• We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Supporting Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply

Pavlovian Reactionism

mamboking053

Well-Known Member
In short, I think most of our society has been conditioned into a generic Pavlovian response in which any discussion on a particular issue degenerates into a discussion about left vs right wing politics or that issues relation to general left versus right wing politics.

I think the main culprits are the News and pop culture. Especially pop culture- which has become increasingly political over the years.

For instance, if taxes come up, the conversation will seem to inevitably slide down to the left's interpretation of taxes versus the rights interpretation of taxes. The issue of taxes then becomes a general debate between the left versus the right with the general theme of taxes as a backdrop.

If a person is shot by a police officer, it's not about police brutality, is about black vs white...which then becomes a battle between left versus white.... I mean right. (see what I did there, lol)

If some person shoots up some place, it becomes a talk about gun rights...which becomes a battle between left and right.

Man versus woman --> Left versus right

Immigration --> Left versus right

Nothing seems to be addressed on it's own merit anymore and I feel it distorts the issue significantly, or worse, suppresses the actual issue in favor of an ideological victory.
 

DeletedUser39797

In one sense I agree with you,but it isn't really that black and white . People only really take the sides of left and right because most people align with one of those sides to an argument. So, while it may be true that most arguments become an argument about the left vs. Right, that 's only due to the fact that people align with that argument, so they will use the arguments of others to state their case
 

DeletedUser39797

In one sense I agree with you,but it isn't really that black and white . People only really take the sides of left and right because most people align with one of those sides to an argument. So, while it may be true that most arguments become an argument about the left vs. Right, that 's only due to the fact that people align with that argument, so they will use the arguments of others to state their case
Also, I just wanted to mention that black vs white is generally not an argument between the right and left. Anyone that isn't a racist slob knows that black people and white people are equal, and neither should be treated with more respect than the other race
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

I would agree with you, @mamboking053. So many people have now aligned themselves so strongly with the left or the right that they don't see individual issues anymore. They just automatically and without thinking for themselves adopt their side's position, and usually just regurgitate the talking points they hear/see from out of control pundits on TV/radio or garbage from the internet. We have lost the center in this country, and the center was always our strength, not the left or the right.
 

DeletedUser39797

I totally agree with you Stephen, would you two both agree that news has become so far aligned with one side or the other that there is almost no media that is now even, just speaking the truth
 

DeletedUser

I totally agree with you Stephen, would you two both agree that news has become so far aligned with one side or the other that there is almost no media that is now even, just speaking the truth
No, I wouldn't go quite that far. I was speaking of individuals, not the media. I'm not saying that there isn't media bias to some extent, some worse than others, but that was not my point.
 

DeletedUser27889

I agree with you and I do think the 'news' is heavily to blame. The two stations of mind would of course be CNN and Fox with their various parties. Not only is their take on things completely different but the stories they report on which has almost entirely witled down to the the current administration. I don't believe in the fake news mantra, I believe much of what we see on those networks is simply not news, it's the View, 24 hr politics edition. I've taken to watching the BBC world news if I want to hear national news stories, even the NHK feed is better. The internet has also become this massive echo chamber where people receive information, sometimes erroneously that backs up their world view and nothing else.

I agree that politics can't be all black/white left/right. I used to be a very middle of the road person, I aligned myself with one party to vote in a primary for a specific candidate I supported but felt no real allegiance to that or any party. However unless things change I will now always vote that party and the sad and scary thing is I don't want to, I feel like I have to. I don't agree with this party 50% of the time however the other one (since as much as we want to pretend we have more than 2, we don't) has been making legislation that could have very real, very profound and very negative and scary affects for myself, for people I love and what I consider at least, society in general.

The last midterms I voted for someone whose moral character was sickening, whose ethical leanings were questionable but who I knew would vote straight party and would vote in alliance with me on the issues I cared most about when now they seem more threatened than ever, all wiggle room is gone. So I do wonder, which is the cause or causation in your outlook. It seems both parties have grown further and further apart. If there is a single issue you care deeply about with our two party system you have to chose the one who agrees with you on that one thing because the other side is the polar opposite voting and legislation wise at this point.

It's like voting for Americans have been brought down to, "Well you can vote for person A who you dislike and disagree with most of the time, or you can vote for person B who you dislike and disagree with most of the time but person B will also shoot you in the foot." So now we all just spend our spare time arguing over which side deserves to get shot in the foot because the stakes have become that extreme as the parties pander more and more every day to the dangerous outer fringes. Most of America can't see it self it either of those extreme outer fringes but they can tell which side they definitely aren't on once the gun is pointed at their foot.
 

Graviton

Well-Known Member
Polarization is the inevitable result of a two-party system. It's not politics anymore, it's a team sport. It's a cult of personality. No offense, Manda, but your post illustrates part of the problem with the binary thinking: the notion that you have to hold your nose and vote for somebody you don't like, because you think you have to vote for one of two crappy choices.

As usual, the boys behind South Park nailed it:

Douche and a Turd Sandwich.jpg

So we have this weird situation where people will vote for somebody they otherwise wouldn't, just because he's wearing a particular lapel pin, and then they support him anyway, even though they didn't really want him. But he's better than the other team's guy! Damning with faint praise, that.

Until enough voters decide to get off this psycho merry-go-round, things ain't gonna change.
 

RazorbackPirate

Well-Known Member
I think @Manda the first is spot on with her opening paragraph. However, her opening paragraph shows that she, like almost everyone else, has fallen for the lie. Once you're down at the level of left /right, this / that, whatever / who cares, you've already lost the conversation simply because you're having the wrong conversation. I also agree with @Graviton that the rest just proves how effective the propaganda and programming is, and how widespread and deeply ingrained it's become.

George Carlin, one of the most brilliant and insightful minds to ever live, said one of the most brilliant and insightful lines ever spoken in comedy, "It's all a big club, and you ain't in it." I'll let him speak for himself, but this I believe is the real issue of our day.

Warning: George uses some of the '7 words'. However, sometimes the best adjective is indeed, the best adjective.


Ever hear of the phrase, 'divide and conquer?' Yup. Divide comes first. Once a people are divided, they are easily conquered. The conqueror need do nothing more, divide us and we will simply destroy ourselves. They sow division, to sow division. It doesn't matter what we're divided over and screaming at each other about, just that we're divided and screaming at each other.

Why? Because when we're screaming at each other about some stupid made up this or that, we're not watching them. This is not a left / right thing, both sides are doing it. It's all 'political theater'. They're all on the same side, playing the roles of opposing teams.

We need to come to grips with the fact that, among the global players on the global playing field, leaders of nations are at best, middle management. They're all simply puppets who do the bidding of their global masters in exchange for the power and position the bidding requires. How exactly did the Bush's, and the Clinton's, and the McCain's, and the Kerry's, and the Obama's, and etc. ALL become so fabulously wealthy working for the people?

Hint - Not working for the people. It doesn't matter which letter is next to their name, the letters are just for show. There to trick us into believing the illusion of choice. The choice they then use to keep us divided and screaming at each other so they can do what they do. The magician's assistant, "Look over there, don't look over here."

It doesn't matter which bought off candidate wins, the people far above middle management, pay the bills, and control the players on BOTH sides of the false narrative. See how that works? Their agenda gets implemented no matter what. There is no left / right. There's us the people, against them, the global elite. Our interests, against their interests, their oppression, against our freedom. So far they're winning simply because everyone's asleep. More interested in Kim Kardasian's vapid existence, than their own freedom. Exactly how they want it. They win, we lose, check, and mate.

Why does every single one of them seem to be dirty in one way, shape or form? Easy. People with secrets are easily controlled. The entire system has become one big blackmail scheme. Very few of our politicians would ever be allowed a security clearance if they had to go about it the same way as the average civil servant. Few would survive the most basic background check and fewer still a forensic accounting. Yet we elect them, they get appointed to committees, and like it or not, dirty, compromised people get security clearances and gain access not only to our Nation's secrets, but also to it's levers of power and control.

Seriously, how stupid have we become? Seems as stupid as they've made us.

It has been said, "We get the Government we deserve." It seems that, indeed we do.
 
Last edited:

Graviton

Well-Known Member
It doesn't matter which letter is next to their name, the letters are just for show.

I agree. Republicans and Democrats are really two factions of the same Ruling Party.

There to trick us into believing the illusion of choice. The choice they then use to keep us divided and screaming at each other so they can do what they do. The magician's assistant, "Look over there, don't look over here."

The proverbial bread and circuses.
 

RazorbackPirate

Well-Known Member
Interesting that you should say that, since he was an avowed atheist.
It shouldn't be. Truth is truth no matter who speaks it. I don't dismiss other men's voices simply because they hold differing opinions. I'm not so insecure in my positions or beliefs that I'm afraid to listen to what opposing voices have to say about my positions and beliefs.

I also spent most of my years NOT being a Christian, quite a few of them arguing for atheism. Having never been a fan of the 'echo chamber', and having long grown tired of all noise, I decided to read the book myself, by myself, do my own research, and come to my own conclusions.

I'm a simple man who simply lives by one simple rule. "When an honest man is confronted with the Truth, he either accepts the Truth, or fails to remain an honest man." Let's just say that for me, Christianity has always been, an inconvenient Truth.

Never been a big fan of gravity, but last time I checked, gravity never asked me my opinion either. Like it or not, believe in gravity or not, there are dire consequences for those who try to live a life refusing to be bound by the laws of gravity. I might 'believe I can fly, that I might even try to touch the sky,' but I also remember a man named Icarus and well ... it didn't turn out so well.
 
Last edited:

DeletedUser

Truth is truth no matter who speaks it. I don't dismiss other men's voices simply because they hold differing opinions.
None of that is what I was saying. Let me spell it out. You said:
George Carlin, one of the most brilliant and insightful minds to ever live
To me that is interesting given our recent discussion on another thread, because on the biggest question of all, George Carlin got the completely wrong answer. Not very brilliant or insightful in my book. Yes, other things he said were clever, but if you get the big question wrong, you can't be one of the most brilliant and insightful minds.
 

mamboking053

Well-Known Member
To me that is interesting given our recent discussion on another thread, because on the biggest question of all, George Carlin got the completely wrong answer. Not very brilliant or insightful in my book. Yes, other things he said were clever, but if you get the big question wrong, you can't be one of the most brilliant and insightful minds.

What was the question?
 

RazorbackPirate

Well-Known Member
None of that is what I was saying. Let me spell it out. You said:

To me that is interesting given our recent discussion on another thread, because on the biggest question of all, George Carlin got the completely wrong answer. Not very brilliant or insightful in my book. Yes, other things he said were clever, but if you get the big question wrong, you can't be one of the most brilliant and insightful minds.
I don't see how that's a conflict. From the limited information available, I see no evidence that George ever read the book.

By his own reports, he was born into an Irish Catholic family, and rejected his cultural Catholic faith for atheism. Seems his rejection was based on how he saw this cultural Catholicism expressed in his parents who split when he was young, due to an alcoholic father. Sans the Irish, divorce, and alcohol, my story is much the same. I also rejected the cultural Catholicism of my parents and grandparents in favor of atheism.

I then spent way too many years equating a sincere belief in Christ with the faux cultural Christianity of most Catholics and Protestants, of every stripe. People simply born into a culture of Christianity who never much thought about anything else. Seems most have never thought much about anything. Just blindly repeating the words blindly repeated to them, little more than ringing gongs and clanging cymbals.

For me, this was the single biggest reason I rejected the very idea of a faith in Christ. I wouldn't even consider it. I can't listen to a bunch of idiots who don't know a damn thing about the thing they're pushing and claim to believe. Complete and total idiots in the classical sense. Blindly pushing a faith they truly know nothing about. Religions of the blind leading the blind, little more than a Sunday morning coffee klatch.

Only difference between George and me as far as I can tell, is I realized the atheists were all idiots too. Complete and total idiots in the classical sense. Just blindly repeating the words blindly repeated to them, little more than ringing gongs and clanging cymbals themselves. Just another club of the blind leading the blind, nothing more than another coffee klatch, only with sex, drugs, and liquor, which at least made them fun to be around.

As brilliant and insightful as that clip is, it saddens me every time I watch it. One of his last performances in the twilight of his years, he looks to me like a man who had lost hope. He clearly saw and understood the symptoms of the illness, but he never understood the underlying cause of the disease. Once he was of the atheist mindset, money, fame, perks, confronted with idiots on all sides, he likely saw the idiots as the underlying cause and just partied the pain away, never even imagining the possibility of a cure.

Yes, he got the only question that needed a correct answer wrong. Too bad. I would have enjoyed spending eternity getting to know his brilliant mind, hanging out and laughing. Sorry, I can't just dismiss a man, his keen intellect, brilliant insights, and honest heart because he got the ultimate question wrong. That's far too reductionist for me.

You may see something different from atop that high horse, but from down here I'm just looking at a horse's ... well, we all know the view from down here.:eek:
 
Last edited:

DeletedUser39797

I agree. Republicans and Democrats are really two factions of the same Ruling Party.



The proverbial bread and circuses.

I don't really think that. I think that there are major differences that most people in each party actually believe in. However, I do believe that at the top of the ladder there are people working together, perhaps controlling candidates from the parties. Personally, I think that could be part of the reason that Trump is getting blasted so badly by everyone (sorry to bring him in to this). As bad as he may be, he seems to not be part of this "conspiracy" by the left and right, considering what he says about the parties. Not saying you have to think he's a good president, by the way. That's your opinion. Just that he doesn't really seem like part of this group
 

DeletedUser39797

He was an atheist.

It can still be important to listen to what others have to say whether they are saved by Christ or not. Also, I think that @RazorbackPirate was more pointing to his insight into things and intelligence of the world than his wisdom and knowledge of Christ. "While boasting of their wisdom they became utter fools" Romans 1:22
 

DeletedUser

I don't see how that's a conflict. From the limited information available, I see no evidence that George ever read the book.

By his own reports, he was born into an Irish Catholic family, and rejected his cultural Catholic faith for atheism. Seems his rejection was based on how he saw this cultural Catholicism expressed in his parents who split when he was young, due to an alcoholic father. Sans the Irish, divorce, and alcohol, my story is much the same. I also rejected the cultural Catholicism of my parents and grandparents in favor of atheism.

I then spent way too many years equating a sincere belief in Christ with the faux cultural Christianity of most Catholics and Protestants, of every stripe. People simply born into a culture of Christianity who never much thought about anything else. Seems most have never thought much about anything. Just blindly repeating the words blindly repeated to them, little more than ringing gongs and clanging cymbals.

For me, this was the single biggest reason I rejected the very idea of a faith in Christ. I wouldn't even consider it. I can't listen to a bunch of idiots who don't know a damn thing about the thing they're pushing and claim to believe. Complete and total idiots in the classical sense. Blindly pushing a faith they truly know nothing about. Religions of the blind leading the blind, little more than a Sunday morning coffee klatch.

Only difference between George and me as far as I can tell, is I realized the atheists were all idiots too. Complete and total idiots in the classical sense. Just blindly repeating the words blindly repeated to them, little more than ringing gongs and clanging cymbals themselves. Just another club of the blind leading the blind, nothing more than another coffee klatch, only with sex, drugs, and liquor, which at least made them fun to be around.

As brilliant and insightful as that clip is, it saddens me every time I watch it. One of his last performances in the twilight of his years, he looks to me like a man who had lost hope. He clearly saw and understood the symptoms of the illness, but he never understood the underlying cause of the disease. Once he was of the atheist mindset, money, fame, perks, confronted with idiots on all sides, he likely saw the idiots as the underlying cause and just partied the pain away, never even imagining the possibility of a cure.

Yes, he got the only question that needed a correct answer wrong. Too bad. I would have enjoyed spending eternity getting to know his brilliant mind, hanging out and laughing. Sorry, I can't just dismiss a man, his keen intellect, brilliant insights, and honest heart because he got the ultimate question wrong. That's far too reductionist for me.

You may see something different from atop that high horse, but from down here I'm just looking at a horse's ... well, we all know the view from down here.:eek:
It can still be important to listen to what others have to say whether they are saved by Christ or not. Also, I think that @RazorbackPirate was more pointing to his insight into things and intelligence of the world than his wisdom and knowledge of Christ. "While boasting of their wisdom they became utter fools" Romans 1:22
Nevermind. You all missed the point entirely, and I'm tired of trying to explain.
 

Freshmeboy

Well-Known Member
News media suffers from lack of objectivity and caters to a public wanting news in 30 seconds or less. Designed around emotional catharsis, the hard news (fire, famine, death, natural calamity, etc. ) is immediately followed by fluff pieces all split into 8.5 minute increments with suggestive teasers to keep you tuned in through the next commercial break. Sports and weather are last unless they are the lead stories. In print, gone are the days of objective reporting using facts, researched and veified through independent sources, then released onto the public as a scoop. Now, suggestion with vague hints and verification are used in a fast paced internet world. It used to be that the only opinions in a paper were on the editorial page..seems you can't tell the difference these days....
 
Top