Social Media Outrage/Cancel Culture

[tooblue]

I thought Pelado's question was a fair question.



To your statement:



So if that's a fact, convince Pelado. Convince me. It was an interesting statement that made me think. But I'm not convinced.

Even if we were to agree that the next logical step from the formation of a federal government is the enforcement of social policies, that doesn't preclude a federal government from not taking on that role. Is that what the founders envisioned? If so, cite them. Your statement implies that only socialists would envision a federal government. That's too much of a leap for me.

But then perhaps I'm just a part of the mob, so feel free to disregard any of that.

My statement is self-evident¹. It is not addressing hypotheticals; in other words the US Federal Government does, as a matter of function and fact, [to use your terms] enforce social policies. This is inarguable, and a confirmation of the self-evident nature of my statement.

Further, it can be argued that the framers of the constitution believed in the type of Federal Government that operates in the US today, by virtue of the statements they made and the manner in which many of them governed. For example, per the link I have already shared in this thread, "Jefferson wrote to Madison that 'legislators cannot invent too many devices for subdividing property.'” Which, inarguably is a socialist idea.

If you follow the link, you can also find links to the writings and read about mandated socialist policies enacted by the framers of the constitution. For example: "Washington gave tax incentives to New England cod fishers to rebuild their fleets after the Revolutionary War on the condition that the captains and the crew sign contracts ensuring broad-based profit sharing among all workers. He also favored grants of substantial land to veterans of the Revolutionary War to make them into self-sufficient property-owners."

Only a narrow (or non-nuanced) reading of my statement, again using your words, implies that only socialists would envision a federal government [that regularly enforces social policies]." Many framers of the constitution clearly embraced wealth distribution² ideas and policies which are socialist ideas.³

1. My definition and sense for the use of the hyphenated term self-evident is: "clearly true and requiring no proof or explanation."

2. My definition and sense for the use of the terms wealth distribution is in part informed by a source such as britannica.com where it is stated the distribution of wealth is: "the way in which the wealth and income of a nation are divided among its population, or the way in which the wealth and income of the world are divided among nations."

3. My definition and sense for the use of the terms socialist ideas is informed by the fact that Canada, the country of my current residence, and the United States, the country of my birth up until young adulthood are both social democracies. Social democracies can be defined as: "a political, social and economic philosophy that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a liberal democratic polity and a capitalist-oriented economy."

Lastly, I argue an informed opinion on this message board as a means of individual expression. This message board was pragmatically chosen because I am a fan of BYU sports, and I share a common religious and cultural heritage with many of the other posters who also participate in discussions in its variety of forums.

My participation here represents an investment of time in what I consider to be a reasonably valued distraction of sorts. I am not interested in convincing anyone of anything. If my arguments are persuasive and convincing, then they are merely that. If not, then they are not.

[Bo Diddley]

My statement is self-evident¹. It is not addressing hypotheticals; in other words the US Federal Government does, as a matter of function and fact, [to use your terms] enforce social policies. This is inarguable, and a confirmation of the self-evident nature of my statement.

1. My definition and sense for the use of the hyphenated term self-evident is: "clearly true and requiring no proof or explanation."

Then I'll just say it was a *poor choice of words, because the very idea would seem to argue from a theoretical standpoint, which you are clearly not trying to do.

*I'm not trying to throw stones, because I'm the last person on Earth who should point out others' poor choice of words.

[tooblue]

Then I'll just say it was a *poor choice of words, because the very idea would seem to argue from a theoretical standpoint, which you are clearly not trying to do.

*I'm not trying to throw stones, because I'm the last person on Earth who should point out others' poor choice of words.

I appreciate that you are not trying to throw stones, but Pelado's original quip was: "How do you figure? I don't remember Madison reading a book on Marx." It is derisive in tone, aimed at mocking my words while ignoring the evident historical chronology of events; that Madison was born and governed before Marx was even born.

But I get that Pelado is part of the protected class here, while I am considered "intolerably cruel." So be it.

[Omaha 680]

I don't know a lot of people who are passionately supportive of a trans female competing and dominating in women's or girl's sports, but it sure is a fun hot button issue!

What was your event?

Sorry to interrupt the socialism talk; I missed this response.

FR why the dismissiveness? Even if it not widely supported, we were commenting on cases in Connecticutt where it is actually happening: trans girls dominating HS girls track.

I was a hurdler/long jumper. My best race was the 110 hurdles because I didnt have the stamina to compete well in the 300.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Pelado]

I appreciate that you are not trying to throw stones, but Pelado's original quip was: "How do you figure? I don't remember Madison reading a book on Marx." It is derisive in tone, aimed at mocking my words while ignoring the evident historical chronology of events; that Madison was born and governed before Marx was even born.

But I get that Pelado is part of the protected class here, while I am considered "intolerably cruel." So be it.

Derisive? Was just a reference to the lyrics from American Pie (Lenin read a book on Marx). At least a couple others caught it.

Lighten up, dude.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I appreciate that you are not trying to throw stones, but Pelado's original quip was: "How do you figure? I don't remember Madison reading a book on Marx." It is derisive in tone, aimed at mocking my words while ignoring the evident historical chronology of events; that Madison was born and governed before Marx was even born.

But I get that Pelado is part of the protected class here, while I am considered "intolerably cruel." So be it.

Good grief. Stop with the vicitim act. You whiffed on pelado's joke and started your usual persecution complex thing. We were mocking you because pelado is one of the nicest guys around here.

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

He’s a socialist. Trump is a fascist.

I thought the GOP was the group pushing us towards communism. Now it’s fascism? That’s a lot of isms.

[tooblue]

Good grief. Stop with the vicitim act. You whiffed on pelado's joke and started your usual persecution complex thing. We were mocking you because pelado is one of the nicest guys around here.

I understood it was a potential song reference. There were plenty of posters who did not because of tone. That's just a fact dude. As far as persecution complexes go, ya'll get right pissy if anyone offers a contrary view, and then holy sh** watch out ... things like a wholesale name change of the site happens.

[frank ryan]

I thought the GOP was the group pushing us towards communism. Now it’s fascism? That’s a lot of isms.

That's just 2 isms. I've never thought Trump to be a socialist.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I understood it was a potential song reference. There were plenty of posters who did not because of tone. That's just a fact dude. As far as persecution complexes go, ya'll get right pissy if anyone offers a contrary view, and then holy sh** watch out ... things like a wholesale name change of the site happens.

Lol. There you go. Someone disagreed with me so we changed the name of the website. That has to be exactly what happened.

[myboynoah]

Dang

Chris Matthews, longtime MSNBC host of ‘Hardball,’ announces his retirement

His departure capped a week of embarrassments.

Matthews apologized last week for comparing Sen. Bernie Sanders’s victory in the Nevada Democratic caucuses to the Nazi invasion of France.

He also was criticized for a skeptical interview with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) last week. Matthews asked Warren why she believes a female employee who sued former New York mayor Mike Bloomberg for allegedly telling her to “kill” her unborn child.

Bloomberg denied making the statement, and Matthews asked Warren, “You believe he’s lying? Why would he lie? . . . You’re confident of your accusation?” (Warren replied: “Why shouldn’t I believe her?”)

During President Trump’s rally in South Carolina on Friday, Matthews mistook South Carolina Democratic Senate candidate Jaime Harrison for Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.). Both are African Americans.

And on Saturday, journalist Laura Bassett wrote on GQ.com that Matthews made inappropriate comments to her and other women when they were guests on his show.

. . . . . . . . .

An MSNBC spokesman said the network and the host “mutually agreed” to the decision. Others at the network, who spoke on the condition of anonymity as they were not authorized to speak on personnel issues, said Matthews’s departure was tied to the negative attention he’s received in the past 10 days.

Those don't seem like firing offenses.

I always like Matthews. Didn't much agree with his politics, but he worked for Senator Frank Moss of Utah back in the day and I felt he understood Mormons and those from Utah. Maybe they felt he was getting too old. He's a young-looking 74.

[frank ryan]

Dang

Chris Matthews, longtime MSNBC host of ‘Hardball,’ announces his retirement



Those don't seem like firing offenses.

I always like Matthews. Didn't much agree with his politics, but he worked for Senator Frank Moss of Utah back in the day and I felt he understood Mormons and those from Utah. Maybe they felt he was getting too old. He's a young-looking 74.

His wife worked for the Marriots and he spoke respectfully about Mormons when Romney was running in 12. I haven't watched him for several years.

[Joe Public]

I thought the GOP was the group pushing us towards communism. Now it’s fascism? That’s a lot of isms.

Isms, in my opinion, are not good. A person should not believe in an ism, he should believe in himself.

[myboynoah]

Pearls.jpg

[SeattleUte]

Dang

Chris Matthews, longtime MSNBC host of ‘Hardball,’ announces his retirement

Those don't seem like firing offenses.

I always like Matthews. Didn't much agree with his politics, but he worked for Senator Frank Moss of Utah back in the day and I felt he understood Mormons and those from Utah. Maybe they felt he was getting too old. He's a young-looking 74.

I'm going to miss Ben Ben Shapiro's crappy impressions of Matthews. Bad impressions are the funniest.

https://twitter.com/realdailywire/status/1234646998889795584?s=21