Would you unfriend or blacklist someone over politics?

I thought we were talking about views and beliefs, not actions. I'll have to think more on it, in regards to that...

I'm not asking this to argue my stance, but sometimes arguing a side to see where it goes brings me better understanding... Question is
even if someone does those things, what good does cutting them off do?

Remaining friends with them may not do good either... I'm just wondering what the motivation is for cutting them off, effectively cutting them off further from a better point of view.

It segregates us further and makes both sides more extreme.

 

Asmo

I've always called myself a leftist, someone would have to define what they mean by 'radical' in this context.

 

Beach

If you didn’t have the views and beliefs you wouldn’t act. It is likely a person would have to hold racist views to support or join in with racist actions.

As I’ve said to me friendship is in part about liking and respecting people, some views I find hard to like or respect.

 

Yes, you'd have to have the views to take part in the action...

But what I was originally thinking of was all the people who display the beliefs but would never take part in violent actions.

Is cutting them them off because they don't deserve my friendship? Because I think they will change their views if they realise people might cut them off for it? (I think a lot of people sub consciously think this)

Like I said, views and opinions may mean I drift apart from someone, but my first thought is that I want my hate-filled friends to associate with love,not just other hate-filled people.

 

Beach

How do you know that they never would do something. Was the Auschwitz guard destined to be a mass murderer or was he just someone with racist views that was given the chance to murder what he saw as the inferior?

 

I suppose I haven't experienced a friend becoming this kind of person. Most people don't really think this stuff. They'll say they hate all gay people, black people, working class, upper class, women, men...

Put them on a one to one basis and give them a chance to connect, and they see the individual as a person rather than a dehumanised collective..

I think cutting them off increases the chance that their views lead them to become more extreme.

 

Beach

Or they can come away feeling vindicated, there was a poster here who after becoming friendly with some black guys playing video games and smoking weed, came out of that experience believing that he was right in thinking black people are inferior to white ones.

These hates are irrational and trying to treat them rationally doesn’t always work

I mean we are living in liberal democracies in the 21st century why are people still hating gay people, black people and women?

I admire your thinking but to repeat to me friendship is in part about liking and respecting people some views I find hard to like or respect.

 

Its about what they're doing with it atm. I know several people I hang with have racist views. But they don't act upon it in any bothering way. I suspect they would distance themselves from and disagree with terminating an ethnic group by putting thrm in concentration camps. Just because they have racist convictions doesn't mean they would support such an atrocity.

 

irrational
ɪˈraʃ(ə)n(ə)l/
adjective
adjective: irrational
1.
not logical or reasonable

 

Well thank you for prompting me to think on it in more depth. I will continue to do so with hypothetical situations.

 

Since more than 50% of millennials prefer socialism and communism over capitalism, it has a lot to do with being a millennial dude and keeping friendships with people of my generation.

When I wrote that, I was thinking back to one particular example of how I lost one of my friends over politics: 10 years ago, back when I had a facebook account, I shared a Ron Paul article about the corruption of the federal reserve. A friend replies, "6, that is the whitest thing I've ever seen!" and I say "What does that even mean? Care to explain?" He says something like, "Everything about this is pushing a capitalist and a white people narrative." I reply, "In what way? This article mentions nothing about race." He gets pissed and says, "We're done," and blocks me.

But feel free to fantasize your own made up stories of how I interact with friends and companions.

Well if that's how she feels, good for her.

What do you personally find problematic about Kanye's statement?

AHAHAHA wow! Just wow, Beavis.

I've seen people on confuse muslims with being a seperate racial group from the rest of us non muslims. But feminist being a race? This takes the cake

(btw, I have done it with a black chick)

 

Just an expression of sour grapes.

 

That’s because your friend couldn’t explain his views and got too emotional, but you also couldn’t recognize that libertarianism is flawed at its foundation when you take it into account of human nature and the statistics on human behavior on a long term general basis.

For example libertarianism and capitalism works assuming each generation thinks rationally and not through an egoistic personality perspective, which we know that 1 in 25 people have sociopathic tendencies.

Pure capitalism has no counter-balance to address the fact of IP-monopolies, and loopholes regarding refreshing the abuse of a patent system or forcefully discontinuing a product line to replace it with another that would refresh it’s lock on a market.

It doesn’t address the situation where sometimes the market, does not meet the product needs of commodity manufactured goods (Epipens shortage or flu vaccine shortage). Any proponent of the right viewpoint here avoids admitting that their policies by de facto, leave the needy, in a situation where all they can do is die because if you don’t make money, you don’t pull your own weight and you don’t deserve to share this earth. The mentally ill are also in this boat too, and charities are falling short.

Capitalism allows greedy bastards to horde money without reinvesting it, because it’s their property. But insodoing it allows capitalism to create FALSE supply-demand chains....a perfect example is the diamond market; technically objectively diamonds aren’t rare, but we make them spike in value.

Companies want constant growth, but there is no mechanism to allow for plateau growth, because overtime capitalism with big corporations leads to oligopolies because the only way to penetrate new markets for the least cost is to eventually gobble up other industries, and some industries become more dependent on other industries with the financial sector being the core, but then basic retail also being cucked to the computer industry....because speed of processing information securely and safely became a necessity.

You can see this too in the general population too, psychologically people get mad on the road, or frustrated at a microwave going too slow, or waiting in line at a checkout counter.


Relationships especially those of millennials, they get mad at their partners if their text messages aren’t responded to within this unspoken time window....


At every level if you deep dive into the mind of society as a mass and as a individual you can see what’s happening.....


Can’t you see it did I help you to understand?

 

Indeed he did. But I believe he was one of those unfortunate examples of a person who was brought without hearing more than one side of an argument. Probably due to a bias in his family, public schooling, and college professors that never gave him a chance to see things from an alternate perspective. So anything contradictory thrown his way caused an emotional breakdown. In my experiences, it's usually hard leftists who make decisions more on emotion than logic and reasoning.

Trying to throw the thread off topic, are ya?

Monopolies and oligopolies exist through weaponized regulation and cronyism.

Lets say you invented the fidget spinner by carving a rollerblade wheel, and you built yourself a monopoly on the fidget spinner. In a free market, what's to stop me from making my own fidget spinner company and dethroning your monopoly? You could buy some politicians to try and regulate your competitors (me) out of business, and keep your monopoly alive. But that's not free market capitalism. You could buy my fidget spinner company and I'll sell you all my assets so you can keep your monopoly. But without weaponized regulation, what's to stop me or someone else from opening up another fidget spinner company? You can keep buying your competitors out, but you'll eventually run out of money and go bankrupt.

Greed is part of human nature. Capitalism utilizes human greed with a reward system where people can better themselves by providing quality goods and services to those who are greedy for such items. Socialism foolishly tries to fight greed through forced redistribution at gunpoint. As a result, it's the greedy leaders of socialist societies who prevail while the rest suffer.

Yes.

I am so woke now.

You've totally changed my life. No longer do I believe in equality of opportunity, provided by capitalism in capitalist societies. I now believe in equality of outcome, provided by socialism.[/QUOTE]

 

Greed:: a selfish and excessive desire for more of something (such as money) than is needed.
Synonyms: Acquisitiveness, avarice, covetousness, cupidity, graspingness, rapaciousness.

Greed is "natural". So is sin, but fortunately, so are empathy and reciprocal altruism. We live in a world where 42 people have as much wealth as the 3.2 billion poorest. Inequality gap widens as 42 people hold same wealth as 3.7bn poorest
The top 1% in the U.S. have 40% of the wealth--something that hasn't happened since before the Great Depression. Our greedy congressmen gave their greedy patrons a big tax cut last year at the expense of the national debt. Did these folks at the top deserve all that wealth because they are more meritorious than the rest of us? Not all of them. Some, like President Trump, were simply clever, unscrupulous grifters, using millions of dollars inherited from their unscrupulous grifter parents to get themselves ahead at all costs, too bad about the people they stepped on. Your "free market" is a myth. Oligopoly and bought governments are facts of life, and your "non-aggression" principle is simply a fantasy in the jungle world of cutthroat competition. As for "forced redistribution at gunpoint", all governments use their monopolies of the instruments of force to back up their laws--governments of capitalist societies included. The 1 per centers rely on those hired guns to protect their wealth and privileges.

So, to ward off your natural instincts to distort what people are saying, am I advocating (gasp) "Socialism"? Or (gasp, gasp, gasp) Communism? Hell no. Just a return to the mentality of the New Deal and Fair Deal in this country before the yuppies took it over, and movement more to the model European Social Democracies, with their mixed economies and safety nets, with a decent minimum of medical, educational and retirement benefits.

What's wrong with ubridled greed ? Well, natural human empathy might make one feel some compassion for those who, because of accidents of being born into the wrong family and social stratum, or being born with a disability, have to make their way through a life of grinding poverty. Christianity, Islam, and other major world religions preach compassion and a duty to care for the poor, the widows, and the orphans--i.e., a duty to control unbridled greed. Empathy, reciprocal altruism, and the ability to subordinate individual interests to group interests go back a long way in human evolution--contrary to what Social Darwinists and Ayn Rand devotees would have us believe--suggesting their value to human survival. The most extensive study comparing attitudes of libertarians (97.000) with conservatives and liberals found them lower than the others in empathy, while sharing conservatives' tendency to downgrade care and sharing liberals' tendencies to devalue loyalty, authority, and sanctity. The Largest Study Ever of Libertarian Psychology Sounds like people on my short list for defriending, but possibly they're salvageable. Deep down inside, somebody must have loved them once, and possibly that spark of memory might be kindled to bring back a traces of humanity. It happened to Scrooge. It could happen to you!

 

[/QUOTE]


Exactly, I haven’t seen an argument from libertarianism to prevent the weaponization of capitalism-free market. That’s exactly my point it’s idealistic not pragmatic enough.

So I’m trying to develop a new philosophy that is mostly capitalistic, but has internal mechanisms that self-trigger to prevent egregious abuses like those that cause decisions on Wall st, that began the 2008 Recession. Sometimes rent control has got to go, and other times nations need to be incentivized to lose money in short term to transition off existing infrastructure; some times nations lose money or business do by squeezing out most profit from one resource til it’s gone (ex: oil).

Socialism is worse than capitalism. Do not mistake me being a proponent of what China did decades ago for example.


Ex: the free market principles get abused by patent systems, especially on an international trade scale where business culture and laws differ by geo-political reason and culture. Locks on supply-chains are another because that at its foundation creates competitive advantage and barrier of entry to others; and it can’t be compared to fidget spinners because fidget spinners are a toy, and isn’t equal to an item that has inherent need to support the Life’s liberty, and property, of a business or individual, it doesn’t have the same integrative addiction into capitalistic structure. (Think water, electricity, flow of information communication, shelter, urgent medical/health needs, transportation and education-depending on major).

Also let’s face it part of the human race’s problem is because we’re reproducing too fast, society has to voluntarily track that and encourage responsible generation growth...in some ways Japan figured out the secret to shrinking population, but that in turn also makes your population weak relative to other countries who have higher numbers than yours...so this point im not willing to argue much just point out.

 

really? in my experience, it's 98% of the population, regardless of political leanings.

 

I'd be willing to make compromises in order to achieve goals.

One compromise I could agree with is the patent system. Corporations weaponize the patent system to create monopolies and oligopolies. Anarcho-capitalists believe that the patent system should be done away with completely. Once an idea is shared from one individual to another, such as a song being played, or a design being drawn, that idea is now in the other person's mind.. A patent system prevents the other person from capitalizing on that idea. Sometimes certain entities will buy patients and do nothing with them for many years, even if the ideas are grand. Now I work in the creative industry, and I disagree with anarcho-capitalists on patients. Good ideas are not easy to come by, and being the creator and the innovator can be a very hard job, and it can be aggravating to see other people take your ideas and run with them after you've spent several hours inventing a brand new device. Patents can be great tools for helping the little guys grow big with protection from idea thieves. I think the innovator should be allowed a 2-year patent on their creation so they can ride the wave to success before it becomes fair game to competitors.

The point of the market system, is to allow competitors to make the best services at the best prices. If a water company charged a community too much for water, the community will drill their own wells and collect their own rain water. Forcing the water company to adjust for fair prices. Same with electricity. If an electric company jacks up the prices, other providers will prevail, and people will buy their own solar panels. Allowing a public flow of information is a good idea though.

 

I just unfriended someone in real life for being a misogynist bullshitting crackhead.

And now I kind of miss him.

C'est la vie.

 

You're kind of the best.