The Left is No Longer Liberal. | The Rubin Report. - General

[QUOTE=sgman91;51728308]Let the antivaxxer talk, ask some basic questions, and then have a vaccination scientist on and do the same. I'm not equating ideas. I think that the best way to defeat ideas is to let them be heard and then present a stronger opposing position, not pushing people into the shadows.[/QUOTE] If ideas are naturally selected, then it's clear that veracity isn't as decisive as other factors in their survival. In your example, for a person to listen to the antivaxxer talk then listen to the scientist would be atypical. Even in the best scenario, where the antivaxxer and scientists are debating directly, all this is high-stakes masturbation. Appearance is paramount. A lack of credible counter-evidence is all that should be needed to preclude anyone questioning scientific consensus from handling a microphone.

honestly, i think climate change denial is just selfishness.. hear me out. if climate change isn't real, and we act as if it is real, what are the consequences? they aren't destruction of the planet, that's for sure.. (might be some economic hurdles if this happened but i'm not sure). however, if the OPPOSITE is true, climate change is real and we [B]don't[/B] act, we're fucked 100% because of all the effects climate change will bring so in this case, the only option that has a chance for catastrophe is if we don't act, regardless of if it's real or not, and even if climate scientists were 50/50 on the situation, there's enough skepticism there that you can't know for sure whether it's real or not, so you don't fucking risk it and put the world at risk because of how confident you are that you're right and they're wrong. if we're wrong, rub it in our faces, but don't fucking get us killed

[QUOTE=Flameon;51728338]Is there a way for him to be racist without thinking that every single Arab hates Jews? Do you not think theres anything problematic with this sentence: " The Arab world, once a beacon of intellectual and religious thought, is today a caldron of hate and cruelty" ??[/QUOTE] Are you saying the Arab world isn't a center for hate and cruelty, especially against Jews and Christians?? I thought that was just a given. Just look at the numbers of Christians that used to live in the Arab world 50 years ago compared to today. It's decreasing and decreasing. Is that because of all the love and tolerance? Clearly if he thinks Arabs used to be a "beacon of intellectual and religious thought," then his argument isn't against the racial group of Arabs, but the current culture in Arab countries. [editline]25th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=343N;51728425]honestly, i think climate change denial is just selfishness.. hear me out. if climate change isn't real, and we act as if it is real, what are the consequences? they aren't destruction of the planet, that's for sure.. (might be some economic hurdles if this happened but i'm not sure). however, if the OPPOSITE is true, climate change is real and we [B]don't[/B] act, we're fucked 100% because of all the effects climate change will bring so in this case, the only option that has a chance for catastrophe is if we don't act, regardless of if it's real or not, and even if climate scientists were 50/50 on the situation, there's enough skepticism there that you can't know for sure whether it's real or not, so you don't fucking risk it and put the world at risk because of how confident you are that you're right and they're wrong. if we're wrong, rub it in our faces, but don't fucking get us killed[/QUOTE] That sounds a whole lot like Pascal's Wager. [editline]25th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Hamaflavian;51728366]The kinds of people who fall for that antivaxx horseshit aren't going to be swayed by some egghead quoting statistics at them. Anti-vaccination as a belief spreads because it taps into people's fundamental distrust of big government, arcane and opaque scientific industries, and having needles stuck in them. They wouldn't listen to any rebuttal by a vaccination scientist because they think that the vaccination scientists are in on the conspiracy to give their kids autism and would tell any lie in the world to keep it going.[/QUOTE] If people are too stupid to hear both sides, so stupid as to need protection from big bad ideas by the elites of society, then we're all doomed anyway.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51728515] If people are too stupid to hear both sides, so stupid as to need protection from big bad ideas by the elites of society, then we're all doomed anyway.[/QUOTE] Don't act like you're so above it all. You're one of the stupids too, so am I, so is everyone we think we respect for their intelligence. The reason rational debate can't change people's worldviews isn't because people are too dumb to listen to your superior logic, it's because rational debate is fundamentally incapable of doing so, because at the bottom of every belief we hold dear is an inalienable moral axiom that rationality just can't address. You are right that we're all doomed though.

And the right in America are no longer against big government and willing to compromise. See how horseshit generalisations are? It's especially ironic coming from the people who said "oh don't generalise us as racists, sexists etc. because we voted for Trump!" then turning around and constantly shitting on people for having different views. Put up, or shut the fuck up.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51728515] That sounds a whole lot like Pascal's Wager.[/QUOTE] the difference is here your decision can affect everyone else your decision of who you believe in when it comes to religion doesn't affect anyone but yourself

[QUOTE=sgman91;51728515] That sounds a whole lot like Pascal's Wager. [/QUOTE] In many circles this argument against climate change skepticism is called Hitchens' Wager, as Christopher Hitchens once used it as a climate change version of Pascal's Wager.

The video's got a hell of a clickbait title. I watched the whole thing. And the whole thing was about the regressive left. A small group of (extremely vocal, and therefore overrepresented) extremists that is shunned by the mainstream left wing and progressives everywhere. It'd be as absurd to assume these things were true of the left at large as it would be to say that all of Trump's supporters are alt-right white supremacists or white nationalists. Why portray it as something else?

[QUOTE=Matthew0505;51728979]If the existence of heaven and hell had as much evidence as climate change I'd sure being going to church every Sunday.[/QUOTE] Well said.

[QUOTE=archangel125;51728944]The video's got a hell of a clickbait title. I watched the whole thing. And the whole thing was about the regressive left. A small group of (extremely vocal, and therefore overrepresented) extremists that is shunned by the mainstream left wing and progressives everywhere. It'd be as absurd to assume these things were true of the left at large as it would be to say that all of Trump's supporters are alt-right white supremacists or white nationalists. Why portray it as something else?[/QUOTE] If you got an "extremely vocal minority" of crazies enabled by your ideals, then your ideals are corrupt

I've e plained my views earlier in thread. Archangel in another thread realized or mentioned that it seems the problem are the crazy idiots. I agree.

[QUOTE=Guriosity;51729050]If you got an "extremely vocal minority" of crazies enabled by your ideals, then your ideals are corrupt[/QUOTE] So every possible political ideal and position is corrupt according to you?

[QUOTE=Guriosity;51729050]If you got an "extremely vocal minority" of crazies enabled by your ideals, then your ideals are corrupt[/QUOTE] What a retarded empty phrase

[QUOTE=Guriosity;51729050]If you got an "extremely vocal minority" of crazies enabled by your ideals, then your ideals are corrupt[/QUOTE] because extremely vocal minorities of crazies exist only on the left of the spectrum, right? you couldn't be more wrong.

[QUOTE=Vodkavia;51729048]IMHO Pascall's wager is flawed in of itself because it just doesn't really consider value in a completely secular world view.[/QUOTE] Pascal's wager is flawed because in reality the choice isn't binary. There's no safe bet because whatever you choose to do might be the very thing that gets you to Hell. With climate change on the other hand you either do nothing and things keep going the way they do, or you try to stop it and at worst it does nothing.

[QUOTE=Kljunas;51729752]Pascal's wager is flawed because in reality the choice isn't binary. There's no safe bet because whatever you choose to do might be the very thing that gets you to Hell. With climate change on the other hand you either do nothing and things keep going the way they do, or you try to stop it and at worst it does nothing.[/QUOTE] reminded of this image [img]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4036/4254681996_27b1ed7ff0.jpg[/img]

I wouldn't say safe spaces and trigger warnings are a big issue within the left, not allowing the opposition to talk and an overprotective attitude of minorities is though. It saddens me deeply were the left is heading now and has become to a part. These new leftist ideals are a waste of time and a distraction. We're forgetting the true fight, which is economic issues.

[QUOTE=Kljunas;51729752]Pascal's wager is flawed because in reality the choice isn't binary. There's no safe bet because whatever you choose to do might be the very thing that gets you to Hell. With climate change on the other hand you either do nothing and things keep going the way they do, or you try to stop it and at worst it does nothing.[/QUOTE] The choice in what we do with climate change isn't binary either. There's a lot of different ways to tackle the issue and how far one is willing to go is also a sliding scale.

[QUOTE=Guriosity;51729050]If you got an "extremely vocal minority" of crazies enabled by your ideals, then your ideals are corrupt[/QUOTE] That applies perfectly to Trump and the alt-right then, doesn't it?

This is probably only annecdotal, but from my experience those who would be considered to be part of the "regressive left" only continue to be empowered. Much of the rhetoric appears virtuous but only maintains to divide the country greater. And being virtuous and an activist is by no means a bad thing, but I feel political alienation and not representing each sides argument fairly has resulted in stiffled debate. Rather than actually discussing issues and finding a greater path for the country, both the alt-right and the "regressive-left" are growing stronger, which is honestly scary. I think what Rubin is meaning to address is his concerns for specifically his side of the aisle instead of saying the problem only exists for the left. And to be clear, political alienation is not exclusive to the left. My point is that I think it is important for both sides to reasses principles and what is best for the country so that we don't end up with the candidates we had for the 2016 Election.

All I need to say is that while it's great to complain about fringe "regressive SJW" leftists, the just as equally idiotic part of the right has been mainstream for them and controls all parts of government. It's all just a distraction.

the worst of the left isnt heralding the acceleration of climate change, antagonizing world leaders, locking access to the country away from it's own people, and declaring negative press as 'fake.' I'm not saying the left doesn't have intolerable people. i'm saying they aren't the immediate threat to everything america is meant to represent.

[QUOTE=artDecor;51744407]the worst of the left isnt heralding the acceleration of climate change, antagonizing world leaders, locking access to the country away from it's own people, and declaring negative press as 'fake.' I'm not saying the left doesn't have intolerable people. i'm saying they aren't the immediate threat to everything america is meant to represent.[/QUOTE] The problem is that Trump was a more appealing canidate, being as terrible as he is, because the left failed to address the concerns of a very large portion of their voting base. Acting like it's a fringe part of the democratic party and nothing can be done about will result in elections being lost. If the left wants to continue to lose, by all means, don't do a thing about your party.

[QUOTE=shadow_oap;51744220]All I need to say is that while it's great to complain about fringe "regressive SJW" leftists, the just as equally idiotic part of the right has been mainstream for them and controls all parts of government. It's all just a distraction.[/QUOTE] How can you say it's fringe? It's prominent in universities, the place where our next generation of leaders will be coming from, and it's indistinguishable from groups like BLM or this recent Women's March (For example, they refused to allow pro-life women's groups to participate in the march).

[QUOTE=dimitrik129;51744490]The problem is that Trump was a more appealing canidate, being as terrible as he is, because the left failed to address the concerns of a very large portion of their voting base.[/QUOTE] You say this, but the Democrats still won the popular vote by almost 3m.

[QUOTE=Banned?;51744521]You say this, but the Democrats still won the popular vote by almost 3m.[/QUOTE] With one of the worst candidates and campaigns ever. It's quite impressive

[QUOTE=dimitrik129;51744490]The problem is that Trump was a more appealing canidate, being as terrible as he is, because the left failed to address the concerns of a very large portion of their voting base. Acting like it's a fringe part of the democratic party and nothing can be done about will result in elections being lost. If the left wants to continue to lose, by all means, don't do a thing about your party.[/QUOTE] and yet the sjw's had nothing to do with hillary being a corrupt disgusting candidate nor did they have anything to do with hillary not tapping into the voter base it really has nothing to do with that. Yes, they're a problem, but they didn't have anything to do with losing, hillary did, and the media underplaying everything, and the bigwigs at the top of the democratic party who roll over in money and don't give a fuck about the people promoting her are why they lost. Those are the problems. Dealing with those fringe idiots on tumblr, twitter, and universities won't make democrats win.

[QUOTE=Naught;51744545]and yet the sjw's had nothing to do with hillary being a corrupt disgusting candidate nor did they have anything to do with hillary not tapping into the voter base it really has nothing to do with that. Yes, they're a problem, but they didn't have anything to do with losing, hillary did, and the media underplaying everything, and the bigwigs at the top of the democratic party who roll over in money and don't give a fuck about the people promoting her are why they lost. Those are the problems. Dealing with those fringe idiots on tumblr, twitter, and universities won't make democrats win.[/QUOTE] The part were "SJW" ideals come into it is it's extremely strong form of identity politics. Hillary's campaign effectively demonized a large portion of the white population while trying to depend on minority voters that Obama got in huge numbers.

[QUOTE=Banned?;51744521]You say this, but the Democrats still won the popular vote by almost 3m.[/QUOTE] Since when did the popular vote matter? Do you honestly think that the 60%+ of California and New York that is Democrat represent all parts of the country. Honestly, if you the popular vote meant anything, there would be no strategic campaigning it would just be who could pander the most to California, Texas, Florida, and New York.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51744559]The part were "SJW" ideals come into it is it's extremely strong form of identity politics. Hillary's campaign effectively demonized a large portion of the white population while trying to depend on minority voters that Obama got in huge numbers.[/QUOTE] which is because of hillary's campaign team being idiots, not people on universities. Notice how strong the left was doing with bernie, and how its recovering with bernie at the helm, with the same amount of sjw's wandering around.