LaxPower Back-Up Stick

HooDat wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 4:37 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 4:14 pm NATIONALISM
"Nationalism refers to a people's sense of common belonging and loyalty to a nation. Nationalism may arise among people who share such common traits as culture, language, origin, and tradition. It may develop as people join to form a unified government. Nationalism may also originate as people fight to establish a unique racial, cultural, or religious identity. A peoples' struggle to prevent their identity from being changed or erased by a more powerful group might also spur a feeling of nationalism. In each situation, nationalism creates a sense of connection and commitment to a group with a distinct set of beliefs, ideals, and traditions."

(Cerulo, K. A. (2016). Nationalism. In World Book student. Retrieved from http://www.worldbookonline.com/student/ ... d=ar383740)

BTW, I purposely picked the South…..I added it because I knew that you would mention my picking the south. You have tendencies that you may not be aware of. We all lean one way or the other even when we feign neutrality. Those confederates were loyal to their vision of a Nation. You want to thread a needle with your innocent definition of Nationalism when everyone on the planet knows otherwise. That definition I posted was from Australia. I picked a foreign source to avoid the Woke, Liberal, post modern, PC claim.

EDIT:

Liberals have been stacking the SCOTUS?

TLD - My definition came from a dictionary - no political science lens involved. Not sure Australia avoids accusation of wokeness etc... but I'll roll with it. The definition you provided includes BOTH definitions I was laying out in my further arguments - namely that some see nationalism as innocent love of country and some see it as the root of genocide and warfare. That slippery definition makes it useful as a WEDGE.

My point is that everyone on the planet does not agree with your claim that there is no innocent definition of nationalism - in fact the very definition you provided includes a lot of "may"s - as it should.

HooDat,
I go do a little work and come back to find a wide scale debate has been raging from our little exchange earlier!

I agree with you that words get used in ways that some people find hard to understand, indeed find it easier to get their backs up and be offended rather than digging in to understand what is actually meant when the words are used.

But let me be clear, just as I have been with Salty a bunch of times...I'm a proud, patriotic American but I reject "nationalist" in all forms as a description of my beliefs.

why? Because I've studied the history of "nationalism" in all of its permutations throughout history.
Seemingly benign definitions simply don't describe how men have used the, at first glance, attractive aspects to drive evil ends.

We can go through all those permutations throughout history, including those that drove some of America's own worst behaviors, if you'd like, but if you take a moment yourself, I bet you can figure this out.

But put aside the simple, singular word "nationalist", it's incredibly clear that when we couple it as a phrase, as in "white nationalist", we mean the notion that a nation should be for the benefit of whites, not others, and that it's very definition as a nation implies racial identity. And when we use the phrase, "christian nationalist" we're describing a belief that a nation should be defined by that sole religion (moreover as only some christians define the religion!) and should be to the benefit of christians to the exclusion or detriment of other religions. These are inherently fascist beliefs, and I reject them wholeheartedly as fundamentally in conflict with the ideals of America about which I and so proud and patriotic.

Our country has not ever been, nor is it likely ever going to be, perfect in achieving these ideals, but these fascist, "nationalist" ideologies are in complete opposition to the striving to be "more perfect".

I suggest folks bother to understand the dangers, and why it's so important, rather than choosing, lazily IMO, to be offended by the words.

HooDat wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 5:38 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 5:25 pm Point is......obviously the desire to live there outweighs living in any other State. That's why they have the highest population...

youthathletics wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 5:27 pm Afan - shouldnt they have an immense tax revenue stream with all those people. Hell, we are able to off load 65 Billion in less than year to Ukraine and not bat an eye, why is CA run so bad?

First off - California is quite possibly the most beautiful place on the planet, pick your pleasure (beach, desert, mountains, PNW, vineyards, pebble beach,...) so they have that going for them.

Cali is the tip of the spear on what is the trajectory for the future for Western civilization. The (re)-creation of a society that includes uber-wealthy globalists, a reasonably well paid serving class (lawyers, doctors, plumbers), and peasants. This is why all the talk about UBI comes from these folks. They see the future and it involves them paying poor people to not kill them....

Was blown away by this seemingly boring movie based on NoCal, worth the time if you want to try it out. A real commentary on San Fran.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Las ... _Francisco

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:31 pm I suggest folks bother to understand the dangers, and why it's so important, rather than choosing, lazily IMO, to be offended by the words.

I suggest you not misappropriate otherwise good words, perverting their meaning, to serve your political agenda.

a fan wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 7:56 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:05 pm Sorry, not buying it in its entirety. Where is the line item that CA is sending the tax revenue to the feds to be re-distributed?

We're gonna do this AGAIN?

Why do we have a Federal Highway program, my man? Why doesn't each State simply pony up, and pay for their own d*mn roads? Nothing is stopping that, right?

Why is the Dept. of Ed sending money to flyover States? Can't Mississippi, Alabama, West Virginia and the rest pay for their own educational systems?

Why is Medicare Federal? Why can't each State pay for their own elderly?

Why was 100% of Covid funding Federal? Vermont can't pay for their own vaccines or hospitalizations?

Or more generally---why do you think counties exist, my man? You think each city in your State is self sufficient, right? So what's the point of adding another layer of government if each city can fend for itself?

Why is there a FEDERAL Farm Bill, my man? Why can't Iowa take care of its own farmers? Being "self-sufficient" and keeping DC out of their affairs is SUPER important to their mostly Republican population, right? So why would they EVER take Federal dollars to help their own farmers compete in the global market?

And most of all: why does your Party ALWAYS increase Federal spending EVERY chance they get? Your'e telling me that they don't need the money...so why does spending go up? Trump, as you know, because I won't let it go....made government 66% bigger in just four years. Now why on Earth would he do that if States don't need that money?

When you can't answer these questions, you'll get it.

that wasn’t the argument on the table. We were discussing why people are leaving Ca, and your rebuttal was a simplistic there are still 18mm still living there.

youthathletics wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 10:47 pm that wasn’t the argument on the table. We were discussing why people are leaving Ca, and your rebuttal was a simplistic there are still 18mm still living there.

Would you prefer I ask the corollary to "why are they leaving"?

Ok. Why did the population of California go from 24 million in 1980 to 40 million in 2020?

Or if you prefer: why did the GDP of California nearly double in 20 years? Have an answer for that?

Your premise is: the libs are bad, right? Straight from FoxNation.



This isn't complicated: highly educated people moved to California for high paying jobs as tech boomed. Then, two things happened.

One, the demand for housing became so great, couple with nosebleed salaries, that the Bay area and other areas became absurdly unaffordable during the tech boom and the years that followed.

And two, remote working and Tech companies starting to open branches and HQ's in desirable places to work like Denver or Austin to make it so workers weren't blowing all their checks on housing. My nephew is in that boat, my friend. Why would he want to live in SF and spend half his paycheck on rent...when he can work in Denver for the same company? SF isn't THAT great. And now he can use his saved money to travel all he likes.

But sure, the libs are bad....is that what you want to hear?

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 10:46 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:31 pm I suggest folks bother to understand the dangers, and why it's so important, rather than choosing, lazily IMO, to be offended by the words.

I suggest you not misappropriate otherwise good words, perverting their meaning, to serve your political agenda.

Again, I'm a proud, patriotic white American christian...but I ain't a white nationalist nor christian nationalist, nor the overlap...is it too hard for you to understand the meaning of those words? Does it strain you to grasp their meaning?

Poor fellow.
My "political agenda" offends you?
The anti-fascist and anti bigotry "agenda" offends you?

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:19 pm

There will be a whole bunch of these guys who will be spending 10+ years in prison.

For a seditious conspiracy to overthrow the govt ?
Or for obstructing a govt proceeding ?
The difference matters.

These criminals will be doing a LOT of time in the big house for BOTH (10+ year for each charge and consecutive sentences). They will soon be joined by a bunch of their friends in similar organizations for doing the same things.

The difference doesn't matter to the bigger picture. DoJ may get to that at some point. Don't believe me - try former WH Counsel Herschmann who told John Eastman to get the best criminal defense attorney he could find because he was going to need one.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 11:37 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 10:46 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:31 pm I suggest folks bother to understand the dangers, and why it's so important, rather than choosing, lazily IMO, to be offended by the words.

I suggest you not misappropriate otherwise good words, perverting their meaning, to serve your political agenda.

Again, I'm a proud, patriotic white American christian...but I ain't a white nationalist nor christian nationalist, nor the overlap...is it too hard for you to understand the meaning of those words? Does it strain you to grasp their meaning?

Poor fellow.
My "political agenda" offends you?
The anti-fascist and anti bigotry "agenda" offends you?

Lots of resentment and offense.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 11:37 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 10:46 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:31 pm I suggest folks bother to understand the dangers, and why it's so important, rather than choosing, lazily IMO, to be offended by the words.

I suggest you not misappropriate otherwise good words, perverting their meaning, to serve your political agenda.

Again, I'm a proud, patriotic white American christian...but I ain't a white nationalist nor christian nationalist, nor the overlap...is it too hard for you to understand the meaning of those words? Does it strain you to grasp their meaning?

Poor fellow.
My "political agenda" offends you?
The anti-fascist and anti bigotry "agenda" offends you?

And the mask slips again…… believe what he tells you the first time. Anti fascist and anti racist are his enemy. It is a Zero Sum Game for him…. For decent folk it is a Non Zero Sum Game.

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 8:37 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 11:37 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 10:46 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:31 pm I suggest folks bother to understand the dangers, and why it's so important, rather than choosing, lazily IMO, to be offended by the words.

I suggest you not misappropriate otherwise good words, perverting their meaning, to serve your political agenda.

Again, I'm a proud, patriotic white American christian...but I ain't a white nationalist nor christian nationalist, nor the overlap...is it too hard for you to understand the meaning of those words? Does it strain you to grasp their meaning?

Poor fellow.
My "political agenda" offends you?
The anti-fascist and anti bigotry "agenda" offends you?

And the mask slips again…… believe what he tells you the first time. Anti fascist and anti racist are his enemy. It is a Zero Sum Game for him…. For decent folk it is a Non Zero Sum Game.

A human being is not one thing among others; things determine each other, but man is ultimately self-determining. What he becomes - within the limits of endowment and environment- he has made out of himself. In the concentration camps, for example, in this living laboratory and on this testing ground, we watched and witnessed some of our comrades behave like swine while others behaved like saints. Man has both potentialities within himself; which one is actualized depends on decisions but not on conditions.

-Victor Frankel

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 8:45 am A human being is not one thing among others; things determine each other, but man is ultimately self-determining. What he becomes - within the limits of endowment and environment- he has made out of himself. In the concentration camps, for example, in this living laboratory and on this testing ground, we watched and witnessed some of our comrades behave like swine while others behaved like saints. Man has both potentialities within himself; which one is actualized depends on decisions but not on conditions.......

-Victor Frankel

Great book, required reading.

Still think that posters around here are far too trigger happy to jump on OS, repeatedly.

BTW, HooDat, I don't think you were being "lazy" about these words. I think you're sincerely concerned about the words being misunderstood and causing greater division, less "unity".

Indeed, the words "nationalism" or "nationalist" have been getting actively and purposely used by the right wing as a signal, a "wedge", to separate themselves from the supposed America-haters they ascribe to those not "nationalist". Same for the excessive flag waving and outrage over taking a knee or other displays of protest with the anthem.

These right wing politicians haven't been "lazy" either, they know that what they are doing is signaling to the "white nationalists" and "christian nationalists", those who support and foment these ideologies, that they are seen, heard, and embraced...while simultaneously pretending they are "patriotic" and should be supported by other "patriotic" voters.

And yes, these ideologies not only exist, they are supported, whether actively or tacitly, by a surprisingly large portion of America (I say surprisingly only because they are so much in opposition with supposed American ideals). That reality is not new, but what is new is for a national party to openly embrace them, raise them up, mainstream them. That said, we've seen such threats before.

Just as McCarthyism needed to be rejected, just as Jim Crow needed to be rejected, just as Bircherism needed to be rejected, so too should these ideologies be rejected today...by both parties.

Back to "nationalism", the other danger that certainly needs to be understood is this current effort by many on the right to suggest that Americans cannot be patriotic if they believe that it is in our nation's best interest to be actively engaged with other nations to solve worldwide problems. Indeed to lead the world through our strength of economy, military and ideals, lifting up other nations as partners and beneficiaries of an international order of rules, laws, trade, and social exchange.

The "America First" (words that independently have benign meaning) movement has deep roots in ultra-nationalist fascism and should be rejected by "patriotic" Americans who actually believe in American ideals. Disagree on various decisions internationally, the use of soft or hard power in specific situations, but lets unify under the notion that the world is not zero sum...

youthathletics wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 9:43 am

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 8:45 am A human being is not one thing among others; things determine each other, but man is ultimately self-determining. What he becomes - within the limits of endowment and environment- he has made out of himself. In the concentration camps, for example, in this living laboratory and on this testing ground, we watched and witnessed some of our comrades behave like swine while others behaved like saints. Man has both potentialities within himself; which one is actualized depends on decisions but not on conditions.......

-Victor Frankel

Great book, required reading.

Still think that posters around here are far too trigger happy to jump on OS, repeatedly.

I dunno, in this exchange, OS really 'asked for it'.
He's entirely free to clarify, but each post dug the hole deeper.

How many posters do you have here? You have a handful of people who go back and forth (and spend way too much time wallowing in the sky is falling and nothing is right world). Of that handful how many don't like OS's persona? 80-90%? This is not a level playing field and posters are way too trigger happy to take shots at OS, there is no question about that. I'm not a left-right, D-R person but right here you can see how the more left and D folks who claim moral and ethical superiority are real quick to jump on and be nasty to those who disagree or are of a different opinion. This is as plain to see as the noses on your faces boys.

DMac wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 10:14 am How many posters do you have here? You have a handful of people who go back and forth (and spend way too much time wallowing in the sky is falling and nothing is right world). Of that handful how many don't like OS's persona? 80-90%? This is not a level playing field and posters are way too trigger happy to take shots at OS, there is no question about that. I'm not a left-right, D-R person but right here you can see how the more left and D folks who claim moral and ethical superiority are real quick to jump on and be nasty to those who disagree or are of a different opinion. This is as plain to see as the noses on your faces boys.

Is this just an observation, or do you have a remedy? Should people who have a difference of opinion refrain from voicing it when OS opines? Should OS not opine? What is your plan?

DMac wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 10:14 am How many posters do you have here? You have a handful of people who go back and forth (and spend way too much time wallowing in the sky is falling and nothing is right world). Of that handful how many don't like OS's persona? 80-90%? This is not a level playing field and posters are way too trigger happy to take shots at OS, there is no question about that. I'm not a left-right, D-R person but right here you can see how the more left and D folks who claim moral and ethical superiority are real quick to jump on and be nasty to those who disagree or are of a different opinion. This is as plain to see as the noses on your faces boys.

+100

Call it what they want, but it really boils down to gaslighting and borderlines online bullying.

DMac wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 10:14 am How many posters do you have here? You have a handful of people who go back and forth (and spend way too much time wallowing in the sky is falling and nothing is right world). Of that handful how many don't like OS's persona? 80-90%? This is not a level playing field and posters are way too trigger happy to take shots at OS, there is no question about that. I'm not a left-right, D-R person but right here you can see how the more left and D folks who claim moral and ethical superiority are real quick to jump on and be nasty to those who disagree or are of a different opinion. This is as plain to see as the noses on your faces boys.

Actually, I'd say it's more 60:40 of those who are liberal/moderate vs conservative/moderate. Very few are much further to the right or left, and even fewer are outright trolling with their posts.

We push and pull between us, and when someone engages, they are engaged in return.

I'm a little puzzled when you say that only one side "claim moral or ethical superiority"...I've seen no humility exhibited on those grounds by those on the more right-leaning 'side'. For that matter, little humility at all...(most of us have pretty strong egos, at least enough to think our opinions have enough merit to share).

Or is it just that the challenges on moral or ethical grounds are uncomfortable?
should those be avoided?

serious question.

youthathletics wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 10:22 am

DMac wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 10:14 am How many posters do you have here? You have a handful of people who go back and forth (and spend way too much time wallowing in the sky is falling and nothing is right world). Of that handful how many don't like OS's persona? 80-90%? This is not a level playing field and posters are way too trigger happy to take shots at OS, there is no question about that. I'm not a left-right, D-R person but right here you can see how the more left and D folks who claim moral and ethical superiority are real quick to jump on and be nasty to those who disagree or are of a different opinion. This is as plain to see as the noses on your faces boys.

+100

Call it what they want, but it really boils down to gaslighting and borderlines online bullying.

I don't think it is "gaslighting" or "borderline online bullying" to disagree with OS on the many, many things he opts to post about and the many positions he seems to adopt. He can take it, and dishes it out just as much as anyone here. I don't think the sky is falling and that there is nothing right with the world. But by and large, I think OS's world view is outdated, and occasionally narrow-minded and small. When he posts on subject matter about which he is plainly an expert or has more knowledge about than me, I find his posts pretty interesting and thought provoking. Pretty basic set of circumstances.

PizzaSnake wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 10:21 am

DMac wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 10:14 am How many posters do you have here? You have a handful of people who go back and forth (and spend way too much time wallowing in the sky is falling and nothing is right world). Of that handful how many don't like OS's persona? 80-90%? This is not a level playing field and posters are way too trigger happy to take shots at OS, there is no question about that. I'm not a left-right, D-R person but right here you can see how the more left and D folks who claim moral and ethical superiority are real quick to jump on and be nasty to those who disagree or are of a different opinion. This is as plain to see as the noses on your faces boys.

Is this just an observation, or do you have a remedy? Should people who have a difference of opinion refrain from voicing it when OS opines? Should OS not opine? What is your plan?

Of course it's an observation (a years long one at that). Nope, no one should refrain from or not opine. I'm not interested in coming up with a remedy and have no plan to do so.
When it was LP and there were many, many more posters (and some pretty darn sharp ones at that) things didn't go down the way they do here where it's a 9 v 1 and everybody pile on game. The discussions were much better there, was a much broader base and much less gang mentality. Jus' sayin'.

youthathletics wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 10:22 am

DMac wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 10:14 am How many posters do you have here? You have a handful of people who go back and forth (and spend way too much time wallowing in the sky is falling and nothing is right world). Of that handful how many don't like OS's persona? 80-90%? This is not a level playing field and posters are way too trigger happy to take shots at OS, there is no question about that. I'm not a left-right, D-R person but right here you can see how the more left and D folks who claim moral and ethical superiority are real quick to jump on and be nasty to those who disagree or are of a different opinion. This is as plain to see as the noses on your faces boys.

+100

Call it what they want, but it really boils down to gaslighting and borderlines online bullying.

Really?
It's not as if posters are posting falsehoods about Salty, rather they are responding directly to his current and many past posts.
He's demonstrated quite a lot of competence in communicating his views, as well as his insights, experience, and perspectives.

I see considerable respect for where there's perceived real value in his posts, based on experience and knowledge, but strong disagreement when his personal perspectives include influences that have led to what some see as evidence of outright bigotries.

Is that off limits when he demonstrates such in a post?
Isn't he free to clarify if he thinks someone has actually misunderstood him?

I'm fine with my biases being challenged...and I've seen my share of flaming at me, only a few times truly out of bounds, IMO.