I don’t understand how that’s so hard to understand, it basically means “don’t insult them or their intelligence” - propose something different without calling Trump voters idiots.
Often I feel that the real failure of modern leftist elites is that, for all our professed “tolerance”, we are completely unable to empathize and connect with people who don’t think like us. Belle Waring exemplifies it: " These men don’t think this because we’re not trying hard enough to educate them, surely?". You don’t educate a peer, you educate a child because you know better. The concept itself that feminists have found The Light or The Word that will save us all, is automatically offensive: with all due respect, social sciences are very young, very weak in all sorts of areas, and the answers they come up with are hardly self-evident truths.
By trying our utmost to “educate” someone we see as inferior, we lose. And lose we do, over and over again.
True, and at the same time choice of words quite illuminating. Thrown “down”? In one sentence he acknowledges condescension as a problem while using the most condescending imagery.
So, when you slaughter them all—which is what you seem to be proposing, what with all the destroying and the rejection of empathy and discourse—what means will you choose? Camps? Machine-gun them and scrape them into trenches with bulldozers? Cut their throats and toss them into pits to expire there, like was done to my ancestors? What is your plan? Please, be specific.
See, I’ve had it to my back teeth with someone posting some article about how to sway the Trump base or some portion thereof to the side of community, civilization, and niceness and then someone grandstanding about how they must never, ever be forgotten and how they, instead, must be destroyed.
Quit it. It’s either grandstanding, in which case it is in poor taste, or it is in earnest, in which case you are, far, far worse than those you purport to oppose.
Did you just use a vulgar term for female genitalia as an insult?
Wow, that is so in keeping with trumpists of my acquaintance. It has that all-too-familiar “denigrate anyone to make a point, oops, present company excepted” vibe.
hmm, looks like you mean Milo. Um, okay, I’ll accept that only as far as one may be the tactic, but the other is clearly provable. Milo clearly lies when the truth is just as handy.
Milo is a an attention whore extraordinaire; an overgrown developmentally stunted man-child so utterly desperate to be noticed that he’ll say anything no matter how offensive, because as every neglected kid with low self esteem knows, “negative attention is better than none at all.”
It’s either a writer one of these articles under discussion, or another article who referenced them, who said that Milo is famous for being famous. (Sorry, the last few days have been a firehose.) Sam Harris makes the point that Trump is the natural end result of a culture obsessed with celebrity. Looked at closely, Trump is also famous for being famous.
Every era has its fair share of ultra-conservative basket cases, there is nothing you can do about that. She’s not the problem, if anything 4channers are less likely to listen to an Oxford PhD. This is why UKIP could offload her with little regret.
The problem is “common-sense” people like Farage, Trump, May and so on. They managed to develop a language that talks to the streets, while leftist language has gone in the opposite direction.
While wearing a white coat and asking about their mother?
People like that aren’t under discussion, though. It’s the people who aren’t hideously horrible that might be turned. Indeed, can be turned. And talking to them is the only way to do it. Indeed, the fact that UKIP—UKIP!—kicked her to the curb shows that there is hope. Even if drunk on hate some vital part of their psyche recognizes evil when it stares right at them and rejects it.
He’s not, though. I went and read the whole thing and, no, it’s not lying. I mean, it’s slanted, it’s obviously slanted as hell, of course, but there’s no immediately apparent whoppers. Indeed, bits of the analysis are surprisingly cogent[1], especially the bit about the Meme-Brigade which is pretty much spot-on.
I write this not because I particularly want to defend Milo Greeknamesarehardtospell. Rather, we—that’d be the people broadly in favor of niceness, community, and civilization—should know better than dismiss things like that.
[1] Especially given that they were written by a professional trolley with the journalistic integrity of a head-louse.
I’d say we are, going by the last time I looked on 4chan (in December, it was the only place that had a live link to something that I wanted).
Maybe some of them aren’t like that, but if you play in the sewer then you shouldn’t get upset if people don’t want to go near you because of the smell of shit.
