Want Unity? You have only 2 options to achieve it

[Earthtank]

This boils down to facts vs alternative-facts. Want Unity? One of the following 2 options has to happen.

1. People who rely on facts must start believing and agreeing with alternative-facts.
2. People who rely on alternative-facts must start believing and agreeing with facts.

It's that simple. You cannot have unity if people cannot agree on facts. It will never happen. The division will remain and only grow.

or option 3..........WAR!!!!!!!!!!

 

[JustGeorge]

or option 3..........WAR!!!!!!!!!!

I don't think war will bring us together again, either. It'll just cost a lot... time, money, resources, and lives. And we'll still probably be in the same place we were before...

 

[alypius]

All versions of good/best are at best inter-subjective.

What reasons are there for taking this position?

 

[ecco]

Well haven't you presented yourself as a thoughtful and considerate person?

Thoughtful, yes. Considerate, only when warranted.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

When are you going to tell me what these far-left outlets are? Cause calling CNN far-left isn't going to cut it.
So, please provide examples of far-left outlets

You know what? I overdid it. And you are right.
Now let us get back to the problem at hand. Morality in the end. Is that a fact?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

What reasons are there for taking this position?

If you indeed are a Catholic, you do believe in Objective Morality. I don't. That fact that I can get away with it, tells me that morality is subjective.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

This boils down to facts vs alternative-facts. Want Unity? One of the following 2 options has to happen.

1. People who rely on facts must start believing and agreeing with alternative-facts.
2. People who rely on alternative-facts must start believing and agreeing with facts.

It's that simple. You cannot have unity if people cannot agree on facts. It will never happen. The division will remain and only grow.

I one thousand percent agree with this. Well said.

I am hearing a lot of Trump’s supporters claim his second impeachment is causing disunity. No, my friends. Trump caused disunity by deceiving his own supporters about the election being stolen and then inciting insurrection. The impeachment is just consequences of his actions.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I one thousand percent agree with this. Well said.

I am hearing a lot of Trump’s supporters claim his second impeachment is causing disunity. No, my friends. Trump caused disunity by deceiving his own supporters about the election being stolen and then inciting insurrection. The impeachment is just consequences of his actions.

That is all well. But what about morality? Is that a case of facts?

 

[tytlyf]

I used to listen to many such right wing shows until I realized they're controlled propaganda like the left wing media is also which I already saw pretty clearly. You see, it's easy to see through the propaganda of the other side ... but when it's your own side it's difficult. You have to fight your own mind. Your own confirmation bias. Unprogram yourself.

Even your entertainment shows are controlled "programming". They often put more truth in fiction than in the news. The reason is to prepare you for what will be revealed later. It's called inoculation. You saw it on a fake TV show so you don't believe it when it really happens.

You're correct. So would you agree with me that people need to tone down the rhetoric against the other side and come together before it's too late?

I hope so. But lately a few on RF have convinced me that they don't hold that view. They believe in no compromise or tolerance. Instead they've been compromised by the rhetoric of the msm propaganda machine.

False equivalence. You're going to have to provide examples. I understand RW media doesn't provide examples for context, they just say it.
So, please point out ANY story on the left you consider panic-mongering propaganda that would incite people into acting violent? Make sure the story is factually based and not some alternative-fact like "the election was stolen and democrats want to burn the Constitution."

Careful, Fox does this all day long. Every day. Moderate/left-leaning media outlets don't go to the extremes of emotional manipulation. Not even close.

 

[tytlyf]

So, pick either one -- I don't care which -- and you are still left with a contradiction. Or else I don't understand the difference between "rely on" and "believe and agree with."

How can I rely on gravity working properly, if I believe and agree that it doesn't?

The discussion is political. If you have 1 side saying gravity is fake and the other side agreeing with the science, you have division where it normally wouldn't exist.

You can't have both options for Unity, you can only have Unity if 1 option is achieved, but not both.

The division is based around 'truths' in America.

The division will remain until the people who believe alternative-facts start accepting the truth. OR, the people who believe facts give that up to start accepted false narratives.

Either way achieves the unity, but not both.

 

[tytlyf]

As an outsider can I ask just what the hell is going on with this recently?
I mean yeah we all have that one (or more) friend/relative we don’t discuss politics with. But it’s not a shunning offence.
But recently I’m hearing all sorts of horror stories about losing family to the Qanon conspiracy and hardcore Trumpism in particular.
I guess that shouldn’t surprise me given the cult of personality status of Trump. But I find myself still somewhat baffled

The tribalism in politics is part of the division. It's a goal of those who want to divide for political reasons.
Say your sister is told Democrats want to "murder your baby, burn your city, destroy the constitution, remove your religious freedoms, tax you to death, take away your guns and throw granny off a cliff." etc etc.

You don't have the other side doing this. So there's a divide on the truth. 1 side so deeply believes these lies that the other side can do nothing to prove it's a false narrative.

People have been programmed to hate the 'other side' of the media aisle, by design. Fox and the rest always tear into MSM, blaming everything on this fictional category they've created.

When in reality, the most mainstream media IS Fox/OAN/Newsmax.

The way these false narratives are targeted towards vulnerable people is very skilled and the people have a lot of experience. These are learned techniques that some people use for evil reasons.

Remember, propaganda is emotional trickery. Propaganda can be used for good or evil.

Here's an example of propaganda used for good purposes. Take note of your own emotions when listening/viewing the message. It's all emotions.

 

[tytlyf]

But critical thinking skills will still lead to different conclusions. Not everyone who falls for this stuff is an idiot, but most of them are discontent.

People should not be reaching 2 different conclusions if there is only 1 truth. Teaching critical thinking will reduce the amount of people falling for false narratives. So it's a positive development that helps the country as a whole.
People are discontent and angry because of their media choices. You've listed emotions, so the people you're referring to are the products of propaganda intake.

Alternative facts are pretty wide encompassing, and sometimes the line gets hazy. Some things can be proven as most certainly untrue(or true), but a lot of topics show different studies. People cling to the one they like best. Which alternative facts are most important to be dealt with, and in what manner?

The discussion is about the political division in America and how to unite it. The division is solely based on media intake.
Alternative-facts = lies.
If you want to discuss something, give me an example of this "things can be proven true or untrue." That sounds like something straying off the political course.

 

[tytlyf]

You know what? I overdid it. And you are right.
Now let us get back to the problem at hand. Morality in the end. Is that a fact?

I wouldn't call morality a fact, but a set of beliefs/viewoints a person has. Mostly dependent on which country they were born into.

Someone born in Saudi Arabia will have a different set of 'morals,' versus someone born in Australia.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I wouldn't call morality a fact, but a set of beliefs/viewoints a person has. Mostly dependent on which country they were born into.

Someone born in Saudi Arabia will have a different set of 'morals,' versus someone born in Australia.

So some people lie. That is a fact.
And it stops. Either they stop lying and all start lying. That is all.

Now as far as I can tell you believe that lying is bad, but that is not a fact, that it is bad to lie. Hence you have achieved nothing.

 

[tytlyf]

So some people lie. That is a fact.
And it stops. Either they stop lying and all start lying. That is all.

Now as far as I can tell you believe that lying is bad, but that is not a fact, that it is bad to lie. Hence you have achieved nothing.

Lying is always bad. As an atheist, I strive in my daily life to be as brutally honest as possible. That's part of my moral fabric. And it has nothing to do with religion.

Some people lie a lot, they're not trustworthy individuals who deserve respect. Lying should not be encouraged. Even white lies should be avoided at all costs.

That's my perspective.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Lying is always bad. As an atheist, I strive in my daily life to be as brutally honest as possible. That's part of my moral fabric. And it has nothing to do with religion.

Some people lie a lot, they're not trustworthy individuals who deserve respect. Lying should not be encouraged. Even white lies should be avoided at all costs.

That's my perspective.

Yeah. I accept that as your perspective as how you do it. But your perspective is not a fact. And it is not a fact that lying is always bad. That is an opinion.

Try to understand my point. It doesn't help just to talk about fact. Nothing follows as per action from a fact. Let me give an example. If I jump in Earth gravity from a sufficient height onto a sufficient hard surface with a sufficient speed, I will die. That is a fact, but whether I should do that or not doesn't follow from the fact.

That is so with all facts. I can lie if I want to. Whether I should lie or not, doesn't follow form that fact that I can lie.
That is the limit of facts.

 

[tytlyf]

Yeah. I accept that as your perspective as how you do it. But your perspective is not a fact. And it is not a fact that lying is always bad. That is an opinion.

Try to understand my point. It doesn't help just to talk about fact. Nothing follows as per action from a fact. Let me give an example. If I jump in Earth gravity from a sufficient height onto a sufficient hard surface with a sufficient speed, I will die. That is a fact, but whether I should do that or not doesn't follow from the fact.

That is so with all facts. I can lie if I want to. Whether I should lie or not, doesn't follow form that fact that I can lie.
That is the limit of facts.

I understand your perspective, but that's not what I'm referring to with the thread. I'm referring to alternative-facts like "Hillary got 3 millions illegal votes."

This is a verifiable falsehood, but that doesn't stop people from believing alternative-facts.

You're not going to have unity until the people who believe "Hillary got 3 million illegal votes" accept the fact that it's not true. It's a verifiable lie. So you tell me what keeps people from accepting verifiable truths?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I understand your perspective, but that's not what I'm referring to with the thread. I'm referring to alternative-facts like "Hillary got 3 millions illegal votes."

This is a verifiable falsehood, but that doesn't stop people from believing alternative-facts.

You're not going to have unity until the people who believe "Hillary got 3 million illegal votes" accept the fact that it's not true. It's a verifiable lie. So you tell me what keeps people from accepting verifiable truths?

Social, cultural and psychological aspects. And that is a fact.

 

[tytlyf]

Social, cultural and psychological aspects. And that is a fact.

But I'm not referring to those. I'm referring specifically to the example I mentioned.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I understand your perspective, but that's not what I'm referring to with the thread. I'm referring to alternative-facts like "Hillary got 3 millions illegal votes."

This is a verifiable falsehood, but that doesn't stop people from believing alternative-facts.

You're not going to have unity until the people who believe "Hillary got 3 million illegal votes" accept the fact that it's not true. It's a verifiable lie. So you tell me what keeps people from accepting verifiable truths?

Social, cultural and psychological aspects. And that is a fact.

That is my answer.
Now if you like we can go into how there are at least 4 kinds of different categories of facts and how they each work differently.