Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic fa
Right. As I suspected the first time, this seems to be just a very long way around discussing identity politics and complaining about DEI and welfare couched in language about morality and the “good life”. You refuse to clarify who are the “undesirable identities”, which is fine because I know who you mean.We’re not going to do that here, Craig. See if they’ll let you try in ph
A national identity based on whiteness and Christian Nationalism would be undesirable.
You don’t know me at all.
Yeah maybe. But I’m stuck on a real life issue at the moment. A little boy hit baby Xnerd in the face today at school, and I’m having some talks with myself about it because this is new for me. Emotional disregulation leads to poor outcomes so I need to really sit on this for a minute lol.
sorry to hear that :(
yeah i wouldn't say decisions around here are all that important or time sensitive, real life should always take precedence
Not really. It's all too religious for me. I also don't see why fostering a morality-based national identity requires a country to maintain safety nets at a low level.
You seem to be drawing some sort of conclusion about safety nets. If the purpose of the safety nets doesn't have anything to do with the levels, then why bother talking about the purpose?
You seem to be drawing some sort of conclusion about safety nets. If the purpose of the safety nets doesn't have anything to do with the levels, then why bother talking about the purpose?
Because it relates to the point I was making about the proposed national identity. Govt programs are not to be seen as the primary driver for transcending the survival mindset or as an avenue to the good life. That’s not to say they provide no benefit or the safety net should be defunded.
People need to condition themselves out of looking to the political class for solutions.
(1) Remaining in the survival mindset over the long term is immoral (doesn’t lead to lasting goodness).
(2) The political class, like the Catholic Church of old, tries to keep people in a survival mindset.
(3) Continuing along this path will lead to destruction.
could probably take general chat out of the title. could also probably create a craig containment thread, or direct him to the philosophy forum
Let's not do any of those things and see how it goes.
I have a guess as to how it will go. It will be the benign version of jbouton, except less focused on John Nash and more focused on Christianity.
could probably take general chat out of the title. could also probably create a craig containment thread, or direct him to the philosophy forum
Honestly, moving the eugenics posters off to SMP or the philosophy form would save the mods an inordinate amount of trouble.
Honestly, moving the eugenics posters off to SMP or the philosophy form would save the mods an inordinate amount of trouble.
I didn't see a mention of eugenics or even an allusion to it.
Trolly is like that kid from The Sixth Sense, he sees racism and eugenics everywhere.
you're new greg, you'll soon learn trolley is beft treated like a red headed step child and left on ignore
Because it relates to the point I was making about the proposed national identity. Govt programs are not to be seen as the primary driver for transcending the survival mindset or as an avenue to the good life. That’s not to say they provide no benefit or the safety net should be defunded.People need to condition themselves out of looking to the political class for solutio
The problem with proposing a national identity is that it's something that has to come about through a cultural evolution. I don't see how that's possible in today's hyperconnected world. Propaganda techniques could be an effective way advancing one but will ultimately fail in a free society. You might enjoy this lecture. It seems to (I think) address some of your concerns about political and social dynamics.
That kid was actually really seeing dead people, tho?
I’m a pluralist and see the secular space as necessary, but..
The underlying idea is that if we take the morally right action, if we do what is right, then we will get closer to the good life (lasting goodness).
The above is kindergarten morality. It’s a basic moral truth. The question I’m asking myself is, “Can the secular not even hold this basic moral truth?”
Is the secular capable of valuing morality over politics? Maybe the answer is no. I wish I knew the answer to this.
Correct. We are focusing on the "seeing things that others don't see everywhere" part, not the specific things part.
In fairness, he balances his range by complete indifference to anything bad going on in the world that cant be blamed on the US or Jews.
I think you might have him confused with Victor.
Got to learn to take constructive criticism Trolly, even after decades of being so profligate with your (ab)use of free bandwidth.
It's quite simple really CN. There are the conservatives (now mainly fascists), the shitlibs and the leftists. They all hate each other but the first and second groups would rather side with each other than with the last group because they feel their wealth and privilege are threatened.
And then there's d2 who's here to keep everyone amused and who does it quite satisfactorily.
