High School Boys Are Trending Conservative

[Dill]

(08-01-2023, 08:55 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Of course, but not if they're conservative.  At least according to Pally.  Odd that you wouldn't call her out for such a claim.  Oh wait, she's a leftist and you never call them out.  Ever.

I don't "call out" anyone for anything.  In any case, what is to be "called out" here?

Pally said  "Conservatives oppose the development of those critical thinking skills that challenging one's position provide"

That's not unreasonable as a general inference, in light of our discussions about GOP censorship of school libraries and higher ed.
I add that no liberal or "leftist" public figure has called Government, Science, Universities, and Media "the four corners of deceit"
and enjoyed a large audience for that kind of thing. (Maybe that explains why I don't "call out" leftists to your satisfaction." 
Such statements are an invitation to stop critical thinking.)

Were I to urge caution, add some quantifiers like "many" or "most," I still could not see in her statement YOUR claim that
she means people who oppose critical thinking skills are people who don't think "exactly like her." 

Claiming that would be an example of the kind of black and white thinking she is criticizing.  People who think in many
different ways and hold many different beliefs can still agree on what critical thinking skills are and deem them a good thing. 
And if they then criticize some group for opposing critical thinking skills, that is not a complaint the group just
doesn't think "exactly like" them. 

[Eraserhead]

(08-02-2023, 06:13 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: We really don't need a new alter far left troll who can't read.  Good news though, you've already made a predictable buddy, so cheers to that. 

I'm not sure you want to go into alt territory.

How about good old Leon? He's the guy who always has issues with the same 4 people all the time,, Pally, GM, Lucidus and Dill.. always calling them names and accusing them of taking up for each other and being extreme lefties. 

Guess who else has a problem with the same 4 people as Leon, and says the EXACT same type of stuff Leon said about them? Guess who was also always liking your posts and saying how smart you are and agreeing with you about those 4 people?

Wonder why that is?

[NATI BENGALS]

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1678914184501927937

What audience does Tucker cater too?

If I’m not mistaken he had a good run on faux news.

I guess we can pretend it’s not conservatives supporting him still? Since I’m not allowed to call out the horseshit coming from the “conservatives” now days.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-02-2023, 06:18 PM)Dill Wrote: I don't "call out" anyone for anything.  In any case, what is to be "called out" here?

Pally said  "Conservatives oppose the development of those critical thinking skills that challenging one's position provide"

That's not unreasonable as a general inference

And never wonder why you have so little engagement outside your little circle.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-02-2023, 06:23 PM)Eraserhead Wrote: I'm not sure you want to go into alt territory.

How about good old Leon? He's the guy who always has issues with the same 4 people all the time,, Pally, GM, Lucidus and Dill.. always calling them names and accusing them taking up for each other and being extreme lefties. 

Guess who else has a problem with the same 4 people as Leon, and says the EXACT same type of stuff Leon said about them? Guess who was also always liking your posts and saying how smart you are and agreeing with you about those 4 people?

Wonder why that was?

This is the final time I'll be responding to you, just so you know, as you already bore the crap out of me.  I don't have an alter, have never had an alter and never will have an alter.  I'm not a punk who needs to hide behind another screen name.  If I think something I'll type it.  If I have an issue with someone, I'll tell them.  And with that I bid you a very fond fair thee well.  

[Eraserhead]

(08-02-2023, 06:37 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This is the final time I'll be responding to you, just so you know, as you already bore the crap out of me.  I don't have an alter, have never had an alter and never will have an alter.  I'm not a punk who needs to hide behind another screen name.  If I think something I'll type it.  If I have an issue with someone, I'll tell them.  And with that I bid you a very fond fair thee well.  

[Luvnit2]

(08-01-2023, 01:19 PM)pally Wrote: Too many teenage boys see the world as absolutes instead of understanding that much of the world and society don't fit nicely into predetermined boxes

Is your opinion the same for teenage girls who have liberal views or just your opinion to trash teenage boys because they are trending conservatives?

It just seems liberals like to say those with conservative views are stupid, and those with liberal views are smart.

[BigPapaKain]

(08-02-2023, 06:41 PM)Eraserhead Wrote:

He'd said that to me, too. But he just can't help himself.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-02-2023, 04:58 PM)hollodero Wrote: Ah, I get it. I will say though, the cases you present are a bit too thin for me to adapt them as being logical. I know you see that differetly, but your jump to gun confiscation seems quite far. The only politician of note I heard talking about that was Mr. O'Rourke who sunk his campaign over it.

I am sorry to say your knowledge in this area is a bit limited.  Gun confiscation has already happened in many states.  The fake Hispanic only made headlines about it because he made the claim on the national stage and when running in a very pro gun state.  There are already ten states with "assault weapon" bans, including confiscation.

https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/blog/which-states-have-assault-weapons-bans/

Hopefully soon there will be zero.  Biden himself has flirted with confiscation, and was caught lying about the issue so badly that even CNN had to call him out.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/21/politics/fact-check-biden-guns-africa/index.html

Not to mention that the ATF attempted to ban an entire category of firearms and begin confiscation efforts under Biden's leadership.  Thankfully, the court's have put this on hold.  So this isn't some fringe conspiracy theory, confiscation is definitely the end goal.

Quote:Free speech is similar, you have your suspicions about potential liberal SCOTUS judges, rather than examples of them actually behaving in a unconstitutional way. I will add this, you reacted quite protective of the actual SCOTUS against unproven accusations, I don't quite get why this thought does not translate to a virtual SCOTUS with liberal judges too.

Because those aren't the same thing.  Do you really think Hillary would have nominated anyone to the right of the current three liberal justices?  This process has litmus tests, I can't even begin to fathom a possibility where Hillary nominates a moderate.

Quote:That said, I understand the motivations still, but it's a tad tougher when the protector of said values is Trump. 2nd, sure. But free speech, I don't know. That's a man threatening everyone speaking his mind, calling the media the enemy of the people and implied it might be treasno not to clap to his state of the union speech, and then some. That's one more reason for me to not quite follow, but thanks for the answer anyways.

Trump's not the protector of anything but Trump.  And he's not very good at that.  But he did deliver three justices that I am confident will protect our Constitutional rights in these two regards.  They've already delivered on one of the two topics.

Quote:I don't disagree with the points you make here. Maybe I was unclear, the thing I disagree with is merely tthe implication that if one party had all the good ideas, they would win all the elections. I have a fundamentally different take on this, I think over time it is only the pendulum that determines wins and losses and not the quality of ideas. That's all I was trying to say, had nothing to do with the actual state of the actual parties.

Ahh, I'm understanding your point now.  Yes, that's a much more compelling argument.  But I think if one party had a monopoly on good ideas people would start noticing and they'd start winning in areas where they could not do so initially.  If California's brand of politics was extremely successful it would eventually expand to other states.  People want peace and prosperity and if CA style politics delivered it they'd eventually convert a lot of people who would never vote Dem right now.  The same is true for a deep red state. Neither is happening, and CA style politics absolutely cannot be said to be a runaway success.

Quote:Well, sure, that is true. Still, I only can compare Americans to a small subsection of Middle European societies; but if it were a competition between those, America wins the gold for me. It is not meant to be arrogant, it just is something I perceeived and needed to get used to. And it might not even be a natural flaw of sorts, for many people tend to react differently to me than they react to other Americans too. It's more a rule of communicating really, or maybe a collective notion that being wrong about something equals weakness or something of that sort. So, yeah, I thought it distinct enough to wonder about the causes for it.

Interesting.  Is this gleaned from internet interactions exclusively?  Because we both know people tend to be different in person than online.  Also, I've had several European friends, or rather friends who reside in Europe, tell me that when they play online games they still play on North American servers as people are more polite to each other.  Please note that I'm not talking about CoD or any of the console games.  

[Eraserhead]

(08-02-2023, 06:54 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: He'd said that to me, too. But he just can't help himself.

He can't stand it when someone won't let him run his normal script.

[Eraserhead]

(08-02-2023, 06:53 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Is your opinion the same for teenage girls who have liberal views or just your opinion to trash teenage boys because they are trending conservatives?

It just seems liberals like to say those with conservative views are stupid, and those with liberal views are smart.

Well,, most of them want to control a woman's body, erase church-state separation, be legally allowed to discriminate, censor everything they don't like or agree with, just to name a few, so..

[*pally*]

(08-02-2023, 06:53 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Is your opinion the same for teenage girls who have liberal views or just your opinion to trash teenage boys because they are trending conservatives?

It just seems liberals like to say those with conservative views are stupid, and those with liberal views are smart.

see the topic of the thread

[Dill]

(08-02-2023, 11:14 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Still waiting on our resident pedant to call out the leftists in this thread making broad generalization about millions of people.  I won't hold my breath.

"Broad generalizations" are necessary for knowledge of society and politics. Everyone makes and uses them. 

Seems to me there is a more pressing need, namely to understand what makes them accurate or inaccurate, and how to use them accurately.*

Take this example: "poll after poll shows that the modern left thinks "hate speech" is violence and should be illegal.

And a similar: "The modern left has really set up a fascinating mental structure of heads I win, tails, you lose.

I find "the modern left" to be a much more nebulous category than "conservatives," as it appears to include millions of  people I wouldn't call "leftist." And I am not sure what a "mental structure" is in the second statement, so I don't really understand what it claims or how I could check it. But both statements employ the same category in a general claim about what the indicated group believes or does. 

I.e., both are structurally similar to a statement like "conservatives oppose teaching critical thinking skills." 

Both the first examples could be defended with clearer definition of what makes someone a "modern leftist" and empirical evidence of the claims. E.g., if a poll shows 70% of college students think hate speech is violence and should be illegal, that could perhaps be massaged into support for the first claim, depending on how "left" was defined. Just as multiple references to Right Wing censorship in education could be marshalled to support Pally's statement.

Were I to criticize such general claims about "the modern left," however, I wouldn't go about it by saying I had a cousin who was a "modern leftist" and HE doesn't think hate speech is violence. I'd assume we are talking about general tendencies, about what most or many in the category believe or do. Can't refute that with unverifiable assertions about individual "modern leftists" I know. 

And I for sure can't do it by insisting that the author is only criticizing "the modern left" for not "thinking exactly as he does" or some such. That's forcing a reductive binary (black/white) into a multipolar context, and it excludes the substance of disagreement. Obviously "the left" doesn't think as he does about hate speech or "mental structures," but that doesn't imply he is only policing for conformity to his thought, regardless of the issue. He could be appealing to principles many agree with. Just criticizing someone else's views doesn't logically imply one is criticizing them for not thinking exactly like oneself. 

Worst case scenario would be for me to trot out my non conforming modern left cousin as an exception to the generalization, and from there not only claim the generalization invalid, but go on to impute all manner of evil intent to the author for generalizing, making him a scapegoat for "division," expressing my hyperbolic "disgust" and such like. Hard to salvage discussion once one goes to the person like that.


*E.g., Important here NOT to call careful, logical qualifications "excuses" whenever they don't fit polemical goals. 

[Dill]

(08-02-2023, 04:45 PM)basballguy Wrote: See that's the thing....if there's anything left wingers don't agree with they immediately call it right wing blah blah blah...we don't know who he is because he's not really relevant to conservative views....but since people on this board don't like him, they immediately associate him with conservatives.  

And no this isn't me assuming the worst, this is me stating a fact of the repetitive behavior on this forum :)

I wouldn't be surprised that if Joe Biden ever gets convicted of a crime, liberals well say "well he was the most conservative president on the liberal side we've ever had" as an excuse....

It would be interesting to discuss definitions of "conservative" and "left" and "right" as they are frequently used on message boards like this. 

One common feature of right wing thinking, it seems to me, is that it is more hierarchical than liberal or leftist. 

E.g., Rightists tend regard conventional gender and ethnic/religious distinctions as more fixed or "natural" than do liberals and leftists. And this is reflected in the policies they propose or oppose, defend or attack. From the early modern era, when people first began founding government on rights and popular sovereignty, the history of political divisions over human and civil rights would seem to bear this out. (These are testable theses; counterexamples welcome.)

Imagine a religious group which thought gays were "unnatural" and that fathers rule over patriarchal families, and when they "give away" a daughter in marriage, they are giving her to another patriarch, whom she must obey. I'd have no trouble ascribing those views to the right of the political spectrum.  And doing so wouldn't tie me a claim that all people on the Right think gays unnatural or that women must obey husbands. 

The right, like the left, has developed over a long time and around many divisive issues, and so can be quite diverse, with a great deal disagreement amongst themselves on specifics.  Useful blanket statements can be made about either group, but they tend to be general. Also, terms like "conservative" seem to me not dependent on specific beliefs but are very context dependent. Someone who believed in small government and popular sovereignty in Philadelphia in 1776 would not be a conservative. Someone who believed that in 1880 likely would be. Nazis are right wing, but not conservative, or at least the historical German version wasn't. They wanted to transform their society, "re-birth" it violently. That's almost the opposite of conservatism. Yet both are "right." 

Anyway, I bring this up because I also didn't know who Tate was until I started following this thread. 

As I read about him, I did see why people might call him "right wing" because of sentiments to the effect that a woman given to a man belongs to a man and young girls are "easier to imprint on," among others.  I understand why these teachers are upset that young males are modeling his behavior. 
https://www.instagram.com/p/ChK9vZUseYy/?img_index=1

[hollodero]

(08-02-2023, 06:54 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I am sorry to say your knowledge in this area is a bit limited.

You can leave the 'bit' bit out. I know about that knowledge deficit, still wanted to blab a little, for it often leads to additional information that I can gather easily. And the gun issue always distracts me and I need to stay away from it, which I hereby do. But I sure get it. Protection of the second amendment is a perfectly understandable reason to prefer a conservative president. As is preferring a conservative court in general, if one shares your perspective.

(08-02-2023, 06:54 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Because those aren't the same thing.  Do you really think Hillary would have nominated anyone to the right of the current three liberal justices?  This process has litmus tests, I can't even begin to fathom a possibility where Hillary nominates a moderate.

Hm. I guess she would have picked professional, experienced and reputable, albeit liberal leaning, judges (and blame McConnell for the opposite being theoretically possible). Imho ones that aren't prone to break all kinds of judicial norms or the constitution even, in cohouts with the other liberal judges. I have - as of yet, but reminder my knowledge is limited - no real reason to believe that's what the virtual liberal SCOTUS would do or would have done. That something's popular or is tried in lower courts imho is no solid reason to believe that.

(08-02-2023, 06:54 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Ahh, I'm understanding your point now.  Yes, that's a much more compelling argument.  But I think if one party had a monopoly on good ideas people would start noticing and they'd start winning in areas where they could not do so initially.  If California's brand of politics was extremely successful it would eventually expand to other states.  People want peace and prosperity and if CA style politics delivered it they'd eventually convert a lot of people who would never vote Dem right now.  The same is true for a deep red state. Neither is happening, and CA style politics absolutely cannot be said to be a runaway success.

Yeah, so my knowledge is limited and I can not quite speak to more local politics. California's a disaster in democratic terms, that's for sure, close to a one-party rule which is never a good thing. Which adds to the disaster that elections going 50/50 in terms of wins or losses over time, aka letting the pendulum rule, is the only way to run the system, and for reasons stated it's a real bad way to run the system. But the big - and to me observable - level is the national one.

@topic and I find it sad that youth's rebellion apparently always seems to mean leaning towards one party over the other. That's not rebellion, that's just picking sides, one of the two the establishment offers.

(08-02-2023, 06:54 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Interesting.  Is this gleaned from internet interactions exclusively?  Because we both know people tend to be different in person than online.  Also, I've had several European friends, or rather friends who reside in Europe, tell me that when they play online games they still play on North American servers as people are more polite to each other.  Please note that I'm not talking about CoD or any of the console games.  

I have little, not none, but little person to person experience with Americans. But I'd never call them impolite, quite the contrary, that was not my point at all. I rather called them often set in their opinions and not quite willing to change a stance, in an overly broad generalization that is somewhat focused on political life and less on gaming or the like. And sure, following society and politics is strictly a media and internet experience for me, and of course that is not sufficient to give any kind of meaningful analysis of the American soul. So that's what it is, a notion of one guy who as established has little knowledge and just talks anyway.

There's maybe some kind of a less subjective overall image, the face of the nation as the world can see it, through media and pop culture and such. And this to me paints a picture of a divided society that argues a lot in black or white terms, with a lot of hostility and villification and dishonest arguments, and with little to no will to be self-reflective or compromising or willing to consider the validity of different perspectives. A picture I see somewhat reflected on internet boards and that lies above what I observe here. As for the validity of that observation, see above.

[*Nately120*]

(08-02-2023, 06:53 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Is your opinion the same for teenage girls who have liberal views or just your opinion to trash teenage boys because they are trending conservatives?

If teen boys are embracing and expressing political views that teen girls find to be a turn-off, then yes they are stupid.

[grampahol]

(07-31-2023, 09:37 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You both are missing the actual key point.  That being that teenagers, especially boys, will rebel against what is considered the "establishment" when they are growing up.  Right now that is the left and their ideology.  Much like the children of the Reagan years, myself included, rejected the yuppie conservative values and the yuppies and that generation rejected the hippie protest culture.  And before that the hippie era was rejecting the post war Leave it to Beaver conservatism of the 50's.  It's not that hard to discern once you look for it.  Rogan and Tate are not causes, they are anchors for what would already be happening.  They aren't popular because they caused a movement, they're popular because the current movement gravitated towards them.

This is why I always laugh at "X" party is dead arguments, because this cycle consistently repeats itself.

Bingo..Something else is the fact that as teenage kids age, start raising families, having to earn a living and so on their views on how the world works tends to change as well. My views now at 64 are nothing like they were when I was still stupid enough to listen to the nonsense spewed by Reagan and Nixon. Hell, I used to listen to Alex Jones and the schmuck who used to rant all day on WLW.. I don't remember his name, but I certainly don't miss the schmuck.. I have no patience for loud mouth schmucks who like to pretend to be tough guys with their mouths..

[grampahol]

(08-03-2023, 12:10 AM)Nately120 Wrote: If teen boys are embracing and expressing political views that teen girls find to be a turn-off, then yes they are stupid.

And they probably have a tough time getting laid too..
Here's a clue. Want a good woman? Don't talk shit all day and pretend to know about things that only make you extraordinarily unattractive to women.. I only have 64 years experience with this..lol

[*Nately120*]

(08-03-2023, 12:29 AM)grampahol Wrote: And they probably have a tough time getting laid too..
Here's a clue. Want a good woman? Don't talk shit all day and pretend to know about things that only make you extraordinarily unattractive to women.. I only have 64 years experience with this..lol

Here is the wisdom of age, boys:  While you are young and attractive you should just let the political crap go and get laid.  When you are old and grey and fat and bald and women find you repugnant even before you open your mouth THEN you can talk about how much you admire men who infuriate the ladies.

Even the alpha males like Elon Musk, and that "change my mind" guy can't even keep women from walking away from them.  Or you could be like Nick Fuentes and sour grapes your way into believing that never having sex with women is actually good, because sex with women is totally gay you guys.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-02-2023, 10:48 PM)hollodero Wrote: You can leave the 'bit' bit out. I know about that knowledge deficit, still wanted to blab a little, for it often leads to additional information that I can gather easily. And the gun issue always distracts me and I need to stay away from it, which I hereby do. But I sure get it. Protection of the second amendment is a perfectly understandable reason to prefer a conservative president. As is preferring a conservative court in general, if one shares your perspective.

There's no need to stay away from it.  I am far more ignorant of Austrian politics than you are of US politics.  I also understand why 2A issues don't resonate with you the way they do with me or like minded Americans.  It's certainly not a fault on your end, just a different perspective and upbringing.

Quote:Hm. I guess she would have picked professional, experienced and reputable, albeit liberal leaning, judges (and blame McConnell for the opposite being theoretically possible). Imho ones that aren't prone to break all kinds of judicial norms or the constitution even, in cohouts with the other liberal judges. I have - as of yet, but reminder my knowledge is limited - no real reason to believe that's what the virtual liberal SCOTUS would do or would have done. That something's popular or is tried in lower courts imho is no solid reason to believe that.

At this point I fear I've offended you with the knowledge remark.  It was certainly not intended in that vein, merely saying that you don't have the first hand knowledge that a US resident would more likely have.  Given the trend of the far left, not liberal, population here I don't think my stance is that far fetched.  Hell, I have very liberal, actually liberal, friends who don't disagree with you in a significant way on these issues.

Quote:Yeah, so my knowledge is limited and I can not quite speak to more local politics. California's a disaster in democratic terms, that's for sure, close to a one-party rule which is never a good thing. Which adds to the disaster that elections going 50/50 in terms of wins or losses over time, aka letting the pendulum rule, is the only way to run the system, and for reasons stated it's a real bad way to run the system. But the big - and to me observable - level is the national one.

And again I have to point out that my comment was not meant as an insult.  You and I have argued the drawbacks of the two party system and are largely in agreement.  I've been a third party advocate since the first election I could vote in in '92.  I certainly don't want a morass on the level of Italy, but three, or even four viable parties would certainly be preferable to what we have now.

Quote:@topic and I find it sad that youth's rebellion apparently always seems to mean leaning towards one party over the other. That's not rebellion, that's just picking sides, one of the two the establishment offers.

Even if there were multiple parties would it still not be, at the basic level a argument between conservative and liberal?  Maybe in this regard my knowledge is limited as I've lived with a binary choice my entire life.  I certainly allow for the possibility, even the probability.

Quote:I have little, not none, but little person to person experience with Americans. But I'd never call them impolite, quite the contrary, that was not my point at all. I rather called them often set in their opinions and not quite willing to change a stance, in an overly broad generalization that is somewhat focused on political life and less on gaming or the like. And sure, following society and politics is strictly a media and internet experience for me, and of course that is not sufficient to give any kind of meaningful analysis of the American soul. So that's what it is, a notion of one guy who as established has little knowledge and just talks anyway.

And again I feel my comment has been misconstrued.  This is one of my main issues with this format of debate.  So much nuance is lost and corrections cannot be made in real time.  Although I have far more experience in foreign countries than most Americans I haven't lived, or even extensively traveled, outside of the US since '86.  At this point that's a lifetime.

Quote:There's maybe some kind of a less subjective overall image, the face of the nation as the world can see it, through media and pop culture and such. And this to me paints a picture of a divided society that argues a lot in black or white terms, with a lot of hostility and villification and dishonest arguments, and with little to no will to be self-reflective or compromising or willing to consider the validity of different perspectives. A picture I see somewhat reflected on internet boards and that lies above what I observe here. As for the validity of that observation, see above.

Yeah, this, I wish, I could argue against.  Sadly, I cannot, as I've pointed out the binary nature of our political system on several occasions myself.  I honestly don't know if breaking out of this is possible under the current framework.  I certainly did back in '92, not so much now.  I certainly hope a peaceful reconstruction is possible, as I fear the alternative would be devastating to the entire planet.  I think I'm understanding the resentment of other nations towards the US more and more.  To have so much power and to wield it in such a cavalier manner has to be disconcerting, at the very least, to residents of other nations.