311–320 of 365 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
...the countries that repress their own citizens and don't have a free press? You go to China and point out abuses. See how it goes. Or Russia - just don't stand by any windows. Those countries have legitimate issues we call out. We call ours out too. That's the difference.
Have you heard of Navalny?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you suggesting that the term " gypped " may've been racist? Presumably because its etymology may be a reference to a stereotypical behavior attributed to gypsies, which some might regard as a racial-slur for [Romani people]( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romani_people )? That passage doesn't give me that vibe -- it seems to be trying to suggest that the relevant behavior, " gypping ", isn't culturally unique, but…
Gypped isn't offensive just because they prefer to be called Romani. It equates Romani with swindlers. Saying some French and some Americans swindle too isn't the same.
For example, in this case the speaker clearly wasn't trying to equate Romani to swindlers. Any logic arriving at such a faulty conclusion would seem fallacious, presumably due to over-simplification.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I love the idea of this, but it also plays poorly with > Brandolini's law, also known as the bullshit asymmetry principle, is an internet adage that emphasizes the difficulty of debunking false, facetious, or otherwise misleading information: "The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude larger than to produce it." But I guess, to be fair, giving the other sides a fair chance to make it's p…
This just seems like a rather clever permutation of ad hominem. “The reason I won’t refute your argument is that it is so incorrect that it would take me forever to explain why.”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’d advise reading the book “112 Gripes about the French” and then applying that same empathy to the people you dislike in our modern era.
Where did you get I disliked anybody? Parent used "sides" before I did, and it's seems absurd to say the right started trigger to mock the left
My philosophy is that I don’t care who started it. I care how I respond to try to improve things.
(Though I myself have a lot to learn as well.)
> For the right to speak involves the duty to listen. The right to criticize involves the responsibility of giving "the other side" a fair chance to make its point. I wish this could be chiseled in rock somewhere prominent
Can't be that hard or expensive, let's make it happen
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> - Voters should show proof of citizenship when voting. You'll get no disagreement on this from any liberal. In fact the disagreement lies not in proving citizenship but in the methods to do so. If you have to show proof to register then why do you need to show proof to vote? In fact, if you have ID that proves you are a valid voter then registration shouldn't be necessary at all. Republicans not only want you to sh…
> If you have to show proof to register then why do you need to show proof to vote? In fact, if you have ID that proves you are a valid voter then registration shouldn't be necessary at all. Why don't you ask every other country why they do such a thing? Seriously, if the issue was as clear-cut as you make it out to be ("Those peoples are just trying to suppress the votes of their opponents") then the US would not be…
I think there are some problems when you bring in the "Why don't you ask every other country?" argument. For one, not every country has the same protections that the U.S. carries in the Bill of Rights. This is why you can't, for example, use this defense when it comes to banning intolerant speech even though it may be done elsewhere.
I think the generous interpretation is this law feels like a "show me your papers" statute which the United States generally has a philosophical angle against. It would be comparable in some people's eyes to a "Show me your vaccine card" enforced by the State. Pragmatically, the ID law may also create de facto racial profiling. Although I think the opposite side of this feels the issue is more about State vs. Federal immigration enforcement than really striking down the "show me your papers" provision.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One side wants trans people to be able to use the same bathroom and universal healthcare the other side talks about shooting democrats and Myanmar style coups. It is impossible to be tolerant of the Fourth Reich or those who if they don't condone it will at best tolerate it for tax cuts. Our unresolvable division is because 10% is evil and 30% is nuts and the remainder can't have anything they want if they don't embr…
In Portland. One side of the crowd holds signs like "Down with the Fash" and "Trans Rights are Human Rights." The other side of the crowd literally wearing "RWDS" Patches (Right Wing Death Squad) and "Pinochet Did Nothing Wrong" shirts. Some of the people in this thread: "Huh! I don't see any difference between the two. Both sides! Hurr durr."
You're failing to see the huge distribution of people on both sides.
There are Nazis on both sides, but there aren't many. The majority are closer to the middle, and the media uses the extreme examples to enrage and divide for dollars.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you expand on that? I have dual citizenship, have spent each half of my life in both countries and I find French and Americans very different. How do you see them as similar?
Not the OP---I agree they're very different, but there's a striking resemblance in how both countries think their political and intellectual culture is civilization's crowning achievement and the entire world should adopt it. (Of course, the US has been more able to do export theirs than France in recent decades.) IMO this shapes both countries' relationships to the rest of the world. I have less first hand experienc…
I don't think they're really comparable.
The most obvious example is policing. In the US, local law enforcement has a lot of independence and discretion, to the point "sheriff has to grudgingly cooperate with out-of-touch FBI guy" is a literary cliché. In France, in rural areas the default expectation is that gendarmerie (basically centralized military police) will handle most serious problems.
In France the central state is pervasive in a lot of areas that are either local or privatized in the US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So your point about why the US are great and morally ‘stellar ‘ (to use your word) is that it’s —- big? Wow, that’s anticlimactic.
Add up all those populations. We're exceedingly generous, although less so than the Germans.
See, I don’t know if this is helping the case you are trying to make against cycomanic. You come here claiming you are more generous than the next 10 combined, when, in reality, you aren’t even in the top 5.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wrong. Try Japan. They're clean, polite, and courteous. Crowded trains in August (like all year) are surprisingly absent of body odor (and litter, and noisy people, ...). Different folks are indeed different in some ways.
Asians sweat less and their sweat does not stink as much for some reason.
From my own experience, if I eat garlic and later scrub my head with a wet washcloth, I can smell the garlic on the washcloth.