Trump knows what he’s doing when he calls his enemies “vermin” in his speeches and online. He’s dehumanizing them. This has happened to my community twice in my lifetime: once during World War II, and again during the pandemic. It is so dangerous, and Trump knows it. He’s preparing his base to do things that you can’t do to other humans, only to subhumans. Be warned. Be vigilant.
@Lizette603_23 Thank you. I had been somewhat aware that border patrol consistently denied the rights of citizens and immigrants, but I had no idea it had gone this far. I began calling out fascism with Trump's first campaign. Should have started when Reagan ran.
@georgetakei To be fair it is no worse than what the left has done to him. They have called him that and worse.
That said I dont particularly mind dehumanizing someone who doesnt act human (compassion towards their fellow man)... So dehumanize away, at worst ill judge you on who you target (as im sure Trump is targeting anyone who doesnt support him it is that aspect that speaks against him for me).
Sure, its not like I should be ashamed for looking at nuance and considering the arguments of all sides in constructing my stance... I will take that over "I blindly follow one side" any day...
Kinda funny how you think I should be ashamed of that, ha!
All humans are animals.. So yes, but not for that reason.
Are we talking about a narcissistic who is incapable of caring but tries to act compassionately, or one who does not act compassionately.
But yes if a narcissist intentionally embraces not having compassion rather than trying to logically enact compassion (regardless of if they feel it) then they would not be part of human society and thus dehumanized in that sense.
@freemo@georgetakei> Are we talking about a narcissistic who is incapable of caring but tries to act compassionately, or one who does not act compassionately.
I wasn’t making a distinction between the two because you hadn’t initially.
I didnt make the distinction because it was implied we were talking about how a person acts, no one cares nor can even determine a persons internal state.
@realcaseyrollins@freemo@georgetakei The funny thing is we're all animals and it's people who think their intellect raises them above that are capable of some of the cruelest things.
Remember last time the argument about murder, you thought most people would think it was because "they were human" but in the poll only a single person (I suspect you) voted for that option.
I suggest you may have a view of what most people think that isnt accurate due to the environment you were raised in perhaps (nopt that it was a bad environment just that you were taught principles that arent in line with most peoples views).
@freemo@realcaseyrollins@georgetakei I think most people usually think of themselves as greater than animals, but occasionally humility is found, sometimes just for a moment and that helps us appreciate our gifts a little more.
Depends on what you mean by greater. I think most people would think themselves intellectually superior to animals. But I'd imagine most people do not find humans morally superior to animals.
@freemo@realcaseyrollins@georgetakei morals are a human concept. Justification for violence is not something animals seem to need. They don't ask whether or not they should do something at all, so I think it's hard to say they are morally superior, but that also kind of brings up an interesting idea. Do human morals do anything to curb our animalistic tendencies or just force us to be more creative to justify violence?
Nah morals are a universal concept, even animals have them. At least most animals. Any creature that can expiernce suffering and happiness and can identify these qualities in other animals has morals on some level.
@thatguyoverthere I suspect you are suggesting that because they act like an asshole when their horny this somehow means their entire species lacks morals all the time? Oh man, wait till you find out about humans...
@freemo have you not been reading what I wrote. The whole point is that we are animals, and our moral code does fuck all to stop us. I'd argue anyone who wants to commit an immoral act will find a way to justify it within their own plastic morality code.
First off im talking about morals (actions which are compassionality motivated) not moral codes (A codified set of rules intended to express compassion by following them).
Second, yes thats my points, animals like humans have morality. The fact that they sometimes dont always follow it doesnt change the fact that it is there.
@freemo I don't know man. Rape is not moral. They don't have remorse for being rapey. They don't care if raping kills the duck. They don't even care if they're raping a female.
how do you know its not consensual? you are assuming rape, but do you speak duck? I'm pretty sure a duck looking at a BDSM couple might likewise assume its rape when its not.
humans rape all the time. To assume the existance of rapists means an entire species lacks morals under all circumstances is a huge leap.
@freemo I see it in person and have had to save ducks from being drown before. I've also seen them attack ducklings, even when there's only one male. I raise these animals and I while I don't "speak duck" I do think I can communicate with my animals a little bit. I think it's funny how much people anthropomorphize animals instead of just embracing their own animal aspects.
If you read the post all the way through you might have seen that I have said I don't think morals stop us anyway. If you want to believe the ducks are consenting to having their children murdered and put at risk of drowning for kicks go on.
So no, you saw them beign sexually rough, to the point of putting others at risk, but have no way to know if the female ducks wanted to be in that situation or were happier for the environment.
I'd argue the best way to tell objectively is to look for happiness and stress behaviors. Take a duck in a purely female environment and they will demonstrate more stressed and less happiness than a duck explosed to it. Id argue this is a strong indicator the duck is conscenting to the behavior in some sense (in that, despite everything they want to be in that environment and thus moral for them).
@freemo I had no idea you were an expert on water fowl. How often do you interact with ducks out of curiosity?
A purely female flock is no problem at all. A purely male flock I have heard is not bad either although I have no direct experience so I can't say. It's when you have both but don't have something like a 1:18 ratio of males to females that things get bad.
> I had no idea you were an expert on water fowl. How often do you interact with ducks out of curiosity?
About 15 years raising them, though I dont currently.
> A purely female flock is no problem at all.
No problem to raise them sure. But to claim they are at their happiest is a whoe 'nother ball of wax. I'd argue they arent as we see an increase stressors in all female flocks.
@freemo :shrug: you really do seem to be an expert at just about everything. pretty amazing sir. Anyway, like I said the ratio matters. One drake is great. More is messy and cruel.
I never claimed to be an expert on this, in fact I explicitly said I dont like the term. But ok if your amazed by the fact that I raised ducks for 15 years thats cool. I have talked about it before, I was a volunteer for 15 years at "The great vally nature center" where I was responsible for caring for all the animals there and was often the only person responsible for it. That included ducks, chickens, goats, and a few other animals.
And yea the issue isnt if more drakes are "messy".. the discussion is about how much of a stress response the females show, which is ultimately the only way we could begin to measure morality, if the animals care about the stress they put others through.. If the act of rape or even death is a situation the females want to be in (due to biology) then it isnt immoral to do it.
The fact that females, despite the apparent abuse, do not show stress indications, and in fact they willfully will remain in such a flock after the incidents shows, or at least strongly hints, at consent. If there was lack of consent then females would leave the flock.
Im not going to play that game.. your tone was apparent and implied:
I had no idea you were an expert on water fowl. How often do you interact with ducks out of curiosity?
you really do seem to be an expert at just about everything. pretty amazing sir.
Seems obvious to me this was meant sarcastically and in a mocking tone. So you assumed going in I had no expiernce raising ducks (the assumption) and even went so far as to mock the fact that I did.
@thatguyoverthere It never went off the rails.. YOU got tired of a conversation you insisted in staying in... You are dealing with a problem that is entirely YOU... just walk away when you get tired.
@freemo wat? I didn't say I have "superior" understanding of ducks or claim to be an expert at anything doc. I said I raise them and have the opportunity to regularly observe their behavior, and that I have in the past had too many male ducks. I asked your expertise after you started talking about stress indicators and the like. You are a real mother fucker sometimes the way you try to twist everything into a contentious debate where you come out the victor for absolutely no damn reason it's just so weird. Like I came into this conversation actually kind of supporting your view, and somehow this has been twisted into a competition I never wanted to be in. It happens damn near every time I join a conversation you are in.
@thatguyoverthere You are the only one imagining a competition here.. You are the one who challenged my expertise and demanded what it was.. Prior to that I had no desire to measure who was the greater expert, I still dont.. that was all you and now your crying foul... way to go.
@freemo I guess technically I disagreed with you first but it spiraled into a really unpleasant conversation as it often does.
You said most people look at themselves as below animals, and I said I think usually I think they think they are above them (which was my original point and yours anyway, you contradicted yourself here as far as I can tell since you seemed to be of the mind that people are in fact animals inspite of the common idea that calling someone an animal is an insult).
Anyway you are exhausting. maybe just go on without me
I guess technically I disagreed with you first but it spiraled into a really unpleasant conversation as it often does.
If you find it unpleasant then dont engage, do yourself a favor. I myself am not so emotionally sensitive to a respectful different of opinion. So for me there is no antagonism or issue that you dont intentionally bring yourself. The nature of my conversations are going to usually be direct, and frank. If you dont like those sorts of philosophical/scientific conversations then feel free not to engage. Likewise if you are going to see disagreement as confrontation. Otherwise if you want to be in the convo feel free, thats on you.
Anyway you are exhausting. maybe just go on without me
Right thats how it should be… you leave when the conversation has no more interest to you.. let those who are still interested and energized by the discussion carry on with whoever is left…
What you shouldnt do is complain about how “tired” you get staying in a conversation you have long since lost interest in… just walk away… silently, and politely, thats how conversations should be.
tldr: you dont need to stick with a public debate until the very getting the last word in… if it interests you, share, if it doesnt walk away, just dont turn it into a shit show that your upset cause you got tired of a conversation and it wouldnt end when you can just walk away.
@thatguyoverthere@freemo@georgetakei The idea that we’re more than animals is a religious one, I think. I’m a #Christian and don’t see a reasonable non-religious reason for believing that people are more than animals
@realcaseyrollins@freemo@georgetakei it is a religious one, but that doesn't make it correct. Love of God is not exclusive to humans, and I might even go so far as to say it's rare, even among the religious. Animals treat the things God gives them way better than we do.
Not to mention it never says they are superior to animals in any way. It does describe us as being shepards over them and a few other passages that make a distinction between us and animals. But none of it, as far as I know, directly denotes superiority in any way.
@freemo@thatguyoverthere@realcaseyrollins@georgetakei
If it is Christianity or Judaism you are thinking of (again that is "if"), check out Genesis 1:26. Humans are the only ones made in God's image. If you don't put any stock in the Bible, no reason to put much stock in that statement. I often think that dogs treat us and each other better than humans do. That said, if I had to choose between my dog and my wife, suffice it to say a) there would be zero hesitation and b) I'd miss my dog terribly.
@freemo@georgetakei tolerance and inclusivity isn't just a set of morals, it's also a social contract - Trump and his like aren't entitled to the benefit of compassion and tolerance as he is operating outside that social contract.
@darreninthenet I disagree on the compassion. He is worthy of compassion because without it we are no better than him. He just isnt to be seen as humanized ( a member of society). But compassion should always be universal... Tolarance I agree with you, we dont have to tolerate him.
@RodneyPetersonTalent Oh I have no intention of making it subtle..
I lean left but am decidedly close to center and am more than happy to adopt some right-wing points among my overall left-wing stance.
Points to you though for trying to weapoinize someone having opinions that dont 100% line up wuith yours as if people are trying to hide it, I dont hide it.
You mean the part where I think all abortions should be free and tax paid? Or we just going to leave that part out?
A giveaway to what? That I have views that arent entierly in line with the left or the right? Yea no shit, im pretty vocal about being a left-leaning centrist... Good work there sherlock.
So now not living in the USA means I dont have a right to have opinions on abortion law in wherever I live? Man you are all over the place ya nut job.
And yes the 10 week part, along side the free abortions and pregnancy tests for all, should be a dead giveaway I dont align with the right or left on this issue but instead have an opinion that adopts concerns of both sides... Ya know, exactly what I say I am, a left-leaning centrist....
@freemo@RodneyPetersonTalent First thing to acknowledge on abortion is it's not a trivial issue and neither side is obviously wrong.
Pregnancy and abortion is practically the divide by zero error of Western ethics.
Western ethics holds that if you have one person dependent on another, and the responsible person cannot provide, you transfer the responsibility to someone else. You cannot do that with pregnancy.
OTOH the West believes each person owns their own body.
No they wouldnt, I am not proposing making abortion illegal illegal in this thread.
If you mean in the case where abortion is illegal (unrelated to this thread by thats ok) then yea, you choose to prioritize the rights of the unborn child over the emotional trauma to the mother.. IT is one reason why any extreme on either side isnt a good one.
@deegeese@freemo@RodneyPetersonTalent Yes, it is not moral. Not good for the species either. Rape must have some reproductive value or men wouldn't do it (since it's risky) so forced parenthood from rape will make more rapists.
There is no answer on the abortion issue that will satisfy all moral constraints, so like with war, people are going to have to accept some sort of compromise as to what is permitted.
Also, Taliban attitudes toward women lose elections, as the Rs keep learning.
Rape probably wasnt risky during caveman days.. or i should say, far far less risky. IF your stronger than the woman, without a society whats the risk? Only risk is the woman might kill you, which is a valid risk, but presumably minimal if the man is stronger (or with a group).
Perhaps thats the issue, we evolved that trait back when the risk was low and now that the risk is high our evolution hasnt fully caught up.
@freemo@deegeese@RodneyPetersonTalent Cultures where raiding, conquest, and capturing women were normal things for centuries (like the Middle East) seem pretty rapey.
Civilized places where rape got you hanged, less so.
Where rape was "safe" was during warfare. Within one's own tribe it has always had consequences. The Middle East has had a lot of warfare.
Im not sure that tracks.. Seems like the correlation has more to do with womens rights and when they became defined (if at all) rather than specifically when rape was outlawed.
@freemo@deegeese@RodneyPetersonTalent Both the Soviets and the Japanese gave their soldiers explicit permission to rape during WW2. Other nations punished soldiers for it. There is definitely a cultural divide on whether rape during warfare is ok or not.
Thats a complete non point for me and I think it only came up as a question at all to make a vain argument for abortion. While I do support abortion I dont think "when a human exists" is a meaningful or even useful question. The only question to ask is "When does this creature have thought, feelings, and can suffer or have desires" As long as the baby is capable of thought on any level IMO it is wrong.
@freemo@mike805@RodneyPetersonTalent the other side of the coin is we know for sure the mother is sentient and her health mental and physical looms large in this equation
Oh you mean thys Bible? The one that’s full of thousands of lies, inconsistencies, scientific impossibilities, exceedingly cruel acts of a “loving God”, and tons of other bullshit documented here verse by verse:
Skepticsannotatedbible.com
“And if you do any of those ten things he has a special place full of fire and torture where he will send you forever and ever.
@freemo@RodneyPetersonTalent Amazing how choosing your own opinions gets you attacked from both sides, isn't it?
Defining yourself as "right wing" or "left wing" is defining yourself as non-thinking. Both of those positions are self-contradictory and would run off a cliff if given the chance.
Both have some valid points, and a lot of accumulated ideology they have not thought through.
Well said... the people who look for even the slightest subtle hint of a thought on the right as an excuse to attack someone or discredit them proves to e they are the problem right now, and not the solution. Toxicity at people who are partly on your side does nothing but to weaken the case for your side to anyone who is on the fence.
This person has certainly done more to increase Trump's vote count than I could ever hope to do.
@freemo@RodneyPetersonTalent Thought policing does seem to be a mostly Left wing phenom. I have read Right side forums and they are much less aggressive about it. They can barely keep blatant trolls out.
Although the Israel/Palestine thing is a humanitarian disaster, the divide within the Left is quite a spectacle. The inability of the Left to admit "their side" did a horrible evil is amazing. Even Greta T is now in trouble over it. Proving she's not really about climate, just wants attention.
I think it may be that the right just doesnt put a priority on keeping trolls out. I guess they feel the free speech is too important a principle. As with most things Im a mix of both, im fine with keeping blatant trolls out but generally feel that we should give more leadway to open discussion than censorship without ignoring either.
What is "their side" when it comes to the left? Israel? From what I've seen the conflict has been divided on the left (some strongly in each camp) so the left doesnt have a clear side... The right however seems to be 100% against Muslims (as their religious hatred always seems to take priority) and with either support or indifference regarding Israel. Largely the right just seems happy they are killing muslims meanwhile the left cant make up its mind about iif jews are a whites or not so they cant decide if they are ok to hate or not.... yea its a shit show.
@freemo@RodneyPetersonTalent The Western Left (with the exception of explicitly Jewish groups) seems pretty anti-Israel right now. And that is driving the Jews out of groups they felt at home in, which may break up the Leftist coalition.
The Left see Israel as colonial occupiers much like the old South Africans. The Holocaust sympathy has pretty much worn off.
Liberal Jewish "tikkun olam" with its "everyone is nice like us" mindset has done as much harm to Israel as to America.
It doesn’t take a whole lot of empathy to understand exactly why a country constructed like a prison where the fucking Israelis bombed their airport with over a 50% unemployment rate would birth a massive movement of discontent and violent rebellion.
@RodneyPetersonTalent Jeesus christ how much is Trump paying you to make the left look like asses, please stop. The man didnt even take sides, he just pointed out your complete inability to have an honest conversation about the issues from both sides... your response is to double down on your absolutism and even attack him... holy hell.
Oh fuck off. Like I have space to make every argument, and the idea I support Palestine or Hamas is ridiculous. So many ignorant fucks.
You suppress people as in what’s happened in Gaza to 1.3 million people, they’re going to revolt.
And the U.S. has a history of genocide, supporting genocide, and having to be dragged kicking and screaming doing anything useful to support their own citizens.
The idea that a piece of shit like Trump could rise to power proves what a shithole this is.
Only stupid people and shadow supporters of Trump, like your worthless ass, think that just because I’m extremely vocal against Trump and anyone of his ilk in power or their supporters that I’m wrong. Whether or not they like the fiery attacks.
Consequently, they’re bright enough not to fall for bullshit no matter how nicely or discreetly it’s packaged. That’s my target audience.
> I’m extremely vocal against Trump and anyone of his ilk in power or their supporters that I’m wrong. Whether or not they like the fiery attacks.
THat has nothing to do with why you are a trump supporter.. You are a trump supporter because you attack anti-trump allys and call them trump supporters, driving them to be more likely to support Trump.
I am someone who has spoken about both Biden and Trump being a family friend (both have had dinner and stayed the night at my parents home). Despite this I hav ebeen very vocally against Trump yet you still create a toxic environment against me and attack me on a personal level as I am sure you do with many people. This has done wonders to push people to vote for trump I am sure. You are trumps biggest supporter!
Most of the people i hung out with as a kid are either dead or in jail. Although i think the same thing is happening in some parts of the US :thinking:
(1) when the Zionists were weak and stateless, some of them resorted to terrorism too (King David Hotel anyone?)
(2) when the Palestinians were given citizenship in Jordan, some of them kept provoking the Israelis, triggering reprisals inside Jordan. When Jordan tried to make them stop, they tried to kill the king! The Jordanian army then drove them out, and that's how they ended up in a prison-like state.
Hardly limited to being weak and stateless. The ISraelis have continued to commit war crimes and terrorism repeatidly. They have even been accused as such by multiple agencies and called to court to be held accountable to those war crimes (such as using small children as shields and intentionally punishing civilians in war).. They just refuse to go to court and be tried..
What the fuck are you talking about? A lot of us think the United States is an absolute shithole morally and that certainly applies to Israel, which seems to have no issue with genocide.
@freemo@RodneyPetersonTalent Yes I was saying the Left supports Palestine as an "oppressed proletariat" and hates Israel as a "colonial oppressor."
They are therefore quick to condemn Israel bombing residential neighborhoods. But somehow they cannot bring themselves to say the Hamas massacre in Israel was a horrible atrocity.
Some of those Leftists who cheered on Hamas, would do the same to Americans and Europeans if they got the chance.
As someone who sides with palestine overall, I agree entierly with this... and that person is now literally proving your point out as we speak... its extraordinary to see.
@freemo@georgetakei It's very different. What's being referred to here is the dehumanisation of a class of people, in a manner which is recognised as the fourth step of genocide. There's a big difference between insulting a person by calling them an animal, and using similar words to flatten an entire group of people into a faceless mass.
@freemo@georgetakei To be clear, I'm not implying that Trump is planning a genocide against liberals; in pointing out the very effective role of dehumanisation in getting an audience to a point where they are willing to enact violence that they never otherwise would.
@freemo I'm sorry, do you think "the left" is a hive mind, a massive caricature that you can equate with one person? It is not possible to extrapolate what a handful in a group of billions of people said and compare it to the statements of one person. No, it is categorically untrue that "the left" has done worse, but saying so makes you feel better about yourself and playing the whataboutism logical fail game as you dehumanize over half the world's population
I’m sorry, do you think “the left” is a hive mind, a massive caricature that you can equate with one person?
That would depend on which left we are talking about. In the USA, yea they are sadly largely a characteture of themselves. To a lesser extent this is true of most english speaking nations. But most of the left in non-english countries tend to be more accepting of nuance and discussion and I wouldnt be so quick to describe the left in the rest of the world in such ways.
That said even in america there are a select few on the left who dont fit that description. But its still a very large overwhelming majority
It is not possible to extrapolate what a handful in a group of billions of people said and compare it to the statements of one person.
Agreed, but it is possible to extrapolate from what the overwhelming majoirity of a group says and compare that to the behavior of individuals. Which is mostly what I did there.
but saying so makes you feel better about yourself and playing the whataboutism logical fail game as you dehumanize over half the world’s population
As someone who is on the left myself, no, it doesnt make me feel good that the side I prefer behaves this way, much the opposite.
@freemo OK? That's a lot of ignorant gibberish, and it doesn't explain your silly (and very, very wrong) "It is no worse than what the left has done to him."
HA! I guess thats one way to respond to someone who directly answers each of your comments with detail... Welcome to the block list for wasting my time.
@freemo No. People have judged Trump for the awful things he's said and done. That's not anywhere near the same thing. I don't know who this "the left" is, but near universal disdain isn't the same thing as calling an entire class of people vermin, and I suspect you understand this perfectly well.
@freemo@georgetakei
To be fair, Trump says a lot thats bigoted, racist, untrue, narcissistic & megalomaniacal, and /still/ leads the GOP. So what does that say about the GOP?
About the same thing it does that the DNC elected the first president in living memory who started his career by fighting to keep segregation alive... worse yet he said he was doing it for his son who he didnt want to be raised around people of other races in a "racial jungle"
Sadly while your assessments about GOP and Trump are valid, they hardly make the DNC look superior in the least.
@camstonefaux@freemo@georgetakei Isn’t it generally accepted that the #RNC doesn’t like #Trump? Plus there’s plenty of infighting among the #GOP establishment about whether or not #Trump is good or should be aligned with, as we saw with the speaker fight.
I guess that depends on who you ask. Trump invokes strong opinions from the GOP fpr sure. That seems to range from hatred all the way to extreme loyalty. I would say rather than being hate by the GoP he has simply polarized it.
Add comment