Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

PlanetSpores.ca
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: Tipote]
    #24784394 -

Quote:
Tipote said:

Does anyone else have similar experiences?



Yes. I was a democrat when I was young, then I swiftly change my mind in my mid twenties.

Quote:
radicalised over the internet, its obviously very concerning.


It's important to define what 'radical' means.

On the internet, violence cannot happen, which means you are suggesting Shroomerite debates on the internet are somehow related to a habit of violence in every day life.

Do you have any data that shows -- at least -- a correlation between internet conservatism and violence? What about liberalism and violence? What about ANTIFA?


Don't be mad because conservatives are debating your utopian ideals.


--------------------
TRUMP 2020

Edited by XUL (11/15/17 09:48 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: MightyWhite] * 1
    #24784585 -

MightyWhite said:
Kryptos said:
I still don't get the right wing focus on "they're taking our jobs!"

No-one has taken my job. Such is the nature of skilled, educated work. I'm hard to replace. Very few people have my specific skillset, and most of them have work.

Anybody whining about losing jobs to outsourcing, or minorities, or what have you: Shut up, and become irreplaceable. Until you do, I won't take your burger-flipping ass seriously. I did that shit as a teenager, and went to college in a valuable field specifically because I didn't wanna do that. If you can't figure out a way to make yourself valuable at market price, well, don't be surprised when your market value drops below the poverty level. Plenty of people worldwide survive on a dollar a day just fine. That's called being replaceable. If I can get someone to do your dollar a day job for 95 cents, your ass is on the curb.

Call me a libtard leftist elite. Do it. I am elite. That's why I have a job, and that's why I have job security. Deal with it. The best people will follow in my footsteps, and elite it up themselves. I wasn't born into the top 15%. I'm there now. I'm still trying to go up a few tax brackets in my lifetime, and I'm willing to pay for your college so you can too.

If there's one thing I've learned in all my years of observation of other people, it's that there is no inherent intelligence. Sure, there's something to say for talent, but the actually hard stuff takes nothing but time. If you put in the time, you can do whatever you want, even if you don't have talent. If you won't put in the time, well, this here immigrant will do your job twice as well at half the pay. There's the curb.

EDIT: Falcon: what's the graph? explain please?



I can't tell if you're trolling or truly ignorant. You've no knowledge of construction fields of work or what?


What do you mean? You mean, the field of construction work? Yeah, that falls into the category of "unskilled, cheaply replaceable labor". That's why most construction workers are seasonal contractors. If you don't wanna be replaced, be irreplaceable. I once worked construction for about three months. My buddy hired me on because one of his workers got injured and he fired him to avoid paying comp.

Illegal? probably. But there's no proof, so nobody cares.

If your job primarily involves working with your hands, and if your job isn't primarily using your brain, then chances are, you're replaceable. Waiters, line cooks, construction, cashiers, heck, even low level lab techs and other bullshit jobs like that, now that everyone goes to college, are all replaceable. If you can fire a guy and hire a guy and not see a difference in a week, that person is replaceable.

EDIT:
Eh, on second thought, some jobs even *train* you to be replaceable. Soldiers come to mind. They're trained to follow orders and not think, because they are literally expendable. Can't have your soldiers expressing free will when they need to be sent on a one way trip.

I guess Trump, and Trumpians in general, are making me a classic callous conservative. Bootstraps and all that. Do or die. You don't need no gub'ment meddling to reduce worker competition, competition is good for the free market! Immigrants are simply competition.

Edited by Kryptos (11/15/17 01:30 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: Kryptos] * 1
    #24791323 -

Kryptos said:
It's interesting you mention suicide. I was thinking not that long ago-a high suicide rate shows that a society is relatively good at taking care of its people. Specifically, a high suicide rate means that not only are people not dying of natural causes, they also have the free time to grow despondent and depressed.


This sounds really counter-intuitive to me. Why would a high suicide rate show that society is good at taking care of people?

Kryptos said:
I was also just reading a piece in the NYT on the Siege Mentality:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/13/opinion/roy-moore-conservative-evangelicals.html

I think this is also relevant-all these death cult members, suicide bombers, all that, they are basically suicidal young men who see no hope for themselves, and then blame society as the "other" who does nothing but shit on them from day one. Even though it's patently false, in many cases. See: republicans still talking about Obamacare death panels.



What are you saying is patently false in many cases? That alienated groups are shat on?

I agree the siege mentality is definitely significant in this discussion.

The fact that this generation has shittier prospects than the previous generation is certainly cause for concern.


--------------------
War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: XUL] * 1
    #24791343 -

Quote:
XUL said:Yes. I was a democrat when I was young, then I swiftly change my mind in my mid twenties.


What was the reason you changed your mind, in your view?

Quote:
It's important to define what 'radical' means.


radical has a pretty clear definition.

merriam webster says..
Quote:
a :very different from the usual or traditional :extreme
b :favoring extreme changes in existing views, habits, conditions, or institutions
c :associated with political views, practices, and policies of extreme change
d :advocating extreme measures to retain or restore a political state of affairs the radical right



Radicalisation usually suggests an increasing acceptance of extreme violence, murder, torture etc.. we speak of far-right radicalisation and islamist radicalisation but I'm not restricting it to those broad groups.

Quote:
XUL said:On the internet, violence cannot happen, which means you are suggesting Shroomerite debates on the internet are somehow related to a habit of violence in every day life.


You speak like the internet is in a vaccuum, disconnected from the real world. Surely, it is an influence that ideas can spread easily across borders..? The manchester suicide bomber was shown to have listened to a lot of extremists clerics from Saudi. Surely you accept there is a relation between the virtual and physical world?

I wasn't suggesting that akira and bodhi are about to become terrorists but their views have gradually got more and more extreme. I never thought I'd see a native American so fiercely supportive of Nazis, and I never thought I'd see akira call for the genocide of leftists.

Someone I went to school with got arrested because in his drug addled mind, he developed the fascination with killing Muslims. He had serious drug problems and mental illness. Exposure to incendiary propaganda - whatever the medium - is surely relevant..?
Someone else I went to school with is definitely more accepting of Christian violence since he has had a psychotic break. Some of the batshit crazy stuff he has read online has not helped at all.
Quote:
Do you have any data that shows -- at least -- a correlation between internet conservatism and violence? What about liberalism and violence? What about ANTIFA?



No, I don't have such a statistic. But do you deny that the internet is a tool of radicalisation?

I wasn't restricting it to conservatism. Yes Antifa are certainly radical, if you'd like to make a point, please do.

Quote:
Don't be mad because conservatives are debating your utopian ideals.


I'm not mad, what are you talking about?


--------------------
War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: XUL] * 5
    #24791414 -

XUL said:
Yes. I was a democrat when I was young, then I swiftly change my mind in my mid twenties.




This is a common theme for both the left and right around here.  I was a very conservative 12 year old.  The older I get, the more I find that i care about people other than myself, which has inexorably led to my becoming more liberal in my views.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: ballsalsa] * 1
    #24791469 -

I think I've always been on the left but I've definitely gotten more left wing over the years.

Normally you hear people say that as they get older they get more conservative but I don't know how widespread that is. My experience has very much been the other way. And the people who do fit that idea tend not to necessarily be more conservative, they are just fucking grumpy assholes and hate everything they don't understand.

I dont know who said it but someone said:
Quote:
If You Are Not a Liberal at 25, You Have No Heart. If You Are Not a Conservative at 35 You Have No Brain


obviously I strongly disagree with this, some frame it as being lefty when you are young is just about idealism and then you learn the reality of the world.


--------------------
War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: ballsalsa] * 2
    #24792212 -

ballsalsa said:
I was a very conservative 12 year old.  The older I get, the more I find that i care about people other than myself, which has inexorably led to my becoming more liberal in my views.


I was brought up conservative and even voted for Ronald Reagan over Jimmy Carter.
:homerdoh3:

I switched because conservative's biggest focus seems to be tax cuts for the rich, which leaves far less money to spend on things like education, infrastructure, etc and increases the debt, hurting future generations.  Their next biggest focus seems to be limiting individual freedoms, by legislating morals, such as fighting drugs, public nudity, etc.


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: ballsalsa]
    #24792501 -

ballsalsa said:
XUL said:
Yes. I was a democrat when I was young, then I swiftly change my mind in my mid twenties.




This is a common theme for both the left and right around here.  I was a very conservative 12 year old.  The older I get, the more I find that i care about people other than myself, which has inexorably led to my becoming more liberal in my views.


I've always been left but have become more liberal over time.


--------------------
NotSheekle said
“if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: koods]
    #24793209 -

I was liberal in my teens and early 20's, then life happened. :lol:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: qman] * 1
    #24793765 -

You mean then you turned racist?  :laugh:  :wink:

(I explained why I switched)


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #24793777 -

Enlil said those type of slanderous statements are no longer tolerated in this forum, maybe you should edit the post. :shrug:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: qman]
    #24794116 -

It was a question (maybe two), not an accusation.

Did you switch because you turned you turned racist?

If not, why the switch?


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #24794146 -

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
It was a question (maybe two), not an accusation.

Did you switch because you turned you turned racist?

If not, why the switch?


"not an accusation"

I disagree.

"why the switch?"

I just grew out of it with life experiences. :shrug:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: qman]
    #24794166 -

qman said:
I just grew out of it with life experiences. :shrug:


Too embarrassed to explain?


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #24794208 -

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
qman said:
I just grew out of it with life experiences. :shrug:


Too embarrassed to explain?


I guess my initial move into liberalism came from my dislike of religion. I was raised Catholic but by age 11-12 I already knew it was bullshit. I associated religion with conservatism and that pushed me into the other direction.

It's very easy to be liberal growing up in an upper middle class community and never seeing the other side of the tracks. I lived a very sheltered life until I went off to college and experienced the real world.

"Too embarrassed"

What's there to be embarrassed about?  I don't even view myself as a conservative and I also hold many "liberal" viewpoints.  I really think it's insane to put oneself into a corner when it comes political viewpoints.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: qman]
    #24794252 -

qman said:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
qman said:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Why the switch?


I just grew out of it with life experiences. :shrug:


Too embarrassed to explain?


I don't even view myself as a conservative and I also hold many "liberal" viewpoints.


I see.  I misinterpreted the following statement as you switching to conservatism.
qman said:
I was liberal in my teens and early 20's, then life happened. :lol:


...and I interpreted your lack of an explanation as being too embarrassed to explain why you switched to conservatism.

Sorry for misinterpreting.


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] * 4
    #24795286 -

i was a diehard conservative until i grew up and learned that about 75% of what i thought i knew was bullshit.  yeah, i voted for ronnie raygun the first time, too, fal. 

then i started learning how little i previously knew, started softening and caring about other people, realized that the family values/freedom party was anything but, and pretty swiftly turned left.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: Tipote]
    #24797492 -

Tipote said:
Kryptos said:
It's interesting you mention suicide. I was thinking not that long ago-a high suicide rate shows that a society is relatively good at taking care of its people. Specifically, a high suicide rate means that not only are people not dying of natural causes, they also have the free time to grow despondent and depressed.


This sounds really counter-intuitive to me. Why would a high suicide rate show that society is good at taking care of people?

Kryptos said:
I was also just reading a piece in the NYT on the Siege Mentality:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/13/opinion/roy-moore-conservative-evangelicals.html

I think this is also relevant-all these death cult members, suicide bombers, all that, they are basically suicidal young men who see no hope for themselves, and then blame society as the "other" who does nothing but shit on them from day one. Even though it's patently false, in many cases. See: republicans still talking about Obamacare death panels.



What are you saying is patently false in many cases? That alienated groups are shat on?

I agree the siege mentality is definitely significant in this discussion.

The fact that this generation has shittier prospects than the previous generation is certainly cause for concern.


A high suicide rate simply means that a society is good at taking care of the base physical needs of its population. Food, shelter, safety, etc. Mental needs, validation, all that stuff at the top of the needs pyramid, well, that's a bit more complicated, we haven't figured that out yet.

And yes, I am arguing that in many cases, "alienated" groups are alienated by themselves, and no-one else. Like the white guy crying racial prejudice when he loses his job to a better qualified and cheaper paid minority. It's a continuation of the siege mentality: You're not under siege if you're not a victim, so you better self-alienate, because then you can go back to being the victim under siege.

Or, if you want an example that can't be discounted as "bleedin' heart libtard talk": The guy with the gun is in most cases the most powerful guy in the room, at least physically speaking. Which makes it a little sad, and a little mind blowing, when they try to act out as the weak underdog (see, ISIS, NRA). But that's how they do. They're the true underdog, fighting for good old-fashioned Islam/Christianity/Mass shootings/Whatever.

As for shittier prospects than the previous generations: I don't know if I fully agree with this. I would agree that from the perspective of previous generations, there are shittier prospects, yes. You don't turn 18 and go work at the local factory/war recruiting office anymore. You now have options. As a result of those options, many old, stable, staple, even industries are dying out. So this means less opportunity in terms of the old definition, but there's plenty more opportunities made available by the internet and new technologies and jobs.

Even if we were to count recent economic policies, which ever since Reagan's "Guns-and-Butter" Reaganomics have mostly screwed the ability for upward mobility, (and continue to do so), I think there are enough loopholes being left behind for the new generations. Sure, most of these loopholes have a entrance exam that mostly consists of weighing daddy's wallet, but a smart and or lucky cookie will still figure out a way to thumb the scale. Bitcoin millionaires come to mind.

One thing I am worried about, however, is the recent explosion in fiscal irresponsibility. Optimistic projections for the new tax bill say it will cement the deficit at $1T/year, if the economy continues going gangbusters. In the almost mathematically certain downturn of the future, well, that deficit prediction becomes $2T/year. With corporate debt making up half the GDP, and corporate taxes going down, I see some rapid inflation coming up. I figure this is the "correction" that the GOP will use as a new method to weigh daddy's wallet. Once everyone is a millionaire, no-one is.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: Kryptos] * 3
    #24797555 -

I think the left and right are suffering from the same problem, they're being bleed dry, squeezed for everything they have, their opportunities are being squandered be it jobs, healthcare, upward mobility, what have you, it all ties together. The only place we really differ is in our identity of the cause.

As a leftist I of course think its the wealthy, the elites, etc putting downward pressure on us. The right thinks it's due to immigration, socialists policy, etc. From my perspective those ideas are put in their head by the wealthy elite. What's real? Well I have my view. :shrug:

As far as extremist reactions go, I mean that's natural. You can only push someone but so far, take but so much from them until they have no rational options left so what do they do? Either give up and submit or respond irrationally. I for one would rather die for what I believe in than cower over and submit. Call that extremists if you will, but it's human nature, we all have it in us. If you take food from someone and leave them with no means to survive they're going to steal it, it's not because they're bad people, it's because that's the only option they have left.

Beyond that it's also in the wealthy elites interests to sow chaos, disorder, and confusion among us. It's well established that they send out 'agent provocateurs' to break up peaceful protests and label them as aggressors. They then go on the news and say things such as 'antifa attacks such and such' or 'nazis do such and such.' I'll see whole reddit threads posted by bots, voted on by bots, and commented on by bots. A lot of it is hard to tell, but some of it is just obvious. Every account is less than 30 days old, there's generic strings of comment threads, some of which even seem disjointed and unrelated, broken english, generic usernames, etc, etc. You can't even tell what is fucking real anymore. This is a dystopia I never imagined. I really wish Huxley had written this timeline, at least give me some moksha medicine to help me cope, we just have SSRIs. :frown:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Internet radicalisation [Re: Kryptos] * 3
    #24797581 -

Kryptos said:
Even if we were to count recent economic policies, which ever since Reagan's "Guns-and-Butter" Reaganomics have mostly screwed the ability for upward mobility, (and continue to do so), I think there are enough loopholes being left behind for the new generations. Sure, most of these loopholes have a entrance exam that mostly consists of weighing daddy's wallet, but a smart and or lucky cookie will still figure out a way to thumb the scale. Bitcoin millionaires come to mind.


I think that is a very serious issue that you are understating though. Just think about it. You're saying that 'there are still loopholes' in which we can use to be successful, 'if you're smart or wealthy you can find them.'

In other words we're not all absolutely fucked to no end, sure, that's better than being so, but that's still well beyond a healthy base for our society. One should not have to rely on 'loopholes' or luck (wealth and intelligence require luck) to be successful in life.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* France Bans Laypeople From Reporting Violence...
( 1 2 3 all )		 lonestar2004 4,117 56 03/11/07 07:51 AM
by fireworks_god
* The internet is still threatened Visionary Tools 805 7 08/08/08 12:48 PM
by The_Red_Crayon
* Media News vs. Internet News - No Wonder People Are Confused ekomstop 529 1 09/29/04 12:13 PM
by Crobih
* Will McCain get Swift boated?
( 1 2 all )		 SirTripAlot 2,612 26 02/21/08 01:50 PM
by zappaisgod
* More Islamocrazies in your own back yard!!! More violence Luddite 418 1 09/29/07 07:24 AM
by Luddite
* For Muslim Who Says Violence Destroys Islam, Violent Threats downforpot 1,122 13 03/13/06 11:51 AM
by mack_tasticlies
* US Casaulty List for Camp Falcon Leaked. Over 300 casualties!!!
( 1 2 all )		 The_Red_Crayon 3,143 30 08/16/07 03:34 PM
by The_Red_Crayon
* Nato soldiers astounded at the amount of Afghani violence. The_Red_Crayon 447 1 10/21/06 05:16 PM
by sleepy

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
10,073 topic views. 2 members, 2 guests and 20 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.035 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 18 queries.