I do genuinely feel kind of bad for them. — thewonder

The left has an honorable habit of being magnanimous. But when thou striketh the king, strike not to wound. We struck Trump and it would be a horrible mistake to grant him any mercy. His ilk should be shown none, until such time as there is evidenced contrition. I personally don't have the strength to maintain much more than my vote or some words on the internet, and leave it to the younger generation. But I warn them: The right would kill you if they could get away with it. That is why, when normally it might be long range planning to maintain the filibuster and placate middle-of-the-road Democrats (Manchin, et al), the gloves are off, it's too late, this is the last chance we will ever have the House, Senate and White House. Playing nice now will result in a mid-term shellacking of the left. Time to go all in or we'll get dummy again in 2024 and the it will be civil war.

I don't know. I can't imagine that reading 400 pages of personal and political insults and attacks can possibly have had a positive impact upon a person's psyche. While it is certainly clear that, by now, @NOS4A2 ought to have either have been willing to admit that Donald Trump was not all that great of a president or guy or, at least, give up on convincing a single other person to support him here, I do think that he is a human being and that we should stop making fun of him.

As this does fly in the face of the general deportment of The Philosophy Forum, I will speak to my own experience as to why you should agree to this.

I ultimately suffer from kind of a crippling internet addiction. I am fairly intelligent, but have no gift for prose, and it is quite common, because of my awkward phrasing, for people, particularly on online forums, to assume that I am either "pretentious" or a "pseudo-intellectual", the latter of which may be true, but, for all intensive purposes, is not relevant to this discussion. Because people mistakenly believe that chauvinist displays of intellectual superiority are clever and charming, they fear being associated with anyone who has been characterized as such above imprisonment without law, which is to say that they quite often take an instant disliking to me. Needless to say, this tends to result in that I find myself within negative social environments. I, in turn, often take great pains and efforts to alleviate the social ecology which I have found myself subject to, often to the point of absurdity, before coming, all too late, to the conclusion that I should just leave. It's not that I am addicted to using the internet per se; it's that I feel compelled to travail in the heedless attempt to improve my social standing for what I lack in self-confidence. On some level, my general plight has only been generated by what complexes I have given myself and, on some level, I do kind of suspect that society is just to blame.

Anyways, often finding myself maligned and isolated, what I can tell you about that is that in no ways does being mocked make you so inclined to take any other person's opinion, no matter how well articulated or reasoned, into any form of consideration whatsoever.

By that @NOS4A2, has consistently failed to win this uphill battle for, at least, the past two years, I would suggest that, like me, they could be somehow neurodivergent or having failed to cope with some sort of life crisis or something and, by that account, do genuinely think that we should stop making fun of them.

But when thou striketh the king, strike not to wound. — James Riley

What I am saying about @NOS4A2 is that he is just some isolated individual and, despite the geo-political bale of the Trump presidency, it ultimately doesn't reflect too well upon this forum for us to have mocked him for two entire years. It's also just simply the case that ignoring his comments in this thread is the only thing that can make it so that we just don't have to pay attention to them anymore.

Anyways, often finding myself maligned and isolated, what I can tell you about that is that in no ways does being mocked make you so inclined to take any other person's opinion, no matter how well articulated or reasoned, into any form of consideration whatsoever. — thewonder

I hope he doesn't change his opinions. He's an inspiration. Fuck him.

It's also just simply the case that ignoring his comments in this thread is the only thing that can make it so that we just don't have to pay attention to them anymore. — thewonder

Agreed. Self-discipline.

I don't understand why you, as one of the mods, are so dead set on keeping this going.

There's not really a way to explain this without just kind of laying it out there, but, were seeing a psychologist a panecea for any and/or all psychological plights, it kind of seems like it is the case, by that he has continued to engage in this debate for a grand total of 400 pages, he is the sort of person who needs to see a psychologist. In the interest of not having a detrimental impact upon such a person's psyche, I am suggesting that we should just this go now. He's been at it for, at least, two years.

I feel no need to psychologize this. He has a political position and is holding to it. It is profoundly harmful and stupid and destructive and it should be called out every time. It's heartening to see that it largely is, and I can only hope people continue to do it. I have no time for this 'we all have our stories/holding hands' hippie shit. You don't be nice to people who are spreading harm. You actively put them down, and encourage it.

If you weigh up the profound suffering caused by positions held by people like NOS and then find that your concern inclines to some anonymous moron on the internet, then you need to revaluate your priorities.

I haven't followed this too closely, but, to my estimation, though his position is what it is, he hasn't said anything that is too damaging. Though I haven't read all of his comments, as he hasn't been banned from the forum, I do assume for this to be true.

A person doesn't subject themselves to two years of psychological abuse on an online forum without something else going wrong with their life or mind. Even upon refusing to let go of Trumpism after Donald Trump was impeached twice, it doesn't seem like people should level attacks at such a person.

This is, perhaps, too evocative of an example, but, in high school, the people that this sort of thing would happen to would develop extraordinary complexes over later being compared to Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. As people who, at least, offer the pretense of being mature intelligent adults, I do think that we ought to be above the kind of conduct you would see from certain jocks who are avoiding coming to the realization that they have just taken things too far.

Furthermore, I don't think that the collective revelry that comes with the popular spectacle of taking shots at easy targets, from any political perspective, gets anyone anywhere. It can be fine to mock people to a certain extent, but, as he is clearly only so well versed in political philosophy, I can't help but compare this to an experience that I had in Catholic grade school where a group of fairly athletic boys had organizing boxing matches during recess that were kind of just sanctioned beatings of this kid who never could seem to repair his glasses.

What I am saying is that NOS4A2 is probably insane. A symptom of this is that he has devoted the past two years of his life to debating Trumpism in this thread. While we don't have to give any ground to Trumpism so as to be nice to NOS4A2, because he is insane, we should stop making fun of him. Even though there is a certain humor to this post, I'm not being wholly facetious and am sincerely trying to point this out.

All very well. I still fully encourage everyone to treat him like shit.

I don't really want to keep on like this, but I just don't think that you've put enough thought into this, as I have just done so, myself.

The first one-hundred and forty-five pages of this thread are just a relatively normal conversation about Donald Trump that you would expect from a philosophy forum. The last four-hundred and forty-five pages are just NOS4A2 trying to convince a single other person here to support Donald Trump. I don't think that I've ever participated within a thread for more than five to ten pages. By that he has done that, I do think that it is probable that he is insane. Carrying on like this seems likely to exasperate that, rather than alleviate it in any way, aside from that I think that he's the sort of person who believes that he likes to feed off of negative energy. Why give him the floor in that sense?

So I guess the question is, if Trump refuses to recognise the result of the 2020 election, and the party falls in behind him, then how can they qualify to contest an election? Unless they’re prepared to acknowledge they lost, then they should be disqualified from running on the grounds that that party won’t honour the democratic conventions that govern elections. — Wayfarer

Have you not learned anything?!
They are winners, they don't dwell on old failures and they don't listen to naysayers. Mark my words, they'll breeze over all past troubles, toward new victories.

Reviewing his term, when elected the Republican Party had a majority in both chambers of congress and held the executive branch. They lost it all in only four years, and particularly ungracefully at the end. Republicans don't learn is what you seem to be saying. — praxis

Or they'll view it as a minor hiccup. They are resilient, tough folks with a winner mentality.

Perhaps it looks like that because you yourself have extreme views? — Benkei

The prime minister here (the most powerful position in the country) congratulated Trump for the victory in the presidential election. So -- I'm not so hopeful.

Why give him the floor in that sense? — thewonder

It's a challenge, isn't it? How should a moral, liberal, democratic, cooperative person treat someone who refuses to cooperate?
Banning them would be against one's own moral principles. So what's left?

Have you not learned anything?! — baker

You don’t get it. What I’m saying is, Trump’s GOP should be ruled ineligible to stand candidates, unless Trump recognises the 2020 election. If they’re not going to observe the rule of law, then they can’t expect to be allowed to participate. Why isn’t anyone saying this??

Trump’s GOP should be ruled ineligible to stand candidates, unless Trump recognises the 2020 election. — Wayfarer

Ruled ineligible -- by whom?

The Supreme Court would be an ideal forum for such an argument. Seriously - get the logic. Trump refuses to acknowledge the validity of the election - so why should he be allowed to participate? Would you allow a known cheat into a chess tournament, or a swimming meet? Someone has to realise this and take action.

What I’m saying it, the price of being allowed to run, must be the acknowledgment that he lost. He can’t have it both ways. Get it?

Okay, but what's the point of continuing to have a go at NOS4A2 when he is probably insane and suffering from the delusion that he enjoys that this thread, which has outlived the Trump presidency, has come to revolve around more or less just everyone else here insulting him? He is not a challenging political opponent, which means that carrying on like this doesn't offer any of us a greater understanding of the world or the perspectives of those within it. It seems like the patrons of this forum just let themselves be bothered by him, when they know that he is just kind of intentionally being contrary, often escalating in a succession of vitriol. The whole thing just smacks of Nihilism.

Besides, letting things continue as such will have the effect of reminding me a period of American history that I would just as soon forget sooner rather than later.

Who decides who is allowed to run??
Is there a law about it?
Is there an official election commission in the US who decides on such matters?

What I’m saying it, the price of being allowed to run, must be the acknowledgment that he lost. He can’t have it both ways. Get it? — Wayfarer

That would be a matter of honor. Pffft.

The last four-hundred and forty-five pages are just NOS4A2 trying to convince a single other person here to support Donald Trump. — thewonder

No, they're not, you're not being precise. Some of it is abstract discussion about the US legal and political systems and other political systems. Some of it is people letting off steam. Etc.

Besides, letting things continue as such will have the effect of reminding me a period of American history that I would just as soon forget sooner rather than later. — thewonder

Die fighting or perish on your knees.

Who decides who is allowed to run??
Is there a law about it?
Is there an official election commission in the US who decides on such matters? — "baker

Convicted felons are not allowed to run. There are all kinds of rules. Someone has to make this argument. If he flouts the rules then he can’t be allowed to play the game. Very simple.

Convicted felons are not allowed to run. — Wayfarer

But then they first need to be convicted felons. And even then ...

There are all kinds of rules. Someone has to make this argument. If he flouts the rules then he can’t be allowed to play the game. Very simple.

Our prime minister was found guilty by a court of law and should now be serving a prison sentence. He isn't. Anything is possible.

There's a scene in the filmed version of Catch-22 where Nately, who is played by Art Garfunkel recites a variation of that that Zapata quote to an old opportunist Italian. The Italian responds, "You have it backwards. It is better to live on your feet than it is to die on your knees.". I've always thought that that was a very clever scene. I don't think that you'd get it, though.

I don't think that you'd get it, though. — thewonder

*sigh*
I would love to be wrong on this matter. I still sometimes hope I am wrong on this matter. I fear that I am not wrong, though.

It is as suspected. You wouldn't get it. It's nothing for or against you, as you'd have to have fucked up your life in a particular way in order to get it, but you just wouldn't get it. As much of a satire on extolling the virtues of cowardice as it is, it's also kind of a joke about how he should just take his advice. I can explain it to you, but you won't get it. People who say things like that tend to be kind of reckless, and, so, perhaps you'll get it someday? You'll laugh when you do.

it ultimately doesn't reflect too well upon this forum for us to have mocked him for two entire years. — thewonder

If a stray dog uses your living room for his bathroom, does it get some sort of squatter's rights for persistence? Acceptance is for the acceptable, tolerance for the tolerable, love for the lovable. and so forth. Within these schema errors are possible, but any long-term confusion of categories is a big mistake.

That’s not necessary, pal. If I wanted high-fives and consensus I’d probably be on some dark corner of the internet by now.

I feel zero pain from the digs—they’re as soft and brittle as imagine their chins are—and I just dig them right back anyways. C’est la vie. Besides, testing your ideas against the grindstone of criticism and free speech is a great way to pass the time during lulls in work. Unlike these vectors of propaganda that’s all I’m here for.

As for the remarks about my sanity I fear you’re projecting. So I’ll be sure to tread lightly around you just in case.

Well, okay, then, but I am saying that, as an insane person, you are probably somehow insane as well. I can't rationalize as to why a person would do this otherwise.

Back in the day if we wanted to know why someone did something we asked him. But yourself and others like to invent little tall tales to fill the holes. So far I’m insane, a charlatan, a Russian bot, a nazi, a man living in his mother’s basement. Perhaps one of these days someone will get it right, but so far it’s all swings and all misses from people who fancy themselves philosophers. That they’re all fellow travellers is no surprise. I just want to know: is this a method of some sorts? a coping mechanism? catharsis?

I feel zero pain from the digs—they’re as soft and brittle as imagine their chins are—and I just dig them right back anyways. — NOS4A2

If they were so painless you wouldn’t be so inclined to “dig them right back”. It’s okay to feel hurt, NOS. It’s okay to accept concern for your mental well-being. You don’t have to pretend to be the tough guy anymore. You can be yourself, for once. I for one give you permission to be human.

Thanks, but I think you’re overestimating the power of words, praxis. The old child proverb “sticks and stones” still holds true, in my mind. So I see the attempts at insult and belittling as little more than group think and ideological back-patting, the basest form of propaganda.