The All Things Political Topic - A conservative is someone who makes no changes and consults his grandmother when in doubt

[Malcador]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67922431

So they've probably been doing this every year. Also Lazio fans exist

[Gorth]

Nothing particularly exciting, but Denmark got a new head of state. They also got an Australian born queen, something the locals down here are very fascinated with.

Interesting bit of trivia, Margrethe II was the first Danish monarch to abdicate since king Erik III in 1146

 

[Gromnir]

am not having confirmed the source, but if true this is intriguing, however...

on january 7, 2021 am betting few would guess another battleground nailbiter 'tween trump and biden were gonna be how one would describe the 2024 Presidential race, but here we are. a percentage point or two in georgia, pennsylvania, michigan, arizona, wisconsin and a couple other states is gonna decide the Presidency, so is gonna be a tendency to read too much into the poll du jour.

is far too early to make grand predictions based on curious data points, and am having no idea what were the actual question asked in the des moines poll, but we were nevertheless surprised by the info. take for what little the linked tweet is worth.

did we add enough qualifiers?

HA! Good Fun!

[Keyrock]

Unsurprising, The Donald has won the Iowa Caucus by an overwhelming margin. 

[BruceVC]

30 minutes ago, Keyrock said:

Unsurprising, The Donald has won the Iowa Caucus by an overwhelming margin. 

Its guaranteed Trump will be the GOP nomination, thats been known for months if you look at almost every poll 

[uuuhhii]

uk really plan to ship people to rwanda

thought it was a joke

really should have expected worse after brexit

[Gorth]

3 hours ago, uuuhhii said:

uk really plan to ship people to rwanda

thought it was a joke

really should have expected worse after brexit

It's not a new plan...

https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/10/10/denmark-election-parties-on-left-and-right-back-controversial-plan-to-send-asylum-seekers-

The Danish government decided in 2022, that it was the way forward

[BruceVC]

3 hours ago, uuuhhii said:

uk really plan to ship people to rwanda

thought it was a joke

really should have expected worse after brexit

Why whats  wrong with Rwanda? Its one of Africa's most well run countries.   Dont get  influenced by  racist or Afrophobic views about Rwanda.  Rwanda is a much better place to live in than where many of these illegal immigrants  come from. 

https://360mozambique.com/world/africa/13-stunning-facts-about-rwanda/#:~:text=Rwanda is known for its,for their hospitality and friendliness.

https://www.butterfield.com/get-inspired/facts-about-rwanda

 

[Malcador]

Think it's the idea that sounds like a joke rather than the destination. Could be shipping them off to Norway and it'd still sound absurd.

Hm, should donate them to Ukraine, help with their demographics. Or mobilization

 

[uuuhhii]

27 minutes ago, Malcador said:

Think it's the idea that sounds like a joke rather than the destination. Could be shipping them off to Norway and it'd still sound absurd.

Hm, should donate them to Ukraine, help with their demographics. Or mobilization

 

entire uk are the punchline since brexit vote

but if they are wasting money shipping people around they should dump all those voted to leave eu at falkland so the rest of uk can join the eu again

[Hawke64]

On 1/16/2024 at 9:10 AM, uuuhhii said:

uk really plan to ship people to rwanda

thought it was a joke

really should have expected worse after brexit

We also had a barge with the Legionella bacteria. Not sure if it's still there. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-67063219

The issue is that the Home Office works slowly (unless you throw about £1000 extra at them, then the decision is made within 24 hours) and there are many refugees who need housing while their application is considered.
Additionally, obtaining a visa has become more difficult in general. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48785695

Edited January 17 by Hawke64

[xzar_monty]

This is something political and current, but not related to the discussion here at the moment. This is a lovely clip of Richard Dawkins commenting on the way Jordan Peterson talks about religion and how he obstinately refuses to make sense or commit to a definite argument. I have delved into Peterson in a professional capacity (i.e. not in my free time, thank you), and I have been astonished by how poor he is as a writer. I mean, in my 25+ years in publishing, I think this is the worst printed sentence I have ever seen: "Many herbivores, comparatively defenseless, facing imminent and brutal death, freeze in place, paralyzed by fear, depending on camouflage and immobility to render them invisible to the terrible intentions of nearby red-toothed and razor-clawed carnivores." If there ever was a perfect example of purple prose, it's this. In a writing class, I would give it an F, even at sophomore level. It's a complete mystery to me where his editor was.

Dawkins' comparison to Deepak  Chopra is apt: there is a whole lot of people ever-prepared to be thrilled by obfuscation whose intent is to hide a lack of content.

 

 

[BruceVC]

54 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

This is something political and current, but not related to the discussion here at the moment. This is a lovely clip of Richard Dawkins commenting on the way Jordan Peterson talks about religion and how he obstinately refuses to make sense or commit to a definite argument. I have delved into Peterson in a professional capacity (i.e. not in my free time, thank you), and I have been astonished by how poor he is as a writer. I mean, in my 25+ years in publishing, I think this is the worst printed sentence I have ever seen: "Many herbivores, comparatively defenseless, facing imminent and brutal death, freeze in place, paralyzed by fear, depending on camouflage and immobility to render them invisible to the terrible intentions of nearby red-toothed and razor-clawed carnivores." If there ever was a perfect example of purple prose, it's this. In a writing class, I would give it an F, even at sophomore level. It's a complete mystery to me where his editor was.

Dawkins' comparison to Deepak  Chopra is apt: there is a whole lot of people ever-prepared to be thrilled by obfuscation whose intent is to hide a lack of content.

 

 

I have to disagree, Peterson has written several books that have become best sellers and they helped  and inspired  millions  of people world wide. So outside of what you quoted his ability to help many people through his writing is irrefutable 

Of course you dont have to think he is an effective writer  because you entitled to your opinion but  his books sales dispute that as  an overall real criticism.  Its like  you  saying you think George RR Martin is a bad writer,  the fanbase and sales  evidence of his works dispute that 

And then Peterson seems to get lots  of criticism or praise  because of his political and ideological views, I agree with much of what he says but not around other things.  I dont  follow or watch  much of his latest podcasts  or videos about how Western countries arent free  or  his views on religion and similar topics but he is someone who I rate based on the specific topic.  I dont automatically agree with him or disagree with him just because he is saying it 

But I respect his intellectualism and how he is able to debate, he is a very formidable debater because he is so well  informed about history and he is able to articulate his point convincingly in most debates 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[uuuhhii]

yes the people helped by jordan peterson are such a nice and friendly group of people online

there are a lot of high selling self help garbage

it is one of the most common type of mint condition book one could find on the bookshelf of pretentious middle manager

Edited January 18 by uuuhhii

[xzar_monty]

9 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Of course you dont have to think he is an effective writer  because you entitled to your opinion but  his books sales dispute that as  an overall real criticism.  Its like  you  saying you think George RR Martin is a bad writer,  the fanbase and sales  evidence of his works dispute that

This argument makes no sense whatsoever, and there is probably a name for precisely this fallacy in the art of rhetoric. Simply put: the success or lack thereof of something is absolutely no indication of the quality or lack of quality of the thing in question. They exist in completely different realms.

If you actually followed your own faulty logic here, you would have to convince yourself of the fact that the "radical left" ideology that you seem to disdain is actually a very good thing because it is apparently so popular.

[BruceVC]

57 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

This argument makes no sense whatsoever, and there is probably a name for precisely this fallacy in the art of rhetoric. Simply put: the success or lack thereof of something is absolutely no indication of the quality or lack of quality of the thing in question. They exist in completely different realms.

If you actually followed your own faulty logic here, you would have to convince yourself of the fact that the "radical left" ideology that you seem to disdain is actually a very good thing because it is apparently so popular.

Im not sure  what you  talking about, he  has written self-help books like "12 Rules  For Life " that have inspired millions of people   

So its not  about the subjective quality of  his writings. Im saying his books have  helped  people grapple with internal problems around confidence and purpose 

And the point Im making is  not if you like  or  dislike or agree with the radical left or even if you think they exist because thats about an ideological definition and its nebulous and subjective

Have you read 12 Rules for  Life ? Here they  and  each of  these is a different chapter and they all   make sense and are applicable in different ways depending on the person 

 

• Stand up straight with your shoulders back."
• "Treat yourself like someone you are responsible for helping."
• "Make friends with people who want the best for you."
• "Compare yourself to who you were yesterday, not to who someone else is today."
• "Do not let your children do anything that makes you dislike them."
• "Set your house in perfect order before you criticize the world."
• "Pursue what is meaningful (not what is expedient)."
• "Tell the truth – or, at least, don't lie."
• "Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you don't."
• “Be precise In Your Speech.”
• "Do not bother children while they are skateboarding."
• "Pet a cat when you encounter one in the street."[14]

[xzar_monty]

6 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Im not sure  what you  talking about, he  has written self-help books like "12 Rules  For Life " that have inspired millions of people

It does indeed appear that you are not sure what I'm talking about.

I made a comment on how eloquently Richard Dawkins points out that Peterson's views on religion are nonsense, and how bad a writer Peterson is. To which you then replied that his success as a writer disputes criticism like that. To which I then said that an argument like that makes no sense, for reasons described above. To which you then replied with a comment that ignores what I said and talks about something else entirely.

Of course I know that he has written books that have inspired people. But that has very, very little to do with whether his views on religion are nonsense of whether he is a remarkably poor writer. Whether his books have "helped people grapple with internal problems around confidence and purpose", as you said, has never been the topic here.

If you seriously intend to equate success with quality, you're going to run into serious trouble because it's such a mad argument.

[BruceVC]

15 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

It does indeed appear that you are not sure what I'm talking about.

I made a comment on how eloquently Richard Dawkins points out that Peterson's views on religion are nonsense, and how bad a writer Peterson is. To which you then replied that his success as a writer disputes criticism like that. To which I then said that an argument like that makes no sense, for reasons described above. To which you then replied with a comment that ignores what I said and talks about something else entirely.

Of course I know that he has written books that have inspired people. But that has very, very little to do with whether his views on religion are nonsense of whether he is a remarkably poor writer. Whether his books have "helped people grapple with internal problems around confidence and purpose", as you said, has never been the topic here.

If you seriously intend to equate success with quality, you're going to run into serious trouble because it's such a mad argument.

I did misunderstand  you,  I assumed you were  saying all his writings are bad but you are  talking about his views on religion and not his successful  self-help books 

I havent followed   much of his  religious views,  people keep wanting him   to  confirm if he is religious or not and thats not a reason I respect  him or care about what he says. Because he has lots of opinions   

 

 

 

[HoonDing]

"

• Stand up straight with your shoulders back."
• "Treat yourself like someone you are responsible for helping."
• "Make friends with people who want the best for you."
• "Compare yourself to who you were yesterday, not to who someone else is today."
• "Do not let your children do anything that makes you dislike them."
• "Set your house in perfect order before you criticize the world."
• "Pursue what is meaningful (not what is expedient)."
• "Tell the truth – or, at least, don't lie."
• "Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you don't."
• “Be precise In Your Speech.”
• "Do not bother children while they are skateboarding."
• "Pet a cat when you encounter one in the street."[14]"

 

is this satire

then again: worst timeline

 

[xzar_monty]

16 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

I did misunderstand  you,  I assumed you were  saying all his writings are bad but you are  talking about his views on religion and not his successful  self-help books

His successful self-help books are indeed written in a style that is not only poor but remarkably poor. Like, so poor that it makes you wonder if any editor ever saw it. See the quote I posted above; as I said, I don't think I have seen a worse sentence in my 25+ years of working in the business.

Jordan Peterson is also the only author I have ever seen who uses smileys in his printed work, and the only author I have ever seen who spends considerable time discussing the sales of his previous work, as if the reader had any reason to be interested in something like that. The latter is selfish crassness at its worst, which also explains why writers so rarely do it: it looks embarrassingly jejune.

The fact that his self-help books are successful is interesting, but there you go. An awful lot of nonsense and/or rubbish can be succesful, especially in the short term. I can almost guarantee that less than one person in a million knows anything about Nat Gould, but a hundred years ago he was just about the most successful writer in the world.

Edited January 18 by xzar_monty

[Gfted1]

I dont like <x>, so everyone who does is dumdum.

[xzar_monty]

4 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

I dont like <x>, so everyone who does is dumdum.

How is this relevant to any of this? I mean, neither Bruce nor I have said anything to this effect.

[Malcador]

 

[BruceVC]

52 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

His successful self-help books are indeed written in a style that is not only poor but remarkably poor. Like, so poor that it makes you wonder if any editor ever saw it. See the quote I posted above; as I said, I don't think I have seen a worse sentence in my 25+ years of working in the business.

Jordan Peterson is also the only author I have ever seen who uses smileys in his printed work, and the only author I have ever seen who spends considerable time discussing the sales of his previous work, as if the reader had any reason to be interested in something like that. The latter is selfish crassness at its worst, which also explains why writers so rarely do it: it looks embarrassingly jejune.

The fact that his self-help books are successful is interesting, but there you go. An awful lot of nonsense and/or rubbish can be succesful, especially in the short term. I can almost guarantee that less than one person in a million knows anything about Nat Gould, but a hundred years ago he was just about the most successful writer in the world.

I realize what the main difference in our views  are, because you  a journalist  you have  a different definition and higher   standard around what is good writing  and  this applies  even to  self-help  books 

For me a good\effective self-help book   is one that resonates with me and its advice is relevant and makes sense to me.  Thats what matters  to me.  You are understandably more pedantic around editing mistakes and things like smileys 

We  have  a different definition of  what makes a "good " self-help  book and thats fine, we can agree  to disagree because we do have different  experiences of 12 Rules for  Life 

 

[xzar_monty]

23 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

For me a good\effective self-help book   is one that resonates with me and its advice is relevant and makes sense to me.  Thats what matters  to me.  You are understandably more pedantic around editing mistakes and things like smileys

This conversation probably isn't worth continuing, but let me just point out that you are now making a completely different argument from the one you made before. Previously, you were arguing that his books are good because they are popular and my criticism of them isn't merited because of that. It's funny how quickly and effortlessly you just change what you're saying.