What causes politics?

Author: thett3

Posts

Total: 227
#31
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
I don't see any address of thett's topic here, which was IS POLITICAL BIAS a PHYSIOGNOMIC TRAIT?

PHYSIOGNOMY "is the practice of assessing a person's character or personality from their outer appearance—especially the face."

I'm fairly skeptical of most physiognomic theories.

The first question that occurs is how do we explain people who change political bias but not their physcial appearance?

  • Reagan Democrats
    • Reagan was a leftist for most of his life- even a Union President
  • Obama Trumpists
    • Trump has no discernible political principle but donated more money to Democratic causes for most of his life
  • Lincoln Chaffee went from Republican to Independent to Democrat to Libertarian in the span of 10 years without once changing his physical traits.
  • Reversely, I know of no reports of a facelift or dramatic weight loss that initiated a political change of heart.



#32
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@HistoryBuff
The republicans are really far "right"
Ah yes, the "far right" party. The one that is just about as degenerate as Democrats, but that slight bit of principle they cling onto makes them "far right".

Unless you only consider economics, then sure, when the opposition is in charge they begin caring about "fiscal responsibility" and could be considered "far right".

 For example, banning abortion is government control of people's bodies. It doesn't get much more "big government" than telling you what you can do with your own body, but the right would love to be able to do that. 
Banning murder of helpless babies = as big of a government as you can get. Pretty neat reality you live in.

A better example would have been banning gender transitions. We FASCISTS love restricting the ability of minors to mutilate themselves and inject themselves with wack hormones.
#33
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@thett3
I agree with the pretty common notion that when we are about ~5-7years old and college-aged are the two main points of our lives at which we develop our opinions on political matters.

The first time, we are influenced by what we see in our parents (not necessarily political talk, but maybe lessons about personal responsibility and self-reliance vs dependency) and what our religious organizations/other groups we are a part of teach us about how we should act.

When you go off to college, you are no longer around your parents as much and you make the choice of which communities you would like to join now. At that point, you think about what you were taught before. If you have positive thoughts about your upbringing, you are likely to keep your values. Otherwise, you discard them and replace them.
#34
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
lol, they aren't though. Under every metric, the Republican party fails to provide anything close to the accepted wiki definition of right-wing.
you clearly didn't both to read much of what I said. There is no definition of "right-wing". To some people it means religious rule. To some, it means authoritarianism. To some it means monarchy. So asking if a party is "right-wing" is pretty much meaningless. 
#35
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@bmdrocks21
Ah yes, the "far right" party. The one that is just about as degenerate as Democrats, but that slight bit of principle they cling onto makes them "far right".
if by principal, you mean corruption and resentence to facts and knowledge, then sure... i guess.

Unless you only consider economics, then sure, when the opposition is in charge they begin caring about "fiscal responsibility" and could be considered "far right".
republicans were in charge. They cut taxes on the rich and ballooned the deficit. Also, again, "right wing" is an almost meaningless term. Monarchists are right wing too. They don't tend to care about deficits. 

Banning murder of helpless babies = as big of a government as you can get. Pretty neat reality you live in.
no. Banning a woman from having control of her own body is as big a government as you can get. I can't think of any more aggressive government control imaginable than their controlling your body. 

 A better example would have been banning gender transitions. We FASCISTS love restricting the ability of minors to mutilate themselves and inject themselves with wack hormones.
that's also a good example. You fascists love banning people from having control of their own body. But if it's the right to own and use weapons of mass death and carnage? well don't tread on me, right?
#36
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@HistoryBuff
if by principal, you mean corruption and resentence to facts and knowledge, then sure... i guess.
No, I mean they at least they pretend to care about "family values" to court their base.

republicans were in charge. They cut taxes on the rich and ballooned the deficit. Also, again, "right wing" is an almost meaningless term. Monarchists are right wing too. They don't tend to care about deficits. 

I don't think either party is in any position to say that they care about the deficit. It's either "keep spending roughly the same and lower taxes" or "raise spending a helluva lot more than taxes"

no. Banning a woman from having control of her own body is as big a government as you can get. I can't think of any more aggressive government control imaginable than their controlling your body. 

You don't need to mince words here. You care more about the right to murder babies for convenience than you do about the right of that baby to live.

that's also a good example. You fascists love banning people from having control of their own body. But if it's the right to own and use weapons of mass death and carnage? well don't tread on me, right?

Yeah, the right to mutilate your genitals and chemically castrate yourself is exactly the same as the right to self-defense/protection against tyranny, amirite?
#37
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,023
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@bmdrocks21
We FASCISTS love restricting the ability of minors to mutilate themselves and inject themselves with wack hormones.
That's not accurate.

We FASCISTS love restricting the ability of Democrat Parynts to mutilate their minor children and inject them with wack hormones.

The poor kids should be lucky they were not an abortion statistic and be grateful for the mutilation.
#38
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@Greyparrot
Perhaps they want to make life so foul for their kids that we think they'd be better off not living at all.

Tis' the anti-FASCIST way.
#39
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@thett3
Evolution for social species always leads to politics if that species isn't a prey species or one that goes extinct.

Alphas lead, betas follow and others such as sigmas, deltas and omegas find their place.
#40
coal
coal's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 1,950
3
3
9
coal's avatar
coal
3
3
9
-->
@thett3
I've been wondering lately why I'm right wing.



#41
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,276
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@thett3
There are many reasons why we see things differently, but I think one thing that goes even deeper than differences in our core values is the way we look at any given political issue.

To use an analogy, it’s always been my observation that liberals are looking at the forest while conservatives are looking at the trees. In other words, conservatives seem to view everything in terms of what it means to them personally or to individuals directly, while liberals view everything through the lens of what they think is best for society as a whole.

Take taxes for example. Conservatives typically say “I don’t want the government taking my money”. Liberals don’t view the issue in personal terms. I don’t want to pay taxes either, but what no one did?

Think of capitalism vs socialism. Conservatives say “if you earned it then you are entitled to whatever you get”. Liberals look at what this means on a holistic level and take issue with what happens when capitalism is left unfettered.

Or gun rights... conservatives: “I have a right to protect myself”. Liberals: “all of these guns everywhere is why so many people are dying”.

When I first had someone explain to me the difference between democrats and republicans I said I’m a republican, because that stuff makes so much more sense. But after getting into some of the debates I started to realize that I was looking at things the wrong way (in my view of course). So to me this is what made the entire difference.
#42
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@bmdrocks21
No, I mean they at least they pretend to care about "family values" to court their base.
to be fair, most of their base only pretends to care about "family values" too. If they actually cared about that, then the republicans wouldn't get away with being so despicable. 

I don't think either party is in any position to say that they care about the deficit. It's either "keep spending roughly the same and lower taxes" or "raise spending a helluva lot more than taxes"
that is my point. Demcoracts say that deficits are fine, the goal is to spend the money to help the people and the country. Republicans say deficits are terrible and should be avoided. Then the second they are in power, they cut taxes and the rich and blow up the deficit and pat themselves on the back for it. Then the second they are out of power they start crying about how terrible the deficit is. Only 1 party pretends like the deficit is an important issue. They are just massive liars about it. 

You don't need to mince words here. You care more about the right to murder babies for convenience than you do about the right of that baby to live.
there is no baby involved in this scenario. I care more about a woman's right to control her body than a fetus' life to live. Because a fetus isn't a person. 

Yeah, the right to mutilate your genitals and chemically castrate yourself is exactly the same as the right to self-defense/protection against tyranny, amirite?
one is making changes to yourself to make yourself happy. The other is endangering lives by having more deadly weapons floating around. 
#43
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@HistoryBuff
to be fair, most of their base only pretends to care about "family values" too. If they actually cared about that, then the republicans wouldn't get away with being so despicable. 

I think the blatant outward parading of degeneracy of the alternative kinda forces them to vote for whatever Republican is on the ticket.

that is my point. Demcoracts say that deficits are fine, the goal is to spend the money to help the people and the country. Republicans say deficits are terrible and should be avoided. Then the second they are in power, they cut taxes and the rich and blow up the deficit and pat themselves on the back for it. Then the second they are out of power they start crying about how terrible the deficit is. Only 1 party pretends like the deficit is an important issue. They are just massive liars about it. 

There are a decent chunk that care about the budget. 109 Republicans in 2019 voted against Trump's spending bill. Just not enough of them care, mixed with your admitted attitude of Democrats of not caring about deficits. 

Kinda makes a veto-proof majority when half or one-third of Republicans and maybe one or two Democrats are all that care about the deficit.

there is no baby involved in this scenario. I care more about a woman's right to control her body than a fetus' life to live. Because a fetus isn't a person. 

Oh it isn't a person? Guess it is a tree or a dog or perhaps a car.

one is making changes to yourself to make yourself happy. The other is endangering lives by having more deadly weapons floating around. 

Cool, just stay the hell away from kids and don't pretend that "women" are women for the sake of sports, government preferential grants, keep men wearing wigs out of bathrooms that children attend, etc.

Also, Democrats' shitily-run cities are where crime occurs with less guns present. More people per capita own guns in rural areas https://www.statista.com/statistics/625196/firearm-ownership-rate-by-proximity-to-urban-centers-us/

Crime rates are also higher in urban areas. Sorry to burst your bubble, bud.
#44
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@thett3
Politics, to me, is society's answer to the need to make continuous improvement toward the goal as stated in the US Constitution's preamble: "In order to form a more perfect union... [to] secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity..."

That we do it badly is not an indictment on the need for it; we just do not embrace the right formula for its accomplishment.

As such, my politics are not Democrat, or Republican, not Green, nor any other color, not even by the essentially non-party labels of "conservative" or "liberal," neither of which make much sense anymore. I've decided I'm a sermonist, that is, a devotee of the Sermon on the Mount [Matthew 5 - 7], which most would view as a religion construct, but it occurs to me that by practice of its entire content, every problem that troubles society today [and always have, and ever will] are entirely solved by living by its principles. Those principles are a party's platform planks, pure and simple. It could be void of any religious implication, and it would still be the ideal society, effectively void of crime and social misery.
#45
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@bmdrocks21
I think the blatant outward parading of degeneracy of the alternative kinda forces them to vote for whatever Republican is on the ticket.
which translates as, "people choose to do things that have no effect on me, but I want the government to force them to behave they I want them to". clearly, they have no choice but to vote to suppress other people's rights.

Kinda makes a veto-proof majority when half or one-third of Republicans and maybe one or two Democrats are all that care about the deficit.
good. because people "caring about the deficit" is almost exclusively used to try to screw over poor people. When they try to balance the budget, they aren't pushing to cut that vastly over bloated military budget, or to raise taxes on the insanely rich ruling class. No, they always run right to cutting services for the poor and vulnerable. So if the choices are deficit spending, or actively trying to screw over the poor, most people would take deficit spending. 

there is no baby involved in this scenario. I care more about a woman's right to control her body than a fetus' life to live. Because a fetus isn't a person. 
Oh it isn't a person? Guess it is a tree or a dog or perhaps a car.
no. it's a fetus. Which isn't a person. It might be some day, but isn't yet.

Cool, just stay the hell away from kids and don't pretend that "women" are women for the sake of sports, government preferential grants, keep men wearing wigs out of bathrooms that children attend, etc.
blah, blah, blah. all I hear is whining and crying about people making choices that you don't like but have absolutely no effect on you at all. And in fact, have negative effects on almost no one at all.

Also, Democrats' shitily-run cities are where crime occurs with less guns present. More people per capita own guns in rural areas https://www.statista.com/statistics/625196/firearm-ownership-rate-by-proximity-to-urban-centers-us/
we've been down this road. Gun control cannot and will not work on a state by state or city by city basis. If I can drive one city or one state over and buy an assault rifle, then it doesn't matter what the local laws say. and yes, crime rates rise as population density increases. shocker. Clearly if we armed them all somehow this would solve the poverty problems that cause crime....

#46
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
no. it's a fetus. Which isn't a person. It might be some day, but isn't yet.
1 U.S. Code § 8: " In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development."

The only distinction between a fetus ["at any stage ofd development"] and a person is that the person is a product of live birth. There is no other biologic or genetic difference. The person breathes air, while the fetus breathes liquid, but the chemistry, function, purpose, and result is exactly the same: O2 enters the bloodstream as an essential element to all living animals as a fuel. Therefore, your statement that a fetus is "someday" a person is blatantly false, because the day of occurrence is set medically and legally, "regardless of stage of development." It must be alive, period, which it is before birth. It's DNA has defined it as Homo sapiens from even before conception, as living, paired gametes of human DNA. 

Besides, the "right of the woman" to the exclusion of the fetus is a nebulous right since no part of the fetal tissue, including not just the fetus, but the umbilical, amniotic sac and its fluid, and the placenta, do not share DNA with the mother. Those various tissues are unique to the fetus, which is only contained by the mother, but not a single cell of the one is shared by the other. As I have said numerous times elsewhere, were it not so, whenever a woman opened her mouth, her tongue would fall out, because one can just as easily say the tongue is not part of her body. it is, an that is the difference. Not so, the fetus. It is a distinct individual.

36 days later

#47
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,243
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
Where there's more infectious disease, there's religion stricter on sex. I can't remember where I'm getting that from exactly, but I take it for a sort of first principle of politics/religion. Each are a thing of necessity whether we know it or not. I find you can always put anti-immigration thinking with conservative Christianity also. I mean there's something going on there right. 

I remember you writing stuff about watching your old neighborhood disappear, be overtaken completely by the Chinese or something lol. That'd give anyone the politics. I reckon Australians must have their own big existential thing about the Chinese, same thing. That's just a dam ready to to burst, right? Or that's the sort of thinking anyway. Fuck it, I have nightmares sometimes about those gobblydegook death march bastards joke joke lol. I dunno thett, but good to see you anyway buddy. 

What I've been thinking about lately, is a sort of padded room politics. A politics of the agey where there's no sharp edges anymore, everything's been rounded off by experience of it, nothing can hurt me anymore. And then it all becomes gibberish a little bit, when you lose that ultimate point of self preservation in it. Reminds me of Greyparrot a little bit lol. He always seemed a halfways clever man who made no sense at all. I see he's still up to it.
Topic's author
#48
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@badger
No way. THE badger! 

I find you can always put anti-immigration thinking with conservative Christianity also. I mean there's something going on there right.
Yes exactly! I used to think that people were complete sheep for just going along with their political parties positions on stuff (and I still think this to some extent) but certain beliefs really are correlated and I still don’t understand why. Right leaning and left leaning people also go to different restaurants, tend to cluster in different hobbies…I think that these are just personality types and politics is just a part of that 

I remember you writing stuff about watching your old neighborhood disappear, be overtaken completely by the Chinese or something lol. That'd give anyone the politics. I reckon Australians must have their own big existential thing about the Chinese, same thing. That's just a dam ready to to burst, right? Or that's the sort of thinking anyway. Fuck it, I have nightmares sometimes about those gobblydegook death march bastards joke joke lol. I dunno thett, but good to see you anyway buddy.
A lot of politics comes from resentment, yeah. My entire 2016-2018 era was pure resentment at all the “woke” stuff lol I kinda cringe at some of the things I said back then. I’m still anti immigration, America first, etc but yeah. Now I just think of politics as a religion for a lot of people frankly 

Good to see you too!!! How are things over there?? I’ve heard the covid lockdowns are crazy but don’t know if it’s true 

What I've been thinking about lately, is a sort of padded room politics. A politics of the agey where there's no sharp edges anymore, everything's been rounded off by experience of it, nothing can hurt me anymore.
I am basically feeling the same way too. I think getting older and more secure is a part of it but idk
#49
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,243
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@thett3
I dunno how you replied like that and I'm not altogether arsed. But yeah been restricted to 5km for the most part of the last year I guess. It's been a crazy time and a lot of grumbling going on but we're nearly out of it now, bars and gyms back open the start of next month, my life can resume finally. I actually qualified as a software engineer in the meantime and retired home to the family farm with my dog for a bit again, it's actually been a peaceful and pretty enough sort of time for me. You guys elected Biden and so you're not in my everyday news anymore, I guess i had a hankering lol. Was cool to see you still knocking around, thett. 
#50
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,174
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
What causes politics?  self serving corruption
#51
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,023
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@badger
Great to see you Mr. Badger!
#52
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,243
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
And you Mr. Parrot haha. May DDO last another 10 years. Or the original crew anyway. 

Have you gotten much fatter? 
#53
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,023
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@badger
Yes..fatter and a lot richer. I'm not even working right now.
#54
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,243
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
That's all great to hear. You could get working as a Russian bot maybe part-time. 

You were a teacher, wasn't it? 
#55
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,023
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@badger
Lol Russians are doing just fine right now.

#56
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,276
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@sadolite
What causes politics?  self serving corruption
Is this how it works for you? Because then your arguments all makes sense... it’s projection.
#57
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,174
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@Double_R
Never saw politics work any other way. Maybe you could enlighten me on how it doesn't work this way.
#58
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,023
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
Attitudes like that are why DC corruption thrives.
#59
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,276
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@sadolite
Politics is the natural result of people within a society having different opinions on how that society should function. Do you seriously have no concept of what that looks like without everyone involved being corrupt?

#60
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,276
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
Attitudes like what? Please enlighten me as to what you read into my two sentence reply.