American "Liberals" Are Dangerous Dimwits

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

Despite the fact that I have done?

I cannot know what you have said before we met, sir. I should have made clear, I was addressing the "you" of young liberals with anti-Israel POVs, not you personally.

My apologies for not being more clear.

 

[danny la rouge]

Well, basically a lot of people seem to identify as either left wing or right wing as a political class

Oh, so you've invented a whole new meaning for the term? This is not what I expected. I thought you meant social and economic class.

Not got time for this now. I'll maybe come back later.

 

[danny la rouge]

BULLSHIT. They condemn Israel's behavior because they have fallen victim to a sophisticated campaign of anti-semitic propaganda.

Ah.

I think you'll find that term carries more weight if you save it for when there's racism against Jewish people.

 

[danny la rouge]

I cannot know what you have said before we met, sir.

I have done in the thread. But I accept your point that you mean "one" rather than me.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

Well, basically a lot of people seem to identify as either left wing or right wing as a political class (at least this is what I have found on the couple of US fora I have frequented,) and express dismissal to the point of caricature, of the philosophies of 'the other side'. The sociology involved is often also affected by class distinctions - another element of 'us and them'.

So people are put into several conceptual boxes, and assumed to engage in group think. Exemplified by opening statements such as "You liberals ..." or "You conservatives ..."

I think what is possible, when engaging in discussion with people of obviously different socio-political philosophies, is the examination and analysis of the case they are making, in a polite and non-confrontational manner, and proceeding from that point to any possible mutual understanding. But it is quite a lot of hard work, often involving compromise of one's own philosophies, and requires a common purpose, and mutual respect, on the part of both people involved.

There will be some things upon which we will never agree, but upon which we can agree to disagree in an agreeable manner. And it is unlikely that such a process of examination and analysis will result in either party altering his viewpoint 180 degrees. But a few degrees here and there may well result in seeing some part of an heretofore invisible philosophy.

I am totally apolitical in the party political sense, but I have my own views - born of my upbringing, education, and environment - as to how society ought to be run for the benefit of the majority of citizens. Those views, while strongly held, are not necessarily set in concrete, and exposure to other, properly articulated points of view may well alter them.

I'm sorry, I'm not very good at this - but does any of this go some way to answering you questions?

When I was young, I could infer your attitudes on a wide variety of topics, if I knew only one. I expected an ant-war protester to support Civil Rights, environmental protection, women's rights, gay rights, etc.

The world is no longer that innocent, and I am no longer that young. I have changed my opinion on some matters, such as how best to address perisstent poverty in the US, or whether Americans should have gun rights.

Mostly though, I think the modern young American liberals fail to think through their own alleged POVs. They are all purportedly dyed-in-the-wool feminists who are vicious to anyone (like me) who dares oppose Hillary Clinton, because it was "her turn to be president". O'rly? What feminist theory is this? What happened to equality between the genders? I also get blowback for suggesting females who commit violent acts against males should be prosecuted, and the crime victims assisted. This is likewise "betrayal", as viewed by people who have gotten their feminism off the back of of matchbook cover -- or a 140 character tweet.

Worst of all, though, they simply have no history. They cannot view the events unfolding in Brazil or Venezuela or the Philippines against a reasonably nuanced historical background that puts the US in the proper position, then or now. Most young American liberals have no real grasp of the events of the War in Vietnam.

It's not a good news development, as regards American well-being, or the well-being of other nations influenced by US foreign policies.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

I have done in the thread. But I accept your point that you mean "one" rather than me.

I cannot even write "one does not do such things" in the US without sounding like an insufferable American 0.01%-er with an embarrassing British fangirl problem.

Which is a shame, as it is an excellent word choice for a unique idea, that cannot be readily duplicated.

 

[bimble]

Nope. Probably never will; I am not attracted to the climate..

The climate is lovely. I was there this Spring, lovely weather, it's just everything else about the place that is deeply confusing and heartbreaking, to my mind at least.
I'm coming to look at it as a tragedy more than anything else, which is not to say that it was inevitable, there are a whole series of turning points at which the current situation could have been avoided had different choices been made by a whole host of people.

 

[ViolentPanda]

BULLSHIT. They condemn Israel's behavior because they have fallen victim to a sophisticated campaign of anti-semitic propaganda.

The Arab terrorists attacking Israel are indistinguishable from those attacking the West. Unless you applauded 9/11 and excused it because the US "had it coming for supporting Israel", you are suffering from an enormous logic gap in your thinking that most young American people of a certain humanitarian bent seem to have acquired, en masse, about 10 years ago.

There is no difference as to the funding, or goals, or organisations between HAMAS and ISIS. You might think it was wrong for the US to extra-legally execute Osama bin Laden, but I don't. I think we should assassinate every one of the leaders of these terror groups, but then, I am a lot less willing to tolerate pointless violence against unarmed civilians than most.

Whether those civilians are Jews in Israel, or English in Britain, or Nepalese in Pakistan.

Although you appear eager to endorse the state-sponsored violence of the state of Israel on Arab civilians, as some form of collective punishment for a minority of them resisting occupation.

I condemn the state of Israel's behaviour not because I'm gullible, and have been duped by anti-Semitic propaganda, but because I'm a Jew who refuses to endorse a state that attempts to legitimise oppression by claiming to do it in my name. The state of Israel's actions actually compromise the safety of diaspora Jews, while claiming to be our last best hope. Well, they're not mine, and haven't been since 1967.

 

[danny la rouge]

Although you appear eager to endorse the state-sponsored violence of the state of Israel on Arab civilians, as some form of collective punishment for a minority of them resisting occupation.

I condemn the state of Israel's behaviour not because I'm gullible, and have been duped by anti-Semitic propaganda, but because I'm a Jew who refuses to endorse a state that attempts to legitimise oppression by claiming to do it in my name. The state of Israel's actions actually compromise the safety of diaspora Jews, while claiming to be our last best hope. Well, they're not mine, and haven't been since 1967.

Well put.

 

[ViolentPanda]

The climate is lovely. I was there this Spring, lovely weather, it's just everything else about the place that is deeply confusing and heartbreaking, to my mind at least.
I'm coming to look at it as a tragedy more than anything else, which is not to say that it was inevitable, there are a whole series of turning points at which the current situation could have been avoided had different choices been made by a whole host of people.

Quite. I haven't been back for 30-odd years. I thought that the socio-cultural apartheid in the US midwest was unnerving back in the '80s, but the same in the state of Israel back then was worse, and as ingrained into the culture in just a couple of generations, as US issues that had been around for three centuries.

 

[danny la rouge]

There's some useful themes in your post here, Pinkie_Flamingo about indentity politics, "authenticity", tokenism and common struggle. Not that I'm saying you've addressed them, but that they're there to be teased out.

I think this could be a useful thread, especially if we drop the qualifier, "American", in the title; American liberals have no monopoly on dimwittery.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

There's some useful themes in your post here, Pinkie_Flamingo about indentity politics, "authenticity", tokenism and common struggle. Not that I'm saying you've addressed them, but that they're there to be teased out.

I think this could be a useful thread, especially if we drop the qualifier, "American", in the title; American liberals have no monopoly on dimwittery.

Fair enough. I am just not sure that young British liberals are the same, as to the deficits they are coping with as they attempt to make the world better.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

Quite. I haven't been back for 30-odd years. I thought that the socio-cultural apartheid in the US midwest was unnerving back in the '80s, but the same in the state of Israel back then was worse, and as ingrained into the culture in just a couple of generations, as US issues that had been around for three centuries.

Again, words have actual definitions. You are disrespecting the struggles of South Africans when you use "apartheid" to describe de facto desegregation in the American Midwest.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

Although you appear eager to endorse the state-sponsored violence of the state of Israel on Arab civilians, as some form of collective punishment for a minority of them resisting occupation.

I condemn the state of Israel's behaviour not because I'm gullible, and have been duped by anti-Semitic propaganda, but because I'm a Jew who refuses to endorse a state that attempts to legitimise oppression by claiming to do it in my name. The state of Israel's actions actually compromise the safety of diaspora Jews, while claiming to be our last best hope. Well, they're not mine, and haven't been since 1967.

Being Jewish doesn't make you right. I bet Bernie Madoff has a few criticisms of Israel, too.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

The climate is lovely. I was there this Spring, lovely weather, it's just everything else about the place that is deeply confusing and heartbreaking, to my mind at least.
I'm coming to look at it as a tragedy more than anything else, which is not to say that it was inevitable, there are a whole series of turning points at which the current situation could have been avoided had different choices been made by a whole host of people.

Agreed. Completely agreed.

 

[danny la rouge]

Being Jewish doesn't make you right.

He wasn't suggesting it did.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

He wasn't suggesting it did.

Others have. Bullying is what passes for debate among too many young American liberals.

Forgive me for my parochial limitations.

 

[isvicthere?]

Wow, a proper old-fashioned urban bunfught!

 

[inva]

the more of their posts i read on this thread the more i like these young american liberals

 

[ViolentPanda]

Again, words have actual definitions. You are disrespecting the struggles of South Africans when you use "apartheid" to describe de facto desegregation in the American Midwest.

Words mean what they mean, regardless of your glib attempt at shaming. Apartheid is not a term that's been purely specific to South Africa for over 30 years, and I haven't used the term to describe "de facto desegregation in the American Midwest", I've specifically used what I experienced in the Midwest as a comparator for the similar volume of instutionalised social prejudices between "races" that I experienced in the state of Israel.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Being Jewish doesn't make you right. I bet Bernie Madoff has a few criticisms of Israel, too.

I wasn't aware that I'd claimed that being Jewish made me right. I possibly wasn't aware because in actual fact I'd made no such claim, or even implied such a claim.

Try harder.

 

[ViolentPanda]

the more of their posts i read on this thread the more i like these young american liberals

It's hard not to develop at least a sneaking sympathy for them, given the self-righteous certainties expressed by our newer contributors. I say "it's hard not to", but I've initiated a regular regimen of self-flagellation in order to NOT develop sympathy for any species of liberal. Such sympathy would make my grandmother rise from her grave and strangle me!

 

[ViolentPanda]

He wasn't suggesting it did.

Sometimes, when people can't critique the argument, they invent something instead. I believe the practice is known as "arseholery".

 

[pengaleng]

lol proper thick aint they

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

I wasn't aware that I'd claimed that being Jewish made me right. I possibly wasn't aware because in actual fact I'd made no such claim, or even implied such a claim.

Try harder.

Okie dokie.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

Sometimes, when people can't critique the argument, they invent something instead. I believe the practice is known as "arseholery".

Kindly insult me more directly, in future. It will save us both time.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

Words mean what they mean, regardless of your glib attempt at shaming. Apartheid is not a term that's been purely specific to South Africa for over 30 years, and I haven't used the term to describe "de facto desegregation in the American Midwest", I've specifically used what I experienced in the Midwest as a comparator for the similar volume of instutionalised social prejudices between "races" that I experienced in the state of Israel.

It is a word that comes with an association with South Africa, where violent oppression of the black citizens cost so many lives and blighted almost everyone else's.

I notice this happens a lot, as to the ME. Pro-Arab people describe the restrictions on Israeli Arabs as creating a "prison camp". Loss of life during the 1948 is referred to as a "massacre" and so forth.

It happens in the U.S. as well. The BLM protests are referred to as "riots", when the last riot here was 1992, after the Rodney King verdicts, acquiting the officers who attacked him.

3 days of violence, more than 100 dead, over $3 billion in property damage.

Point is, this kind of hyperbole is dishonest and frustrates the meaningful exchange of ideas.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

Wow, a proper old-fashioned urban bunfught!

O, hopefully not. I wish I was communicating better. I have only one role to play in the ME: that of an American citizen. My only sphere of influence is my own government.

IMO, everyone is better off if my government applies its enormous influence to foster the human rights of Arabs, so that moderate Arab leaders will emerge sooner, and make peace.

 

[squirrelp]

IMO, everyone is better off if my government applies its enormous influence to foster the human rights of Arabs, so that moderate Arab leaders will emerge sooner, and make peace.

But who gets the oil and are we still going to use the dollar as the oil trading currency?

 

[danny la rouge]

It is a word that comes with an association with South Africa, where violent oppression of the black citizens cost so many lives and blighted almost everyone else's.

I notice this happens a lot, as to the ME. Pro-Arab people describe the restrictions on Israeli Arabs as creating a "prison camp". Loss of life during the 1948 is referred to as a "massacre" and so forth.

The problem is that I've presented evidence to you that supports the comparison; evidence that justifies the use of the term "apartheid", but you say it's the work of anti-semetic mouthpieces of Arab extremists. So given that you won't accept any evidence that challenges your view, we're at something of an impasse.

On the converse, you have not presented any evidence or references to back up your view, you've merely asserted it.

The facts are there, but you deny them.