Is it OK to forswear family and friends for political beliefs?

[Kadagar_AV]

Seems to be a popular topic.

My grandfather lived in Nazi Austria, and built up a resistance force there. That meant he had to forswear a LOT of family and friends.

I am pretty sure not many would argue he did wrong, but yet I see members ridiculing the same thing, but from different perspectives. But let's face it, we have to start the debate with: There ARE political factors that calls for forswearing.

IF you have a grasp of the world that makes you think life is a divine thing (and what a beautiful thought that is!), then why would you NOT forswear someone arguing for mass-extinction?

Given the amount of focus this has had, I thought this might be an apt topic start.

[Vuk]

@Gelatinous Cube: What if they voted for Hitler, or worse, Obama?

[Kadagar_AV]

I start to regret doing Goodwin in OP... Can we keep the thread somewhat balanced?

[Vuk]

Well, I got unfriended for voting for Obama, which amuses me. Obama is a far, far, far-right Democrat. He's not an extreme candidate, and his party is not an extreme party.

Hitler, on the other hand, was clearly a threat to everyone's health long before he actually got into power. Interestingly, the tactics he used to get elected in terms of campaigning and making promises are pretty similar to a certain group of American idealogues...

Well, forgetting your blindness and hypocrisy , I think you missed the point that my post was a humorous and not horribly serious way to ask you if there were exceptions to what you said about not forswearing people because of who they voted for.

[Vuk]

The Black Panthers being 'observers', Obama supporters chasing Republican observers out with guns, etc, etc. Man, you live in a bubble.

[Vuk]

Please back that hogwash up with sources that don't come from Fox News or the conservative blogosphere.

But more to the point, if you think black people being observers automatically makes them 'thugs' then you have your own issues. The Black Panthers stopped being a violent group decades ago.

So you will except a source from anyone except those who actually care enough and are honest enough to tell you? Well, in that case...


It is not that they are black. There are plenty of black vote observers on the Republican and Democratic side. It is that they are a fanatical, militant, wanna-be terrorist group.


Yes, I can see why you say they are so peaceful! Inciting genocide is usually considered peaceful.

[Kadagar_AV]

Vuk, may I say that I object to your:

Everything you need to know about Kadagar_AV:
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV
In a racial conflict I'd have no problem popping off some negroes.

The quote is indeed true, but VERY much taken out of context. Specially by the way you highlight it.

If I remember correctly, what followed before that was: In a war between aliens and humans I would go berserk on the aliens... or something along those lines... Then that quote followed... ... then the rest followed.

The discussion at hand was at what level you would fight. And YES, if there was an ALL OUT GLOBAL RACIAL CONFLICT... I wouldn't mind popping off some Negroes. I do however deem the chance of that ever happening to next to nil. Remember that this was the next link in the chain from alien invasions. Why would anyone NOT defend their race in an all out global conflict?

You make it sound like I in a bar fight would jump in on the white guys side. Or even worse, shoot the black guy for joy.

It frankly disgusts me that you use the quote like that.

You are of course entitled to, it is an actual quote of mine and I stand by it still. Most people on these boards, I sincerely hope, know that it is taken wildly out of context though. But remember that we do have new members, and stuff like that might alienate them from visiting these boards, and this sub forum in particular.

[Vuk]

Well, I got unfriended for voting for Obama, which amuses me. Obama is a far, far, far-right Democrat. He's not an extreme candidate, and his party is not an extreme party.

Hitler, on the other hand, was clearly a threat to everyone's health long before he actually got into power. Interestingly, the tactics he used to get elected in terms of campaigning and making promises are pretty similar to a certain group of American idealogues...

Like having thugs posted outside polling stations?
Like cheating, lying, and trying to make disagreeing with you a crime? That is actually Obama and the Demzis.

[Vuk]

[Vuk]

LOL did you just try to say Fox News is more credible than other news sources?

No, I didn't, but it is better than most.

[Kadagar_AV]

No, I didn't, but it is better than most.

Actually, keep my quote... The fact that you oppose me seem rather brilliant at the moment.

[HoreTore]

There is a difference here based on political factors.

What's described in the OP is of course nothing anyone(sane) sees as wrong. Goes for most opposition to dictatorships. The kind described by Lemur in the Obama thread, however, is clearly on the whacky side of the spectrum. That's a clear sign of fanaticism and cult-mentality.

[Fragony]

Might surprise you but most of my friends are lefties and import, we don't discuss politics all that much and yes that includes muslims before you ask. We just have fun, they know I disagree with them that's enough.

[Lemur]

@Vuk, as per usual, is a cascading fountain of sparkling disinformation. The video of scary black people he posts is from 2008. When Fox tried a repeat this year, all they could find was a single scary black man who was ... opening doors for old people. EVIL NEGRO INTIMIDATION!

As for the OP, I'd say it's a thing not to be done lightly, and dependent on judgment. If my close friends and/or family were supporting a cause or politico who was a clear and present danger, sure, I'd lay into them. But (a) even the most horrifying monsters of history usually had some sort of excuse or rationale to give a figleaf of justification to their crimes. The Khmer Rouge, Mao, Hitler, Vlad Tepes, take any one of them. All had their rationales. All had well-meaning people who helped them. If we refuse to engage, how do we persuade, and possibly peel away supporters?

(b) I'm not clear on how cutting someone completely out of your life is a convincing argument. My uncle, for example, is a Fox News Republican. He lectures me about how Wisconsin is a "socialist state," how liberals hate America, and when he's had enough gin he'll go off about how America should be split in two so "conservatives won't have to live with people who aren't real Americans."

Not clear how cutting him off would be helpful. I'd much rather be in his presence, calm and reasonable, and let the rest of my family observe the difference between us.

Anyway, what the current crazyfest reveals is that a measurable fraction of the right in America has convinced themselves that Obama is the Antichrist. The dangers of this sort of self-delusion should be evident. Just look at Vuk.

Meanwhile, some on the right continue to engage in a full-throated mental meltdown, such as this. (Warning: Profanity and hilarity.)

[Kadagar_AV]

You're not.

He's American, You have to give him some respect for at least trying to master the English language.

[Centurion1]

Alright sorry as I said I am not very good at grammar.

[Fragony]

Alright sorry as I said I am not very good at grammar.

I am sorry, was being a jerk

[Kadagar_AV]

It's okay. Grammar is overrated anyway.

Yeah, who wants to articulate their thoughts in written form anyway?

Don't get me wrong, grammar should NEVER EVER be used to dictate someones mental abilities on the internet, unless of course it is their native language.

[Kival]

Don't get me wrong, grammar should NEVER EVER be used to dictate someones mental abilities on the internet, unless of course it is their native language.

Ah, so having Dyslexia should be used to dictate someones mental ability? It isn't even correlated with the IQ.

[Beskar]

Ah, so having Dyslexia should be used to dictate someones mental ability? It isn't even correlated with the IQ.

Not entirely true. The way you are meant to diagnose Dyslexic is via an IQ test. I forgot the actual test used, but they test a range of different areas with an assessor which shows all the strong and weaks points. People with Dyslexia are usually spotted because they do really poorly in the language section, but do very good in the others. Obviously, this shows the person is not "stupid", and thus there must be some actual problem in that idea.

For example, the test I took only measured up to 140 iq, and I scored 138, even though I did significantly worse in the language areas due to my dyslexia. Though just for reference, there is no 'real' reliable test that can score above 140, the ability to test degrades over 130 and over 140 is not seen as clinical valid or reliable (so my 168 Mensa test score isn't really valid)

Only big issue with this testing system is that in a way, it assumes "dumb people cannot have dyslexia" because there is no way to actually 'see it' statistically.

[Kival]

Not entirely true. The way you are meant to diagnose Dyslexic is via an IQ test. (...)
Only big issue with the testing system is that in a way, it assumes "dumb people cannot have dyslexia" because there is no way to actually 'see it' statistically.

I see. You may clearly know more about the issue, I only read this publication:

http://pss.sagepub.com/content/21/1/93

Out of the abstract:

We show that in typical readers, reading and IQ development are dynamically linked over time. Such mutual interrelationships are not perceptible in dyslexic readers, which suggests that reading and cognition develop more independently in these individuals. To our knowledge, these findings provide the first empirical demonstration of a coupling between cognition and reading in typical readers and a developmental uncoupling between cognition and reading in dyslexic readers.

I did not mean - but was unclear about that - that dyslexia doesn't effect the IQ-Test at all.

[Beskar]

I did not mean - but was unclear about that - that dyslexia doesn't effect the IQ-Test at all.

Possibly true, depending on the test! Though the way they actually come to the diagnosis is via an IQ test. But then again, I did score really highly with dyslexia, if my 'weak areas' which were affected by my dyslexia were on par with my other areas, I would have scored significantly higher. The difference was between getting 19-20 out of 20 for different area, and scoring 10-11 in areas which indicate dyslexia. Was very insightful when reading through my assessment.

[Kadagar_AV]

I see. You may clearly know more about the issue, I only read this publication:

http://pss.sagepub.com/content/21/1/93

Out of the abstract:



I did not mean - but was unclear about that - that dyslexia doesn't effect the IQ-Test at all.

You can design an IQ test that let dyslexic people be on the same level as others. Just do the instructions orally and skip all text in questions and answers.


Also, let's remember that dyslexia doesn't directly hurt grammar. I have had some students with dyslexia, and one of them actually got an A in Swedish. She got audiobooks instead of books, I also completely separated her spelling learning from writing.

She was just AMAZING at making stories, not writing stories of course, but making them. When she made stories, I had her plan it with pictures instead of words, and then she got help with the actual writing.

One example, the class got an assignment to make a remake of a story we had just read. I spent some time about talking about "sucking the reader right in", and the importance of how you open a book and a chapter.

She handed in her paper, and first line went "I don't mean to scare You now, but I am dead." Yepp, she sucked the reader straight in at once alright. She was only 11!!

And that wasn't like "the" example of her brilliance, these things came on a regular basis.

[Kadagar_AV]

Ah, so having Dyslexia should be used to dictate someones mental ability? It isn't even correlated with the IQ.

Of course not.

I'm not sure dyslexia, or rather SLI (specific language impairment), is the most likely culprit in this case though.

[Kadagar_AV]

The great thing about English is that it is the ultimate mongrel language. I find that those who speak it the worst are often most in tune with its best qualities. The internet, in particular, was just made for English.

0111100101101111011101010010000001101101011010010110011101101000011101000010000001100010011001010010 0000011100100110100101100111011010000111010000100000011110010110111101110101001000000110110101101001 011001110110100001110100001000000110001001100101001000000111011101110010011011110110111001100111

EDIT: forum rules says you are not allowed to write in other languages than English. So the translation is: "You might be right, You might be wrong"

[a completely inoffensive name]

I find that those who speak it the worst are often most in tune with its best qualities.

ya mang, USA #1, luv it or leave it. $moke w33d erry day420 thats why i bailed eng class and just chilled at the 7-11. teachar tried to fail, me but i did well enough on my last esse to get my C- #SWAG

[Beskar]

For details, as I reacquired my report.

It was the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - Third UK Edition (WAIS-III UK) that was used for diagnosis in my case. (Fourth edition is out now)

Here is Wikipedia link.
and a random google obtained article .

Just so people have an understanding of what I meant by IQ test and not simply thinking I was meaning something like this.

[HoreTore]

Indeed.

Having dyslexia means you're too dumb to read and/or write.



The social acceptance associated with dyslexia is something I find puzzling.

[Montmorency]

Do you mean to trip up those who haven't read your previous posts?

[HoreTore]

Do you mean to trip up those who haven't read your previous posts?

Who, me?

I stand by every word in both of my posts.

Edit: Ima gunna start a new thread for this topic, so Kadagar can use this thread to stay friendless