Needless Disrespect for a President - Biden, Trump or otherwise

[Twilight Hue]

But it doesn't actually address anything other than accusing the opposition of being a "closet communist." The adjective "worthy" adds a personal quality to it that suggests attack rather than rebuttal.

Nope it addressing the post itself because that's how the post sounds.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Nope it addressing the post itself because that's how the post sounds.

There is a difference between:

1. A statement worthy of a closet communist.

2. This statement supports communism.

I don't mean to nitpick the issue, but I feel like this is kind of the spirit of the thread. It's difficult to not attack a debate opponent, but it does happen. Conversations like this are helpful. I've found myself called out on RF before for this. As humans, we are always likely to revert to personal attacks, so being able to discuss it can help keep us honest.

I do feel like it is different for American leaders, though. There is a cathartic quality being able to poke fun at political leaders in a democracy.

 

[Twilight Hue]

There is a difference between:

1. A statement worthy of a closet communist.

2. This statement supports communism.

I don't mean to nitpick the issue, but I feel like this is kind of the spirit of the thread. It's difficult to not attack a debate opponent, but it does happen. Conversations like this are helpful. I've found myself called out on RF before for this. As humans, we are always likely to revert to personal attacks, so being able to discuss it can help keep us honest.

I do feel like it is different for American leaders, though. There is a cathartic quality being able to poke fun at political leaders in a democracy.

That's why I kept my response open to rebuttal as to why it's not worthy of a closet communist.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

That's why I kept my response open to rebuttal as to why it's not worthy of a closet communist.

Okay, I didn't mean to butt into the conversation. Take care!

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Perfect statement worthy of a closet communist.

Spoken like a true closet troll.

 

[F1fan]

I will make no bones about it; I don't like Joe Biden or in general the job he's doing. And I will be the first to admit that I have used some choice language myself, but here goes.

Part of me really does not like terms like "demented president" (or stronger), "puddle brain", or "potato head." Right after Trump was elected (I didn't vote for him in 2016) someone in synagogue referred to him as a "pig" and I definitely had something to say. At that point I had not yet shifted to being a mild, intermittent supporter of some of the actions of the 45th President.

However, the President, whether Biden, Trump or otherwise, stands on a higher plane, entitled to a modicum of respect. The use of terms like that is just wrong, even if one totally dislikes him. And truly, I believe that epithets have no place in dialog. They tend to end all rational discussion.

Trump has already ruined his credibility with his rampant lies and corruption. Biden might not be liked because he's aging and a democrat, but he is doing the job he was hired to do by the majority. He is boring and competent. No drama. That is fantastic. He is doing a vastly better job than Trump would have done. If republicans would stop the slide towards authoritarianism and support ethical representatives then our nation would be in vastly better shape.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I actually agree with this.

Well, ya know, doing some very simple and easy things like quit going to needless wars decade after decade after decade, quit bombing people who done nothing wrong and don't deserve it, then I might be willing to upgrade my view of them to corrupt and misguided. Still a long ways from good, but its better than my "full flavored" opinion of Uncle Sam and how he's basically never really respected the right to life and peace and democracy abroad, has an abysmal record of mistreating and abusing the army that carries out his murderous orders, has a terrible record with citizens and the Natives and would rather bailout corporations than help the poor not be poor.
If they want respect, they just have to be respectable people. And that does mean respectable policy that treats people with respect and dignity. Wanting people needlessly bombed is the opposite of that.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

He is boring

Sad to say this is partly why I voted for him. He's boring. He's dull. He'snot glued to twitter and does this thing called shutting up. He's almost like a Ron Popiel President where you can set him and forget him.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Spoken like a true closet troll.

Then don't say stuff like that if you don't like my take on it. I'll call it out for what it is.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Trump has already ruined his credibility with his rampant lies and corruption. Biden might not be liked because he's aging and a democrat, but he is doing the job he was hired to do by the majority. He is boring and competent. No drama. That is fantastic. He is doing a vastly better job than Trump would have done. If republicans would stop the slide towards authoritarianism and support ethical representatives then our nation would be in vastly better shape.

Biden isn't doing anything. Hes a puppet.

His handlers are doing it all behind the scenes by people whom this country did not vote for.

 

[PureX]

Yep, and any country that went in that direction became so unstable that it didn't last, and usually it was replaced by an authoritarian regime.

Anarchy last only as long as it takes the thugs among us to realize that they have an open road to unmitigated tyranny. And as they are constantly just awaiting their chance to rape, rob, pillage, torture and muder for their own fun and profit, it doesn't take them long to notice.

 

[PureX]

Do you how societies functioned when we were hunters and gatherers? It was a lot of anarcho-communism. The pipe dream (more like bad acid trip) is that we're individuals who must be in it for ourselves. We have to unlearn this and learn we are social animals who thrive best,as a whole, with mutual cooperation. After all, the more individualized a person becomes it also becomes easier to control this person (who are individuals first and foremost and lack necessary support and strength to figbt back).
But we keep fooling ourselves into believing are creatures of rugged individuality who must relly on ourself.

I agree.

When we lived in small primitive tribes, we had to cooperate to survive, and we all knew it. We also had elders that knew how to enable their tribe's collective survival, and how to discourage those who acted to contradict it. Even those primitive tribes had 'government'.

But the modern abstractions of money, technology, task specialization and the enormous size of our "tribes" have totally destroyed that immediate and visceral sense of collective cooperation and well-being. And it's turned us all against each other as selfish individuals living in a sea of other selfish individuals. Every man for himself. And I see no hope of our regaining that sense of collective well-being and responsibility again.

And fantasies of some utopian anarchy certainly aren't going to do it.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I agree.

When we lived in small primitive tribes, we had to cooperate to survive, and we all knew it. We also had elders that knew how to enable their tribe's collective survival, and how to discourage those who acted to contradict it. Even those primitive tribes had 'government'.

But the modern abstractions of money, technology, task specialization and the enormous size of our "tribes" have totally destroyed that immediate and visceral sense of collective cooperation and well-being. And it's turned us all against each other as selfish individuals living in a sea of other selfish individuals. Every man for himself. And I see no hope of our regaining that sense of collective well-being and responsibility again.

And fantasies of some utopian anarchy certainly aren't going to do it.

We still rely on others, we just like to pretend otherwise. But as Obama pointed out, much to the dismay and chagrin of RW, you didn't build that on your own, it was the whole of society contributing in various was to create the opportunities to have it built.
It was like that back in ancient Greece, as am overall mindset. There, it was the wealthy who paid taxes, and as an acknowledgement it was the city that allowed them to create their fortune they'd not only pay their taxes, they often did so happily and with a generous extra chunk added on to it.
Even in America in the mid 20th century things were different than they are today. During that time the neo-liberal philosophies that lead to the Depression were a social pariah, the highest income bracket was taxed heavily, paychecks were better and America thrived. Amd then along came Reagan to the White House and things began to change. Kansas is good state level example of this.
The problem isn't human nature, it's that our society has forgotten how to win as a team and believes too much in the abilities of material possessions.

 

[Soandso]

In debate, no, such things have no place.
But outside of that respect is not an entitlement but something that must be earned, and politicians usually fail at being decent and respectable people.

These are my thoughts. Within the context of a debate it's ad hominem, but outside of a debate it's good fun at the expense of people who deserve no respect

 

[PureX]

We still rely on others, we just like to pretend otherwise.

I agree. In many way we are even more inter-dependent than ever because we are so isolated and specialized. But we have all become so self-obsessed in our isolation that we are almost completely blind to that fact. And should anyone dare to suggest it they will soon suffer the wrath and indignation of that entrenched selfishness.

It was like that back in ancient Greece, as am overall mindset. There, it was the wealthy who paid taxes, and as an acknowledgement it was the city that allowed them to create their fortune they'd not only pay their taxes, they often did so happily and with a generous extra chunk added on to it.
Even in America in the mid 20th century things were different than they are today. During that time the neo-liberal philosophies that lead to the Depression were a social pariah, the highest income bracket was taxed heavily, paychecks were better and America thrived. And then along came Reagan to the White House and things began to change. Kansas is good state level example of this.

Yes, the Great Depression and the WW2 reminded us as a nation that we thrive or suffer as a people, not as individuals all competing with each other for the biggest pile of money. But as soon as those threats were behind us, we fell right back onto the big monopoly game. Because the sad truth is this country has always been the land of the ruthless and greedy (in the name of individual freedom) and those few decades after the war were the exception to the rule.

The problem isn't human nature, it's that our society has forgotten how to win as a team and believes too much in the abilities of material possessions.

100 years of 24-7 industrial strength commercial advertising (propaganda) will do that to culture.

 

[Kathryn]

Well, ya know, doing some very simple and easy things like quit going to needless wars decade after decade after decade, quit bombing people who done nothing wrong and don't deserve it, then I might be willing to upgrade my view of them to corrupt and misguided. Still a long ways from good, but its better than my "full flavored" opinion of Uncle Sam and how he's basically never really respected the right to life and peace and democracy abroad, has an abysmal record of mistreating and abusing the army that carries out his murderous orders, has a terrible record with citizens and the Natives and would rather bailout corporations than help the poor not be poor.
If they want respect, they just have to be respectable people. And that does mean respectable policy that treats people with respect and dignity. Wanting people needlessly bombed is the opposite of that.

True.