So, the Womens March ... What Is It For? (page 14)

azor

Simon. Keep pushing the centrists to the extremes. Good job.

Simon

Ah, I see, it's MY fault !

The left does batshit crazy, I point and say "gee, I don't like that batshit crazy" and now I'm the head of extremist nazi recruitment?

Please, get real. It's the extremes of the left that are pushing people to the centre, except there was no one there. Clinton was so far right I wondered if she was possessed by the ghost of Ronald Reagan (especially when she did that shaking thing getting in the van, that was like something straight out of the exorcist).

Anyone on the left who excuses idiocy is doing the damage to real liberalism. The people who throw around the nazi label just because someone is white. Who use identity politics instead of actual arguments. That is why Trump was elected.

Lessons learnt since last election: 0

The world can always come up with someone worse if you force it to.

bohm

OK, so we can cross another thing off the "what was this about?" list then eh?

Yes, "like to touch vaginas" is not on the list...

Because I value free-speech and I don't want them to turn us into North Korea.

So if you observe something happening locally that you don't like, then it is okay to protest that even though the same type of things are happening elsewhere in the world only much worse?

bohm

I just heard a new word today -- alternative facts -- Is that worth protesting even though things are no doubt worse in north korea?

azor

Nope not all you Simon. I think I listen to and read many of the same things you do, and agree and disagree with some of the things said.

One of the things I disagree with most vehemently is the smug attitude of too many of these intellectuals toward the average citizen participating in events like this one.

This is one of the many things pushing those in the center to the extremes.

Simon

if you observe something happening locally that you don't like, then it is okay to protest that even though the same type of things are happening elsewhere in the world only much worse?

Of course. But if you are protesting a general concept, then it should be made general.

To ignore the worse offenders of the thing you are apparently so concerned about you organized a big march to demonstrate against it seems ... well, retarded.

I just heard a new word today -- alternative facts -- Is that worth protesting even though things are no doubt worse in north korea?

You could. I'm sure there are plenty of people who had such a great day out they are revved up for another one whenever someone gives the word. I predict the next one will be to support the right of women to accept Sharia law and they'd probably get takers.

Probably quite ineffective protesting something quite so nebulous though. It comes back to "what does the march achieve?"

You see protests and marches used to go together with a whole load of other things including campaigning in elections and pushing for laws to be passed to bring about actual changes in society.

Marching just to be seen to be having a march? It's a media event and nothing more. It's like imagining that going to a big Springsteen concert will change the world. It's probably a great event and you feel great, but it's just that.

bohm

Of course. But if you are protesting a general concept, then it should be made general.
To ignore the worse offenders of the thing you are apparently so concerned about you organized a big march to demonstrate against it seems ... well, retarded.

Okay but this has implications. First off we can probably agree that the women and men participating in the march did so for many, diverse reasons. Let's suppose Jill participated in the march because she think that a person who makes the remark Trump did is not suited to hold office (she does not like her daughters hearing that language, plain and simple, and she knows from her experience with HR that this type of language would never fly in a normal workplace) and because she is very concerned with climate change.

Just so I get it right: Jill acknowledge that women are treated horribly in the middle east, something she is aware of but does little about. She is mainly concerned with Trump because Trump happens to be her president. That's why she finally went to the streets today in her first protest.

Does Jills actions and motives also make you angry?

I predict the next one will be to support the right of women to accept Sharia law and they'd probably get takers.

Do you want to bet 100$?

Simon

One of the things I disagree with most vehemently is the smug attitude of too many of these intellectuals toward the average citizen participating in events like this one.

This is one of the many things pushing those in the center to the extremes.

I disagree with that part. I think the lecturing comes from both the hollywood types AND the ground-level leftists so it becomes a wall of sound that just turns regular people off. Seriously, look at this shit:

The left is eating itself right now. https://twitter.com/KatanaOfLogic/status/823283882388844549

I think the majority of people in the country are decent and like to see everyone treated fairly, even when they are "different" to them. Apart from certain religious segments, most are happy with gay marriage etc... But when you start attacking them as "evil" just for existing, pushing things in people's face and people start claiming oppression and injustice where it clearly doesn't really exist ... well, the argument is lost and so is the support.

Some of the nonsense that the left has pushed will put the causes concerned back years in terms of public sympathy. It's not that the right came and convinced people to support them, the left pushed people to them - they got tired of the BS.

But the labelling of Trump as "the extreme" is part of it too. Some really seem to want him to be Hitler but c'mon, he's not - let's keep things in perspective. He's self obsessed and seems to be authoritarian but any worse than Reagan, really? We have to see. He might be, but pulling the emergency cord too often, too soon, will dull people to the issues and let him escape fair criticism because of the constant background noise.

bohm

I disagree with that part. I think the lecturing comes from both the hollywood types AND the ground-level leftists so it becomes a wall of sound that just turns regular people off. Seriously, look at this shit:

At the core of the rhetoric of BLM is the idea that "the police" (notice: one, uniform blob) can and should be evaluated based on the actions of individual police officers in individual cases; the cases are then selected as those where the police officer acted (or is thought to have acted) in the least favorable way. I don't think that is sound.

Now we are evaluating "the march" and "the liberals", and we got a tweet with some bullsh*t....

How do we evaluate a movement like the people in the march?

azor

Simon as I've said before this is not a zero sum endeavor. I agree there are serious problems on the left. That doesn't negate the merit of this march. I have also not compared trump to Hitler. Some have and their wrong at this point. To say he is no worse then Reagan is hyperbole as well. Again their has not been a President as dangerous as trump is in the last 100 years if not the entire history of the U.S.

When the center left condemns a large portion of their own as loons they are pushed directly into to extremist hands. That is what I'm worried about with these types of general condemnations.

So, the Womens March ... What Is It For?

Share this