• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Europe under extreme duress

Recovering LSO

Suck Less
pilot
Contributor
If I see any emotion out of liberals and so-called "progressives" lately, it's disdain and utter contempt for the rubes that dare to disagree with them. Sheer, unadulterated arrogance. It's why the gun debate, for instance, is only partially about guns. It's also part of a Kulturkampf where every aspect of conservative or working-class values is to be branded as an expression of ignorance or moral deficiency which needs to be reformed. Which is a brand of bigotry that dares not speak its name when the other side is arguing things like "minorities can't be racists because they're oppressed." Rather than engage with the arguments against their position, much of the Left reflexively assumes that these arguments come from insecurities, mental deficiencies, and so on. If gun owners are just insecure people with anger issues and small penises, their opinions don't matter. If devoutly religious people don't want to bake a wedding cake, they're just slaves to a regressive fairy tale Mommy and Daddy told them, so their opinions don't matter. Honest patriotism is mocked as "'Murica!" You can't possibly have an opinion worth including in the discussion unless you make the right choices at Whole Foods.

This doesn't mean that all of the ideas of the modern Left are invalid, but they've been implemented in a way that is leaving broad swaths of society feeling pissed off, marginalized, and condescended to. And then when they vote in a manner that expresses that anger, they get told that they have no right to feel the way they feel, and that doing so is wrong. You think this is supposed to persuade people? Hell no, it's just going to piss them off even more.

So...is being "pissed off" an excuse for irresponsibility? By your account, being made fun of and "condescended to" is reason enough to justify any number of wrongs (objective absolute wrongs) - to include electing an irresponsible, unqualified, racist to the highest office in the land?*


*this critique does not constitute an endorsement of the other irresponsible, unqualified clown running for office.
 

nittany03

Recovering NFO. Herder of Programmers.
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
This is not something that's reserved for the left. It's a two way street that travels up and down both sides of the aisle. There are just as many mindless drones on the left who blindly follow the dogma of their political philosophy as there are on the right. Whether your particular side sees the other as uneducated God-fearing rubes, or godless socialists who hate America - what's the difference? Do you think that the hardcore right are any more willing to engage in thoughtful debate about their core issues like abortion or an absolutist interpretation of the 2nd amendment?
Not really. I'd argue discourse on both sides is getting worse.
How generous of you. You're engaging in the very same thing that you criticize the left for doing, aren't you?
Huh? I wasn't intending to imply that every liberal was guilty of what I talked about.
 

nittany03

Recovering NFO. Herder of Programmers.
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
So...is being "pissed off" an excuse for irresponsibility? By your account, being made fun of and "condescended to" is reason enough to justify any number of wrongs (objective absolute wrongs) - to include electing an irresponsible, unqualified, racist to the highest office in the land?*
No, it's not. You're confusing an explanation with an endorsement.
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Not really. I'd argue discourse on both sides is getting worse.
That's not what I'm arguing - of course it is. I may be misinterpreting, but you seem to be saying that the left holds a monopoly on social and political condescension - I think that is false.
 

nittany03

Recovering NFO. Herder of Programmers.
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
That's not what I'm arguing - of course it is. I may be misinterpreting, but you seem to be saying that the left holds a monopoly on social and political condescension - I think that is false.
I didn't mean to imply it was a monopoly; I just happened to focus on that side due to my belief that Trumpism, Brexit, and other populism that's been creeping up lately is at least partly due to liberal condescension. That doesn't make the populist response correct or appropriate, but you've got to understand causal factors to keep the mishap from happening again. There's a huge group of people who feel like the Left and the "establishment" Right don't speak for them and actively oppose them. They don't have to be correct to be here, to be politically active, and be something that needs to be addressed. They're not just going to go away whether you agree with them or not.

I read an article somewhere where people were polled on their primary candidate and then asked various other questions. The phrase "People like me don't get a say in what's going on in the country anymore" (or words to that effect) were statistically unlikely to predict support for any other candidate but Trump. If a person agreed with that statement, they were 85 percent more likely to vote for The Donald. This is a huge problem.

The Right's own breed of condescension is different. It's more based in anti-intellectualism than intellectualism, as in "my ignorance is just as good as your expertise." Hence climate change denial, for one. If anything, what I find disconcerting about modern political discourse is that the snark and hostility of the two sides seems to be turning into a feedback loop.
 

Randy Daytona

Cold War Relic
pilot
Super Moderator
NATO's $100 billion Defense Budget Gap
By
Justin T. Johnson

http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2016/07/06/natos_100_billion_defense_budget_gap_109525.html

In response to rising threats, at the last NATO summit (two years ago in Wales) the leaders of all 28 countries committed to moving toward spending at least 2 percent of their gross domestic product (GDP) on defense. 2 percent of GDP has been a goal for NATO for some time, but never before had all the NATO leaders officially agreed to embrace it at the highest levels...While the majority of NATO countries are below the 2 percent of GDP guideline, five NATO countries make up the bulk of $100 billion gap. If Germany, Italy, Canada, Spain and the Netherlands all spent 2 percent of GDP on defense, they would add $80 billion to total NATO defense spending. In 2015, all five of these countries spent close to 1 percent of their GDPs on defense, from the low of Spain’s 0.89 percent to Germany’s high of 1.18 percent of GDP. While some of these five are talking about defense spending increases, none of the current proposals would bring any of them anywhere close to 2 percent of GDP.
 

Randy Daytona

Cold War Relic
pilot
Super Moderator
As if there isn't enough going on in Europe, it looks like a military coup is underway in Turkey against Erdogan.
 

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
As if there isn't enough going on in Europe, it looks like a military coup is underway in Turkey against Erdogan.

I wouldn't put it past the military to try but I also wouldn't put it past Erdogan to manufacture a coup either.
 

Uncle Fester

Robot Pimp
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
The Turkish military has done this before, most recently in the '90's, as I recall. Remove the civilian government and then hand power back after new elections, not unlike Egypt.
 

jmcquate

Well-Known Member
Contributor
This could be a good thing............I'm a glass half full (of scotch) guy on Friday nights.
 
Top