4 ms·

> Anyone in a position of power who took a look at Trump and didn't recoil with disgust needs to be exiled from civil society. And this well represents the lef

> Anyone in a position of power who took a look at Trump and didn't recoil with disgust needs to be exiled from civil society. And this well represents the leftist-elitistic-rhetoric that drove so many to vote for Trump (HRC's "deplorables" comment). Five year olds say "I told you so," adults find reasonable pathways forward in difficult situations. People voted for and supported Trump for a variety of reasons, let's not generalize them all into one block like his administration is doing to Muslims.

geofft 10y ago
Five-year-olds don't commit genocide. Five-year-olds don't become tyrants. Five-year-olds don't deport people. Five-year-olds might say "I told you so," but they have a far better track record at the things that matter than adults. Maybe we should take a lesson from them.
- SirensOfTitan 10y ago
  I find your comment a bit bizarre. You ignored the point of my entire comment, instead deciding to focus on a meaningless portion of my metaphor and apply it to an equally meaningless point about how humans ought to be. This comment becomes even more bizarre whenever my comment was about acceptance of everyone, including Trump supporters, which is in line with your tao of five year old here.
  - geofft 10y ago
    Five-year-olds don't feel compelled to accept everyone. They love everyone, yes, but when someone hurts them, they cry and fight back, they don't say "Hm, how can I work together with this person like an adult." The inclination to treat unreasonable people as if they're reasonable is a major and easily exploited failure of adulthood. Plenty of Trump supporters are reasonable. Peter Thiel is not. Every five-year-old knows a dozen stories about a good king with an evil counselor, and how the king would have been better off getting rid of the counselor.
jowiar 10y ago
Perhaps I wasn't clear enough with "position of power". I wasn't talking about "James Wilson, truck driver in Madison" or "Allison Smith, bartender in Columbus". It's the folks who single-handed lot have power to shape the world. Thiel can grab a friendly dinner with the greatest threat to humanity on Monday, and yet Sam Altman will gladly have lunch with him on Tuesday and joke about his "friends" as though nothing happened?
- SirensOfTitan 10y ago
  > Perhaps I wasn't clear enough with "position of power". I wasn't talking about "James Wilson, truck driver in Madison" or "Allison Smith, bartender in Columbus". I suppose I don't really see much of a rhetorical difference. Proposing that we exile people who disagree with you is pretty gross to me. It doesn't matter you constrained yourself to only punishing the 'powerful'. > Thiel can grab a friendly dinner with the greatest threat to humanity on Monday This just sounds hyperbolic. Care to back this ridiculous statement? > and yet Sam Altman will gladly have lunch with him on Tuesday and joke about his "friends" as though nothing happened? People are multifaceted. As much as you'd like to reduce people down to single words or ideas, they're not that simple.
- concinds 10y ago
  > the greatest threat to humanity Objectively ridiculous. Davos disagrees[0], and geopolitical experts are utterly nonplussed by Trump (Stratfor, Geopolitical Futures). What 22 year old journalism majors decry as "a systemic threat to the world order" is just seen by geopolitical observers as an interesting gambit that may pay off big. Take what they say about Trump and Taiwan[1], NATO, torture (Trump said yesterday that Mattis was in charge, and if Mattis doesn't believe in torture, he gets to override Trump's orders). Your hysteria is unfounded. [0]: http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/the-biggest-risks-facing-the-world-in-2017/ http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/the-biggest-risks... [1]: https://geopoliticalfutures.com/trump-taiwan-and-an-uproar/ https://geopoliticalfutures.com/trump-taiwan-and-an-uproar/
CalChris 10y ago
Adults usually tell five year olds I told you so after having already told them. Republican voters had many choices in their primary. Cruz, Carson, Christie, Huckabee, ... were just as bad. So your variety of reasons isn't very convincing. At a certain point, you have to take responsibility for your vote. Hand waving it away with a variety of reasons isn't fooling anyone.
- concinds 10y ago
  > you have to take responsibility for your vote You're not advocating "responsibility". You're saying Trump supporters are morally defective, and when they refuse that label, you say: "see! not only are you morally flawed, but you won't even admit it! proves my point!" Is it hard to understand that Trump supporters vote for what they think is morally just and right, just like you, and not for evil, because they're evil?
  - CalChris 10y ago
    Actually, I am advocating responsibility. That's why I used that word when I called out his hand waving with a variety of reasons. Moreover, when you say what they think is morally just and right it's pretty much the same. At a certain point, you have to accept responsibility. Trump is your guy and he is doing your work. I suppose you need to understand that y'all went way over the line with Trump and that we're not going to be nice about it.
    - concinds 10y ago
      > I suppose you need to understand that y'all went way over the line with Trump and that we're not going to be nice about it. Don't include me in that. I'm not even American. "We're not going to be nice about it" is once again pretty vindictive. Is that a threat?
      - CalChris 10y ago
        You're not very good at this.

geofft 10y ago

Five-year-olds don't commit genocide. Five-year-olds don't become tyrants. Five-year-olds don't deport people. Five-year-olds might say "I told you so," but they have a far better track record at the things that matter than adults. Maybe we should take a lesson from them.

SirensOfTitan 10y ago
I find your comment a bit bizarre. You ignored the point of my entire comment, instead deciding to focus on a meaningless portion of my metaphor and apply it to an equally meaningless point about how humans ought to be. This comment becomes even more bizarre whenever my comment was about acceptance of everyone, including Trump supporters, which is in line with your tao of five year old here.
- geofft 10y ago
  Five-year-olds don't feel compelled to accept everyone. They love everyone, yes, but when someone hurts them, they cry and fight back, they don't say "Hm, how can I work together with this person like an adult." The inclination to treat unreasonable people as if they're reasonable is a major and easily exploited failure of adulthood. Plenty of Trump supporters are reasonable. Peter Thiel is not. Every five-year-old knows a dozen stories about a good king with an evil counselor, and how the king would have been better off getting rid of the counselor.

jowiar 10y ago

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough with "position of power". I wasn't talking about "James Wilson, truck driver in Madison" or "Allison Smith, bartender in Columbus". It's the folks who single-handed lot have power to shape the world. Thiel can grab a friendly dinner with the greatest threat to humanity on Monday, and yet Sam Altman will gladly have lunch with him on Tuesday and joke about his "friends" as though nothing happened?

SirensOfTitan 10y ago
> Perhaps I wasn't clear enough with "position of power". I wasn't talking about "James Wilson, truck driver in Madison" or "Allison Smith, bartender in Columbus". I suppose I don't really see much of a rhetorical difference. Proposing that we exile people who disagree with you is pretty gross to me. It doesn't matter you constrained yourself to only punishing the 'powerful'. > Thiel can grab a friendly dinner with the greatest threat to humanity on Monday This just sounds hyperbolic. Care to back this ridiculous statement? > and yet Sam Altman will gladly have lunch with him on Tuesday and joke about his "friends" as though nothing happened? People are multifaceted. As much as you'd like to reduce people down to single words or ideas, they're not that simple.
concinds 10y ago
> the greatest threat to humanity Objectively ridiculous. Davos disagrees[0], and geopolitical experts are utterly nonplussed by Trump (Stratfor, Geopolitical Futures). What 22 year old journalism majors decry as "a systemic threat to the world order" is just seen by geopolitical observers as an interesting gambit that may pay off big. Take what they say about Trump and Taiwan[1], NATO, torture (Trump said yesterday that Mattis was in charge, and if Mattis doesn't believe in torture, he gets to override Trump's orders). Your hysteria is unfounded. [0]: http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/the-biggest-risks-facing-the-world-in-2017/ http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/the-biggest-risks... [1]: https://geopoliticalfutures.com/trump-taiwan-and-an-uproar/ https://geopoliticalfutures.com/trump-taiwan-and-an-uproar/

CalChris 10y ago

Adults usually tell five year olds I told you so after having already told them. Republican voters had many choices in their primary. Cruz, Carson, Christie, Huckabee, ... were just as bad. So your variety of reasons isn't very convincing. At a certain point, you have to take responsibility for your vote. Hand waving it away with a variety of reasons isn't fooling anyone.

concinds 10y ago
> you have to take responsibility for your vote You're not advocating "responsibility". You're saying Trump supporters are morally defective, and when they refuse that label, you say: "see! not only are you morally flawed, but you won't even admit it! proves my point!" Is it hard to understand that Trump supporters vote for what they think is morally just and right, just like you, and not for evil, because they're evil?
- CalChris 10y ago
  Actually, I am advocating responsibility. That's why I used that word when I called out his hand waving with a variety of reasons. Moreover, when you say what they think is morally just and right it's pretty much the same. At a certain point, you have to accept responsibility. Trump is your guy and he is doing your work. I suppose you need to understand that y'all went way over the line with Trump and that we're not going to be nice about it.
  - concinds 10y ago
    > I suppose you need to understand that y'all went way over the line with Trump and that we're not going to be nice about it. Don't include me in that. I'm not even American. "We're not going to be nice about it" is once again pretty vindictive. Is that a threat?
    - CalChris 10y ago
      You're not very good at this.