Staff No conspiracy theories or fringe content on the Politics board

[Cato]

Btw, is Neogaf hosted or dependant on any service that cracked down on conservatives recently?

No, but I imagine that when people react and reach they always overreact and overreach. Even R Paul got locked out. Mistake or glitch, who knows. Who cares. And shit got a bit crazy here too with people actually buying in to really crazy shit. Even worse imho, the crazy shit they believed in was BORING crazy shit. But regardless, best to stamp that out and not try to become a target.

I imagine too that only those conspiracy theories that attract dangerous-crazy people are what is really important to keep a lid on right now. All these youtube channels that have people sitting talking about planet x and that bigfoot is an alien are probably perfectly safe, these are the theories believed by funny-crazy people, not dangerous-crazy people.
So, if your theory seems like it will be something that the average 10 follower youtube channel about how fukushima boiled the pacific dry, you are probably ok, I think. If your theory touches on things that dangerous-crazy people latch on to (and destroy) it is sadly a no go.



Sadly the latter means the end for Q-Anon as well. Initially, everyone knew Q-Anon was not real. It was basically a crowd sourced "MetalGearSolid: TheRolePlayingGame - Current Day Edition" where people just created and added to the most convoluted conspiracy theory ever, for shit and giggles. Everyone knew it was not real and just a game. It was awesome. Then some retards that can not keep reality and fantasy apart joined in and took it as fact. Jesus, it is like watching the cut-scenes from MGS2/3 and thinking "yeah, that actually happened at the end of ww2."
And now we will never know who is behind and controls the DeepState. :-(
(My theory is a rouge AI from the supercomputer in the secret basement under the white house that became sentinent, escaped and is now hiding in big-tech datacentres. Q because it was the 17th DARPA based AI experiment.)
((Kojima, just ping me. I got plenty of ideas for MGS6))

If anyone wonders, no I actually don;t think a rouge AI hiding in Google/FB datacentres is behind Q-Anon. Actually believeing that would be clinically insane. But it is a fun thing to fantasize about, or maybe write a cool comic book about.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

No, but I imagine that when people react and reach they always overreact and overreach. Even R Paul got locked out. Mistake or glitch, who knows. Who cares. And shit got a bit crazy here too with people actually buying in to really crazy shit. Even worse imho, the crazy shit they believed in was BORING crazy shit. But regardless, best to stamp that out and not try to become a target.

I imagine too that only those conspiracy theories that attract dangerous-crazy people are what is really important to keep a lid on right now. All these youtube channels that have people sitting talking about planet x and that bigfoot is an alien are probably perfectly safe, these are the theories believed by funny-crazy people, not dangerous-crazy people.
So, if your theory seems like it will be something that the average 10 follower youtube channel about how fukushima boiled the pacific dry, you are probably ok, I think. If your theory touches on things that dangerous-crazy people latch on to (and destroy) it is sadly a no go.


Please don't ban me:
Sadly the latter means the end for Q-Anon as well. Initially, everyone knew Q-Anon was not real. It was basically a crowd sourced "MetalGearSolid: TheRolePlayingGame - Current Day Edition" where people just created and added to the most convoluted conspiracy theory ever, for shit and giggles. Everyone knew it was not real and just a game. It was awesome. Then some retards that can not keep reality and fantasy apart joined in and took it as fact. Jesus, it is like watching the cut-scenes from MGS2/3 and thinking "yeah, that actually happened at the end of ww2."
And now we will never know who is behind and controls the DeepState. :-(
(My theory is a rouge AI from the supercomputer in the secret basement under the white house that became sentinent, escaped and is now hiding in big-tech datacentres. Q because it was the 17th DARPA based AI experiment.)
((Kojima, just ping me. I got plenty of ideas for MGS6))

If anyone wonders, no I actually don;t think a rouge AI hiding in Google/FB datacentres is behind Q-Anon. Actually believeing that would be clinically insane. But it is a fun thing to fantasize about, or maybe write a cool comic book about.

Having known someone who started as sane and went down the rabbit hole from cynical and edgy 4channer to true believer in the soros/bill gates/white genocide conspiracies makes these things less fun. I’ll never forget the day he called someone a n****r and wasn’t edgy shit but actual racial shit.

Used to be a fellow gaffer as well.

 

[Monkeygourmet]

It’s all ok until it isn’t

 

[Ricky_Bee]

Having known someone who started as sane and went down the rabbit hole from cynical and edgy 4channer to true believer in the soros/bill gates/white genocide conspiracies makes these things less fun. I’ll never forget the day he called someone a n****r and wasn’t edgy shit but actual racial shit.

Used to be a fellow gaffer as well.

Where exactly did you think the endless demonisation and persecution of white men was going to end up?

You can’t really say ‘progressives hate White men and work tirelessly to fuck over their lives’ is a conspiracy theory because. You know. Everyone can read the twitter accounts of progressive activists and see the policy announcements of big tech and governments and anywhere that might convey status on someone.

 

[Marcus Aurelius]

Another important reminder. They do not forgive, these far leftist elements that control many of these tech companies don't believe in second chances.

Once branded a republican/conservative/"alt righter"/"gamer gater"/... you will always be one in their eyes, evidence or not. It's a hive mind.

So capitulating or trying to garner any favors will not work.

 

[Cato]

Having known someone who started as sane and went down the rabbit hole from cynical and edgy 4channer to true believer in the soros/bill gates/white genocide conspiracies makes these things less fun. I’ll never forget the day he called someone a n****r and wasn’t edgy shit but actual racial shit.

Used to be a fellow gaffer as well.

I am sorry for your friend, but we all have friends that turned out to be crazy.
I also can provide anectote: there was this guy in our friend group that was always searching. He was a good friend but there was always something.
(forgive me if I get the events in the wrong order)


Let me also do an anecdote:
--------------------------
Then one day he became a vegan. Not just a vegan but a super vegan. He had always been a vegan and vegan was then only thing he could talk about. He was basically the most vegan person ever and should have gotten a medal if there was some kind of international "most vegan person" competition.
Then one day he was not vegan anymore, and got super hostile if we even joked about 'last week you wanted us to forage for nuts and leaves'.

Then somewhat later he found god, he became a super catholic. Not go to church once a week catholic but "I think Opus-Dei are fake catholics corrupted by Satan" kind of catholic. Overnight. Flaggelation and shit, you have no idea. Most extreme catholic ever.
Until one day he wakes up and he is not catholic anymore. And he gets super hostile if someone mentions "but last week you said the Pope was a corrupted
servant of Satan."
Ok.

Then one day he decides he is a woman. In less than a year he goes through hormone stuff and starts surgery.
At this point his wife and teenage children have left him and even have restraining orders on him.
We have stopped associating him, actively avoid associating with him or allow him to be part of our group.
At this stage he is VERY unpleasant to be around and no one wants to deal with him and his issues any more.
Then one day he decides suddenly he is not trans anymore, but this time it is a lot harder to walk it back than veganism or super-catholic stuff.

We never meet or associate with him any more. His family has left him and I have no idea where his next obsession took him.
We wish the best for him in the future but would prefer to never have to meet him again. All his episodes eventually just became too much.
And with the hormones he got aggressive and violent. I hope the best for him the door back to our community is closed now.


See, that is also an anecdote. But I do not blame Veganism/CatholicChurch/Transgenders for this tragedy. He was mentally ill and that is all it was.
Maybe your friend was also mentally ill? Sounds like it if words on a website can change him that much.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

Where exactly did you think the endless demonisation and persecution of white men was going to end up?

You can’t really say ‘progressives hate White men and work tirelessly to fuck over their lives’ is a conspiracy theory because. You know. Everyone can read the twitter accounts of progressive activists and see the policy announcements of big tech and governments and anywhere that might convey status on someone.

I think there’s other avenues to take that on other than becoming a flag bearer for white power.

 

[hariseldon]

I am sorry for your friend, but we all have friends that turned out to be crazy.
I also can provide anectote: there was this guy in our friend group that was always searching. He was a good friend but there was always something.
(forgive me if I get the events in the wrong order)


Let me also do an anecdote:
--------------------------
Then one day he became a vegan. Not just a vegan but a super vegan. He had always been a vegan and vegan was then only thing he could talk about. He was basically the most vegan person ever and should have gotten a medal if there was some kind of international "most vegan person" competition.
Then one day he was not vegan anymore, and got super hostile if we even joked about 'last week you wanted us to forage for nuts and leaves'.

Then somewhat later he found god, he became a super catholic. Not go to church once a week catholic but "I think Opus-Dei are fake catholics corrupted by Satan" kind of catholic. Overnight. Flaggelation and shit, you have no idea. Most extreme catholic ever.
Until one day he wakes up and he is not catholic anymore. And he gets super hostile if someone mentions "but last week you said the Pope was a corrupted
servant of Satan."
Ok.

Then one day he decides he is a woman. In less than a year he goes through hormone stuff and starts surgery.
At this point his wife and teenage children have left him and even have restraining orders on him.
We have stopped associating him, actively avoid associating with him or allow him to be part of our group.
At this stage he is VERY unpleasant to be around and no one wants to deal with him and his issues any more.
Then one day he decides suddenly he is not trans anymore, but this time it is a lot harder to walk it back than veganism or super-catholic stuff.

We never meet or associate with him any more. His family has left him and I have no idea where his next obsession took him.
We wish the best for him in the future but would prefer to never have to meet him again. All his episodes eventually just became too much.
And with the hormones he got aggressive and violent. I hope the best for him the door back to our community is closed now.


See, that is also an anecdote. But I do not blame Veganism/CatholicChurch/Transgenders for this tragedy. He was mentally ill and that is all it was.
Maybe your friend was also mentally ill? Sounds like it if words on a website can change him that much.

I think there are many people searching for meaning, a product of the west taking away its sources of meaning (be they God or the family or the community) and replacing them with vacant consumerism and the self. Many of our current woes are closely linked to that.

 

[TheContact]

I'm hoping this doesn't lead to legitimate conservative voices being silenced as time goes on. I get that having the real crazies around isn't good for business, but I do enjoy that GAF seems like one of the few remaining havens for right wing speech that won't REEEE or #cancel whenever an opinion that isn't on the far left is shown.

Crossing my fingers for the future, and that a lot of the posters I enjoy reading don't end up banned or leaving.

it’s interesting that a post about not allowing conspiracy theories and fringe content is silencing specifically “conservatives”. I wonder why that is ...

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

it’s interesting that a post about not allowing conspiracy theories and fringe content is silencing specifically “conservatives”. I wonder why that is ...

Because conservatives preserve free speech and open debate. This means that some people will speak their conspiracies.

Also because conservatives have been pushed to the fringe of society, and progressives clap for it.

Also because conservatives have watched this process in other countries in the past 100 years, a marginalization of a culture's conservative beliefs paired with a frenetic progressive push to install new values and norms.

So it's natural to come to the conclusion that "no conspiracy" will disproportionately silence conservatives more than progressives, in the same way that "no books" would disproportionately affect literate people and not illiterates.

Progressives only seem to believe in conspiracies that have firm backing of corporations and politicians, which by definition aren't really conspiracies.

 

[QSD]

I think there are many people searching for meaning, a product of the west taking away its sources of meaning (be they God or the family or the community) and replacing them with vacant consumerism and the self. Many of our current woes are closely linked to that.

On this point I agree fully, but it became very hard on this board to talk about some of the problems with capitalism without being labelled a "commie".

Conspiracy type beliefs are (as you rightly point out) a kind of substitute for religion. Some people these days label themselves as "foodies" which (considering the amount of contradictory theories about what kind of diet is healthy) is also a quasi-religious category I would argue.

I am sorry for your friend, but we all have friends that turned out to be crazy.

THIS, one of my high school friends once dove down a (classic ancient aliens) conspiracy rabbit hole. It was pretty tiring being his friend for a while as he would constantly bombard me with all kinds of 'evidence' whenever we met. I'm an extremely skeptical person by nature so I patiently refuted what I could refute. It all culminated one summer in the early 2000's when he drove down to Bosnia from The Netherlands to help dig at a site known as "the bosnian pyramids" which are a bunch of odd-shaped hills in the Bosian landscape that some archeologist believed to actually be artificial, man-made structures. Of course they never found anything, though he was loath to admit it. Oh and I also had to argue him out of spending a lot of money to go see some kind of medium woman who claimed to be in contact with ET's. In the end luckily he grew out of this phase, and is now a happy family man. I just don't mention it anymore whenever I talk to him. He is also a person with a keen interest in spiritual matters, so I just consider it a part of his 'search for meaning'

One thing I do remember is that I would endlessly tell him to also read sources that disagree with his point of view, and he never would. If someone really wants to believe something it becomes really hard for them to judge that thing neutrally. At least Joe Rogan always openly admits he wants aliens to be real and can't be trusted to read/listen to sources with the appropriate amount of skepticism.

 

[hariseldon]

On this point I agree fully, but it became very hard on this board to talk about some of the problems with capitalism without being labelled a "commie".

Conspiracy type beliefs are (as you rightly point out) a kind of substitute for religion. Some people these days label themselves as "foodies" which (considering the amount of contradictory theories about what kind of diet is healthy) is also a quasi-religious category I would argue.

I would disagree that it's hard to discuss the problems of capitalism. I've certainly expressed my concerns on many occasions and it's not uncommon among those on what is now the right to take a similar view to the old left, that a small set of massive corporations got too big, exported our jobs to China and then fucked us. I think it's not hugely uncommon across the spectrum (excluding far left) to conclude that the corporations, left unchecked, are the undoing of everything good about western freedom and capitalism. Discussing the problems of capitalism only gets labelled commie when you want reparations or free money or don't think the consequences of your ideas through properly. As it is, I think we've missed the boat now for bringing the corporate world to heel and they are now our masters.

 

[nush]

I think there’s other avenues to take that on other than becoming a flag bearer for white power.

Now you tell me!? I Just placed my order on Amazon.

 

[lock2k]

Now you tell me!? I Just placed my order on Amazon.

Nush, whenever I look at your avatar I think there's hair stuck in my computer screen. Was that on purpose? If so, genius lmao

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

Because conservatives preserve free speech and open debate. This means that some people will speak their conspiracies.

Also because conservatives have been pushed to the fringe of society, and progressives clap for it.

Also because conservatives have watched this process in other countries in the past 100 years, a marginalization of a culture's conservative beliefs paired with a frenetic progressive push to install new values and norms.

So it's natural to come to the conclusion that "no conspiracy" will disproportionately silence conservatives more than progressives, in the same way that "no books" would disproportionately affect literate people and not illiterates.

Progressives only seem to believe in conspiracies that have firm backing of corporations and politicians, which by definition aren't really conspiracies.

Is it bad though I mean 40 years ago in my country being conservative meant supporting a dictatorship that had no civil liberties and had a state religion and in order to get a job amongst other papers you needeed a certificate from your priest that you were a Christian in good standing then we changed that now we have a democratic regime and being conservative means Being in favor of traditional family believing in God believing in the traditional Spanish customs like bullfighting and lowering taxes and keeping social services as an acceptable level. Well that was before Trump now we have another conservative party that is fiercely populist and Amongst other things preaches nostalgia for a dictatoship so I don’t know thanks for that I guess.

 

[Ornlu]

it’s interesting that a post about not allowing conspiracy theories and fringe content is silencing specifically “conservatives”. I wonder why that is ...

 

[QSD]

I would disagree that it's hard to discuss the problems of capitalism. I've certainly expressed my concerns on many occasions and it's not uncommon among those on what is now the right to take a similar view to the old left, that a small set of massive corporations got too big, exported our jobs to China and then fucked us. I think it's not hugely uncommon across the spectrum (excluding far left) to conclude that the corporations, left unchecked, are the undoing of everything good about western freedom and capitalism. Discussing the problems of capitalism only gets labelled commie when you want reparations or free money or don't think the consequences of your ideas through properly. As it is, I think we've missed the boat now for bringing the corporate world to heel and they are now our masters.

Well, there's not too much I disagree with here, at least you seem to realize that "the left" is supposed to be a bulwark against corporate power. There were a lot of people on this board who used "left" as a pejorative to dismiss anything they disagree with. It's down to the american 2-party system mostly. The democratic party might be slightly to the left of the republican party, but the democratic party is not "left-wing" by any other standard (speaking as a european)

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Is it bad though I mean 40 years ago in my country being conservative meant supporting a dictatorship that had no civil liberties and had a state religion and in order to get a job amongst other papers you needeed a certificate from your priest that you were a Christian in good standing then we changed that now we have a democratic regime and being conservative means Being in favor of traditional family believing in God believing in the traditional Spanish customs like bullfighting and lowering taxes and keeping social services as an acceptable level. Well that was before Trump now we have another conservative party that is fiercely populist and Amongst other things preaches nostalgia for a dictatoship so I don’t know thanks for that I guess.

Populism is typically a left / progressive thing. It is a warning sign that a culture's progressivism has stopped functioning properly when you see populism appearing on the conservative side.

Are you asking me if it's bad that voices get pushed to the fringe and silenced? Yes, it is bad. The bad behavior of people who wore the label of conservative and abused it does not mean that everyone else who wears that label should receive retribution. This is basic grade-school stuff that we all learned in the USA, that you don't punish people for the sins of the fathers (or the sins of the party, or the sins of the race, or whatever collectivist label is being used).

 

[QSD]

Populism is typically a left / progressive thing. It is a warning sign that a culture's progressivism has stopped functioning properly when you see populism appearing on the conservative side.

This is a pretty cheap take. Populism is bad, thus populism must be left. If populism is not left, then it is still the left's fault for not being left enough...?

I don't know if you've ever watched that much touted Jordan Peterson vs Slavoj Zizek debate (highly recommended) but in it Zizek makes the point that Trump is basically the ultimate post-modern president, he doesn't believe in objective truth, but believes that his interpretative framework is as valid as anyone else's and thus he can bend the facts to suit his narrative when it suits him. Compared to Trump, someone like Bernie Sanders is an 'old fashioned moralist', a conservative basically.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

This is a pretty cheap take. Populism is bad, thus populism must be left. If populism is not left, then it is still the left's fault for not being left enough...?

But... I don't think populism is bad. I don't think the left is bad. Conservative and progressive are descriptors, not slurs.

Is there any actual conversation on this subforum like we used to have, or only accusations of "cheap takes" based on misunderstandings?

I don't know if you've ever watched that much touted Jordan Peterson vs Slavoj Zizek debate (highly recommended) but in it Zizek makes the point that Trump is basically the ultimate post-modern president, he doesn't believe in objective truth, but believes that his interpretative framework is as valid as anyone else's and thus he can bend the facts to suit his narrative when it suits him. Compared to Trump, someone like Bernie Sanders is an 'old fashioned moralist', a conservative basically.

Trump is a wrecking ball for that very reason.

However, I don't believe that a leader has to share all your same beliefs. Nor does a leader have to cull anyone who doesn't follow their personal beliefs. Politics are better when they are transactional instead of drawing up teams/parties.

 

[QSD]

But... I don't think populism is bad. I don't think the left is bad. Conservative and progressive are descriptors, not slurs.

Is there any actual conversation on this subforum like we used to have, or only accusations of "cheap takes" based on misunderstandings?


Trump is a wrecking ball for that very reason.

However, I don't believe that a leader has to share all your same beliefs. Nor does a leader have to cull anyone who doesn't follow their personal beliefs. Politics are better when they are transactional instead of drawing up teams/parties.

Okok, no worries man, if I misjudged your post I apologize. I've gotten pretty used to "the left" being used as a pejorative on this board, but I completely agree it's better to discuss issues rather than labels.

Re: trump being a wrecking ball: it's hard to argue with that, certainly at the moment. But on this issue I'm the conservative, I don't think throwing in your lot with someone who's basic MO is lying about everything and who's only value system is "winning" is going to wreck the things that trump voters perhaps hoped to wreck. Give me an old fashioned positivist like Sam Harris or a moralist like Sanders or Tulsi any day of the week.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Okok, no worries man, if I misjudged your post I apologize. I've gotten pretty used to "the left" being used as a pejorative on this board, but I completely agree it's better to discuss issues rather than labels.

Re: trump being a wrecking ball: it's hard to argue with that, certainly at the moment. But on this issue I'm the conservative, I don't think throwing in your lot with someone who's basic MO is lying about everything and who's only value system is "winning" is going to wreck the things that trump voters perhaps hoped to wreck. Give me an old fashioned positivist like Sam Harris or a moralist like Sanders or Tulsi any day of the week.

Those hollow moral figures as partly why we are in this situation. Sam Harris, Sanders, and Tulsi cling vainly to an outdated liberalism that is based on logic and empathy. They're also spineless. Harris became yet another frothing anti-Trumper, Sanders bent the knee so much he looks like controlled opposition, and Tulsi still believes in many of the "systemic oppression" nonsense preached by her party.

To not be taken as some kind of partisan, the same tactics were used on the republican side, passing off the likes of W Bush and McCain and Romney as "strong godly men who stick to their beliefs" to the pain of us all. Conservatives tried the "old fashioned conservative" a la Ron Paul clan and look what happened.

Trump cleared a lot of the playing field so that ideas can breathe and people can engage with the political process again. Historic voter turnout in 2016. Historic voter turnout in 2018. Historic voter turnout in 2020. Trump got everyone to "rock the vote" more than any previous candidate. And the "hollow moral figures" are becoming more obvious.

I think Positivism is dead. It is not a sufficient compass for a society when the ideology itself fails its own standard (i.e. prove to me that logical positivism can accurately describe reality). We need people who have stronger principles than positivism can provide. There will always be "illogical" morals. Nations are not based on logic but on meta concepts like freedom, enterprise, and faith.

 

[Schrödinger's cat]

Maybe EviLore should consider finding alternatives to leftist services that were cracking down so the continuation of this site and he himself does not become dependant on them. Of course I understand this isn't easy and maybe even impossible.

I've got a PS3 with OtherOS still on it. Got about 25gb of HDD space. I could uninstall MGS4 and get it closer to 50gb.

Should be more than enough to host NeoGAF. EL, hit me up. Let's talk.

 

[Maiden Voyage]

What if the changes are actually EviLore's will and he's not kowtowing to the Silicon elite? Does it really change anything?

The conversations on Poligaf are largely the same. The biggest difference is that there are less derails about the validity of the elections results. I have seen only one thread get locked and that wasn't for a sourcing issue, it was because the Op was void of substance (the Op just linked to an article & had an incomplete title).

So far, to me, it seems the change has been a net positive and the only people getting banned that weren't before are the people who over-reacted to this announcement.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

Editing out, not the proper place.

 

[QSD]

Those hollow moral figures as partly why we are in this situation. Sam Harris, Sanders, and Tulsi cling vainly to an outdated liberalism that is based on logic and empathy.

What's wrong with logic and empathy? (note: I understand Peterson's argument that too much empathy is unhelpful, but some measure of empathy is certainly needed is society is going to coalesce)

They're also spineless. Harris became yet another frothing anti-Trumper,

I would certainly not call Sam Harris spineless, he's been very consistent in his views and has been pelted from all sides for them. If you consider he's written a book about the destructive influence of lying (which I fully agree with) it's completely consistent that he's vehemently opposed to Trump. Peterson on the other hand has said that he might have voted for trump, even though one of the rules in his book is basically "don't lie" so I feel he's in murkier waters.

Sanders bent the knee so much he looks like controlled opposition, and Tulsi still believes in many of the "systemic oppression" nonsense preached by her party.

To not be taken as some kind of partisan, the same tactics were used on the republican side, passing off the likes of W Bush and McCain and Romney as "strong godly men who stick to their beliefs" to the pain of us all. Conservatives tried the "old fashioned conservative" a la Ron Paul clan and look what happened.

I don't know enough about American politics to comment on this bit

Trump cleared a lot of the playing field so that ideas can breathe and people can engage with the political process again. Historic voter turnout in 2016. Historic voter turnout in 2018. Historic voter turnout in 2020. Trump got everyone to "rock the vote" more than any previous candidate. And the "hollow moral figures" are becoming more obvious.

What do you mean by "cleared the playing field"? I don't see how 'ideas can breathe' when you need at least some kind of shared frame of reference or value system to discuss ideas and evaluate them. In this I agree with Peterson that post-modernism is toxic, because conversation becomes impossible. I don't see how you can combat the corruption in any political system by electing someone who espouses no values other than 'winning'. The moment Trump lost all credibility to me was the moment he started shitting on McCain, basically ridiculing core conservative values like responsibility and loyalty because McCain didn't 'win'. It's very hard for me to understand why such a person seems like a solution to anything. Huge voters turnouts are nice but if the country is poisoned by lies to such a degree that a civil war seems a likely outcome, then the cure is worse than the disease.

I think Positivism is dead. It is not a sufficient compass for a society when the ideology itself fails its own standard (i.e. prove to me that logical positivism can accurately describe reality). We need people who have stronger principles than positivism can provide. There will always be "illogical" morals. Nations are not based on logic but on meta concepts like freedom, enterprise, and faith.

Meta concepts like "freedom, enterprise and faith" are also not self-justifying but need to be qualified. Trump has no principles at all, he'll espouse religious faith even though he's never been religious. He literally said (when he was younger) that if he'd ever run for president, he'd run as a republican because those voters are the stupidest and thus most easily misled. He's an utter cynic, not a person of any principle.

Edit: I'll be at work for the rest of the day so reply may take a while

 

[EviLore]

Maybe EviLore should consider finding alternatives to leftist services that were cracking down so the continuation of this site and he himself does not become dependant on them. Of course I understand this isn't easy and maybe even impossible.

GAF isn’t in danger of being taken down. Don’t concern yourself with whether we’re using “leftist services.”

 

[DGrayson]

...

Meta concepts like "freedom, enterprise and faith" are also not self-justifying but need to be qualified. Trump has no principles at all, he'll espouse religious faith even though he's never been religious. He literally said (when he was younger) that if he'd ever run for president, he'd run as a republican because those voters are the stupidest and thus most easily misled. He's an utter cynic, not a person of any principle.

This is false btw

FACT CHECK: Did Donald Trump Say Republicans Are the "Dumbest Group of Voters"?

Trump supposedly proclaimed that Republicans are the "dumbest group of voters" in a 1998 'People' magazine interview.

www.snopes.com

 

[EviLore]

What if the changes are actually EviLore's will and he's not kowtowing to the Silicon elite?

That's exactly what it is. "The Globalists" didn't tell me to change the Politics forum guidelines. I've been pushing back and removing people from Politics like Compsiox to prevent the forum from completely going off the rails prior to this. The plan was to make hard rules changes about the stolen election conspiracies from January 20th onward, but the Capitol Attack pushed the timetable forward and made it clear that significant changes would be necessary.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

What's wrong with logic and empathy? (note: I understand Peterson's argument that too much empathy is unhelpful, but some measure of empathy is certainly needed is society is going to coalesce)


I would certainly not call Sam Harris spineless, he's been very consistent in his views and has been pelted from all sides for them. If you consider he's written a book about the destructive influence of lying (which I fully agree with) it's completely consistent that he's vehemently opposed to Trump. Peterson on the other hand has said that he might have voted for trump, even though one of the rules in his book is basically "don't lie" so I feel he's in murkier waters.

Logic is a great tool. So is empathy. But they must be anchored by a worldview or a paradigm. Empathy can be short-circuited and used against you. So can logic. The implication is that a wholesome individual requires more than just logic and empathy to successfully navigate the world. I can think of at least one person who wrote a book about it:

I don't know enough about American politics to comment on this bit

What do you mean by "cleared the playing field"? I don't see how 'ideas can breathe' when you need at least some kind of shared frame of reference or value system to discuss ideas and evaluate them. In this I agree with Peterson that post-modernism is toxic, because conversation becomes impossible. I don't see how you can combat the corruption in any political system by electing someone who espouses no values other than 'winning'. The moment Trump lost all credibility to me was the moment he started shitting on McCain, basically ridiculing core conservative values like responsibility and loyalty because McCain didn't 'win'. It's very hard for me to understand why such a person seems like a solution to anything. Huge voters turnouts are nice but if the country is poisoned by lies to such a degree that a civil war seems a likely outcome, then the cure is worse than the disease.

I don't see how you can combat the corruption in any political system if the populace doesn't think there's corruption. Trump ran on the promise of "draining the swamp" and warned of a "deep state". These were not political planks in either party prior to Trump. At best, Party A would talk about undoing the actions of Party B, but there was little to no acknowledgement of the modern corruption in politics.

Nor was there acknowledgement of widespread corruption in the media. Similar to what I pointed out above, there was Fox News, and then some middle of the road sources like ABC and NBC, and they spent time bickering over who was reliable and who wasn't. But Trump was the first one to yank off the masks and show people that their media pundits cannot be trusted.

Doesn't mean Trump masterminded every step of the way or something. I think it's unnecessary to go that far when the impact itself is plainly observable.

Meta concepts like "freedom, enterprise and faith" are also not self-justifying but need to be qualified.

Exactly. Which is why people are swinging back to the ideologies that are willing to qualify them.

Meanwhile, the public experts using logic and empathy are happy to stomp on concepts like freedom, enterprise, and faith.

And I'm supposed to put my confidence that logic and empathy will keep me and my beliefs safe. Heh.

Trump has no principles at all, he'll espouse religious faith even though he's never been religious. He literally said (when he was younger) that if he'd ever run for president, he'd run as a republican because those voters are the stupidest and thus most easily misled. He's an utter cynic, not a person of any principle.

Edit: I'll be at work for the rest of the day so reply may take a while

You have to be pretty cynical to run as a politician at all these days. None of this is a refutation of Trump's role as a wrecking ball. People who deny Trump's warts or prop him up as a virtuous man are seeing what they want to see. This, however, is separate from Trump being used as a crude tool to clear out a lot of political cobwebs and dark closets.

The obvious lesson is that We The People can elect Trump, or another person like Trump, if we feel their concerns aren't being addressed at the Federal level. And We The People can take power away from the wrecking ball if we so choose, which was the result of 2020. Previous attempts -- like Bernie Sanders and Ron Paul -- kept getting swatted down by parties on Both Sides™ until Trump came along.

Enjoy work. I don't mind if you can't reply quickly. I'm not in a hurry.

 

[Soapy Wooder]

Keep in mind we already have these standards in place in gaming. We close threads for reasons like the “leak” or author of it being disproven, the source having absolutely no record of knowledge, or the source having a shaky history.

 

[Poop!]

That's exactly what it is. "The Globalists" didn't tell me to change the Politics forum guidelines. I've been pushing back and removing people from Politics like Compsiox to prevent the forum from completely going off the rails prior to this. The plan was to make hard rules changes about the stolen election conspiracies from January 20th onward, but the Capitol Attack pushed the timetable forward and made it clear that significant changes would be necessary.

At some point it had to turn. I personally was waiting for 1/6 as there was no more "just wait for" moments that Trump supporters could clamor on about. What is the alternative? It had to be shut down once there were no more avenues left. We as a society need to move on.

 

[wachie]

Oh my god, even GAF is banning free speech! They are out to silence the conservative right!!!1 /s

 

[Sterling88]

it’s interesting that a post about not allowing conspiracy theories and fringe content is silencing specifically “conservatives”. I wonder why that is ...

Because leftist media gets to decide what is and isn't 'a conspiracy'. Anything that doesn't fit their narrative makes you a crazy person or a nazi in their eyes.

 

[wachie]

Because leftist media gets to decide what is and isn't 'a conspiracy'. Anything that doesn't fit their narrative makes you a crazy person or a nazi in their eyes.

You need common sense, not "left media" or anybody else to filter whats BS conpiracy and what's not.

I'm glad GAF is making that decision.

 

[Ornlu]

You need common sense, not "left media" or anybody else to filter whats BS conpiracy and what's not.

I'm glad GAF is making that decision.

Sounds like white-supremacist enabling language, comrade. Cancellation in progress.

 

[Goro Majima]

Because leftist media gets to decide what is and isn't 'a conspiracy'. Anything that doesn't fit their narrative makes you a crazy person or a nazi in their eyes.

Specifically for the topic driving this thread, Fox News says that Biden won the election though. People like Chris Christie and Mitch McConnell have said that Biden won.

If that’s “leftist media” then that seems crazy to me.

 

[Halo is Dead]

Ok, so here are my honest thoughts on the whole thing. I understand why you did it. This site could have been nuked like the others with no further moderation. I agree with ending the voter fraud nonsense but I don't like the scorched earth policy on conspiracy theories in general.

Anyone who has done some honest research into the American government will tell you just how corrupt they are and just how much they lie to the American people. No to mention all of the fucked up wars and secret projects they have carried out over the past century. I am one the least people you will be talking about conspiracy theories but all this does is the give big tech reason to silence people who question the intent and actions of our government. Having skepticism is healthy and I think this is a over reaction when the vast majority of conspiracy nuts would rather sit in their basements.

I just don't like the broad stroke. I am skeptical now where this forum will go but I will trust the mods and EviLore to moderate it the best they can.

 

[Halo is Dead]

Japanese people get to live in peace, in a society that is flushed with cash and is constantly pumping out the latest technology.

I actually find it bizarre why people look down on the country despite the fact Japan is probably more influential than 70% of the world.

Japan is not exactly going great rn socially speaking. The have the highest rates of suicide in first world nations and their birth rate is dwindling because they are having less sex, and less relationships. Their obsession with technology is killing the soul of the people. Not trying to throw shade at them, but it is a legit problem they are facing.

 

[prag16]

And rightfully so. Derailing the democratic transition of power because the guy currently in charge wants to stay in charge is very, very scary shit.

This below is scarier to me than whatever you want to call what happened on 1/6.

But its your house man and its probably the only way to survive the fed crackdown in the near future. Im checking out of posting at most of my regular sites because clearly the globalist left are in the drivers seat of the west (in the USA they are the entire car), and your online presence will be counted and measured by them at somepoint, the fear in the air is certainly palpable.

it’s interesting that a post about not allowing conspiracy theories and fringe content is silencing specifically “conservatives”. I wonder why that is ...

The fuck is this. Was about to go on a tirade, but this post did a better job than I would have:

Because conservatives preserve free speech and open debate. This means that some people will speak their conspiracies.

Also because conservatives have been pushed to the fringe of society, and progressives clap for it.

Also because conservatives have watched this process in other countries in the past 100 years, a marginalization of a culture's conservative beliefs paired with a frenetic progressive push to install new values and norms.

So it's natural to come to the conclusion that "no conspiracy" will disproportionately silence conservatives more than progressives, in the same way that "no books" would disproportionately affect literate people and not illiterates.

Progressives only seem to believe in conspiracies that have firm backing of corporations and politicians, which by definition aren't really conspiracies.

Is it bad though I mean 40 years ago in my country being conservative meant supporting a dictatorship that had no civil liberties and had a state religion and in order to get a job amongst other papers you needeed a certificate from your priest that you were a Christian in good standing then we changed that now we have a democratic regime and being conservative means Being in favor of traditional family believing in God believing in the traditional Spanish customs like bullfighting and lowering taxes and keeping social services as an acceptable level. Well that was before Trump now we have another conservative party that is fiercely populist and Amongst other things preaches nostalgia for a dictatoship so I don’t know thanks for that I guess.

Funny. You're unintentionally making a case for horseshoe theory. The trend in the US certainly is not towards "more civil liberties" and it's going to get worse before it gets better.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

Funny. You're unintentionally making a case for horseshoe theory. The trend in the US certainly is not towards "more civil liberties" and it's going to get worse before it gets better.

I'm making a case why his claims that "Also because conservatives have watched this process in other countries in the past 100 years, a marginalization of a culture's conservative beliefs paired with a frenetic progressive push to install new values and norms." are not exactly true nor represent an ideal state of society.

But whatever.

 

[EviLore]

I agree with ending the voter fraud nonsense but I don't like the scorched earth policy on conspiracy theories in general.

The Politics forum has changed. You're welcome to stay if you follow the stated guidelines. If you're not interested in staying, it's a big internet out there and no doubt you'll be able to find somewhere else more to your liking.

 

[Halo is Dead]

The Politics forum has changed. You're welcome to stay if you follow the stated guidelines. If you're not interested in staying, it's a big internet out there and no doubt you'll be able to find somewhere else more to your liking.

I didn't say I was going. Nor do I post conspiracy theory threads but I simply wanted to say that I disagree with the approach. Sure there are a lot of crazy / dumb theories no doubt but I think there is still great value in questioning our government. They have continued to lie to us about countless wars raged by them.

 

[PhoenixTank]

We can still joke about Xaero Gravity being a mod's alt... or that every account on the site is actually an alt of EviLore , right? Nothing taken seriously by anyone of course, but the meta thread & ban thread shitposting have offered me many sensible chuckles in that vein.

 

[EviLore]

I didn't say I was going. Nor do I post conspiracy theory threads but I simply wanted to say that I disagree with the approach. Sure there are a lot of crazy / dumb theories no doubt but I think there is still great value in questioning our government. They have continued to lie to us about countless wars raged by them.

Understood, no worries.

 

[Rentahamster]

I didn't say I was going. Nor do I post conspiracy theory threads but I simply wanted to say that I disagree with the approach. Sure there are a lot of crazy / dumb theories no doubt but I think there is still great value in questioning our government. They have continued to lie to us about countless wars raged by them.

The point is that the legitimate criticisms of the shitty things government does are legitimate because there's proof and evidence. Not all conspiracy theories are created equal.

 

[Xaero Gravity]

We can still joke about Xaero Gravity being a mod's alt... or that every account on the site is actually an alt of EviLore , right? Nothing taken seriously by anyone of course, but the meta thread & ban thread shitposting have offered me many sensible chuckles in that vein.

 

[QSD]

Enjoy work. I don't mind if you can't reply quickly. I'm not in a hurry.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. Actually work is one of the things keeping me sane during covid lockdown since I can't work from home, so at least I get to shoot the shit with my colleagues.

Logic is a great tool. So is empathy. But they must be anchored by a worldview or a paradigm. Empathy can be short-circuited and used against you. So can logic. The implication is that a wholesome individual requires more than just logic and empathy to successfully navigate the world. I can think of at least one person who wrote a book about it:

I should definitely read Dostoevsky sometime so unfortunately can't comment on that reference right now. You obviously need more than both

I don't see how you can combat the corruption in any political system if the populace doesn't think there's corruption. Trump ran on the promise of "draining the swamp" and warned of a "deep state". These were not political planks in either party prior to Trump. At best, Party A would talk about undoing the actions of Party B, but there was little to no acknowledgement of the modern corruption in politics.

I don't understand what you mean by the first sentence. Obviously there is generally a lot of concern/suspicion about corruption in US politics, otherwise an oblique catchphrase like "drain the swamp" would never have caught on at all. There will only be more concern and cynicism henceforth I fear.
The problem is the fact that there are only 2 viable parties in American politics. I live in The Netherlands, population 17 million, and there are 14 political parties in our 'house of commons', and 3 parties in our government. For a country of 328 million, 2 viable parties is batshit. I'd compare them to 2 competing but largely indistinguishable aristocracies. The arrival of Trump hasn't really done much to change that, he is himself a kind of figure or symbol of (corrupt/entitled) aristocracy I'd say. I use the term aristocracy deliberately because Americans once had a revolution to get rid of European aristocratic rule, now they seem to be embracing it...?

Nor was there acknowledgement of widespread corruption in the media. Similar to what I pointed out above, there was Fox News, and then some middle of the road sources like ABC and NBC, and they spent time bickering over who was reliable and who wasn't. But Trump was the first one to yank off the masks and show people that their media pundits cannot be trusted.

It's difficult for me to comment about US media because I don't live there. General distrust of the media is justified, but at the same time it's turning out to be highly dangerous and destabilizing. I'd point to a general abandoning of journalistic standards of neutrality in reporting, in favour of a profit-based pundit/partisan model. (again here I see the negative influence of post-modern, post-truth thinking) Doctors take a hippocratic oath before they are allowed to practice. Journalism has a similar "sacred" function in a democracy but lacks any kind of behavioural standard or norm.

Exactly. Which is why people are swinging back to the ideologies that are willing to qualify them.

What ideologies are you referring to? I'm not a fan of ideology in general.

Meanwhile, the public experts using logic and empathy are happy to stomp on concepts like freedom, enterprise, and faith.

This sentence you need to elaborate. I don't see that many "happy" to stomp, I see a lot of inadvertent or reluctant stomping

You have to be pretty cynical to run as a politician at all these days.

this is a problem that needs addressing, just accepting it as "the way of the world" feels like giving up to me.

None of this is a refutation of Trump's role as a wrecking ball. People who deny Trump's warts or prop him up as a virtuous man are seeing what they want to see.

Agree

This, however, is separate from Trump being used as a crude tool to clear out a lot of political cobwebs and dark closets.

I sincerely hope that that's all he'll turn out to be, but I fear the ball is off the chain

Previous attempts -- like Bernie Sanders and Ron Paul -- kept getting swatted down by parties on Both Sides™ until Trump came along.

Well it certainly is some kind of achievement that he made it all the way to the presidency. But I fear he hasn't done much to cure Americans of the idea that they need to stan for their favourite flavour of corrupt aristocracy.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. Actually work is one of the things keeping me sane during covid lockdown since I can't work from home, so at least I get to shoot the shit with my colleagues.




I should definitely read Dostoevsky sometime so unfortunately can't comment on that reference right now. You obviously need more than both


I don't understand what you mean by the first sentence. Obviously there is generally a lot of concern/suspicion about corruption in US politics, otherwise an oblique catchphrase like "drain the swamp" would never have caught on at all. There will only be more concern and cynicism henceforth I fear.
The problem is the fact that there are only 2 viable parties in American politics. I live in The Netherlands, population 17 million, and there are 14 political parties in our 'house of commons', and 3 parties in our government. For a country of 328 million, 2 viable parties is batshit. I'd compare them to 2 competing but largely indistinguishable aristocracies. The arrival of Trump hasn't really done much to change that, he is himself a kind of figure or symbol of (corrupt/entitled) aristocracy I'd say. I use the term aristocracy deliberately because Americans once had a revolution to get rid of European aristocratic rule, now they seem to be embracing it...?

I think you understood my meaning in the first sentence fine, based on this reply. i don't think a democracy can combat corruption unless enough people think there's corruption. Trump was not the first politician ever to campaign on corruption, but he definitely rode the line between both parties and made that his focus. He "just started a conversation", as progressives love to say. Getting rid of corruption in gov't as a sentiment is not unique to either party. Both parties have constituents who think politics are corrupt, not just politicians on the "other side" but politicians in general. so Trump appealed to that sentiment and got votes from it.

He played a quasi-Third Party, in a manner of speaking.

As for our two-party system, I think that's an overblown "problem". Having numerous parties causes its own issues too.

It's difficult for me to comment about US media because I don't live there. General distrust of the media is justified, but at the same time it's turning out to be highly dangerous and destabilizing. I'd point to a general abandoning of journalistic standards of neutrality in reporting, in favour of a profit-based pundit/partisan model. (again here I see the negative influence of post-modern, post-truth thinking) Doctors take a hippocratic oath before they are allowed to practice. Journalism has a similar "sacred" function in a democracy but lacks any kind of behavioural standard or norm.

I don't know how it would be enforced without neutering its purpose. Unfortunately the issue is deeper: we have willingly let go of our old standards of "sacred", therefore nothing is sacred. Media isn't supposed to inform you of facts, it is to enlist you to the Right Side of History. In the same way that mobile companies profit from gacha whales, medai profits from zealots.

What ideologies are you referring to? I'm not a fan of ideology in general.


This sentence you need to elaborate. I don't see that many "happy" to stomp, I see a lot of inadvertent or reluctant stomping

this is a problem that needs addressing, just accepting it as "the way of the world" feels like giving up to me.

Agree

I sincerely hope that that's all he'll turn out to be, but I fear the ball is off the chain

Well it certainly is some kind of achievement that he made it all the way to the presidency. But I fear he hasn't done much to cure Americans of the idea that they need to stan for their favourite flavour of corrupt aristocracy.

I'm referring to any ideologies that are willing to quantify "freedom, enterprise and faith". An easy example is conservative health-and-wealth religious groups. If the secular world continues down a path of post-modern authoritarianism, it'll rankle normies who will intuitively feel their freedoms being squelched. I think this is beyond the scope of the thread, though, so I hope I've explained/answered without going too much further off topic.

 

[Valued Gamer]

Just checking if talk about Lizard People and Flat Earth is OK?