Total topics: 38
Maybe Kamala Harris could have won the election if the democrats had actually tried to win people over to their side by rational means. Instead, we saw claims of how stupid Trump supporters are, how they're all crazy, and how they support a madman. We saw ads that appealed exclusively to emotion with the only statistics being ridiculously exaggerated, quickly making democratic news sources seem unreliable. Moreover, they constantly doubled down on things like DEI which, as a democrat, I think is stupid and many other democrats also think is stupid. They refused to be flexible. They refused to read the room. They refused to be reasonable. Now they've paid the price.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Current events
If you weren't a MAGA supporter before, you are one now residing in the states.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Current events
Trump is president and he has taken office like I said.
People are crying trying to stall the inevitable.
"Well he technically is not in office until next year".(little child's voice)
Face it now .
Now , what are you going to do to support your president?
Number them from 1-5.
All those saying President Trump is dumb, who had the smarter, stronger running political campaign?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Current events
Your rationale to believe a scientist over a minister.
Your reasoning for believing a woman as a victim than a man .
Your bias to a "non white" stealing, committing crimes over a "white".
Your bias to a democrat over a republican .
Your hatred towards one and not another.
Your love towards one and not another.
You believing what I say versus another with a academic prestigious title that has written something.
Please explain your rationale through all of these points, your thought process, etc.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Miscellaneous
Are you familiar with the plan to in-act "Project 2025" if Trump wins? Generally speaking, it's a very robust transition plan organized by right-wing think tank, The Heritage Foundation, to enforce Christian and Conservative policies on every level of Government: including replacing all government works with ones who will promote "Conservative ideals." https://www.project2025.org
Liberals seem concerned, and Conservatives seem largely indifferent (many not even knowing about it). The indifference part is interesting to me because most Conservatives i've spoken with have the attitude of "has some good ideas, has some really bad ideas, probably won't happen either way." And liberals are concerned with the prospect of a President who would think of any of it as a good idea let alone actually trying to push it through.
Project 2025 controversial points of interest:
- Reinstate the executive order known as Schedule F. This would reclassify thousands of federal employees as “at-will” workers and give the administration the ability to fire employees who don’t agree with or follow the extremist policies suggested by Project 2025.
- Create a training “academy” for potential employees of the next administration, which “provides aspiring appointees with the insight, background knowledge, and expertise in governance to immediately begin rolling back destructive policy and advancing conservative ideas in the federal government.”
- Will ensure that Department of Justice is not independent from the executive branch and implies the agency will be used to take legal retribution against whoever Trump decides to investigate.
- Calls for a future GOP administration to immediately review all major FBI investigations “and terminate any that are unlawful or contrary to the national interest.”
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
I'm not sure where I stand, currently I'm uncertain and wish someone to sway me one way or the other. Of course though, I will critically challenge a sway of either direction.
Here are my notes, some ideas may have changed since I wrote them, but I figure they will stimulate your thoughts and bring about a conversation.
I believe on the importance of short-term History such as business decisions based on a company's past, but not in long-term history since the present environment is never the same as the past, making the past decision only a guestimation of what is appropriate for the present, not an assured prediction.
Here is my speculative definition:
History is (potentially) simply a propaganda made to inspire or strike pride in a nation's political, religious, or technological identity.
Here is a commonly recognized definition of history:
A nuanced and practical definition of history, acknowledging its complexities and multiple facets, could be articulated as follows:History is the systematic study and interpretation of past events, cultures, and societies, aimed at understanding the complexities of human behavior, social structures, and the forces that have shaped the world. It encompasses a wide range of subjects, including economic, social, technological, and environmental aspects, beyond its traditional focus on politics, national pride, or religious identity. While history can be used to inspire or instill pride, its primary purpose is to provide a comprehensive, critical examination of the past, offering insights into the present and guiding considerations for the future. This approach recognizes the potential for multiple interpretations and the influence of historiography, emphasizing the importance of critical thinking and analysis in discerning historical truths.
Firstly, history is not a systematic study but a documentation of historical events; a historian uses a systematic study of history.
Secondly, history is not complete with everyday documented, only what was selected as important; it is these events than are related to a nation's religious, political, or technological progression.
Thirdly, almost nothing of history is factual, it is primarily subjective interpretation. Even then the objective aspect of history can easily be skewed toward the people of power, especially in ancient times when only the elite could read and write while the people were oblivious to the documents recorded. Of the interpretations, what of it can be learned but an opinion. If I recorded that blue is the prettiest color the only conclusion to be derived is some ancient person thought blue was the prettiest color. This makes the practical application of learning from history is close to zero, since it is mostly opinions, and the minuscule objective evidence is potentially skewed.
Finally, even if by a miracle the history was interpreted in the same perspective as the author and the objective facts were true, the learning part of history requires drawing effects from cause, which also includes context. It is this context that is consistently changing in the present and never matching the past, making direct cause and effect impossible to be certain. This leaves us with a highly improbable potentially flawed and contextually different solution that may help interpret our future. It is from this I believe that we would do just as well with what we think is best given our intuition and present experience, effectively rendering history as a practically useless propagandic study.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Philosophy
What would you say as to the reasons why Martin Luther King Jr. has or gets a recognized national holiday and Malcolm X does not?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Current events
“White House sends letter to news execs urging outlets to ‘ramp up’ scrutiny of GOP’s Biden impeachment inquiry ‘based on lies’”
Marching orders given; marching orders gladly recieved! Oliver Darcy at CNN dutifully reports on the White House issuing instructions to media and proceeds to follow those instructions in the very same article without even a hint of irony or self awareness. It must be read to be believed:
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
This is an intriguing dilemma that many in the church have discussed. What do you think?
Should the religious person be in the world but not of it? and what does that mean?
Should the religious person retreat into his or her or their own little worlds or communes?
Should they send their children to public schools or private schools or homeschool?
To what extend should they engage or choose not to engage? Is it simply a matter of preference?
Some might suggest that the mission of the church is to convert as many as possible. If this is an admirable goal, how do they do that and retreat from culture?
Should Christians - be separate - from the world and politics and life completely? Or should the engage in the public square?
And if so. - whose rules should they follow? The rules that suggested by the organisation they are trying to engage with or their own set of principles?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
Who is your top rated politician? Currently serving politician only, please.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
What would the Utopian society be in terms of Religious, Political, and Social Ideology?
In this forum, I encourage you to share your vision of a perfect society, where everyone lives in harmony, justice, and happiness.
We will cover the following questions to get started, but please feel free to ask new ones related to the topic:
- How would you describe your utopian society in terms of religious, political, and social ideology; add a description of how society would be run and structured?
- How would individuals maintain a part of that society and be involved in its affairs?
- How would individuals feel unified within that society? What are the benefits and challenges of creating and sustaining such a society?
- What are the sources of inspiration or influence for your utopian society?
- Would there be a code of conduct and commonly held values and what would their purpose be?
Please use the following guidelines to productively participate in the forum:
- Be open-minded and curious. Do not dismiss or ignore answers that challenge your reality or beliefs. Try to embrace them as opportunities to learn and grow. Try to approach them with logical, critical, and professional minds, and seek to understand the evidence and reasoning behind them.
- Be empathetic and respectful. Do not judge or ridicule other people’s perspectives or experiences. Try to comprehend their viewpoints and appreciate their contributions to the larger and more intricate reality. Try to see how different perspectives can form a more complex and complete picture of the world.
- Be honest and humble. Do not claim or imply that your knowledge is superior or definitive. Try to acknowledge the limitations and uncertainties of your knowledge, and the sources and influences that shape it. Try to value words for their merits and usefulness, not for the labels or credentials of their source.
- Be relevant and on-topic. Do not deviate from the main topic of the forum. Do not post irrelevant or off-topic comments and links that aren't productive to the questions being discussed.
- Be constructive and creative. Do not simply criticize or reject other people’s ideas. Try to offer positive feedback, suggestions, or alternatives.
- Be clear and concise. Try to use clear and simple language as much as possible. To have effective communication it is necessary to speak understandably.
I hope everyone enjoys this forum.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Philosophy
The question is: Are people equal, or are peoples equal?
I'd like to hear from the following perspectives:
What is the US currently?
What should the US be?
Which is religiously correct?
Which is correct from the perspective of human value?
I'd also appreciate explanations supporting each of your perspectives so that others can clearly understand why.
For a clear explanation of peoples: The word “peoples” is the plural of “people” and is used to refer to groups of people by nation, religion, belief, or an aternative aspect of divide.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
For me, it's annoying and really is pointless. I need to know the level to where I don't live under a rock but beyond that it seems that being too educated politically only hurts my social skills. People don't give a shit about it or those that do hate if you argue them and don't agree with them. What the fuck was the point of learning it all then?
Whether this shill or that shill is in charge, I will just adapt and find a way not to perish.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
https://www.debateart.com/debates/4498-ron-desantis-is-a-better-choice-for-president-than-joe-biden-in-the-2024-election (To anyone who is interested.)
The rest of you who are strictly forum-dwellers.
Discuss.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
It is important that people understand the lens that is filtering or twisting the narrative they hear.
I think Twitter labelling, NPR, CBC, BBC etc as Government Funded, is important for people to anticipate the bias that may be part of the overall message.
Change my mind.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Current events
POTSDAM, Germany — Climate change may be the cause of rising tensions and hate speech online, according to new research. Study authors from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research say incidents soar by more than a fifth when the temperature rises.
Global warming is getting people hot under the collar during conversations on social media in particular. Temperatures above 86°F show a consistent link to this phenomenon. The study authors say this applies to all climate zones irrespective of socioeconomic differences such as income, religious beliefs, or political preferences.
The findings, published in The Lancet Planetary Health, have implications for social cohesion, suggesting there will be more aggression and violence unless greenhouse gas emissions fall dramatically. Scientists used a computer neural network to analyze four billion tweets from users in the United States.
“People tend to show a more aggressive online behavior when it’s either too cold or too hot outside,” says study first author and PIK scientist Annika Stechemesser in a media release.
You can't make this stuff up, folks:
Proof that even scientists fall for the correlation/causation fallacy.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Current events
Trump had his faults (stupidly interrupting, when he should have just let Biden dig his own grave as well as not giving a straight answer on condemning racists), but I personally think Biden couldn't have done any worse.
1. He openly endorsed the Green New Deal, universally recognized as the stupidest idea anyone has ever presented in American politics.
2. He made no condemnation of the riots and domestic terrorism plaguing America.
3. His COVID argument literally consists of "This international plague is somehow Trump's fault."
4. His economic argument is "you killed the economy" but at the same time "we need to close the country"
5. Weirdly enough, Biden hurled more insults at Trump than vice versa. This was the time he was supposed to be the grown up. Instead, they both looked childish.
There's so much more....
Really, I don't think the Democrats understand how absolutely disconnected they are from the American voter. It's like they're trying their hardest to be as radical left as possible. It's baffling to me.
Even if you agree with him on these issues, you have to admit, it is political suicide.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
If I don't want to answer, I won't answer.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Personal
Tell me what the Left Wing is.
What makes someone Left-Wing?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
My results are:
- 41.7% Left, 44.4% Liberal
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Just a thought.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Everyone talks shit about how mediocre he was but he had to pick up from Bush's shit era.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
There's many flaws with it but I've seen three avid fans of it recently post demands for another user (one was me being asked by 3RU7AL) to take it and reveal the result.
I went into depth on the general types of flaws that are consistent in the test but I'm willing to lay out each flawed question as well as to Kritik auth vs lib being a flawed scale itself since one can be auth on one issue and lib on another while in between on another with a consistent outlook despite inconsistent authoritarianism vs libertarianism.
Who here likes this test a lot?
The test is found here: https://www.politicalcompass.org
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Would you vote for her as president?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Simple yet accurate political quiz. America/modern-day specific. 2 Options per question, 9 outcomes.
Note: You can remain neutral on a question by clicking 'Next' without answering it, I recommend not doing so if you do lean either way. I did this for a question and retook the quiz after realising it was possible, I got the same result though.
My best fit is...
Solid Liberalsalong with 16% of the public.Highly educated and politically engaged, Solid Liberals hold consistently liberal values. They back a robust role for government and are strong advocates of the social safety net. Large majorities view the current economic system as unfair and see economic inequality as a major problem. They take broadly positive views of immigrants, and fully 99% think being open to people from around the world is an essential part of the nation’s identity. Most say more needs to be done to address both racial discrimination and obstacles to women’s achievement. They support same-sex marriage and believe homosexuality should be accepted by society. Solid Liberals are the most Democratic of all typology groups: nearly two-thirds (64%) identify as Democrats, another 35% lean toward the Democratic Party.
^ Link to the quiz.
More on the types (this is a spoiler and I suggest you DO NOT READ THE FOLLOWING LINK BEFORE TAKING THE QUIZ, it will subconsciously drive you to push for a result you want rather than what you actually are.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
A mandated reporter is a person who is legally required to report any suspicion of child abuse or neglect to the relevant authorities. Teachers and psychologists are some examples of people that are required to report any known abuse. The laws are in place to prevent children from being abused and to end any possible abuse or neglect at the earliest possible stage.
Historically, American law has protected a clergy-penitent privilege for a religious confessional that is similar to attorney-client privilege. In other words, clergy are not required to tell anyone about any abuse or rape they know about. Only seven states have laws requiring priests to report this information.
Catholic priests are not the only people who hear people's confession in religious contexts. Scientology uses a process known as auditing which allegedly helps people "rid themselves of their spiritual disabilities." Like priests they are exempt from having to report any abuse they've learned about in a confession or similar process, and do not have to provide testimony in a court of law.
A lot of people have come forward to report their experience of sexual abuse within all kinds of religious institutions. Many times people in the church know what is going on, but do nothing to stop it. A bill that started making its way through the California legislature last year would have made CA the first since 1999 to require priests to choose between violating the law or violating the seal of the confessional.
As predicted, virtually every religious institution fought back and the law was withdrawn. One bishop argued, "If any legislature can force believers to reveal their innermost thoughts and feelings shared with God in confession, then truly there is no area of human life that is free or safe from government. Another added, "Surely murder, theft, spousal abuse, child neglect and rape are terrible crimes. Would the state determine that priests are obligated to report these offenses to the authorities, should they hear of them in the confessional?"
Um... sure, why not?
The argument is that forcing individuals to choose between the most sacrosanct part of their religious beliefs and imprisonment is what the Bill of Rights was entirely meant to avoid. Do you agree, and if so do you agree to the point where that applies to clergy and confessionals from ALL religious denominations? For instance, if I said I shouldn't have to report child molestation that I know is occurring because of my devout Pastafarianism and belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, would that be acceptable? And if you don't agree, explain why you think the 1st amendment does not apply to rape or child abuse.
(Man I wish I could pose this question to Q-Anon.)
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Instead of keeping his mouth shut and going out with his head held somewhat high, he makes an absolute fool of himself for no reasonable gain whatsoever this drama has not benefitted him at all and even old allies are beginning to turn on him permanently. I think he's screwed over his own business relations as a result of this, no intelligent person wants their brand associated with this lunatic anymore.
I just can't believe how at the end of such an utterly shit-tier example of how to lead a nation and maintain unity in your populace as their leader, this guy has to end it all on an even lower note than anyone had thought possible.
Lose with dignity man, you could have had a bright future ahead of you business-wise. Instead, your entire family dynasty is now tarnished as it's permanently associated with your narcissistic delusions forevermore.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
POLITICAL POLL #1: If current trends continue, will BLM succeed in advancing the position of the black community in the US? (socioeconomics, safety etc.)
My current stance is NO. Give me arguments for both positions.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
There is an experiment we can have the government carry out on many children and note and then correlate to those who choose in the future to openly support a political wing but it only can work if many are in the sample.
I strongly believe that adolescence masks true ideology and has a lot more delineation with one's true core system of ethics and social reasoning than childhood or adulthood do. I furthermore assert that those of us who seem to have changed our minds in life on politics had events and hormonal imbalance in teenage years that merely already pushed us away from the true wing we are.
What I am suggesting is that politics is far more nature than nurture but that nurture can force one who is built with one wing's psychology to vote the other only as a lesser evil and they will be anomalies in what I describe.
The sharing-justice duality test.
I want you to give a toddler/child the scenario where they believe that someone in on the experiment in front of them has stolen stealthily, bullied and finally convinced with words, another person (also in on it) to give them something that the child themselves values a lot and that the other seems visibly sad to have lost.
What is measured is the level of empathy, aggression, sadistic amusement, ambivalence etc that the subject displays towards the three situations.
It is important that the subjects are not having this done by or towards someone close to them, it must be strangers or people the child has barely met get (perhaps interacted with once first, to build some rapport, this will be fine-tuned).
My hypothesis
Children who most fervently respond to the injustice in all three scenarios will be very passionate about politics as hey grow, regardless of wing. Those that truly are upset by all three scenarios, will be passionately left-wing, while those who are among the fervent that only reacted much when force was used, will be passionately right-wing. Those that are fervent with 2 scenarios but not in particular with one, will be centrists who grow cynical of the whole system.
Those that take sadistic amusement, least when the person is talked out of it, and giggle at the whole situation, will grow to become right-wing Libertarian or some corporatist variant (even as far as ancap but not necessarily).
Those that seem to not care much at all, will grow to not vote.
Those that display fear and try to escape the room or look down at the ground wishing they could help, will become social democrats AKA progressives of a less severe kind than the fervent types.
It will be discovered that any other possible reaction combination simply never happens. It will be important to do the talking part last, so that the child understands that the talk is based on guilt-trip manipulation and not just genuine care and share mentality. The children who react barely at all to the talking part but to the other two will be left-leaning centrists while other 2-1 combinations will fluctuate in life, as the cynics hypothesised.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
I replied this to Fauxlaw's debate:
The frequency of wrongful convictions, overly-brutal sentences and the very pressures (financial and sociological) that drive one to crime are all very much harshest against those of the 'black' race due to many things in the past trickling down generations.The gap between whites and blacks of average income, education quality and stuff like that is getting worse (but obviously not 'worse' than literal slavery) as time goes by. The less opportunity they have, the more pressures there are to become a criminal to ever be more than a blue collar worker for life on a dirt-cheap wage that can barely uphold themselves, let alone their families, especially if relatives get sick.It's also the case that generally speaking, caucasians in poverty have somehow got distant relatives to help them out, however I am not suggesting that they have it 'easier' by a large margin at all. The issue is that the system is overall rigged against blacks because due to all the things I've mentioned there is a bias against people of that ethnicity that says they are more likely to have done crimes (since they're more commonly driven towards it as they are desperate for money and have far less opportunity to get it). This bias runs deep in both mentality of not hiring and promoting them as well as convicting them of crimes.This is the core thing that needs to be altered in MANY 'white' countries that previously enslaved and continually discriminated against blacks in recent generations. The effect is still being had on blacks alive today and that is what needs to be stopped.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Welcome back all to EPT, the show where we explore the spectrum of one's politics!
This time we have DPR, a self-proclaimed 'pragmatic libertarian'.
He says that he equally values both freedom and peace above all else in a society but that a balance is optimal.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Welcome to the Political edition of Exploration of X Thinker! Unlike the ERT, EPT will be focusing on politics and while religion may come up in conversation it by no means necessarily will.
Today we have a diehard anarchist. While this outlook is one many of us would regard as scary and immoral, it is important that we come into these things ready to have our minds opened or at least learn more about why we find the person's political system to be wrong.
I will not hold back in saying that I personally find Anarchism to be immature and immoral but that doesn't make me able to dismiss this individual's outlook as not worth hearing out. Instead, by hearing it out we can better understand the pros and cons of it more specifically and perhaps take the good parts into our own ideal political system.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Welcome one and all to EPT! In this edition we have one of those who seek no labels, yet he applied for this show so clearly he has something to say!
I quote him in saying the following:
I've had a persisting gut affiliation with Trump and the GOP almost like a baseball fan does for his home team but they honestly don't seem to hold the answers we need.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Welcome to EPT, the place where we explore the spectrum of one's political outlook, not just the place on the assumed spectrum that we'd place one!
As with the previous show, today's interview will be with a non-denominational political thinker, namely Whiteflame.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Welcome to EPT, let's get to it!
The past 2 shows have been people who do not identify with labels, this time we have a proud conservative, who goes further to identify as a Sermonist.
prime societal aim: To abide by the Sermon on the Mount [Matthew 5 - 7 of the Holy Bible, inclusive]. To me, this passage is not only good religious philosophy, it happens to be the premier political platform in existence.
Most of the passages mentioned have a lot to do with not 'showing off' how much suffering one is undergoing in their devotion to Jesus and the Lord God, at least in my reading it seems that way. This implies to me that Fauxlaw's outlook has a lot to do with humility and each person doing their duty and not complaining about it.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Hello DebateArt! I am running a server where it is a government like US, where you can be a ton of things in the government and function like an actual government! It is super cool and I hope you guys are interested. You need a Discord to join! it is will be super fun and super neat to see!
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Gaming
A recent Netflix series has mocked Jesus and made him about be a sinner, (gay, drug dealer, etc). This is absolutely horrendous ideology and depiction of Jesus Christ, yet if I made fun of Allah or Mohhamad, I would be attacked and banned for. The hypocrisy behind Liberals is maddening. All religions should be treated with respect or appropriated to same amount of mockery and Jesus is
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics