Race

[dorankj]

I actually largely agree with the 'paradox' of whether you can actually tolerate intolerable people and the positions they take that you know will lead to terrible outcomes. I also really can't tolerate hypocrisy or flat lying especially when people know or should know that they are espousing hypocrisy and lies (i.e. it is pointed out to them). When others metaphorically 'scream' about others bad behavior actions or words but refuse to acknowledge the same actions, words and behavior from their favored 'team' (politicians, billionaires, celebrities etc.). Generally, i "tolerate " others, their bad ideas, poor choices and positions that have been proven to fail time and again. I may try to change their mind, warn and encourage others to not follow their views or favored ideas and may even (usually after provocation) engage in harsh criticism or hyperbolic name calling if I believe it's warranted by their behavior or words. I expect to be challenged if others feel I'm being hypocritical or disagree with my views but I will take offense when provoked and retort similarly.

[PAL]

Ok, Ken, what are you intolerant of and what are you tolerant of?

[dorankj]

So you all can be intolerant (because....reasons) but i shouldn't consider being intolerant of you, your ideas and politicians you support? You elitist assholes sure don't seem to understand hypocrisy!

[mister_coffee]

What I see clearly is at the putrid core of MAGA is a toxic brew of racism and misogyny. I won't apologize for how I feel about people who embrace such vileness. They have earned my hatred and contempt.

If that hurts their fee-fees maybe they should take the effort to reflect about their political philosophies.

Also, saying you are for MAGA "except for the racism and misogyny" is kind of like being pro Nazi except for the murdering Jews part.

[PAL]

I remember in another post it seems about the paradox of tolerance.
I must say, no, I will not tolerate someone who makes comments about their own daughter that are suggestive. Or someone that brags about grabbing women by the p*@ssy.
The examples go on and on. Look the other way and accept #47 if you wish.
Oh, yeah, let's hear you bring up your whataboutism Biden. So in the past. A worn out example.

[just-jim]

Mister coffee, how do you think turnabout to your posit about 'tolerance'? Or are only you able to hold others to your standards and don't accept them for yourself?

About tolerance (from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance ):

.

The paradox of tolerance is a philosophical concept suggesting that if a society extends tolerance to those who are intolerant, it risks enabling the eventual dominance of intolerance; thereby undermining the very principle of tolerance. This paradox was articulated by philosopher Karl Popper in The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945),[1] where he argued that a truly tolerant society must retain the right to deny tolerance to those who promote intolerance. Popper posited that if intolerant ideologies are allowed unchecked expression, they could exploit open society values to erode or destroy tolerance itself through authoritarian or oppressive practices.

Nicely done David! ken proves your point exactly….he wants the outrageous behavior of MAGA-ites normalized.

Q.E.D.
.

[dorankj]

PAL, have you ever considered that many people including me think Dementia Joe was far more despicable and disgusting than DJT for similar or worse reasons (and facts) that you present? I react similar to how I'm attacked here by you and others, if you find it hostile maybe consider holding all here accountable to standards you desire to see and not participate or ignore others despicable behavior?

Mister coffee, how do you think turnabout to your posit about 'tolerance'? Or are only you able to hold others to your standards and don't accept them for yourself?

[mister_coffee]

About tolerance (from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance ):

The paradox of tolerance is a philosophical concept suggesting that if a society extends tolerance to those who are intolerant, it risks enabling the eventual dominance of intolerance; thereby undermining the very principle of tolerance. This paradox was articulated by philosopher Karl Popper in The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945),[1] where he argued that a truly tolerant society must retain the right to deny tolerance to those who promote intolerance. Popper posited that if intolerant ideologies are allowed unchecked expression, they could exploit open society values to erode or destroy tolerance itself through authoritarian or oppressive practices.

[PAL]

Maybe it is more respect than tolerance. I can respect what you, but don't agree with what you say about #47 and how wonderful he is. I don't have to like what you say. Same goes for what I say.
When I post and article or an opinion about #47, pointing out things he has done that I don't like, many times I will get a hostile jab(it feels hostile anyway) from Ken. So how is that for tolerance?
It is hard for me to be tolerant of #47. But I can be tolerant of you.
Is it bigoted to disagree with other people's ideas? #47 wouldn't like it if he knew I disagreed with his plans, is my take away from all the various news sources I listen to. Even Fox.
And I certainly disagree with Jan. 6th. and also the pardoning of all of the people on that day, especially those that were violent. No denying, it did happen. It was recorded.

[tristanbgilb]

bigot
n
a person who is intolerant of any ideas other than his or her own, esp on religion, politics, or race

This is how I feel about enjoying Trump as President openly on this BB. I am not pointing fingers, only I receive a sense of intolerance while I am writing words from my heart. Ken might enjoy having a fist fight here. I would prefer not to. Only I have been watching discussions, and I hold him innocent, and justice would be an apology from many of you for your bigotry.

[Rideback]

PAL, my post was meant to compliment your good post on race as well as compliment Tristan's points. Both share the reality of over simplification in order to divide people and the nod to war time us vs them at its worst. The common good should always be a goal, but how we get there is a pretty creative process.

[PAL]

Nice post Rideback.
All I did was post about Race. Understand Tristen, I do not hate you. I know you served. Do you "hate" me because I like Obama?
Coming from you, assuming people on here hate you, is there still some of that dull madness in your heart?
I think not. Going out in the natural world, up Twisp River, like you do is the great healer.
It's mainly the people of color that get sh*t upon; that's what my post is about. And there should be no color differentiation, in an ideal world.
But since people have made a differentiation and pointed out the discrimination that people face, tolerance must be practiced and discrimination must be eliminated.

[Rideback]

"Perhaps no less distressing than the sirens of war is the death of nuance. War's first victim is always complexity. It commands its very public execution by recruiting the mind to think in terms of stable categories. Behind the erotic mask of patriotism, it fosters a beguiling sense of belonging that manufactures the "other side", the enemy to be vanquished.
The flag flutters. The anthem stirs. Followed by the applause-infected declaration. Victory is announced. But an unspeakable cost has been enacted: not just the death of many, but the churning of a pattern larger than trophy or grave, larger than loss and confetti. A pattern that silently whispers our collective incarceration within a field of perception that obscures just how indebted we are even to those we call our enemies and hides how radically incomplete and painfully insufficient we are all by ourselves.
It remains true that the "enemy" is an ableist formulation. We are not as neatly convened or as ontologically coherent as our logics insist. In a game of sides, the greatest loss is the other side. Because the other side is us, the stranger is us. "
Báyò Akomolafe

[mister_coffee]

I hope that works out for you. But understand that many of us are most doubtful that it will.

[tristanbgilb]

I like to see it when the younger generation celebrates the differences between them rather than look at these differences as a weakness to peck upon. Life is about learning peace and love in our lives. My heart is full of life sometimes joy and then sorrow. There has to be a peace in my own heart before I am able to enjoy the eccentricities of my friends and neighbors. There is joy in having good people care about each other. My heart was stone cold when I got discharged from the navy. There was a dull madness in my heart that I hadn't known in my youth. A joy slowly died. Today I know joy as my heart has melted during my times and travels of tribulation.

My point is that it is discrimination and wrong to hate me just because I am in a group you don't belong to. I love and admire Trump and am sometimes fearful in saying it do to the lame brained media outlets telling you all about me since I admire Trump. Hate me I am NAZI. I am so awful in every way. It is like the litmus test of good and evil. If you like Obama you are good. If you like trump you are scum of the earth and discriminated upon and hated with all the evil you can muster.

I am a disabled veteran having served my nation and will fear no evil. Go at it. Hate me. I love our President and give him grace in my prayers. Just because you don't hate me for my race, it is still apparent people amongst us think I am fair game to hate because you are all so well educated about me and rabidly foaming at the mouth to expel your discrimination against me like some kind of sick vampire show.

[mister_coffee]

“Race” is largely a social construct. Some cultures historically were remarkably color-blind, while others made the Confederates and Nazis look extremely liberal.

[PAL]

https://apnews.com/article/school-segre ... 63c042ae7c

In an ideal world there is no such thing as "race". Most probably some privileged white men long ago made it up. Of course we know the history of how people of color were thought of and still are in many places, especially the south. If they don't go back to segregation wouldn't that be great. But we will see how this plays out. And remember executive orders are not laws. I suspect this will go to the Supreme Court again.