Patience and empathy have their limits. If you don’t listen to reason, evidence, and argument — you leave little recourse. — Xtrix

You treat people like they are your underlings. And you think they should just accept that, submit to you?

And blaming them is helping you how exactly?
— baker

Helping with what? — Xtrix

Changing them.

They are to blame, bringing everyone down with them, and patience is rightfully wearing thin.

Goodwill doesn’t last forever.

Again, there's that authoritarianism.

So, I take it you don't enjoy your life at all, or at least not very much? — Janus

What on earth makes you think that?

Well, sounds like you enjoy righteous indignation at least. It's an acquired taste; you have to bracket off the great annoyance caused by what you are indignant about or else it's more aggravating than enjoyable I'd say..

Nah. Righteous indignation rocks! People are addicted to it, it's orgasmic, and then some.

Well, expect backlash — baker

There was backlash before as well. So what does it matter.

The thing is that you see yourself as the arbiter of rationality. — baker

:yawn: More diagnoses.

I’m not doing that.

You treat people like they are your underlings. — baker

I do not.

Again, there's that authoritarianism. — baker

Nothing to do with authoritarianism.

Patience and empathy have their limits. If you don’t listen to reason, evidence, and argument — you leave little recourse. — Xtrix

For me it's about more than that. I will confess to being a child in this regard. I remember all too well listening to all their shit when they were in the cat bird seat. They had their chance to reason, evidence and argument. Too late. Maybe next time. You notice how Nancy Reagan supported baby stem cells once Ronny got oldtimers? Or Jim Brady got gun control once shot in the head? And Jim Baker got all inconvenient big gubmn't regulation once he lost his kin? Or Newt and Dick are soft on lesbians when it's their sister or daughter? The list can go on about how these people only get empathy when the shit comes home. Until then, everybody is on their own and fuck them. Well, guess what . . .

And now they threaten backlash when that is what they are currently getting. The problem for them is, they always lose the backlash game. Two steps forward, one step back, the long and gentle arc of history, justice, etc. And it only progresses when the left has finally had enough.

Goodwill doesn’t last forever. — Xtrix

Then it wasn't goodwill in the first place. It was pity.

There was backlash before as well. So what does it matter. — Xtrix

Do you want to be effective or not?

Then it wasn't goodwill in the first place. — baker

It was goodwill.

Do you want to be effective or not? — baker

Effective at changing minds? Surely.

If I have to engage in endless debate while the planet burns around me, in the name of goodwill, then no— I don’t want to be effective in that way.

Effective at changing minds? Surely. — Xtrix

Blaming people, limiting your goodwill, showing contempt, considering them infantile, irrational, and so on is _not_ effective in changing people's mind.

Effective at changing minds? Surely.

If I have to engage in endless debate while the planet burns around me, in the name of goodwill, then no— I don’t want to be effective in that way. — Xtrix

Don't worry, cancel culture, consequences, ostracization, passports, mandates, sickness and death will be effective. They'll cry like little puppies about big bad authoritarian gubmn't treading on them, but they had their chance to debate politely on the merits of the science and consider what the experts had to say about what the experts had to say about what the experts had to say. Their bed may be uncomfortable, but they made it.

This about sums it up:

https://www.facebook.com/TheIronSnowflake/photos/a.156018051569910/1229385930899778/?__cft__[0]=AZX0qYdsLHlTE7oY1jfkxEDWY8jQLTn8tm_95uBh36D1SEPkjDrYDrtRA5ysN7IaBaXqqBSPRmUEKcejrIUc5xOVq2bWb15JXSKYf2WeJCmN8fI-QvMaT7scLQ_5wnS-gQweFE8gDRDuYBpqtlzH8qTA&__tn__=EH-R

And this:

https://www.facebook.com/TheIronSnowflake/photos/a.156018051569910/1229410574230647/?__cft__[0]=AZXdy3HRlRMz9FkddNOHk64AxCDtgYC6FLKXB-u5svbxo7kIjsbXerQ0jFV8C0jNb73SCCk32xTGgIG77KVdPOpCNBJftcrNcbSQc7ZbzgUdiuk0LSz3d8dOpdfFGI0sSl6QxZcKNNo-AGOc1rJlLo5W&__tn__=EH-R

I don't know if it's forbidden to post links like that, but if so, I'll stop. It seems kind of weak, like I'm not thinking on my own two feet, but some folks just say it better.

On point with devaluation. I'm not devaluing until they tell me to:

https://www.facebook.com/TheIronSnowflake/photos/a.156018051569910/1229235150914856/?__cft__[0]=AZUnIRGF0EOAdqgrtaPQvTmSKgbkRPq9bqfXpP2QPfiP-8_HUtHwazBVE4IbWj-DB0cQ0f4F2Pj4Nhfg6rZylsZcjn8gu3P1xPPVj2HMK-zs5pyOfQ__-ORUAgK4F-kSaI32HtzfoI7tNLaQWPj78pHL&__tn__=EH-R

It doesn't have much of a practical effect to devalue people, does it?

It's mostly like venting behind someone's back, right?

Oh, and this:

Well, I never took you for an optimist. — Tom Storm

How about taking your own advice and actually get to know a person?

It doesn't have much of a practical effect to devalue people, does it?

It's mostly like venting behind someone's back, right? — frank

Actually, it does. Every time people get up before the podium and devalue the position of the opposition, people take that under advisement for the voting booth. Same with editorials. Don't even get me started on war.

It's not all venting behind people's back, either. For instance, you are here endeavoring to devalue my position on devaluing. Granted, you are not doing it to my face, but you aren't exactly doing it behind my back either. And rest assured, you could do it to my face with impunity. Sticks, stones, all that.

P.S. If you would like to distinguish between the position and the person, just remember what I've already said on that point: Ownership of the party (platform/position) reflects on the person. Not because I want it to, but because they want it to.

Actually, it does. Every time people get up before the podium and devalue the position of the opposition, people take that under advisement for the voting booth. Same with editorials. — James Riley

So we aren't devaluing people, but rather attitudes, beliefs, and so on. Works for me.

Devaluing here just means we're calling out someone's bullshit. I think it's important to realize that the deplorables we're thinking of here are doing the same thing, many of them, anyway. They truly believe it's foolish to trust the government or science or what have you. If they spend time in an echo chamber, it becomes normalized. I know people who are like this and they think I'm as deluded as I think they are.

It's become an accepted narrative in some leftist circles that the attitudes of these people are a direct result of the neoliberal policies that have prevailed since the 1980s. So far from being lice on the skull of an otherwise healthy society, they're a predictable side effect of a social disease.

So we aren't devaluing people, but rather attitudes, beliefs, and so on. Works for me. — frank

I may have edited on my P.S. subsequent to your response. In any event, I do devalue people who own ideas that I likewise devalue. I believe in personal responsibility. Academic philosophy might allow a divorce, but in the real world, not so much. Parties, people, ideas (groups, platforms, members) can marry each other and, like felony murder, the driver who did not pull the trigger was still on board for the killing.

I agree that both sides do it. I know for a fact that I and my opinions are both devalued, all the time. While I am not a member of any group, per se, and while I believe "liberal" is not a person but a position, I can understand why I am deemed to be married and I accept that view unless and until I disown my spouse.

In the end, though, valuation is a consideration when deciding how much we want to spend; how valuable an idea, a group or an individual is. You, as a health care provider, may not want to distinguish between someone who honors, respects and looks up to your efforts, and another who thinks you are part of a conspiracy, full of shit and not worth listening to. That's fine. I only devalue you and your position to the extent you believe all ideas, groups and individuals are equal on your gurney. I disagree. That doesn't mean I think your value is zero. Far from it.

How about taking your own advice and actually get to know a person? — baker

What a curious reaction. And here I am thinking this is a site dedicated to making comments on comments.

, I do devalue people who own ideas that I likewise devalue. I believe in personal responsibility. — James Riley

So little Johnny thought 5+5=11. You're going to devalue him because he was mistaken? How does that make sense?

You're going to devalue him because he was mistaken? — frank

Relative to little Sally who nailed it, yes.

How does that make sense? — frank

It makes sense because I'm not going to hold little Johnny to the same standard of value as I would for an adult anti-vaxxer who should know better. I accord little Johnny a much higher value. Nevertheless, not as high as little Sally.

Of course, there would be other factors at play. Did little Johnny assume five adult males + five adult females, one of each which procreated and had one child for a total of 11 people? Hmmm. Did he ask "5 what + 5 what? And what do you mean by +? And what do you mean by = ?" Then I would value little Johnny more. But if he was fucking off in class and not paying attention and actually thought 5 apples + 5 apples made for 11 apples, then not so much.

Johnny to the same standard of value as I would for an adult anti-vaxxer who should know better. I accord little Johnny a much higher value. Nevertheless, not as high as little Sally. — James Riley

You've got quite the cosmic scale working there. Interesting.

You've got quite the cosmic scale working there. Interesting. — frank

The me in me says we all do it, whether we admit it or know it or not. But then, that's me. Perhaps there are some real Boy Scouts out there, some real Mother Teresa's that don't value people. For them, even Hitlers, are invaluable.

What on earth makes you think that? — baker

Nah. Righteous indignation rocks! People are addicted to it, it's orgasmic, and then some. — baker

I can only speak for myself. Feeling indignant is far more annoying than it is orgasmic; in fact it is not orgasmic at all. If I ever get to the point where I think righteous indignation is better than sex then I'll know I'm no longer enjoying life very much.

:up: :strong:

The me in me says we all do it, whether we admit it or know it or not. But then, that's me. — James Riley

I really don't know what you're talking about. It just doesn't mean anything to me to value people one way or the other. I guess it's working for you, though.

There is your extreme again, assuming devaluation is the assessment of no value. Just because I think your widget isn't worth what you are asking for it, doesn't mean I think it's worthless. — James Riley

As a clarification I'm stating the valuation of the widget and the person selling it should be separate matters. So, just because my widget is worth less than I'm asking; it doesn't me I am worth less because of it.

It just doesn't mean anything to me to value people one way or the other. — frank

Do you find all people invaluable?

Do you find all people invaluable? — James Riley

There's no way to put a value on a life.

As a clarification I'm stating the valuation of the widget and the person selling it should be separate matters. So, just because my widget is worth less than I'm asking; it doesn't me I am worth less because of it. — Cheshire

While they may be separate matters, they can inform each other. Someone who is selling meth does indeed have a different valuation than the meth itself. I never said they tracked equally.

There's no way to put a value on a life. — frank

Okey Dokey. I guess Hitler and Mother Terresa are of equal value. One thing is for sure, you need to keep your day job and not try for the life insurance industry, or Worker's Compensation, or . . . etc.