology of human nature.

reviseddamage 11y ago
Obama?
JackFr 11y ago
I'll assume that you just read the headline, since the article basically posits exactly the opposite of what you claim. Your claim would make sense, but what we find in the wild is that outrageously bad behavior is ignored or explained away when the actor is sufficiently rich or successful.
- oldmanjay 11y ago
  I read it. It's ridiculous handwringing that assumes a moral stance and ignores any fact that contravenes that stance in pursuit of a banal point. I didn't see any reason to give something rooted in dishonesty an honest appraisal.
- im2w1l 11y ago
  Think about the press. How often do you see "joe schmoe did something stupid" vs "celebrity did something stupid"? Now, if you are rich and powerful, but not enough so to be famous, then I could see your point.
dota_fanatic 11y ago
People who actively try to subvert the efforts of science through shit studies, or lobby government officials to skew their judgement in ways that are objectively wrong (public health, environmental health, etc.), or undercut local business by taking advantage of defenseless populations overseas, or take more than they give solely because they can cut a piece of profit out, betraying the trust of the person that hired them or the trust of their clients, and 'who cares if the company goes under, not my problem, on to the next gig', are assholes. By only some definitions are those people winners. I'd say, given a population of 7+ billion, most assholes simply make a bed of shit and then lie in it, dragging their family and friends down with them. Nothing winning about it.
crimsonalucard 11y ago
right, but you need to consider the fact that ass holes always self decieve themselves into believing that they are winners rather than ass holes. It's a tautology of human nature. The question is... which view is correct and which view is self induced illusion? I would put the argument to a vote.

Obama?

I'll assume that you just read the headline, since the article basically posits exactly the opposite of what you claim. Your claim would make sense, but what we find in the wild is that outrageously bad behavior is ignored or explained away when the actor is sufficiently rich or successful.

oldmanjay 11y ago
I read it. It's ridiculous handwringing that assumes a moral stance and ignores any fact that contravenes that stance in pursuit of a banal point. I didn't see any reason to give something rooted in dishonesty an honest appraisal.
im2w1l 11y ago
Think about the press. How often do you see "joe schmoe did something stupid" vs "celebrity did something stupid"? Now, if you are rich and powerful, but not enough so to be famous, then I could see your point.

dota_fanatic 11y ago

People who actively try to subvert the efforts of science through shit studies, or lobby government officials to skew their judgement in ways that are objectively wrong (public health, environmental health, etc.), or undercut local business by taking advantage of defenseless populations overseas, or take more than they give solely because they can cut a piece of profit out, betraying the trust of the person that hired them or the trust of their clients, and 'who cares if the company goes under, not my problem, on to the next gig', are assholes. By only some definitions are those people winners. I'd say, given a population of 7+ billion, most assholes simply make a bed of shit and then lie in it, dragging their family and friends down with them. Nothing winning about it.

crimsonalucard 11y ago

right, but you need to consider the fact that ass holes always self decieve themselves into believing that they are winners rather than ass holes. It's a tautology of human nature. The question is... which view is correct and which view is self induced illusion? I would put the argument to a vote.