Certainly. They should be punished as well. The contention is proportionality as well. Is one group significantly over represented? Is one group using power to do it openly?
Stereotyping is not necessarily bad, or untrue though.
Well the people who are telling me to go buy an EV because I’m complaining about the cost of gas or telling me to go take a kickboxing class or drink a margarita because inflation is high are not my Friends. That seems like an easy enough observation.
He’s going along with the GAE conspiracy theory stuff.
Or pretending to, who knows at this point.
What conspiracy theory are you talking about exactly? Bro, go to literally any International Relations graduate or post-graduate program (including some of the so called Presidential Schools like the program I attended and graduated from) in the entire country and you will hear the term “Liberal World Order” used unironically lmao. A term that was only well used and known academic jargon until it was uttered on CNN last week.
Even the feeders for the administrative state don’t pretend the GAE is just a conspiracy theory, they just don’t call it that.
A lot of assumptions there.
Maybe another group is making up grooming stuff about another group, or using “grooming”, being the loaded word it is, in a mis or disinformational way?
That’s the question I ask myself.
These games run deep and wide…
We just had an example of it in my part of the country. I got to see it happen from the grass-roots level, and those folks were taking their cues from a higher level of organization.
Bwahaha.
Did you pay out of pocket for that?
Tell me someone else paid for it please.
LMAO I got grants, tuition waiver, and stipends as a graduate assistant. I also went to one of the Presidential Schools that is structured for practitioners and not to send students back into academic employment, so it’s extremely cheap compared to most other APSIA member schools.
GAE equals liberal world order?
They really are just two different terms with two different connotations for the same thing: the post World War II US led “rules based” world order. Obviously when proponents of the “Liberal World Order” say it they mean it in a positive manner; GAE is negative.
Some things are true, some things seem true…
Best way to spread dis and mis information. I mean, dis and mis serve their purpose, they are not the ends desired, right?
QANON, GAE, et al. Some truth, some lies, to manipulate people.
You think by defining friends and enemies, and whatever else of Schmitt you… believe? adopt? you are at the core of it.
I don’t know, for sure, but I seriously doubt it.
The term of art for that is “limited hangout”.
I think a lot is in play, in the US alone, in terms of the struggle for power. I know, Dr. Obvious in the house.
I’ve posted some of those threads elsewhere on these forums.
It’s a work in progress. It’s playing out, to some degree, right in front of my face.
To a lot of people, though, it’s not that personal.
In any case, decent convo, time for me to hit the rack.
The term for that is a dog whistle?
I have never been sure what fits and what doesn’t.
What would you like people to tell you?
At the very least I would like for those with and in power not to tell my people to fuck off when I have complaints about the material conditions we experience that they are directly responsible for and/or can do something about. So the response of “just buy a Tesla” when my people complain that the price of a gallon of gas has increased by more than 200% is a hard no go.
The problem I see based on responses not just here but my experience talking politics elsewhere online and IRL is that there is not even just an aversion to radically affecting the system in order to change this but simply voting within the system based on material concerns is considered a faux pas. Unless of course you’re a self described Marxist. But they don’t really mean it either.
So for example, I say to the Bullshido audience I have engaged here with who have an issue with statements I have written, “there is no Friend Enemy Distinction and I simply will vote for whoever in the Treat Regime promises to give me the most Treats” the response is overwhelmingly likely to be “you should vote on principles, not Treats! If you vote for more Treats for yourself you’re not voting in your best interests!”
Because I realize that there is jargon above, the Treats Regime is basically the liberal democratic regime who has promised in return for giving them power to make sure Treats (consumer goods, houses, luxury items, food etc.) are not just affordable but cheap. And here is where I break with the mainstream conservatives and libs who like to point out conservative hypocrisy: If we aren’t going to get Treats then the Treat Regime has to go. If you want to say that I shouldn’t care about the Treats because it means everyone has to take personal responsibility, pull themselves up by their boot straps, and live within their means then the Treat Regime doesn’t get to stay in power and we will go to the Personal Responsibility Regime.
Ok. Where would you rate this president?
I’ll call it scapegoating then.
This not an argument.
That is a chant. Something you continually repeat over and over or speak in tongues
It’s like you watched Conan the Barbarian and decided to craft an ethos and form a cult from it.
One reason would be belief in and making decisions, based on arbitrary rules prescribed by a super natural entity that, in the balance of reason, probably doesn’t exist
Mainly