141–150 of 365 posts
I kind of wonder why it's always acceptable to have general critics about the Frenchs, but take exactly the same discours and replace it replace it with Jews or Blacks, and sundenly, it becomes completely racist and unacceptable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a more appropriate word to describe this? Honest question as a non-native English speaker. Seems like this is a commonly used term/usage: https://www.google.com/amp/s/dictionary.cambridge.org/us/amp...
"Offended" would be my suggestion. "Triggered" is only really used in this sense as part of bad faith culture war discourse, mocking the idea of trigger warnings.
They leverage and weaponize the concept, which is arguably worse.
Did the book address the topic of rapes by US soldiers? This was a big issue after liberation, and still is a major issue near US bases nowadays (in particular Okinawa).
Question 81 mentions problems caused by US soldiers. Crimes by foreigners generally cause a lot of outrage, regardless how common they are. I saw stats a few years ago that had the crime rates of US troops in Japan lower than the native population. While the crime rates of immigrants was higher than natives. But one of these topics is politically correct and the other is not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People weren't as fragile and sensitive then. It was better in that way.
Except that it's actual nonsense. Not long after WW2 the congress tried to ban comic books for spoiling the youth,just couple decades later people were holding public protests against the Simpsons, and the first TV show to mention the word "period" was met with similar level of protests as if that's something dirty and unspeakable. No, it's the exact opposite - "back then" people were far more fragile and sensitive a…
Now, everyone is comfortable with talk of sex and biological realities...but a book critical of transgenderism is literally called "violence": https://www.rt.com/usa/529308-american-booksellers-associati....
I guess critics of such topics are today's Juvenile Delinquents. /s
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I wish we had such a book currently on how arabs and the muslim world are different I also wish we had such a book currently on how progressive and conservatives are different
I'll use myself as an example: - Voters should show proof of citizenship when voting. - The US needs to take a serious look at implementing Universal Basic Income, and not just because of the automation of jobs. - Abortion should be legal up to the earliest that a fetus has survived out of the womb, roughly 3 months. - We should celebrate diversity, and, we should be able to talk about what makes us different. Withou…
While I wouldn't want to label 11thEarlOfMar personally, I think it can be helpful to look at each of those views in the context of a larger framework because it helps understand what value systems you operate with to either find inconsistencies or common ground.
Edit: I think the fact that people are so quick to either label their personhood or assume someone else is doing the same is indicative of the problem. It's also a bit troubling that a post simply advocating for contextually understanding differences would get downvotes. I don't know if that's a problem with my inability to communicate that point effectively or something worse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This one could apply to our relationship with China maybe? This is absolutely nothing like the situation with China, which is definitely NOT an ally of the west. Shortly after assuming his position as President of the People's Republic of China, Xi Jinping disseminated a secret internal paper with his most important views and plans, including the 7 biggest threats to China in his eyes. In 2013, this "document numbe…
Isn't the republican party dismantling democracy right at this moment? Also, America is a friend of human rights mostly as lip service, see Hague Invasion Act. And the calling American corporate media independent is a stretch. If these are the most fundamental values to Americans, they do a poor job defending them.
Where does this reflexive anti-American bullshit come from?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was a statistical observation. The people who phrase it the way the parent did, usually tend to be on a specific side. (The other side has its tell-signs as well).
If you are liberal you believe conservatives are greedy, amoral and probably evil. If you are conservative you believe liberals are stupid and probably brainwashed. This is America.
When a man beats up a wife, _you don't say_, well, look, she probably wasn't the easiest to live with, and he had it tough dealing with her. He is a good business man, and a pillar in the community. so look both sides have positives and negatives. (Well to be fair as a society we usually do, do this, but clearly we are wrong).
No the facts say otherwise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I wish we had such a book currently on how arabs and the muslim world are different I also wish we had such a book currently on how progressive and conservatives are different
sometimes groups of people are just nasty, bad people worthy of mocking and ridicule. You can't always pretend that situations are around reasonable differences of opinion with each side being honest actors. Each situation is going to be different. the english/french situation may be one way and the progressive/conservative situation may be different.
E.g., Someone could assume a person is against voter ID simply because they want to disenfranchise specific groups or they can legitimately be concerned about fraud. If we just assume the former, it misses any opportunity to make rational arguments about the claims of the latter.
I wish this could be chiseled in rock somewhere prominent
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This one could apply to our relationship with China maybe? This is absolutely nothing like the situation with China, which is definitely NOT an ally of the west. Shortly after assuming his position as President of the People's Republic of China, Xi Jinping disseminated a secret internal paper with his most important views and plans, including the 7 biggest threats to China in his eyes. In 2013, this "document numbe…
Each comment GP made corresponds to quote following the comment. i.e.: >This one could apply to our relationship with China maybe? >> Yes, we quarrel with the French. The members of a family argue pretty freely inside the home ; We quarrel with our allies, We don't quarrel with our enemies -- we fight them. With that said, I wouldn't interpret the US relationship with China as one of alliance nor as one of enmity (ye…