Jump to content

The Congressman is back yo


congressman

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, FLEA said:

Bro you arent going to find many sympathizer here. The democrats changed the rules for civility, not the other way around. Once they normalized threats, riots, police attacks, sequestering government buildings, burning cars, etc.... harassments, even sexual in nature, became completely fair game. You may not like it, but that's what our civilization has become. If AOC feels "uncomfortable" than she can step down. But I recall her saying that protest should make people feel "uncomfortable." 

 

Edit: to clarify, I don't personally condone any of this. However, it has become the reality of the US, that political supremacy is now earned through civil unrest and civil disobedience, not through civil discourse. 

These forms of violence, and the harassment we see in the video, have economic origins. Liberal economic systems are unstable, and when they break down, this is expressed very violently. This break down is inevitable. The fact that 'Alex', if that's his name, didn't assassinate the political figure in the video implies we still have a ways to go in terms of the economic system's cycle duration.

 

Here's an example of how that behaviour we see if the video is treated in the UK: https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/discrimination/taking-action-about-discrimination/taking-action-about-harassment/

And in Germany:  https://www.antidiskriminierungsstelle.de/SharedDocs/downloads/EN/publikationen/agg_wegweiser_engl_guide_to_the_general_equal_treatment_act.pdf?__blob=publicationFile

 

UK

image.thumb.png.12f85c1f438a9193e4e33d0e23d9231e.png

 

 

Deutschland

image.png.9ad852d9b79c35120159ac9c804f0851.png

 

In Europe, 'Alex' would have been arrested for sexual harassment of a public official. 

Edited by Random Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Random Guy said:

🤷‍♂️

By describing the landlord and Cara using gender binary pronouns of "him" and "her," respectively, the Brits are reinforcing the patriarchy wherein the male holds the power of property ownership and the female is relegated to the role of subservient, dependent tenant.  Furthermore, they are reinforcing the heteronormative, chauvinist worldview by establishing the toxic male as the aggressor upon the female.  A gender nonconforming example would have been much more appropriate.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, nunya said:

By describing the landlord and Cara using gender binary pronouns of "him" and "her," respectively, the Brits are reinforcing the patriarchy wherein the male holds the power of property ownership and the female is relegated to the role of subservient, dependent tenant.  Furthermore, they are reinforcing the heteronormative, chauvinist worldview by establishing the toxic male as the aggressor upon the female.  A gender nonconforming example would have been much more appropriate.

Gotcha, mistook your post for BO sarcasm. Seems like a valid point. 

 

So, to sum up: if you are going to do it, do it properly. That means discourse should be educated and civil. And when discourse fails, violence should be well targeted against the appropriate political institutions. No fussing about with "Your my favorite big-booty latina!!" bullsh***. 

Edited by Random Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Random Guy said:

These forms of violence, and the harassment we see in the video, have economic origins. Liberal economic systems are unstable, and when they break down, this is expressed very violently. This break down is inevitable. The fact that 'Alex', if that's his name, didn't assassinate the political figure in the video implies we still have a ways to go in terms of the economic system's cycle duration.

 

Here's an example of how that behaviour we see if the video is treated in the UK: https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/discrimination/taking-action-about-discrimination/taking-action-about-harassment/

And in Germany:  https://www.antidiskriminierungsstelle.de/SharedDocs/downloads/EN/publikationen/agg_wegweiser_engl_guide_to_the_general_equal_treatment_act.pdf?__blob=publicationFile

 

UK

image.thumb.png.12f85c1f438a9193e4e33d0e23d9231e.png

 

 

Deutschland

image.png.9ad852d9b79c35120159ac9c804f0851.png

 

In Europe, 'Alex' would have been arrested for sexual harassment of a public official. 

Not sure I really care. I'm not a UK or German citizen and their fascist speech practices, which have been known to send people for prison for shit as stupid as saying Angela Merkel is fat, is not something I really want in the US. You might think Europe is a utopia of liberal ideology but I'd encourage you to live here for a bit. Because it is overtly one of the most racist, xenophobic and misogynists' societies I've ever experienced. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nunya said:

By describing the landlord and Cara using gender binary pronouns of "him" and "her," respectively, the Brits are reinforcing the patriarchy wherein the male holds the power of property ownership and the female is relegated to the role of subservient, dependent tenant.  Furthermore, they are reinforcing the heteronormative, chauvinist worldview by establishing the toxic male as the aggressor upon the female.  A gender nonconforming example would have been much more appropriate.

...and you earned a PCA to the MAJCOM EO office...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Random Guy said:

Are you a lawyer, because I am not. If you are, how is harassment treated at law currently in the US (DC) area?

 

As a citizen I can say that if his behavior does not constitute harassment which affords legal consequences, I support Congress passing laws which would provide that outcome. Certainly I think replacing the political figure he's speaking to with our wives we can agree nothing he said is related to our wives' politics in any way, but rather is purely sexual in nature. 

 

Edit: I suppose as a society we should simply demand better discourse. We can communicate better than this, can we not? And if you pass beyond discourse to violence, then take up proper violence. But shouting sexually at someone as a form of soft-intimidation is an unnecessary middle ground we shouldn't dwell in. Talk properly or fight I say.

Laws regarding sexual harassment are most often relevant to work. Hostile work environment, sexual favors for promotion, etc. Just hearing someone whom you have little to no association with say unpleasant words to you typically isn't prosecuted.

Your "butwhataboutsim" regarding anyone's wife is simply an appeal to emotion, not logic. If "talk properly or fight" are the two options you propose, then you regard bad speech worse than violence. If you look closely at the video, AOC's boyfriend was just a few steps ahead of her, turned and looked at Alex, and kept walking. Clearly, the "man" who has the most interest in that big booty found nothing Alex said to be worthy of violence, yet you do. How strange.

1 hour ago, Random Guy said:

So, to sum up: if you are going to do it, do it properly. That means discourse should be educated and civil. And when discourse fails, violence should be well targeted against the appropriate political institutions. No fussing about with "Your my favorite big-booty latina!!" bullsh***. 

Once again, you want to jump straight from civil discourse to violence.

Bear in mind that has already occurred, and the appropriate political institutions were soundly defeated so we could have the right to say unpleasant things. Yet here we are, being lectured to again to by the losers. What do you tell an empire with two black eyes? Nothing it hasn't already been told twice.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, FLEA said:

Not sure I really care. I'm not a UK or German citizen and their fascist speech practices, which have been known to send people for prison for shit as stupid as saying Angela Merkel is fat, is not something I really want in the US. You might think Europe is a utopia of liberal ideology but I'd encourage you to live here for a bit. Because it is overtly one of the most racist, xenophobic and misogynists' societies I've ever experienced. 

 

I'm an American, former pilot, live in Europe at the moment. Remember that ALL parties in the US are liberal. I get that you mean 'Democrats' when you use the word 'liberal' though. 

 

image.thumb.png.13638a8524d4308938aa77556fd63f19.png

 

 

 

The logical check of 'your wife' is not an appeal to emotion, it is a check of the original premise that his statement's were political. If we change the political_affiliation variable and hold the sex variable constant, we can check to see how his statements relate to the recipient. This does not qualify as a 'whataboutism'. 

 

image.thumb.png.abb71cba94137632929089118175a340.png

 

I think in this context you are misinterpreting my usage of the term 'violence'. 

'Alex' has a political objective, and his actions qualify as sexual intimidation (my position). He hopes to achieve a political objective through sexual intimidation, which is a lesser form of violence. Discourse has clearly failed, 'Alex' is operating on the border of US law and is tentatively entering the realm of violence. Right? Why is he so tentatively entering the realm of violence?

 

Edit: condensed.

Edited by Random Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
The logical check of 'your wife' is not an appeal to emotion, it is a check of the original premise that his statement's were political. If we change the political_affiliation variable and hold the sex variable constant, we can check to see how his statements relate to the recipient. This does not qualify as a 'whataboutism'. 
 
image.thumb.png.abb71cba94137632929089118175a340.png
 
I think in this context you are misinterpreting my usage of the term 'violence'. 
'Alex' has a political objective, and his actions qualify as sexual intimidation (my position). He hopes to achieve a political objective through sexual intimidation, which is a lesser form of violence. Discourse has clearly failed, 'Alex' is operating on the border of US law and is tentatively entering the realm of violence. Right? Why is he so tentatively entering the realm of violence?
 
Edit: bold text.

You’re using it (your wife example) saying you’re trying to be logical, but you’re actually appealing to emotion and keep showing that you don’t know what political violence actually is. Par for the course, you should read some Paul Collier, but until then here’s some cliffs notes:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_violence

Edit: and it sure as shit doesn’t meet the legal sense of violence, but that doesn’t mean it was smart.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Random Guy said:

 

He hopes to achieve a political objective through sexual intimidation, which is a lesser form of violence. Discourse has clearly failed, 'Alex' is operating on the border of US law and is tentatively entering the realm of violence. Right? Why is he so tentatively entering the realm of violence?

"Words are literally violence"

You're an actual personification of long running stereotypes and memes depicting leftists.  LOL

wordsviolence.jpg

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, FLEA said:

Not sure I really care. I'm not a UK or German citizen and their fascist speech practices, which have been known to send people for prison for shit as stupid as saying Angela Merkel is fat, is not something I really want in the US. You might think Europe is a utopia of liberal ideology but I'd encourage you to live here for a bit. Because it is overtly one of the most racist, xenophobic and misogynists' societies I've ever experienced. 

Learning about the racism part rather quickly in Germany.  I also find it funny that they have stricter abortion laws across Europe than most places in America (Texas, Alabama). Good lord, anti American hippies can be so damn ignorant. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, dream big said:

Learning about the racism part rather quickly in Germany.  I also find it funny that they have stricter abortion laws across Europe than most places in America (Texas, Alabama). Good lord, anti American hippies can be so damn ignorant. 

The EU does actually have 'technically' stricter abortion laws than nearly all US states. The comparison isn't 1:1, because there are situations where in the EU an abortion will be performed but in some US states it would not be performed. Again, Congress can at any time pass laws that people want, whether its about harassment or abortion. If people in the US want particular abortion laws, write and pass those laws. 

For the sake of argument, I voted for Trump. Given that context, why do you consider me a 'Leftist'? And, what is a 'Leftist', in your opinion? Honest questions.

 

 

Quote

"Words are literally violence"

You're an actual personification of long running stereotypes and memes depicting leftists.  LOL

wordsviolence.jpg

 

Again, I'm not a lawyer. Law folks can offer their professional opinions. But this is fair counter argument of sorts, because clearly words are not violence. If its not violence, not sexual harassment, not intimidation, not expressing political opinion or political speech, what is it? And do we want this type of discourse in our society? Is it helpful?

 

 

Quote

You’re using it (your wife example) saying you’re trying to be logical, but you’re actually appealing to emotion and keep showing that you don’t know what political violence actually is. Par for the course, you should read some Paul Collier, but until then here’s some cliffs notes:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_violence

Edit: and it sure as shit doesn’t meet the legal sense of violence, but that doesn’t mean it was smart.

Which work by Paul Collier, can you share a link? Again, if you are unwilling to enter into 'violence' territory, but you skirt along the edge of it, then you clearly are still in a 'discourse' phase, and the economic repercussions of violence outweigh the status quo. Northern Ireland may be a good case study here. I don't consider the 'your wife' as an emotional appeal. But, let's replace 'your wife' with 'any woman', or for that matter, 'anyone', or 'yourself'. If you are the subject of his statements, do you think to yourself 'Alex is expressing his political beliefs' and I ask you: what are the political beliefs he's expressing?

 

Edit: condensed.

Edited by Random Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

Which paper, preferably a specific paper? If you would like others to read and learn about a specific topic as it relates to an argument, it is best practice to provide a citation. 

 

For example, if I want you to learn about financial instability, I wouldn't say 'read Minky', as Minsky has a great deal of writing and that provides no useful starting point for you to learn those key concepts. Put in just a little bit more effort, please. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which paper, preferably a specific paper? If you would like others to read and learn about a specific topic as it relates to an argument, it is best practice to provide a citation. 
 
For example, if I want you to learn about financial instability, I wouldn't say 'read Minky', as Minsky has a great deal of writing and that provides no useful starting point for you to learn those key concepts. Put in just a little bit more effort, please. 

No, you’re the one that’s lacking, using terms without specificity/inaccurately; you put in the effort. It’s a series of books, start at the beginning you need the whole picture. Sometimes he has a free online course, or you can “not put in the effort,” I don’t care but you’re the one who looks foolish.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SurelySerious said:


No, you’re the one that’s lacking, using terms without specificity/inaccurately; you put in the effort. It’s a series of books, start at the beginning you need the whole picture. Sometimes he has a free online course, or you can “not put in the effort,” I don’t care but you’re the one who looks foolish.

This is not a particularly good technique for spreading information that supports your argument. I'm happy to read opposing points of view. When you've identified which pieces best apply to your argument, let me know so I can read them. 

The intersection of economics and war is an underdeveloped space. War and violence finds its source in economic systems and phenomenon. No need to be coy with useful data if you have it. Share it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not a particularly good technique for spreading information that supports your argument. I'm happy to read opposing points of view. When you've identified which pieces best apply to your argument, let me know so I can read them. 
The intersection of economics and war is an underdeveloped space. War and violence finds its source in economic systems and phenomenon. No need to be coy with useful data if you have it. Share it. 

Neither is your technique of oversharing your stream of consciousness incoherence a particularly good technique for spreading coherent ideas instead of random words, but alas here we are.
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SurelySerious said:


Neither is your technique of oversharing your stream of consciousness incoherence a particularly good technique for spreading coherent ideas instead of random words, but alas here we are.

What would you prefer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would you prefer?

You write like IBM AI trying to fit in with humans using a minimum word count parameter. I’m sure if you went back and edited all posts with APA citations humans might agree with you though, Watson.
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, SurelySerious said:


You write like IBM AI trying to fit in with humans using a minimum word count parameter. I’m sure if you went back and edited all posts with APA citations humans might agree with you though, Watson.

I'm actually a bit disappointed our discussion digressed into name calming, as it so frequently does. Anyway, feel free to carry on the discussion.

 

Edit: for torque.

Edited by Random Guy
Civility
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Random Guy said:

I'm actually a bit shocked the AF produced such a whiny b*tch (joking 😄). Anyway, feel free to carry on the discussion.

 

On 7/19/2022 at 2:04 PM, Random Guy said:

So, to sum up: if you are going to do it, do it properly. That means discourse should be educated and civil.

You're a joke.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/20/2022 at 6:58 AM, Random Guy said:

This is not a particularly good technique for spreading information that supports your argument. I'm happy to read opposing points of view. When you've identified which pieces best apply to your argument, let me know so I can read them. 

The intersection of economics and war is an underdeveloped space. War and violence finds its source in economic systems and phenomenon. No need to be coy with useful data if you have it. Share it. 

You are a strange bird indeed. You state that you voted for Trump, elude to following the economist Minsky, play dumb in response to a satirical (but hilarious) comment about social issues, and post all sorts of drivel about banking, MMT, and the like to "educate" others as if you're slowly revealing what's behind the curtain in the modern banking and economic system.

Stop trying to play cat and mouse with your posts. If you have ideological priors or foundational beliefs, just state them instead of trying to play Socrates on an anonymous forum.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...