"Fake News" vs "Truth"

I could definitely be wrong....but it sounds as if you agree that "facts" are not all that important right now...and "truth" really doesn't matter
the outcome will be the same regardless.

 

Close. Facts are important. Just not as important as rights- both to those who want the right to choose for themselves and to those who want the right to choose for others. Some truths matter more than other truths, and the truth that matters most right now is that we're in an existencial fight between the will of the individual and the will of the collective.

 

Okay....but how do you explain that to the majority of folks who elected Biden?
There are "those who want the right to choose for others" that seek to eliminate those majority votes....
would you take away their rights to preserve your own?

 

False.

 

Thanks for the block quote, gets the truth out to more legitimate posters and lurkers.

 

Gosh another well thought out RW reply.

 

And just like that, yet ANOTHER LW Irony Universe BANGS into existence!

 

You got nothing. All hat and no cattle.

 

As someone who sees things as a fight between partisans over political power, I see at least one party leader right now actively trying to throw out the results of his own electoral loss with many in his party willing to back him. I also see the fear of this man put into his own party members - those who dared speak out against him four years ago are either enthusiastic supporters now, or are largely excised from power. What is your reasoning to someone like me that this is anything but an alternative and faster form of authoritarianism (ie: the strongman)?

 

That its clear to many of us that the election was stolen. And if it wasn't (or we can't prove it) then we're stuck between two forms of authoritarianism- dictatorial tyranny and the tyranny of the (imo- manufactured) majority, aka mob rule.

To put another way, many people don't see a meaningful difference between one tyrant, a small group of tyrants and a large political majority of tyrants- the end result in all cases is that we lose our individual rights to tyranny. How big the group of tyrants is doesn't make it any more or less acceptable.

To put even another way: individual rights > democracy. Democracy was embraced as a means for The People to protect their individual rights from being infringed by theelite class. But it has always come with a warning that the political majority could use democracy to make themselves the elite class over the political minority. When that happens, democracy is of no more use to that political minority.

Supposing the election was entirely legitimate (which I don't), then we have the choice of accepting the legitimate election of authoritarian collectivists that want to sacrifice our individual choice to some grand consensus of the greater good, or we accept a 'dictator' that seeks to undermine democracy in order to- what? Stand up for individual liberty and self determination? Given the choice between a democratic tyranny were my prosperity rests on the whims of a popularity contest, and a dictatorship that primarily wants to leave me alone and let me succeed or fail on my own, thats not a hard choice.

 

That's rather profound. Original?

 

Well, one thing is certain. A society that appeals to the authority of media and politicians will never arrive at the truth. Because neither deal in facts.

 

Afaik

 

More like what you want to hear and they want you to hear. The MSM ceased dealing in facts long ago. What they peddle is not even opinion, it is propaganda and crafted in such a way that it appeals to those who cannot think for themselves or care to. When you are deaf to what is beyond the echoes you willingly cede your intellectual filter to the herd.

 

Fake news is propaganda not fact which is all we get from the MSM. If you believe in that twaddle it is because you are intellectually lazy.

 

I agree - so choose your news sources wisely. Ignore all the networks and shows that offer commentary and still to the morning/evening news programs that do just that - report the news.

 

Kinda difficult to discuss with someone who begins by announcing his belief in a stolen election, but once you get past the irrational fear-mongering, what you end up with is anarchy.

If you want to be left alone, to succeed or fail on your own, you are free to extract yourself from society and do what you will. Maybe...just maybe...we can make an exception to "alone" by allowing you a dog and a cat.

 

lol...guess I would prefer to be called "intellectually lazy" than what I would be if I believed Trump won the election...
on second thought....it would probably be the same

 

Actually, he has a point.

Have you ever tried believing in things without evidence? Have you ever had to constantly rationalize someone's behavior? These require a high level of intellectual effort to achieve.

 

Good point....sounds like an accurate "rationalization" of his behavior. lol

 

Thank you for your honest reply. It is incredibly disappointing to read that, but it is better than skirting the issue.

Our democratic institutions, most especially the elections, are the primary reasons we have those freedoms to begin with. The dictatorship you posit that will leave you alone is under no constraint to leave you alone. The collectivist who doesn't leave you alone has another election in 2-6 years, where by infringing your rights too much may only end with their own ousting from power. It's why congress, even when one party has a majority in both chambers, routinely fails to do anything significant and punts to the executive / judiciary constantly on anything contentious (immigration reform / gun rights / abortion). I see zero chance currently of a medicare for all, expansion of the supreme court, or other contentious legislation being passed even if D's win the GA runoffs. There is always someone in an unsafe district / swing state looking ahead to the next election.

Regrettably, it sounds like you are already in the camp of "victory or death". While I have no love for the collectivists as you term them, and have a number of issues with our FPTP popularity contests, I am also unaware of any dictatorships that have remained benevolent for any length of time. We find ourselves in a world where the democratic nations of the world also happen to be the freest in terms of personal liberties, and the dictatorships of the world happen to be decidedly less free. It is like the saying, democracy is the worst form of government, except for all of the others.

 

Agree completely.

I see a much more basic breakdown in the arguments I've read recently. Detractors from democracy only have an issue with majority rule when they lose presidential elections. These same detractors fully support democracy when they win, and for all other elections; federal, state, local and "what does everyone want for dinner?"

It's a thinly veiled reaction to their candidate's loss, which some take very personally. Many Clinton voters reacted in much the same manner; they took it personally, but they didn't rationalize by attacking the very source of our freedom.

The term "collective" is ambiguous, and the line is being blurred between "collective" and "the will of the people." The majority becomes the "mob," and those whose candidate lost must be protected from the mob.

It's not new behavior. I remember similar reactions when Obama and Clinton won. The irony is that executive power has been increasing steadily for decades, and some of us, including me, have been mentioning this for almost as long.

The solution involves ending the partisanship started, in my opinion, by Gingrich, and return to a time when the president of one party had a working relationship with the speaker from another. Kinda like Tip and Ronnie. It can happen, and if anyone is old enough to remember that cooperation, it's Joe Biden. This time it's the Senate leader of the opposing party, and I think Mitch is gonna surprise a lot of progressives (and others who distrust him as much as I do).

 

The only source like that that I have found is CBS News radio -- not TV, AM radio. There is not the slightest bit of editorializiing. Strictly facts.

Interestingly, it only takes 3 minutes or so to broadcast the only news I hadn't already heard,, meaning that the 24 hours of "news" on CNN is 99.9% opinion.

 

CNN, Fox, OAN and MSNBC.

 

What about them? All opinion, you mean? I agree with that.