-
@gollum Yes, you were banned for that, you had already been warned. It was discussed at the time and you were on your last warning for such behavior, it is a blatantly dishonest method of discussing a topic and derails entire discussions, you have done this on numerous occasions to numerous people and the moderators got sick of it.
You will continue to be banned if you continue to do it. If you want to apportion a position to someone, quote them.
Others dont have to be so careful because nobody else has a track record of using such dishonesty as a debate tool.
All future posts about your discussing moderation on the fern will also be removed, as has always been the policy. -
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Erdogan in the US:
All future posts about your discussing moderation on the fern will also be removed, as has always been the policy.
I just deleted all of the off topic bollocks
-
This post is deleted!
-
Heard a comment today by Chris Ryan and Mike Shermer musing that in these more recent secular times that politics in the US has replaced the role of religion in terms of polarising people and the lengths folks will go to get their point across.
I think it rings true in that: "My politician/god is better than your politician/god because I say so...yadda yadda yadda"
Particularly apt when comparing same god religions like catholics and protestants etc (I think they have the same core god don't they?)Got me to thinking what are people trying to prove....?
-
@Siam said in Erdogan in the US:
Heard a comment today by Chris Ryan and Mike Shermer musing that in these more recent secular times that politics in the US has replaced the role of religion in terms of polarising people and the lengths folks will go to get their point across.
I think it rings true in that: "My politician/god is better than your politician/god because I say so...yadda yadda yadda"
Particularly apt when comparing same god religions like catholics and protestants etc (I think they have the same core god don't they?)Got me to thinking what are people trying to prove....?
Virtue Signalling.
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Erdogan in the US:
@Siam said in Erdogan in the US:
Heard a comment today by Chris Ryan and Mike Shermer musing that in these more recent secular times that politics in the US has replaced the role of religion in terms of polarising people and the lengths folks will go to get their point across.
I think it rings true in that: "My politician/god is better than your politician/god because I say so...yadda yadda yadda"
Particularly apt when comparing same god religions like catholics and protestants etc (I think they have the same core god don't they?)Got me to thinking what are people trying to prove....?
Virtue Signalling.
I honestly have no idea what that means but thanks for writing to me.
Given your insights on here for about a decade, forgive me if I interpret that as derogatory or condescending to me
-
@Siam said in Erdogan in the US:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Erdogan in the US:
@Siam said in Erdogan in the US:
Heard a comment today by Chris Ryan and Mike Shermer musing that in these more recent secular times that politics in the US has replaced the role of religion in terms of polarising people and the lengths folks will go to get their point across.
I think it rings true in that: "My politician/god is better than your politician/god because I say so...yadda yadda yadda"
Particularly apt when comparing same god religions like catholics and protestants etc (I think they have the same core god don't they?)Got me to thinking what are people trying to prove....?
Virtue Signalling.
I honestly have no idea what that means but thanks for writing to me.
Given your insights on here for about a decade, forgive me if I interpret that as derogatory or condescending to me
I'm don't think it's virtue signalling , that's an interesting perspective on politics though.
For future reference, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling
-
@Siam said in Erdogan in the US:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Erdogan in the US:
@Siam said in Erdogan in the US:
Heard a comment today by Chris Ryan and Mike Shermer musing that in these more recent secular times that politics in the US has replaced the role of religion in terms of polarising people and the lengths folks will go to get their point across.
I think it rings true in that: "My politician/god is better than your politician/god because I say so...yadda yadda yadda"
Particularly apt when comparing same god religions like catholics and protestants etc (I think they have the same core god don't they?)Got me to thinking what are people trying to prove....?
Virtue Signalling.
I honestly have no idea what that means but thanks for writing to me.
Given your insights on here for about a decade, forgive me if I interpret that as derogatory or condescending to me
I was answering your question, if you dont know what I mean you could have just asked.. or googled it..
-
How Netherlands responded to Erdogan's thugs
-
@Siam google it, it's what celebrities do all the bloody time. He was answering your last question.
I think there's an element of truth in what you are saying. Religion is very much a 'group think' mentality and that applies to Democrats/Republicans or Left/Right too.
I don't like the idea of labelling myself as 'left' or 'right' as people will immediately assume my position on a variety of completely unrelated topics based on whose side I am on. I try to look at each issue in isolation and draw my own conclusions rather then blindly follow a particular politician or party.
That means that no matter who I vote for I am unlikely to agree with everything they say or stand for, and I think that is the best position to be in as you will be more likely to want to hold them accountable.
In the States right now half the population absolutely hate Trump and will do everything they can to protest his every action, whether what he does is good or bad, purely because they are on the left. And the other half of the population will support his every move and turn a blind eye to the bad stuff, purely because they are on the right. That's not an environment for any kind of healthy debate or discussion.
-
The bit I loved about that was she refused to get out of the car so they brought in a truck & told her they were going to load her car onto it & drive it out of the Netrherlands.
She exited the car
-
@No-Quarter said in Erdogan in the US:
I don't like the idea of labelling myself as 'left' or 'right' as people will immediately assume my position on a variety of completely unrelated topics based on whose side I am on. I try to look at each issue in isolation and draw my own conclusions rather then blindly follow a particular politician or party.
That means that no matter who I vote for I am unlikely to agree with everything they say or stand for, and I think that is the best position to be in as you will be more likely to want to hold them accountable.
Yep, I'm very left on social issues & freedom of rights, and WAY right on military, crime and economic issues. it amazes me how people cannot look at both the Democrats & GOP policies & not see some are utterly insane & other bits are great. Its not banket shit on either side.
In the US religion plays a huge part. A massive chunk of the GOP base will back anyone who adheres to their religious view re marriage, abortion & seperation of church & state, so that clouds it. There are a lot of similarities there to the (comparitively) more democratic religious theocracies, like Turkey or even Iran
-
@No-Quarter said in Erdogan in the US:
@Siam google it, it's what celebrities do all the bloody time. He was answering your last question.
I think there's an element of truth in what you are saying. Religion is very much a 'group think' mentality and that applies to Democrats/Republicans or Left/Right too.
I don't like the idea of labelling myself as 'left' or 'right' as people will immediately assume my position on a variety of completely unrelated topics based on whose side I am on. I try to look at each issue in isolation and draw my own conclusions rather then blindly follow a particular politician or party.
That means that no matter who I vote for I am unlikely to agree with everything they say or stand for, and I think that is the best position to be in as you will be more likely to want to hold them accountable.
In the States right now half the population absolutely hate Trump and will do everything they can to protest his every action, whether what he does is good or bad, purely because they are on the left. And the other half of the population will support his every move and turn a blind eye to the bad stuff, purely because they are on the right. That's not an environment for any kind of healthy debate or discussion.
ahh ok thanks mate
Wondering if that ain't too broad a brush though (this virtual signalling thing and labelling folk as left or right.)
As you say it's never that simple, and rather disingenuous.Also this virtual signalling term seems a bit wanky if all expressions of opinion are deemed to be subterfuge to elevate your impression of yourself, but people (specially those yanks it would seem) love to fit everything into good and bad boxes, with seldom "it depends on context" considerations. An urge to simplify everything I guess - all drugs are bad, never hit a women, black lives matter etc
A good rule of thumb is to walk away from anyone beating the "all or nothing" drum, but most sane people will realise that i guess.
Back tot he thread though, by christ those Dutchies get some stuff spot on don't they? They seem quite good at accepting shades of grey
-
This recent incident is eerily similar to this scene from the Bader Meinhoff Complex:
I assume that's pretty much how it went down in real life. Would be nice if Erdogan went the way of the Shah but without the Islamic nutcases replacing him.
-
@gollum said in Erdogan in the US:
In the US religion plays a huge part. A massive chunk of the GOP base will back anyone who adheres to their religious view re marriage, abortion & seperation of church & state, so that clouds it. There are a lot of similarities there to the (comparitively) more democratic religious theocracies, like Turkey or even Iran
I don't think it is so much a case of 'following' as 'dismissing' (if that makes sense)
When it comes to religious based views people are loath to support someone whose views threaten their own and fair enough.
It does mean that people get adversarial rather than look for ways to work together as a society though. By being scared of having someone else's viewpoint thrust on them they try to impose their own view back. -
@Siam said in Erdogan in the US:
@No-Quarter said in Erdogan in the US:
@Siam google it, it's what celebrities do all the bloody time. He was answering your last question.
I think there's an element of truth in what you are saying. Religion is very much a 'group think' mentality and that applies to Democrats/Republicans or Left/Right too.
I don't like the idea of labelling myself as 'left' or 'right' as people will immediately assume my position on a variety of completely unrelated topics based on whose side I am on. I try to look at each issue in isolation and draw my own conclusions rather then blindly follow a particular politician or party.
That means that no matter who I vote for I am unlikely to agree with everything they say or stand for, and I think that is the best position to be in as you will be more likely to want to hold them accountable.
In the States right now half the population absolutely hate Trump and will do everything they can to protest his every action, whether what he does is good or bad, purely because they are on the left. And the other half of the population will support his every move and turn a blind eye to the bad stuff, purely because they are on the right. That's not an environment for any kind of healthy debate or discussion.
ahh ok thanks mate
Wondering if that ain't too broad a brush though (this virtual signalling thing and labelling folk as left or right.)
As you say it's never that simple, and rather disingenuous.Also this virtual signalling term seems a bit wanky if all expressions of opinion are deemed to be subterfuge to elevate your impression of yourself, but people (specially those yanks it would seem) love to fit everything into good and bad boxes, with seldom "it depends on context" considerations. An urge to simplify everything I guess - all drugs are bad, never hit a women, black lives matter etc
A good rule of thumb is to walk away from anyone beating the "all or nothing" drum, but most sane people will realise that i guess.
Back tot he thread though, by christ those Dutchies get some stuff spot on don't they? They seem quite good at accepting shades of grey
Virtue signalling you plonker, not virtual
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Erdogan in the US:
I assume that's pretty much how it went down in real life. Would be nice if Erdogan went the way of the Shah but without the Islamic nutcases replacing him.
In this instance Erdogan IS the Islamic nutcase, Turkey was secular & heading more secular pre Erdogan, under him its heading toward the Iranian model fast. He's a full on religious fricking nutter
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel
whoops - genuine dyslexia
Erdogan in the US