|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
weso1
Joined: 26 Aug 2010
|
 Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 11:17 pm Post subject: What's wrong with Americans? |
 |
|
I haven't been home (State-side) for nearly 5 years now. When I left, things seemed okay. Sure, there were conservatives and certainly there were liberals. But most people seem to get along with each other. Even during a debate or discussion, it was doubtful you'd change the other person's view on that topic, but at the end at least you all agreed to disagree.
Boy howdy, not anymore. Every political debate instantly dissolves into name calling, ad-hom attacks, and flat out ugliness. This used to be reserved for the most fervent followers of the extremes on either end. It's now as if the entire country clings to one fringe or the other.
I've also noticed, that there is no debate on fact, policy, or issue. Conservatives are quick to label everyone that isn't lock-step in line with them as "socialists" or that they "hate America." I kid you not, I've seen 2 self-proclaimed Tea Partiers get into a shouting match calling each other socialists because one didn't agree fully with the other. Madness. Liberals are just as bad. If you dare criticize the president in any form, even constructively, you're immediately labeled stupid, uneducated, racist, or evil.
I have both liberal and conservative friends I like to hold debates with. I like voicing my opinions and ideas and I like having them challenged. At times, I have been swayed by a very logical argument. Other times, my beliefs have only been reinforced. The point is not to get one outcome or the other, it's the very idea of the argument. We can debate, we can present our views and facts that back them up, and do it civil manner.
Recently, I argued the exact same position to two different people. The conservative called me a "socialist" and an "America hating liberal." The liberal called me a "right wing nut job" a "GOP arsehole" and a "swamp person (?)"
I'm starting to wonder what the hell exactly has happened? I concede we were never the smartest bunch (poor public education system.) But it seems to have gotten so much worse. It's like the whole country is split down the middle and both sides just throw relentless attacks on the other that basically amount to "you smell like poo!"... "no! you smell like poo!"
What does a guy like me do? I enjoy politics. I enjoy the political process. I admire government. I'm in awe of business. I thrive in a stimulating argument where I can challenge others and they can challenge me. It literally pumps up my adrenaline. But I have no interest in descending into name calling chaos. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
johnnyenglishteacher2
Joined: 03 Dec 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 12:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Maybe the Internet is changing things. People first started using Internet forums to voice opinions they never would express to somebody's face, maybe this has changed the standard of discourse and set new norms. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zackback
Joined: 05 Nov 2010
Location: Kyungbuk
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 3:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
You won't enjoy politics anymore.
Happened to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
itistime
Joined: 23 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 4:07 am Post subject: Re: What's wrong with Americans? |
|
|
| weso1 wrote: |
I haven't been home (State-side) for nearly 5 years now. When I left, things seemed okay. Sure, there were conservatives and certainly there were liberals. But most people seem to get along with each other. Even during a debate or discussion, it was doubtful you'd change the other person's view on that topic, but at the end at least you all agreed to disagree.
Boy howdy, not anymore. Every political debate instantly dissolves into name calling, ad-hom attacks, and flat out ugliness. This used to be reserved for the most fervent followers of the extremes on either end. It's now as if the entire country clings to one fringe or the other.
I've also noticed, that there is no debate on fact, policy, or issue. Conservatives are quick to label everyone that isn't lock-step in line with them as "socialists" or that they "hate America." I kid you not, I've seen 2 self-proclaimed Tea Partiers get into a shouting match calling each other socialists because one didn't agree fully with the other. Madness. Liberals are just as bad. If you dare criticize the president in any form, even constructively, you're immediately labeled stupid, uneducated, racist, or evil.
I have both liberal and conservative friends I like to hold debates with. I like voicing my opinions and ideas and I like having them challenged. At times, I have been swayed by a very logical argument. Other times, my beliefs have only been reinforced. The point is not to get one outcome or the other, it's the very idea of the argument. We can debate, we can present our views and facts that back them up, and do it civil manner.
Recently, I argued the exact same position to two different people. The conservative called me a "socialist" and an "America hating liberal." The liberal called me a "right wing nut job" a "GOP arsehole" and a "swamp person (?)"
I'm starting to wonder what the hell exactly has happened? I concede we were never the smartest bunch (poor public education system.) But it seems to have gotten so much worse. It's like the whole country is split down the middle and both sides just throw relentless attacks on the other that basically amount to "you smell like poo!"... "no! you smell like poo!"
What does a guy like me do? I enjoy politics. I enjoy the political process. I admire government. I'm in awe of business. I thrive in a stimulating argument where I can challenge others and they can challenge me. It literally pumps up my adrenaline. But I have no interest in descending into name calling chaos. |
Where are you from? It's a HUGE country.
Don't you think 'divide and conquer' has been in
practice for some time now?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 5:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Things would be much better if we all just acknowledged:
(a) our rightful place in the cosmos. We are a nugatory species occupying a nugatory planet in a meaningless, amoral, 11-dimensional multiverse that doesn't know about us, let alone care.
(b) that we are all ruthlessly self-interested animals who have but one relation - that of utility
We must strive to be more honest; our moral/political convictions converge, in remarkably convenient ways, with our self interest. Once this is done, thou shalt have peace. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 11:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is how things have always been in this country.
The Cold War was an exception. Americans faced the threat of sudden nuclear annihilation and the result was a sense of shared sacrifice and commitment as well as civility of discourse. Vietnam destroyed that, but it would resume, and last well into the Clinton era.
But once SCOTUS descended and tampered with the election of 2000, everything started to go out of control. We've reached a status quo that was common during the 19th Century and early 20th Century. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wishfullthinkng
Joined: 05 Mar 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
one of the simple ideas that america was founded on was the separation of church and state.
however they can't even seem to do something as simple as that which really illuminates how everything else is run. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mix1
Joined: 08 May 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
This is how things have always been in this country.
The Cold War was an exception. |
Even if true, it sucks watching the current political climate sink lower and lower by the day.
For example, just several years ago FOX (Faux) News was generally perceived as a joke due to its lowbrow nature and blatant conservative/Republican right wing bias. However, its been gaining ground and you have a lot more people taking it seriously and parroting the lingo and messages that their slant conveys. For many, its now their default news source; it's totally mainstream now in many bars, restaurant or public areas. That's sad and not a good mark on the country. If anything, you'd want to see the news get MORE balanced and sophisticated, not LESS.
Is the news a reflection of the people or are the people a reflection of the news they watch? Either way it's been spiraling downward as of late and I noticed it too last time I went back.
The gauge is moving to the right, so any move to the center is actually what would have been a right wing position a few years ago. The brilliant thing is that the right has successfully characterized the country as somehow moving left by constantly using phrases like "socialist" and "commie" for both people and policies. Meanwhile the other side just sits there and tries to appease the radicals.
This shift is in part possible because the conservative right are great at playing the victims, and they currently perceive themselves as victims because they don't hold the presidency. So the megaphone becomes louder and the political moves become more shrewd and you get things like the teabagger movement. It's been interesting to watch conservatives/Republicans shift from their complacent Bush comfort zone into whiners and concerned activists. I guess it's their turn to whine now, and boy do they do it well.
But the idea that liberals/Democrats (they annoy me but on many levels they are slightly more sane) are "just as bad" is overblown. It relies on an argument of false equivalency. If you compare folks like Glenn Beck or Rush to folks like Keith Olberman or Rachel Maddow, there's clearly a big difference in terms of who is more intellectually balanced and emotionally stable, which in general is the latter side. Of course, if you listen to a true believer Fox viewer, somehow they'd have the exact opposite view (despite the former two being always angry/paranoid and plagued with drug issues and emotional breakdowns i.e. crying on screen, etc.).
And that's it in a nutshell: completely opposite worldviews viewing similar information in completely opposite ways (climate change, evolution, taxes, etc). It's kind of like telling a mentally disturbed person that everyone is not really out to get them, but they look around and still feel completely paranoid and panicked. There's not much convincing you can do no matter what you say. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 7:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mix1 wrote: |
| But the idea that liberals/Democrats (they annoy me but on many levels they are slightly more sane) are "just as bad" is overblown. It relies on an argument of false equivalency. |
It's not false equivalency. They're all worthless talking head hacks, spewing out lies and propaganda, reading from teleprompters. They're all equally disingenuous (and they all get paid millions of dollars to lie to the public).
| Quote: |
| If you compare folks like Glenn Beck or Rush to folks like Keith Olberman or Rachel Maddow, there's clearly a big difference in terms of who is more intellectually balanced and emotionally stable, which in general is the latter side. |
Keith Olberman and Rachel Maddow are complete trash. They are caricatures of smug liberals that so many people love to hate (and rightly so). They are nothing more than sophists, worthy only of our utmost scorn and contempt.
They just seem "clever" to you because their entire made-up schtick is about using mockery to discredit their opponents and distract from actual debate. Nevermind facts, I can just make you look like a fool by cracking some smug, sarcastic jokes, and the audience will laugh and think I'm smarter than you.
As for Glenn Beck, he is a buffoon and a phony who presents himself as a pro-liberty, pro-constitution figure, but flip flops whenever an important issue presents itself (he was for the bailouts, and always attacks Ron Paul). Limbaugh is just the mouthpiece for the neo-Cons. Neither of them is in any way genuine or worth listening to - but at least they're not as vomit-inducing as Rachel Maddow...
| Quote: |
| And that's it in a nutshell: completely opposite worldviews viewing similar information in completely opposite ways (climate change, evolution, taxes, etc). It's kind of like telling a mentally disturbed person that everyone is not really out to get them, but they look around and still feel completely paranoid and panicked. There's not much convincing you can do no matter what you say. |
Well gee, it's nice to see you're impartial in all this.  Classic liberal debate strategy right here - first they position themselves up as impartial, enlightened observers to make themselves look credible, and without having proven anything they finish off with mockery and/or calling you mentally disturbed. That's how they think they win debates! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
weso1
Joined: 26 Aug 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| Mix1 wrote: |
| But the idea that liberals/Democrats (they annoy me but on many levels they are slightly more sane) are "just as bad" is overblown. It relies on an argument of false equivalency. |
It's not false equivalency. They're all worthless talking head hacks, spewing out lies and propaganda, reading from teleprompters. They're all equally disingenuous (and they all get paid millions of dollars to lie to the public).
| Quote: |
| If you compare folks like Glenn Beck or Rush to folks like Keith Olberman or Rachel Maddow, there's clearly a big difference in terms of who is more intellectually balanced and emotionally stable, which in general is the latter side. |
Keith Olberman and Rachel Maddow are complete trash. They are caricatures of smug liberals that so many people love to hate (and rightly so). They are nothing more than sophists, worthy only of our utmost scorn and contempt.
They just seem "clever" to you because their entire made-up schtick is about using mockery to discredit their opponents and distract from actual debate. Nevermind facts, I can just make you look like a fool by cracking some smug, sarcastic jokes, and the audience will laugh and think I'm smarter than you.
As for Glenn Beck, he is a buffoon and a phony who presents himself as a pro-liberty, pro-constitution figure, but flip flops whenever an important issue presents itself (he was for the bailouts, and always attacks Ron Paul). Limbaugh is just the mouthpiece for the neo-Cons. Neither of them is in any way genuine or worth listening to - but at least they're not as vomit-inducing as Rachel Maddow...
| Quote: |
| And that's it in a nutshell: completely opposite worldviews viewing similar information in completely opposite ways (climate change, evolution, taxes, etc). It's kind of like telling a mentally disturbed person that everyone is not really out to get them, but they look around and still feel completely paranoid and panicked. There's not much convincing you can do no matter what you say. |
Well gee, it's nice to see you're impartial in all this. Classic liberal debate strategy right here - first they position themselves up as impartial, enlightened observers to make themselves look credible, and without having proven anything they finish off with mockery and/or calling you mentally disturbed. That's how they think they win debates! |
You see what I mean? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mix1
Joined: 08 May 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 9:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| weso1 wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| Mix1 wrote: |
| But the idea that liberals/Democrats (they annoy me but on many levels they are slightly more sane) are "just as bad" is overblown. It relies on an argument of false equivalency. |
It's not false equivalency. They're all worthless talking head hacks, spewing out lies and propaganda, reading from teleprompters. They're all equally disingenuous (and they all get paid millions of dollars to lie to the public).
| Quote: |
| If you compare folks like Glenn Beck or Rush to folks like Keith Olberman or Rachel Maddow, there's clearly a big difference in terms of who is more intellectually balanced and emotionally stable, which in general is the latter side. |
Keith Olberman and Rachel Maddow are complete trash. They are caricatures of smug liberals that so many people love to hate (and rightly so). They are nothing more than sophists, worthy only of our utmost scorn and contempt.
They just seem "clever" to you because their entire made-up schtick is about using mockery to discredit their opponents and distract from actual debate. Nevermind facts, I can just make you look like a fool by cracking some smug, sarcastic jokes, and the audience will laugh and think I'm smarter than you.
As for Glenn Beck, he is a buffoon and a phony who presents himself as a pro-liberty, pro-constitution figure, but flip flops whenever an important issue presents itself (he was for the bailouts, and always attacks Ron Paul). Limbaugh is just the mouthpiece for the neo-Cons. Neither of them is in any way genuine or worth listening to - but at least they're not as vomit-inducing as Rachel Maddow...
| Quote: |
| And that's it in a nutshell: completely opposite worldviews viewing similar information in completely opposite ways (climate change, evolution, taxes, etc). It's kind of like telling a mentally disturbed person that everyone is not really out to get them, but they look around and still feel completely paranoid and panicked. There's not much convincing you can do no matter what you say. |
Well gee, it's nice to see you're impartial in all this. Classic liberal debate strategy right here - first they position themselves up as impartial, enlightened observers to make themselves look credible, and without having proven anything they finish off with mockery and/or calling you mentally disturbed. That's how they think they win debates! |
You see what I mean? |
Yes I do! 
The funny thing is I've read visitorq's posts before and I probably agree with him on most of the basic issues, especially regarding Ron Paul. I'm just a little more "liberal" regarding where I throw my derision, which these days is just about everywhere.
And I never claimed to be totally impartial - nobody is.
I'd say most of my bias these days is towards the Republican anti-science crowd who celebrate and take pride in not knowing much, but being skeptical about everything science based. We need to be more competitive worldwide in science and technology and these guys are hell bent on turning the clock backwards and putting their heads in the sand. But I'm not happy with the current pansy Dems either who spout one line but do something totally different while not standing for much except half measures and platitudes. Either way, Fair and Balanced I'm not! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ineverlie&I'malwaysri
Joined: 09 Aug 2011
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| weso1 wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| Mix1 wrote: |
| But the idea that liberals/Democrats (they annoy me but on many levels they are slightly more sane) are "just as bad" is overblown. It relies on an argument of false equivalency. |
It's not false equivalency. They're all worthless talking head hacks, spewing out lies and propaganda, reading from teleprompters. They're all equally disingenuous (and they all get paid millions of dollars to lie to the public).
| Quote: |
| If you compare folks like Glenn Beck or Rush to folks like Keith Olberman or Rachel Maddow, there's clearly a big difference in terms of who is more intellectually balanced and emotionally stable, which in general is the latter side. |
Keith Olberman and Rachel Maddow are complete trash. They are caricatures of smug liberals that so many people love to hate (and rightly so). They are nothing more than sophists, worthy only of our utmost scorn and contempt.
They just seem "clever" to you because their entire made-up schtick is about using mockery to discredit their opponents and distract from actual debate. Nevermind facts, I can just make you look like a fool by cracking some smug, sarcastic jokes, and the audience will laugh and think I'm smarter than you.
As for Glenn Beck, he is a buffoon and a phony who presents himself as a pro-liberty, pro-constitution figure, but flip flops whenever an important issue presents itself (he was for the bailouts, and always attacks Ron Paul). Limbaugh is just the mouthpiece for the neo-Cons. Neither of them is in any way genuine or worth listening to - but at least they're not as vomit-inducing as Rachel Maddow...
| Quote: |
| And that's it in a nutshell: completely opposite worldviews viewing similar information in completely opposite ways (climate change, evolution, taxes, etc). It's kind of like telling a mentally disturbed person that everyone is not really out to get them, but they look around and still feel completely paranoid and panicked. There's not much convincing you can do no matter what you say. |
Well gee, it's nice to see you're impartial in all this. Classic liberal debate strategy right here - first they position themselves up as impartial, enlightened observers to make themselves look credible, and without having proven anything they finish off with mockery and/or calling you mentally disturbed. That's how they think they win debates! |
You see what I mean? |
No, not at all.
It is simply another case of goof/cop bad cop. You're busted either way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| It has been like this in America to some degree for a long time. It's not unusual, but it has gotten worse. There have been fluctuations in American history. Don't forget that Roosevelt was called a Jew and a socialist, and Abraham Lincoln was accused of being a Catholic. However, for a while there was more uniformity in America and an acceptance of the New Deal, and not this horrible backlash by religious extremists. The cultural extremists are older, and they are going to go out of fashion. That's my hope. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 3:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
| It has been like this in America to some degree for a long time. It's not unusual, but it has gotten worse. There have been fluctuations in American history. Don't forget that Roosevelt was called a Jew and a socialist, and Abraham Lincoln was accused of being a Catholic. However, for a while there was more uniformity in America and an acceptance of the New Deal, and not this horrible backlash by religious extremists. The cultural extremists are older, and they are going to go out of fashion. That's my hope. |
Roosevelt was a cultural extremist. He was Stalin in the White House. Lincoln (the big railroad lawyer) was the first fascist/corporatist president. Some of the presidents we are taught to most revere were often the worst. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zackback
Joined: 05 Nov 2010
Location: Kyungbuk
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 4:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wishfullthinkng wrote: |
one of the simple ideas that america was founded on was the separation of church and state.
however they can't even seem to do something as simple as that which really illuminates how everything else is run. |
A reason why America is in the decline it is. Lies like this.
The Declaration of Independence says our rights come from the Creator. It is a "self-evident" truth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
