- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
If I had my druthers, this forum would be labeled “Discussion” or “Current Events.” Not to be policed any differently, just to avoid assuming that actual debates happen here.
Note: The following is written from a US POV but the point is global. Visit the site before commenting, s’il vous plait.
“Yes, divisiveness is a weapon of mass destruction. It has the power to destroy us without launching a missile, dropping a bomb, or firing a bullet. Divisiveness is the weapon that charts the future path of rockets, missiles, and bombs. The internal and external enemies who threaten the destruction of the United States have been sowing the seeds of division for years, just waiting for the harvest. ISIS, racism, bigotry, and ignorance thrive on our dysfunction. They will hammer the wedge more each day if we don’t wake up from our sleepwalking toward the abyss.”
https://ctmirror.org/category/ct-viewpoints/divisiveness-a-weapon-of-mass-destruction/
20 Mar 19
@JS357
I had to look up druther...so internationality was lost in the first few words...
In fact ideology is a sharp weapon. Sowing
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
20 Mar 19
@ponderable saidSorry. The etymology: “late 19th century: from a US regional pronunciation of I'd rather, contraction of would rather.” Are we OK?
@JS357
I had to look up druther...so internationality was lost in the first few words...
In fact ideology is a sharp weapon. Sowing
@js357 saidIf I had my druthers, this forum would be labeled “Discussion” or “Current Events.” Not to be policed any differently, just to avoid assuming that actual debates happen here.
If I had my druthers, this forum would be labeled “Discussion” or “Current Events.” Not to be policed any differently, just to avoid assuming that actual debates happen here.
Note: The following is written from a US POV but the point is global. Visit the site before commenting, s’il vous plait.
“Yes, divisiveness is a weapon of mass destruction. It has the power to destr ...[text shortened]... he abyss.”
https://ctmirror.org/category/ct-viewpoints/divisiveness-a-weapon-of-mass-destruction/
Yes Indeed. I posted something like this before. Perhaps politics needs it's own forum.
Divisiveness is a weapon of mass destruction. It has the power to destroy us without launching a missile, dropping a bomb, or firing a bullet.
I agree, but don't know what can be done about it. I watch networks like FOX News and MSNBC sowing the seeds of divisiveness every day. I guess it's profitable to promote unrest and mistrust. All I can suggest is, don't allow the networks to make up your mind for you like so many do.
Think for yourself.
🙂
@js357 saidIs destruction always bad?
If I had my druthers, this forum would be labeled “Discussion” or “Current Events.” Not to be policed any differently, just to avoid assuming that actual debates happen here.
Note: The following is written from a US POV but the point is global. Visit the site before commenting, s’il vous plait.
“Yes, divisiveness is a weapon of mass destruction. It has the power to destr ...[text shortened]... he abyss.”
https://ctmirror.org/category/ct-viewpoints/divisiveness-a-weapon-of-mass-destruction/
@whodey saidNot when it's destruction of anti-human anti-God Trump supporters. The worse mistake Lincoln made was not destroying the treasonous south when we had the chance. Now, we are paying again for that mistake. In my opinion, it's time to round them all up and finish the job!
Is destruction always bad?
@kingdavid403 saidAs I suspected.
Not when it's destruction of anti-human anti-God Trump supporters. The worse mistake Lincoln made was not destroying the treasonous south when we had the chance. Now, we are paying again for that mistake. In my opinion, it's time to round them all up and finish the job!
@js357 saidIf people fundamentally view the world differently won't there be divisiveness? There were always some issues like abortion, death penalty and gun control which there seemed to be diametrically opposed views. But it seems now people have contradictory visions of what every person is entitled to and who should pay for things. Unless people magically see start seeing the world the same way, I'm not sure how we can get more philosophical harmony.
If I had my druthers, this forum would be labeled “Discussion” or “Current Events.” Not to be policed any differently, just to avoid assuming that actual debates happen here.
Note: The following is written from a US POV but the point is global. Visit the site before commenting, s’il vous plait.
“Yes, divisiveness is a weapon of mass destruction. It has the power to destr ...[text shortened]... he abyss.”
https://ctmirror.org/category/ct-viewpoints/divisiveness-a-weapon-of-mass-destruction/
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
20 Mar 19
@quackquack saidSome psychologists say one approach might be to identify superordinate goals which are goals that demand attention and compel people who are opposing each other to work together for a common outcome, in a way that brings about reconciliation and continued cooperation. Some people thought that the UN and EU would be examples of cooperation to break the escalating threat of nuclear war in the latter half of the 20th C. But both of those attempts seem to have poison pills.
If people fundamentally view the world differently won't there be divisiveness? There were always some issues like abortion, death penalty and gun control which there seemed to be diametrically opposed views. But it seems now people have contradictory visions of what every person is entitled to and who should pay for things. Unless people magically see start seeing the world the same way, I'm not sure how we can get more philosophical harmony.
20 Mar 19
@js357 saidI respect what you are saying but even the forced cooperation examples you give are very controversial. Brexit shows there is a fundamental dispute over whether the EU is even preferable for Europe. The UN is given limited power because the idea of giving up your countries power to one world power is at best very controversial. I think the idea of forced cooperation with one country would be very unpopular I can't imagine the controversy in letting other countries override a single county's policy.
Some psychologists say one approach might be to identify superordinate goals which are goals that demand attention and compel people who are opposing each other to work together for a common outcome, in a way that brings about reconciliation and continued cooperation. Some people thought that the UN and EU would be examples of cooperation to break the escalating threat of nuclear war in the latter half of the 20th C. But both of those attempts seem to have poison pills.
@quackquack saidBut those views seem to correlate with level of education ...
There were always some issues like abortion, death penalty and gun control which there seemed to be diametrically opposed views.
Now if everyone was educated, perhaps
everyone would agree more on major issues?
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
21 Mar 19
@kingdavid403 saidEver heard of loving thine enemy? Don't let yourself become like them. Limit yourself to locking up the real criminals like Trump's court, have forgiveness for the majority of his followers who are merely idiots.
Not when it's destruction of anti-human anti-God Trump supporters. The worse mistake Lincoln made was not destroying the treasonous south when we had the chance. Now, we are paying again for that mistake. In my opinion, it's time to round them all up and finish the job!
@wolfgang59 saidI think you are assuming you are correct and that if people really understood the issue they would think like you. I don't believe that different views of the world or how to balance certain things that society value is based on education or that there even is a correct answer.
But those views seem to correlate with level of education ...
Now if everyone was educated, perhaps
everyone would agree more on major issues?
If you believe abortion is the killing of a living thing and therefore morally wrong you will not agree that it is a permissible medical choice. Similarly if you believe that death is a legitimate punishment for certain heinous crimes then you will not believe it is murder. I'm not sure even two people who have differing views will come to a conclusion via discussion... I certain don't see how you believe you can convince the whole society to see it your (or my or anyone's) way.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
@quackquack saidHowever, education can enlighten you on the various situations in which pregnancies occur and decisions are made (such as rape/incest) the technical aspects of abortion (such as the ‘when life begins’ question), the development of the zygote, chemical versus surgical abortion, ‘morning after’ treatments; etc. Education can help you be more effective in promoting your interests, whichever side you are on.
I think you are assuming you are correct and that if people really understood the issue they would think like you. I don't believe that different views of the world or how to balance certain things that society value is based on education or that there even is a correct answer.
If you believe abortion is the killing of a living thing and therefore morally wrong you will ...[text shortened]... don't see how you believe you can convince the whole society to see it your (or my or anyone's) way.