12

Understanding Progressives

Posted by strugatsky 7 years, 5 months ago to Politics
171 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Today, I had accidentally gone to a meeting of Liberals/Progressives, about 20 of them, on the subject of healthcare. The topic was intentionally advertised so as to conceal its aim and I, in a state of bliss, took the bait. Disappointed at first, I ended up almost enjoying it, for this was not the typical college uneducated crowd of children (per Obamacare, childhood has now been officially defined as 0-26), but a geriatric congregation where some of the patients may have gone to real schools back then. So I stayed. What I learned was quite interesting. The presenter was a retired medical doctor, whose medical expertise I won't question (though he seemingly retired at an earlier age than most), but whose lack of understanding of economics and other subjects which he proclaimed to champion was astounding. It was like listening to a NFL player or a Hollywood star. But most interesting was the reaction of the audience, who approvingly nodded their heads to every unsubstantiated claim. Even a claim that doctor visit deductibles are evil, as, he claimed, that a $5 deductible prevents patients from seeing a doctor – regardless of the fact that these same patients spent that on cigarettes every day. I thought that I was in a middle of circus seals, only these were too weak to clasp. As the level of bull rose above my tolerance level (quickly, actually) and I began to politely challenge with facts, the audience became most uncomfortable and their leader asked me to be quiet (of course, I did not). My main take away was the amazing shallowness of these people – every attempt at analysis, delving even a little deeper, caused them pain and anguish. I have seen this before – from the teenagers going onto 30-something, but these were supposedly adults in their 60's and 70's. Had American education failed us that long ago?

Second takeaway – the Progressives actually believe that the US economy, prior to Obama, was pure capitalism! I was and remain, at a total loss how to confront such a deviation from reality. Can anyone here help?


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 5.
  • Posted by ewv 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Thoughts do not "represent language". Language is the means by which you think and communicate. Irrationality is not an alternate means of understanding. There are no shortcuts to rationality. Hardly anyone is totally irrational. If you can't find some means to rationally convey thoughts to someone then you can't do it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Rational persuasion does not manipulate emotions. If a person is not rational then don't try to communicate with him. You cannot emotionally manipulate a person into rational understanding and knowledge.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    There are (or at used to be) several interesting recordings of talks by Lisa Van Damme at their website describing their teaching and experiences.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by dougthorburn 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    No you're not. Don't confuse factual analysis with persuasion. Feelers decide based on emotions, not logic. The lower brain centers are at work when deciding political things (not to mention stock prices). It's the herding instinct at its finest.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The Van Damme school is achieving excellent results. A school having what it calls a "philosophy" doesn't tell you what it is. They are all different and every one of them has one at least implicitly. Imagining something bad when you see a different school is like imagining some crook you encountered whenever you see a person. It isn't logical.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Philosophy is a lot more than a direction. See Ayn Rand's Philosophy: Who Needs It?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by starznbarz 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    We disagree on individualism. When you find yourself at that point it`s because talking has failed. Your choices are to capitulate or fight, the only threatening that was done, was done by the "bully" .
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    On the average, the worse students would go into teaching careers, providing ever slightly worse instructions to the following generation. And so on... I have personally seen examples when the teachers' lack of understanding of their subject was appalling. Most noticeable is the lack of proper grammar among most teachers that I've interacted with. Even brought back to the principal an English assignment that was riddled with grammatical errors; I thought that I was reading Michele Obama's Master's thesis...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I think of philosophy as direction, closely tied to our moral compass. Can we wander without direction? Sure. But I think that you can see where that would lead a person.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I did not perceive this comment as a "threat," but a proper response to physical aggression. The bully needs to be taught that bullying does not pay, while the victim needs to learn how to deal with the bullies. Both are invaluable life skills, which the school system completely destroys. While my son was in public school, I have instructed him that should he be physically attacked by any kid, he is to physically defend himself, regardless of the consequences that the school threatened. Otherwise, I would punish him. My goal was to raise a man, not a snowflake.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I went to two religious schools and got very turned off by religion. However, through the study of the Bible and Judaeo-Christianity, I can better understand our Western Civilization. If I didn't have to, I doubt it that I would have ever read the entire Bible. But in the end, I'm glad that I did.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 7 years, 5 months ago
    Liberalism is based on emotion and emotional manipulation. They say whatever will convince people to give in and support the liberal programs.

    As to healthcare, its funny that a medicare for everyone supporter thinks

    1) that HE is going to get free medical care that OTHERS pay for; forgetting that the others will get "free" medical care that HE is going to pay for.
    2) that "free" medical care will continually expand into more and more "care" options.
    3) that the current tax structure supports only retired people over 65 basically, but the costs will increase quite a bit when everyone is covered and the base of people (working people) who will pay for it essentially doesnt increase
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "I was so appalled by what I saw that I immediately removed my children from the public school. "
    My wife says, half jokingly, that that point is coming for us. -- I highly recommend sitting in the class during a lesson. You are permitted to do so. The schools often don't like it and often try to discourage it, which is a sign of a problem. There are good schools that welcome parents sitting in. Typically, after insisting, you will be allowed to sit it on one or two lessons (that is enough) with an assistant principal there with you. Obviously, you are to be a fly on the wall and sit quietly in the back. Well worth the experience.

    When it comes to gun rights, maybe the best thing we can do is teach them to shoot and use guns responsibly, so they won't believe stereotypes about guns. -- Completely agree. I taught my kids to respect guns, safety and shooting at kindergarten age. I think that is much more difficult for those living in large cities.

    "everyone knows that water boils at 100 deg C." -- no need to whitewash stupidity. The girl explained everything properly. This is a level of experiments that we did in elementary school. The teacher was (and remains) too stupid to know basic physics and too moronic to be able to learn.

    "No, they don't [teach the relative merits of holidays]. And that is the problem"
    I am confused. -- What I am trying to point out here is that there is an intentional effort to remove our historical symbols – holidays, icons, statues, items and people of value, the bedrock of our culture and civilization. This is not unique to the American Progressives; this is exactly the same as happened in the Soviet Union, where every pillar of society was intentionally uprooted and destroyed. This is the continuation of the Lenin-Stalin-Alinsky policy.

    "The preaching of sharing, donations, food drives, the evils of unequal distribution"
    I don't want the school to teach it, but I think giving voluntarily to the poor is generally a good thing... - I am not against charity or help. I am against charity at someone else expense. If you want to give – by all means, everything that is yours. The school teaches the kids to give that which belongs to others, starting with the parents.

    Global Warming. -- I've addressed this in another comment, but to ease of reading, will copy and paste here: When we talk about religion, we give examples of the hypocrisy and lies surrounding it. That in itself is enough for a thoughtful person to question the dogma. It is a well demonstrated fact that Global Warming claims are riddled with intentional lies and falsification of data. For a thoughtful person, that in itself should be enough to question the dogma.

    To touch again on the safety, busing and bullying issue – we are in agreement, but I want to reiterate as it is so important. These issues are related in the sense that the system prevents children to grow up into adults. It is as if we are making eunuchs. They can't make decisions, can't take responsibility, run for cover at a mere sight of a micro-aggression and, most importantly, look up to the government for everything, from jobs to housing to healthcare.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Not that I want to change this discussion exclusively to Global Warming, but I will point out that when we talk about religion, we give examples of the hypocrisy and lies surrounding it. That in itself is enough for a thoughtful person to question the dogma. It is a well demonstrated fact that Global Warming claims are riddled with intentional lies and falsification of data. For a thoughtful person, that in itself should be enough to question the dogma.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Even in my college days (1980's) we all knew that professional professors knew little of the real world. We had some teachers that taught part time while working in the industry - those were the best. The "education" system now has built-in fail safes, where in order to teach one needs degrees that can be attained through many years bowing to the education system and being molded by it. I am an engineer with extensive business and economics experience and knowledge; I am not allowed to teach HS kids neither math, nor physics, nor business - I don't have the correct, approved by the system, degrees for that.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Let's suppose that rational thought represents a language. And irrational thought represents another language. If you want to communicate with the later, shouldn't you use the language that your intended audience understands? I am making two points here: a) we need to communicate with the Progressives because our political system is set up in such a way that the majority holds most of the power. They are the majority. b) the only language that the Progressives understand is irrationality. If we want results, there does not seem to me much of a choice, is there?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "As simple and primitive as the experiment was, the student was ahead of the teacher, "
    WOW. That's kind of mind boggling, if you're right. That kind of thing would have our kids in a different school.

    Our kids are lobbying to stay at their public school b/c they like their friends, but I would definitely draw the line there.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It's unfortunate how turned off I am to philosophy and schools Our kids were in a school that claimed to have a philosophy, and it ended up being the only time I've been a party to a law suit. I don't disparage philosophy as a subject, but I'm turned off by it. When I read the Van Damme website and their philosophy, I was reminded of that other school and their philosophy. I immediately imagine people who are fastidious, sanctimonious, rigid, self-righteous, and so on. I'm a bit of a philistine when it comes to kids' education because of that experience.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Abaco 7 years, 5 months ago
    A colleague of mine just handed me a printout of something you guys should look at on this. Pew Research Center "Democrats and Republicans more ideologically divided than in the past". Enlightening graphics on this one.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ allosaur 7 years, 5 months ago
    Dang, Captain, I'm surprised you weren't called a racist in an attempt to make you shut up.
    When unaffordable Affordable Healthcare Act became,as Harry Reed would bray, "The law of the land," I recall critics being called racist due to the socialist in the White House being Obamacare's driving force.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Abaco 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I saw the valley as a place to escape to in the story. Perhaps I misunderstood. Sure looked like an escape to me.

    I agree that strugatsky did not join the moochers.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Threatening to bloody people's noses will not convince anyone of anything except to put you down where you are no longer a threat. Threatening people is not the way to defend and spread reason and individualism.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 7 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It doesn't work because presentation of facts has been too narrow. If the fundamental premises of altruism, pragmatism and collectivism are not replaced by a defense of individualism and reason no detailed facts will change the direction people look to for what they think is improvement.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo