Profile
Search
Register
Log in
Lest we forget ...war is a racket
View previous topic | View next topic >

Post new topic Reply to topic
Strange Famous Forum > Social stuff. Political stuff. KNOWMORE

Author Message
See Arrrgh



Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 251
Location: New England
 Reply with quote  

Sage Francis wrote:
Every person has opinions that contradict a lot of other people's opinions. Just because they don't "say it to their face" doesn't mean their opinion is wrong.

I don't blame anyone for being reluctant to get in the face of a trained killer just to express their opinion and prove their conviction.


Never said it was. You keep trying to simplify what I was getting at as just "say it to their faces or don't have an opinion." Or "say it to their faces or your opinion is wrong." I could go in-depth with attempting to point out why such generalizations are off-base in regards to the original discussion that arose from the first page, but I've tried to keep from getting into a long-winded discussion with someone who kind of missed the point early on when IAmNiki commented. My argument has been against the generalizations made by Raoul that seem to be unfounded (outside of the general negativity expressed toward modern wars), not that he has an opinion that differs from mine. I have these same types of discussions with anyone who generalizes a large group of people in front of me. I guess that might be a character flaw.
Post Fri Nov 12, 2010 12:27 am
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
Sage Francis
Self Fighteous


Joined: 30 Jun 2002
Posts: 21529
 Reply with quote  

Is that what I keep doing? I'm trying not to. All I'm saying is that I will gladly say this stuff "to your face." But I'll probably do it with a pretty smile just as long as you offer the same social fakeness in return. Beyond that, I believe that other people can hold their own opinions and convictions without having to prove it by saying it to anyone's face.

This is all i've really been talking about in this thread. It's the only reason I involved myself in it because I didn't really understand what the point was. So what is it you were saying again? Haha. I'm definitely missing something. What's your overall contention?
Post Fri Nov 12, 2010 12:33 am
 View user's profile Send private message
See Arrrgh



Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 251
Location: New England
 Reply with quote  

Raoul DeGroot wrote:
mmm nah. It doesn't matter though. They're still making decisions about things that we have similar information about (war/military).

I don't deny that they have their own mental fingerprint that causes them to interpret information differently. But that doesn't stop me from knowing that there are some decisions that are plain wrong. There are some things that humans do to eachother and participate in that are flatly incorrect and fucked up.

Now do I scream to the rafters they're fucked up and watch nothing happen? Or worse a hardening of a stance?
Or do I swallow my pride and wait til I've actually got a chance of making an impact on someone.

I don't pretend to know what leads people to certain decisions in every case(But I have strong guesses). And I presume good intentions most of the time (isn't assuming the best a positive and constructive use of generalization? Isn't everything we do as humans actually a form of generalization?)

You're fucked up. I generalize you to be fucked up in the mente.


You've already shown the scope of your understanding of veterans to be limited. You've also already shown your scope of understanding regarding Veterans' Day (and those who are thanked on a day like that) to be skewed by your own personal exceptions. This dips outside the realm of truth and into opinions. When challenged on your opinion, as you were earlier, you kind of crumpled back in upon yourself. It's to the point that we're no longer talking about your generalizations, but rather that we're talking about your opinion and, seemingly, why you're allowed to have it. You're probably right. A lot of what we do as a species can be deemed as generalizations. However, this neither makes it right, or make it true. It also seems like you're attempting to generalize your generalization in order to tell me how right you are. If that's what you need, then take your internet "win" and run with it. You've already conceded the point I would have made anyway.
Post Fri Nov 12, 2010 12:35 am
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
Raoul DeGroot



Joined: 30 Apr 2009
Posts: 2437
Location: Son Quest
 Reply with quote  

Here's the thing, I've clarified that there is no generalization that is without exception, but guy who says whiny shit to people all sideways has not come with any evidence to the contrary other than to say "generalizations are bad! Tut tut."

Generalizations are what we exist in. That is incontrovertible.
At what level of generalization does it become kosher for this guy Seeargh to allow people to make an observation about the world? It'd be good to know.
I know white people have fucked it up so that generalization automatically means stereotype and nice guilty white people have deep seated anxiety about it. That's okay.
Post Fri Nov 12, 2010 12:39 am
 View user's profile Send private message
firefly



Joined: 27 Sep 2002
Posts: 3990
Location: Montreal
 Reply with quote  

Saying that "I'm not saying anything new" is the cheapest excuse me for why you're upset about my post/timing. Read the fucking excerpt. I know you guys didn't even read the forward. This is very compelling writting you fucking dummies.

And not going up to veterans and telling them their dummies to their face isn't about being cowardly, it's about not being an asshole. I think that was pretty clear in Raoul's post.
Post Fri Nov 12, 2010 12:41 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Raoul DeGroot



Joined: 30 Apr 2009
Posts: 2437
Location: Son Quest
 Reply with quote  

I wrote that before you responded, seeargh.

Hold on. This is the meat. The generalization semantics and bravery to spit disagreeable fire stuff was annoying me.

You think I have a skewed idea of veterans and what veterans day is for? That's interesting. I invite you to please tell me how so. This your big chance, man. I sound sarcastic but I mean it. Correct my error. Show some conviction. It was that there was the draft and good ol Nazi killin' to consider? Did you have anything more or was that it?
Post Fri Nov 12, 2010 12:44 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Raoul DeGroot



Joined: 30 Apr 2009
Posts: 2437
Location: Son Quest
 Reply with quote  

firefly wrote:
Saying that "I'm not saying anything new" is the cheapest excuse me for why you're upset about my post/timing. Read the fucking excerpt. I know you guys didn't even read the forward. This is very compelling writting you fucking dummies.

And not going up to veterans and telling them their dummies to their face isn't about being cowardly, it's about not being an asshole. I think that was pretty clear in Raoul's post.


I might clarify that it's not that you wanna call them dummies. It's that you would want to tell them they came to the wrong decision. And have them believe it.
They could theoretically have come to the wrong decision very smartly. They could be supersmart in fact. Smartness and good intentions don't guarantee success at life. Quite frankly it's mostly a crapshoot.


Last edited by Raoul DeGroot on Fri Nov 12, 2010 12:52 am; edited 1 time in total
Post Fri Nov 12, 2010 12:52 am
 View user's profile Send private message
See Arrrgh



Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 251
Location: New England
 Reply with quote  

Sage Francis wrote:
Is that what I keep doing? I'm trying not to. All I'm saying is that I will gladly say this stuff "to your face." But I'll probably do it with a pretty smile just as long as you offer the same social fakeness in return. Beyond that, I believe that other people can hold their own opinions and convictions without having to prove it by saying it to anyone's face.


Your first bit is spot on. You can address opinions with civility without being two-faced. It's possible to sit down with a group of men and women that have served in the armed forces and hold a civil conversation about the generalizations made about said individuals. To me, generalizations made on a weak opinion (like all African-Americans/poor people are lazy people looking for a hand-out, or that all Muslims are terrorists, or that "illegal" immigrants are all criminals that are only here to add to the crime rate) need to be challenged. Did I imply that "saying it to their faces" was what would prove their convictions? I guess I may have misrepresented my point. The comment, made to Firefly and carried by Raoul, was a litmus test of sorts to simplify my challenges to said opinion. Being willing doesn't mean that you must immediately go out and make a scene. Being willing, to me, just shows that you're not just talking out of your ass without having facts to support your opinion. Being willing, to me, doesn't mean that your opinion is more or less correct. Being willing, to me, doesn't mean you have to cause trouble with the group. Being willing, to me, just means there's more to your opinions/convictions, at a quick glance, than gobbledygook.

Just for future reference, it's wicked late and I took Tylenol PM a little while ago, so if I stop making sense, or start saying the same thing in ten different ways, let me know.
Post Fri Nov 12, 2010 12:52 am
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
Raoul DeGroot



Joined: 30 Apr 2009
Posts: 2437
Location: Son Quest
 Reply with quote  

Well thanks for carrying on needlessly then, you macho fuckadoo. Next time less litmus tests and more clarity.
Post Fri Nov 12, 2010 12:58 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Sage Francis
Self Fighteous


Joined: 30 Jun 2002
Posts: 21529
 Reply with quote  

It's all good. I mean, if people have anything to say then they should be able to back it up in one form or another. And, when all else fails, at they very least they should say it to a face. That way, when they're on their deathbed, they can say, "Hey...I may have been wrong about Michael Jackson but at least I said it to his FACE!"

Which, of course, is impossible. Shit...I'm on Tylenol PM too.
Post Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:00 am
 View user's profile Send private message
firefly



Joined: 27 Sep 2002
Posts: 3990
Location: Montreal
 Reply with quote  

See Arrrgh wrote:
Veterans' Day is about being thankful that there are people who are willing to die for their country.


What does that even mean? Die for my country? Give me a real answer of what that actually means. Seriously. That just sounds like propaganda that you hear everyday on television

The whole point of that quote in my post is that the only people who should be thanking the veterans are the war profiteers. I'm not trying to rub it in the faces of the veterans that they were wrong, I'm sorry that some people see it that way. It's about trying to show people that we should stop getting into wars. That while we should remember the sacrifice that many people have made we shouldn't get romanticized about WHY they were doing it. It wasn't about freedom then just as much as it isn't about freedom now.

I'm trying to remove the smoke and mirrors.
Post Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:03 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Raoul DeGroot



Joined: 30 Apr 2009
Posts: 2437
Location: Son Quest
 Reply with quote  

Party's over.
Saying shit like "I'm trying to remove the smoke and mirrors" makes you sound egotistical by the way. Like you've created some reel in your head about yourself. You are wearing a black leather trenchcoat. (I can't control my tough love firefly. forgive me. It's only what I think it sounds like. Not what it really is.)


I will add that I'm glad there are still people willing to die for the Crips. Hallelujah. If you're willing to throw your own and other people's lives away for what you think helps your tribe, well it's an aspect of human nature to treasure.


Last edited by Raoul DeGroot on Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:11 am; edited 1 time in total
Post Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:08 am
 View user's profile Send private message
firefly



Joined: 27 Sep 2002
Posts: 3990
Location: Montreal
 Reply with quote  

Raoul DeGroot wrote:
I might clarify that it's not that you wanna call them dummies. It's that you would want to tell them they came to the wrong decision. And have them believe it.


For heavy situations like this I don't even want to be trying to convince anybody of anything unless they bring it up. Then it's up in the air. But going up to somebody that you KNOW will have a problem with what you're saying just for the sake of argument is juvenile. It's attention seeking.
Post Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:11 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
firefly



Joined: 27 Sep 2002
Posts: 3990
Location: Montreal
 Reply with quote  

Raoul DeGroot wrote:
Party's over.
Saying shit like "I'm trying to remove the smoke and mirrors" makes you sound egotistical by the way. Like you've created some reel in your head about yourself. You are wearing a black leather trenchcoat.


haha you're right.

I do a show called "Smoke N' Mirrors" so it is kind of in my head all the time. Thanks for pointing out how pretentious it sounds.
Post Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:15 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
See Arrrgh



Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 251
Location: New England
 Reply with quote  

Raoul DeGroot wrote:
Here's the thing, I've clarified that there is no generalization that is without exception, but guy who says whiny shit to people all sideways has not come with any evidence to the contrary other than to say "generalizations are bad! Tut tut."

Generalizations are what we exist in. That is incontrovertible.
At what level of generalization does it become kosher for this guy Seeargh to allow people to make an observation about the world? It'd be good to know.
I know white people have fucked it up so that generalization automatically means stereotype and nice guilty white people have deep seated anxiety about it. That's okay.


I wasn't trying to get into the argument, but rather responding to something else.

I've yet to say that "[all] generalizations are bad," directly or indirectly. Specifically, I've made my points on that subject. You can generalize all you want, as often as you want, about anything you want. That's your right. However, you made a SPECIFIC generalization about a SPECIFIC group of people. That's why I made a comment. It seems like your target is directed toward modern war and the veterans that served (minus those drafted, which makes up a large group of veterans I would thank on Veterans' Day). It also fails to address historical wars (ie: WWII) that have veterans I'm very thankful for. The men and women who have the courage to put their lives on the line for what they believe in are people I'd rather not see generalized as ignorant.

People who don't fit nicely into your generalization:
Those drafted to Vietnam
Those who enlisted and fought in WWII (possibly WWI)

You already said that drafted veterans are an exception. They were forced into it. I'm thankful that they had the courage to serve. Though newer veterans are not forced directly through a draft, there are plenty of circumstances that "force" people into the military. Are these people an exception too? Your vagueness throughout the whole thread has made it hard to really get into a direct conversation. Really, you just seem like you want to be perceived as the witty poster, but you don't really offer up shit in way of defending your opinions.
Post Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:18 am
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
All times are GMT - 6 Hours.
The time now is Sun Jul 27, 2014 10:30 pm
  Display posts from previous:      


Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Template created by The Fathom
Based on template of Nick Mahon