The Maelstrom of Violence

[Bob Butler 54]

(09-22-2017, 03:35 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(09-21-2017, 12:44 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(09-19-2017, 10:19 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(09-19-2017, 09:44 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(09-19-2017, 09:33 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Unlike with you, I think in his case it is the latter since he rarely if ever makes new arguments.

I think you've got that backwards.  Most people have to encounter new ideas more than once if they are counter to a lifetime of propaganda exposure - especially when the propaganda specifically includes simplistic ways to reject those ideas.  In addition, I believe, he has a vested interest in the welfare system.  Get him a job that takes him off welfare for a few years, and he might suddenly become open minded.

I would not doubt that PBR has a vested interest in maintaining the welfare state, however, I have seen little evidence of his supposed intellgence.

As for countering a lifetime of exposure to propaganda, I did it.  Of course having been a Marxist-Leninist and a propagandist myself it was far easier for me to detect what is propaganda.

I'm not at all claiming he's smarter than you - just that he's smarter than Bob.

I wouldn't make the claim that PBR is smarter than Bob.  Of course that might be a difference of perception or experience.  Bob makes new arguments on occasion--his problem is that he's values locked and in a time warp which is rather typical of Boomers in general.

The old generation gap of the awakening got hit by the southern strategy and turned into the red - blue gap.  I don't know how many time's I've admitted leaning blue.  My view of the divide is from a different perspective, from one who has seen the transition.  Younger generations just haven't seen what it takes to make a culture really change.  They are allergic to the real effort it takes, which has been in large part the reason for a lack of a true regeneracy.  I don't really expect young folk to see it short of a true regeneracy occurring.  That will take more than just a timer expiring.  You'll have to give up on your cynicism and care about People.

You can grumble about patterns, but that isn't the same as breaking them.  I'm not thrilled by the divide, and will grumble about it too, but causing the pattern to shift by misconceiving the real issues won't happen.  We've got a values clash.  As Eric will tell you, those with one set of values have to overwhelm the other.  Maybe it will happen because Trump is a wonderful guy.  I doubt it.  He's got well document problems.  Maybe we should watch the inevitable power of demographics and polls, as PBR does.  They are ever so inevitable and correct except on days like the first Tuesday of November when they can end up useless.  Or, you can wait and watch the real world rather than make too silly a values based prediction.  You can commit to a faction and have to decide whether to jump ship if it fails.

Meanwhile you get a few people who haven't encountered a problem thinking themselves expert on the problem and trying to lecture someone who is much more familiar.  To me, it is a values problem, a case of some with economic values and some with health and quality of life standards.  I don't expect much to change yet.  I expect that those with economic values will keep them, will cling tightly to the Reagan meme of not spending on Americans.  I expect they will be opposed by those who have seen medical costs rise with improved care and twisted politics, who do wish to share risks and costs.  This is just a repeat of the old argument more personalized.  There is values lock there all around.  

I the long term, the rising expenses, the sharing of risks and costs, will make too much sense.  You generally present good ideas on the health care thread.  Choose something.  There will be ultimately too few fully employed to choose employee or employer based methods.  The selfish healthy and wealthy will drag their feet though, as long as their values lock lets them.  If you have economic values and a good situation, you want to avoid the risk and cost sharing ultimate solutions.

Meanwhile, we are having too much fun being the world's policeman that we can't keep the super military while Americans maintain a decent life style.  There are choices made by deciding to follow Reagan, Trump and the unraveling pattern.  The choices remain whether you or I want them to.  If spending on the armed forces rather than Americans is going to go away, it will not be by pretending a pattern has not been set and followed.

Again, I don't see anyone associating intelligence with which world view one clings to.  On this forum at least, there are smart and less smart people who associate with any values, most of whom are locked into their perspective.  People ought to listen more.  There are good ideas worth absorbing, and if one must engage in endless futile bickering, you might as well try to argue against what they actually say.  I feel safe in saying that if you need to throw away a whole branch of science, you are likely wrong.  Betting everything on a stalemated branch of 'science' such as economics is not a big win either.  In general, I would prefer scientific values over political.  One should tie back to the real world often.  Someone who argues politics and religion all the time, not science, is suspect.

But sensing one's own values lock remains hard.