Thought for the Day

Trump doesn't even mention education!!
Every kid in school costs the taxpayer close to ten grand, that's why the Republican fatcats don't like it. Why teach Shakespeare to a car mechanic or garbageman?
Bernie, on the other hand, is ultra pro education, maybe gene scientists of the future can filter out all the troublesome chromosomes and make a perfect race of Humanoids. Through Science.
People look at Teaching as a calling rather than a job,
My brother went to College with lots of rich white guys who were schooled in Expensive Private Schools, he said they were no better in general than anybody else, but when an important exam was coming up, they went into the ZONE, they would disappear into their rooms.
As dire as the situation seems with Donald Trump, this is a fantastic time to be a Democrat in the USA.
A Woman and Commie on the steps of the White House???
The Republican Convention is going to expose the real Donald Trump.
Reality is going to set in.
Reality is the test.
I give my main man Obama an A+
Racism is a can of worms that's been fermenting in the can for 200 years, the stench is unbelievable.
It's an American Dish.
Rent THE WIRE, Stavros. It's Obama's favorite TV show.

Just a riff on your post, nothing more:
I look at teaching as my day job; research my night job (and calling). In larger universities it's the other way around. I love to teach, though. I can spend hours thinking through and breaking down the material into digestible chunks and arranging it into a logical and pedagogically natural sequence. I'm a bit old fashioned in my approach. Rather than lead an meandering discussion where the students explore on their own, I still prefer to present a well planned lecture and answer the questions that arise as I go. Home and study groups are the places for exploring ideas.
Most of my students will probably never apply, in a direct way, the subjects I teach. Why teach a garbageman Shakespeare, or Nabokov? You don't really. You expose him to human values well expressed, as well as to the process of reading and thinking questioningly and how to be critical and open at the same time. I know a meat packer who reads Kazuo Ishiguro. He remembers he had a crush on his old high school English teacher.

Living in exciting times, I believe, is an ancient Chinese curse. I do hope you're right about reality setting in (as opposed to reality TV).

Welcome back, Martin. Gee, thanks! That’s got that bit over. Currently educational theory and practice demotes the lecture and promotes problem-based learning and self-discovery. I like to call it FOFO learning (for Fuck Off and Find Out). There is little better than a well-presented lecture given by an enthusiastic expert. I used to teach quite complicated engineering math(s) without notes. Occasionally, I’d mess up a problem – but it showed the students that could make a mistake and how I argued my way back.

I’m all for active learning and being lectured to can be active.

I don’t teach now, just research (my calling). If that is what Trish meant, ‘cos she’s never called me.

Hats off to our teachers.:Bowdown:
My thought for the day ,... I just wanted to share some excellent video coverage of todays' successful SpaceX launch and first stage recovery in the resupply mission to the International Space Station.
http://www.spacex.com/webcast

Wow . now that was some convention ...Attachment 951776

Here's my thought for the day:
Donald Trump has been getting a PASS on everything from the Conservative Media, and really, the media at large, really,...but if Novembertime starts approaching and it looks like Trump has any real chance of getting into the White House,.........(which would have to mean a Republican House, Senate, and Supreme Court in Donald Trump's little hands)
...............

His hands be too small to steer the ship of state!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

His hands be too small to steer the ship of state!

---

His greed though big enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

His hands be too small to steer the ship of state!

---

Attachment 953162

That sail will need a steady hand on the tiller to steer straight...

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/20...iter-tells-all
Excellent New Yorker article.
Tony Schwartz who ghostwrite "The Art of the Deal" felt compelled to speak out about the "sociopath , compulsive liar and bully" he came to know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sukumvit boy

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/20...iter-tells-all
Excellent New Yorker article.
Tony Schwartz who ghostwrite "The Art of the Deal" felt compelled to speak out about the "sociopath , compulsive liar and bully" he came to know.

---

Unbelievable that people actually think he is "great". Are so many lacking basic observational skills?

They're rewriting the history books on the American Election process, EVERYBODY with a lick of sense laughed at Trump, yet here we are.
The new history books will not be printed, they will be downloaded onto apps, or Applephones, or whatever it is you kids are linked into these days.

...See?.... This crazy shit is what happens when you put a jig in the White House!!!
The World is upside down, and traveling a thousand miles an hour below your feats.
Feel it now?
VOTE!!!!!!!!!!

And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there;
O! say does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the freeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
and the home of the brave?

https://s31.postimg.org/hyr88l3y3/us...ted_gif_32.gifimage hosting 30 mb

My thought for the day.

Roses are redish
Violets are Bluish,
If it wasn't for Jesus,
We'd all be Jewish

One thing about Trump some might not understand. What everyone says on this group is quite correct about him being a liar, a bully and whatever else bad that was mentioned,, but what you guys don't understand is we don't care. People who like Trump don't care whatever bad things is said about him even if it's true. We just don't care what is said, Trump is who we/they want.

You can't always get what you want.
No, you can't always get what you want.
You can whine and stomp,
And act like a chump,
And that's just what you'll be,
~you're a chump~
Yeah, that's just what you'll be,
~what a chump~
Yeah, Trump made a chump out of thee.
~ooohh yeaaah~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yvonne183

My thought for the day.

Roses are redish
Violets are Bluish,
If it wasn't for Jesus,
We'd all be Jewish

One thing about Trump some might not understand. What everyone says on this group is quite correct about him being a liar, a bully and whatever else bad that was mentioned,, but what you guys don't understand is we don't care. People who like Trump don't care whatever bad things is said about him even if it's true. We just don't care what is said, Trump is who we/they want.

---

On one level, Yvonne you are right, because most people do not think intellectually or analyse what candidates say, they vote with their gut -in the UK people voted Labour in 1997 not because they knew or cared what Tony Blair and the Labour Party said they would do, but because they were fed up with Tories holding office for 13 years and arguing among themselves. Again, many voters in the UK voted to leave the EU because they took the view there were too many immigrants in the country, the EU was responsible and voting to leave would 'solve' the problem -no amount of evidence or argument showing the argument to be wrong was needed, one wonders if the tv debates were a waste of time.

On the other hand, in the US election, it is not clear if there are enough 'angry white men' in the US, or anyone else who supports Trump, to swing it his way. And whereas in the UK we have a 'first past the post' system which means one vote is enough, in the US Presidential election the Electoral College makes the final decision. Unless there is some extraordinary event that fells Mrs Clinton's campaign, I don't see how she can lose. But who knows what will happen, could Trump just walk away from the campaign some time between now and November? He is already trying to duck out of the tv debates with Mrs Clinton.
But yes I think a lot of people have made up their minds already, but the 'unknown unknowns' remain a potent part of the electorate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavros

On one level, Yvonne you are right, because most people do not think intellectually or analyse what candidates say, they vote with their gut -in the UK people voted Labour in 1997 not because they knew or cared what Tony Blair and the Labour Party said they would do, but because they were fed up with Tories holding office for 13 years and arguing among themselves. Again, many voters in the UK voted to leave the EU because they took the view there were too many immigrants in the country, the EU was responsible and voting to leave would 'solve' the problem -no amount of evidence or argument showing the argument to be wrong was needed, one wonders if the tv debates were a waste of time.

On the other hand, in the US election, it is not clear if there are enough 'angry white men' in the US, or anyone else who supports Trump, to swing it his way. And whereas in the UK we have a 'first past the post' system which means one vote is enough, in the US Presidential election the Electoral College makes the final decision. Unless there is some extraordinary event that fells Mrs Clinton's campaign, I don't see how she can lose. But who knows what will happen, could Trump just walk away from the campaign some time between now and November? He is already trying to duck out of the tv debates with Mrs Clinton.
But yes I think a lot of people have made up their minds already, but the 'unknown unknowns' remain a potent part of the electorate.

---

Whether there is enough of any type of person to get Trump elected remains to be seen.

What I tried to say in my comment is people seem to say bad things about Trump as if their words will change the minds of people who support him. Even if the words are true about Trump, people won't be swayed by what others say about Trump.

I first came to this group thinking that my words could sway people to see things my way, all I learned is people are set in their ways and no amount of rhetoric will change their minds. Also I woke up and realized I don't know anyone here from Adam and why waste my time responding to people I honestly don't give two craps for,, but you are cool Starvos, I kinda like you.

In a way people who like Trump won't be swayed just as people will vote for Hillary who is clearly a criminal. And just cause she wasn't indicted doesn't mean anything, Al Capone was never charged with being a murdering gangster. People are basically sheep and will follow a few certain candidates, just look at the web sites including this site, most people are aligned with one of two groups dems or repubs, very few independently thinking people out there.

One reason I like Trump is cause of his stand against big business that want to close up shop and move out of the country. Whether he is actually able to do something remains to be seen but at least he talks about it, while Hillary takes as much money from said companies. Bernie Sanders comes close to this but he seems to just want to tax companies for the sake of getting money from them. Trump is a nationalist but I feel he might do something good, we've tried all the rest of the bozo's and none seem to have worked, maybe I have faith that Trump will be different. Also he is a New Yorker and for some reason people don't fully understand when a true New Yorker talks, there is a lot of grain of salt to be taken, one can't take everything said literally word for word. I just hope he's right on the things that matter.

Also I am tired of the dynasties, like the Clintons, the Bushes, the Kennedys, the Coumos. I am tired of politics seeming like it's a royalty thing.

Good day to you Starvos

Quote:

---

...people seem to say bad things about Trump as if their words will change the minds of people who support him.

---

One rarely engages in discussion to persuade an 'opponent', but rather to sway reasonable onlookers. On the other hand memes are generally used to reinforce the already decided or troll the 'opponent.'

Quote:

---

I am tired of politics seeming like it's a royalty thing.

---

Difficult to believe of any Trump supporter.

Oh Boy, A fight!!!
Yvonne, if I'm ever on trial for Murder, I hope you're on the Jury
(wink wink)
As long as it was a black man I killed, I'm golden.

I have mixed feelings that the Republicans are running Trump, and not a Lincoln or an Eisenhower,
one the one hand Trump is going to be easy to beat, but on the other hand, it proves what a fucked up undercurrent is going on beneath the scum covered surface that is the Congressional Pond.

"There is no security, only opportunity" -Gen Douglas MacArthur

This would be a fantastic time to destroy the Republican Party and send Hot Yvonne out into the Wilderness for eight years, just like I was when THE BIG W was in the Oval Office.
I love you Yvonne, and I want you to loosen your monkey grip on the insanity you crave so much.
President Trump WILL NOT HAPPEN.
The Republican Fund Raising Division has metastacized into a cancer that is murdering the Country.
Time to start cutting.

https://s31.postimg.org/b1emppm8r/donald_trump_1951.jpgfree upload pictures

Trump will, and already has, hurt the GOP - deeply. But he won’t kill it. The death of the Republican Party has been proclaimed many time before. It lives because it has its Congressional seats sewn up and neatly packaged into oddly shaped, little gerrymandered pieces. It’ll take one lucky shot to slay that Goliath.

Here’s my conspiracy theory: Once he’s in office, the GOP is planning to impeach Trump at the earliest opportunity (Trump will provide them with plenty of impeachable offenses in just his first 100 days). Donald ousted, Pence will take office, a fiscal and social conservative. Problem solved.
You don’t have to tell me - I know it’s malarkey - I just right now made it up - but it is a fun thought for the day.

Those red states you see on the electoral map will always be Republican, with Senators and inbred House members,
my conspiracy theory is that the Russians have the best hacked Hillary emails waiting for a Nov 7 release.
Ummnggghhh!
The BIG MONEY side of Republican Politics might cozy up under the sheets with Hillary. Career Politician Hillary will spread her legs for cash. Obama has had Big Business sitting on their hands for eight years. (God, I'll miss Obama.) Wooing Republican Investors would take the fangs out of the Republican Party, just like taking ISIS' oil bucks is what will fatally kill them. Karl Rove is having a hard time making an impassioned speech to Donors when Trump spends the money on Miralago parties.

Trump voters don't have much of an explanation as to why they would vote for Trump except for "He's one of us"
I'm going to have to sit down some time when I have a calm moment and figure out why that makes sense, or why that makes absolutely no sense, yet it must make sense and I can't figure it out, or why it makes absolutely no sense on one level but perfect sense on another level...... I kinda get it, but politics is all about blind spots. I'm getting a headache.

I just started Blood Meridian, thanks Trish, cool book, I also bought a book on 1/43 scale model cars, it was cheaper to buy it from England, even with shipping charges, because of Brexit's devaluation of the Pound......
Maybe Putin really is behind all this craziness!

...since laptops, kindles and tablets came out...I can't remember the last time I bought an actual book. I think it was a Home Depot DIY book...definitely more than eight years ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yvonne183

Whether there is enough of any type of person to get Trump elected remains to be seen.

What I tried to say in my comment is people seem to say bad things about Trump as if their words will change the minds of people who support him. Even if the words are true about Trump, people won't be swayed by what others say about Trump.

I first came to this group thinking that my words could sway people to see things my way, all I learned is people are set in their ways and no amount of rhetoric will change their minds. Also I woke up and realized I don't know anyone here from Adam and why waste my time responding to people I honestly don't give two craps for,, but you are cool Starvos, I kinda like you.

In a way people who like Trump won't be swayed just as people will vote for Hillary who is clearly a criminal. And just cause she wasn't indicted doesn't mean anything, Al Capone was never charged with being a murdering gangster. People are basically sheep and will follow a few certain candidates, just look at the web sites including this site, most people are aligned with one of two groups dems or repubs, very few independently thinking people out there.

One reason I like Trump is cause of his stand against big business that want to close up shop and move out of the country. Whether he is actually able to do something remains to be seen but at least he talks about it, while Hillary takes as much money from said companies. Bernie Sanders comes close to this but he seems to just want to tax companies for the sake of getting money from them. Trump is a nationalist but I feel he might do something good, we've tried all the rest of the bozo's and none seem to have worked, maybe I have faith that Trump will be different. Also he is a New Yorker and for some reason people don't fully understand when a true New Yorker talks, there is a lot of grain of salt to be taken, one can't take everything said literally word for word. I just hope he's right on the things that matter.

Also I am tired of the dynasties, like the Clintons, the Bushes, the Kennedys, the Coumos. I am tired of politics seeming like it's a royalty thing.

Good day to you Starvos

---

Yvonne, hundreds of people browse the forum and never post, so you might in fact say things people do agree with, only they don't post an acknowledgement to you. Your punk political anarchy apppeals to a lot of people who think all politicians are as you say in the US, 'Assholes'. And I think there are a lot of people who have opinions liberals don't like but feel timid in expressing themselves.

In the matter of argument and changing what people think because of something said, I think Trump himself is such a liability he is more likely than Mrs Clinton to lose actual or potential voters because of something he says, even if he then claims he didn't mean it. Hillary Clinton probably clears all her public statements with her team before they are released, it is a machine and if it sounds like politics by photocopier, that is probably what it often is. I don't know about New Yorkers but I have found many Americans do not often understand the self-deprecating humour or sarcasm common in the UK, but I do think Trump too often lacks sincerity when forced to apologise or explain for something he said.

Trump's position on business -which Mrs Clinton suggested she shared in her Convention speech- is a non-starter unless the Chinese and other states make it harder or less profitable for US firms to make things in their countries, and after all Trump himself off-shores production so he lacks sincerity on that issue. It is also too true that Presidents have to work with Congress, and when you have such a bitterly divided Congress real change is hard if not impossible.

Real change tends to happen slowly and in small ways, not with grand gestures of the sort Trump talks about, which sound good on tv but are close to impossible to implement in reality. Trump may be expressing frustration with the way the system works, but you may need to change the system and a President cannot do that.

Dynasties are not good, but in the age of social media and a MacDonaldized society, brand recognition is often seen as an instant entry into the field. Nobody needed to ask Who is Hillary? Who is this Trump guy? They have facial and name recognition worth, say, a million votes just by being seen and named. I think this is why candidates with no experience of politics can do better than in the past -would George Clooney had done as well as Trump if he had made a serious bid for the job? This begs the question, is there nobody else? This in turn raises the question do the best people choose politics as a career? I think we are coming to an end to dynasties in the US (but not abroad), from the Daley family in Chicago to those you mentioned and it may be in particular that the Republican Party is facing a major crisis of identity that they need to sort out over the next 4 years because otherwise you will have Democrats in the White House into the third decade of the century and that cannot be a good thing for democracy or the USA.

Thanks Starvos for your thoughts, I appreciate you taking time to write back.

Well, time for me to go now, maybe I'll come back next year,,,, maybe not, I fear the reaper is near.

Take care Starvos, I can't help but think of Kojak when I hear your name. bye

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yvonne183

Thanks Starvos for your thoughts, I appreciate you taking time to write back.
Well, time for me to go now, maybe I'll come back next year,,,, maybe not, I fear the reaper is near.
Take care Starvos, I can't help but think of Kojak when I hear your name. bye

---

The 'reaper' comes for us all, that is certain, we do not need to dwell upon it much as we do not constantly yearn for the bathroom until the moment comes. Or to paraphrase Proust, tell people you will be travelling abroad but don't know when you will return. And as long as your name is mentioned, you will always be alive.

Prussian Blue : when art ,science and medicine intersect.Ain't it nice when things sort of come together. In 1706 it was Prussian Blue . The first synthetic pigment ; influenced Japanese Ukiyo-e wood block prints , Vincent Van Gogh , was later discovered to be an antidote in radiation poisoning and found a host of uses in science and industry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_blue
Attachment 958132Attachment 958133Attachment 958134

What might a 'post-political correctness' Britain allow? What would it look like?
Bill Etheridge, who is campaigning to succeed Nigel Farage as the leader of the United Kingdom Independence Party [UKIP] published this pamphlet in 2011, indicating, perhaps, the direction in which he would like to take the UK.

Attachment 959674

I’ve been following the recent discussion at http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/sho...irls-in-London . I am not a British Citizen, nor a citizen of an EU nation, nor do I feel adequate to add much of significance to that discussion. I do notice quite a number of references there to Political Correctness, which may mean something different in Britain than it does here.

Most of the definitions I have found, though, comport with my understanding: the avoidance of language that offends or excludes minority or disadvantaged social, ethnic or religious groups. When applied in ordinary speech it sounds to me like nothing more than a self-imposed species of etiquette; political politeness - ordinary politeness exhibited toward the otherwise habitually disenfranchised.

It puzzles me how a self-imposed politeness could be the cause of so much political distress, except to those who take its widespread practice to be indicative of a decline in their particular monocultural advantage.

It is, I think, a term invented by the right to denigrate such practices. Why is the right so offended by political politeness? It could be that they dislike the social pressure they feel these days when they themselves speak disrespectfully of their fellow citizens; i.e. they can’t say what they feel about minorities in public without getting called out for the inappropriateness of those feelings. Of course those who ‘disrespect’ and those who ‘call out’ (in the USA) are both within their legal rights, protected by the First Amendment. I do not see how Trump (for example) is going to end the practice of political politeness and not stray from our First Amendment liberties.

The right is of course more upset when political politeness gets codified. For example, many businesses (from the small shops to large corporations) will fire workers, managers, executives etc. who use offensive language when at work or while representing the company. This is not because CEOs are radical ‘libtards’, but because it’s simply good business practice not to offend clientele, or others with whom the company needs to deal. In the same way colleges and universities have codified certain aspects of political politeness in order to maintain a public face and to stay scandals that would push away the best minority students, athletes, coaches and professors. For some strange reason, what the right finds scandalous is the existence of such codes of conduct.

The right is more upset with the notion of Hate Crime which they sometimes conflate with political correctness. In the US intent has always been a large consideration when deciding how to charge a criminal wrongdoer. An assault resulting in injury committed out of, say to be specific, hatred for Mormons will get you more time than an assault and an injury that resulted from flaring tempers over, say, a traffic accident. This I think is an appropriate use of intent that, first and foremost, justly serves the victim and secondly serves to protect religious groups in locales where they are not readily accepted.

Whether a person is polite or not is their choice. In the US, there is no law forcing right wingers to remain quiet and inoffensive in the presence of minorities or their supporters. The only restriction they feel is the judgment against them in the eyes of the public, and constriction of their own guilty consciences. Against that they whine, complain and applaud demagogues who have no consciences.

Trish, I think that re-labelling political correctness as a form of political politeness sidesteps some of the important issues as they have arisen here in the UK, that concern multi-culturalism, Islamophobia, and the 'white male anxiety' over the 'ascendancy' of women in positions of authority. All three have their counterparts in the US but have a different context here, at least in part.

If you begin with the concept of 'diversity and inclusion' PC is a response in the media, and also in business, to what used to be a predominantly white, male visual and employment culture. For example, women on tv were there for decoration unless they were skilled, which usually meant tv cooks, entertainers, or sportswomen. When the first women were given the job of reading the news, newspapers -Rupert Murdoch's The Sun, for example- judged them not by their skills as journalists but whether or not they were attractive to men. When tv began to break down this wall it did so by being more inclusive, of Black people in particular but in the 1970s Black people were on tv either to make people laugh in situation comedies, because they could sing and dance, or were good at sport.

It has taken over 40 years for television in the UK to give jobs to ethnic minorities and women on the basis of their ability to do those jobs, but has also been part of a deliberate policy by the BBC and other broadcasters to reflect the reality of multi-cultural Britain, and this is where the rage sets in for those who see the most common forms of news and entertainment being 'taken over' by non-white people.
To people such as Bill Etheridge, the BBC's promotion of diversity and inclusion means by default that as more and more Black and Asian, and assertive women and gay people appear on tv, so they see a demotion of the white man. Add in to that a view that behind this 'diversity and inclusion' is a form of Marxism that is associated with Antonio Gramsci and a deliberate 'culture' campaign that aims to feed 'leftist' ideas into the public mind through education and the media, sometimes called Common Purpose.

Political correctness thus becomes transformed from something passive, to something active. What began as the censorship of offensive words used to describe Black people, homosexuals and the disabled, has become part of a conspiracy to degrade the 'British' by 'ramming multi-culturalism down our throats' in spite of the fact that visibility for minorities actually reflects the fact that 'they' are 'here' and 'they' (or we) are going to stay.

If there is a difference between the UK and the US it rests on immigration which is not seen as a fundamental part of what has shaped this country over the last 950 years (ie, since the Battle of Hastings in 1066) in the way that it has shaped the US.

For many white people who identify themselves as 'British' or 'English' their version of national pride finds it hard to accept that Black people truly belong here. These feelings at various times have also extended to the Irish, the Italians, the Jews and most recently Afro-Caribbeans and the various religious groups from the Indian sub-continent. Whatever role immigrants have played in the positive development of British society and the economy is not accepted by a hard core who see multi-culturalism as literally 'the death of Britain'.

A cogent example was provided recently by the former editor of The Sun, Kelvin Mackenzie. He believes the BBC and Channel 4 news are left-wing broadcasters, and 'unusually' for him he watched a broadcast of Channel 4 News in which one of their journalists (Fatima Manji) reported on the massacre in Nice. He wrote:
Was it appropriate for her to be on camera when there had been yet another shocking slaughter by a Muslim? “Was it done to stick one in the eye of the ordinary viewer who looks at the hijab as a sign of the slavery of Muslim women by a male- dominated and clearly violent religion?”
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entr...b019ee5fd82da0

This is the kind of Un-PC language and narrative that some 'white British' feel they must own in order to fight against what they see as a conspiracy to demote and degrade 'our heritage' in favour of a multi-cultural fantasy which has the effect of replacing what is British with something else, and if you believe that Muslims are breeding more children than anyone else and at heart are all yearning for Shari'a law, the argument is set for a 'clash of civilizations' based, in fact, on little more than paranoia and prejudice. It is the kind of language that Nigel Farage sought to reclaim for the political sphere during both the General Election and the EU Referendum campaigns, so it goes far beyond being 'polite' and is in my view a campaign to make respectable what amounts to a form of loathing that itself comes from a crisis of identity and resentment, a feeling that the white British have a 'birthright' that is being taken away from them and being 'given' to Muslims. I think this is also part of the Trump campaign that believes it is 'finally' saying in public what many Americans have been saying in private or were too afraid to say in public for fear of being ostracised by the 'multi-culturalist elite'.

It is also part of the narrative of the 'white male' who no longer walks into a job from school that enables him to become the main breadwinner of the family, to be the head man, as it were. Because the decline of labour-intensive heavy industry has hit the working class hardest, there is a view that men have not only lost their place at the head of the economic unit at the heart of capitalist society -the family- but they have lost their virility. That men must now temper their language and behaviour and be deferential to minorities adds to the anxiety complex that feeds the theory that Marxism -which is what this all is- is destroying the family. On top of this as work changes many more women not only work theyhave become the main breadwinner, it is as if men have become useless and redundant. Perhaps the greatest irony of this argument is that it forms one part of the critique of western society provided by a guru to violent Salafist Muslims. In Signposts, Sayed Qutb says that capitalism is a 'Jewish plot' to 'destroy the family', thus as arguments go, members of UKIP and the English Defence League have an unusual ally on their side, if they only knew it.

Political Correctness thus sets itself against all of the major trends that have taken place in our society but does so with a language that is angry and resentful, and whose political hostility to dominant political parties and institutions has created divisions which are exploited by financial crises, acts of terrorism and most recently the immigration crisis in Europe. The problem is that either the proposed solutions to 'the crisis' are not popular enough to attract votes -in the case of UKIP- or they have in the EU Referendum vote established an as yet incoherent agenda of change that is unlikely to address the alternative to Political Correctness for its opponents, who want an end to immigration as a first step to be followed by repatriation (initially of Muslims) and one assumes the return to the days when A can refuse services to B if B is Black, Gay, Muslim, Jewish -whatever.

Political correctness is anything but polite, it is an aggressive attack on the multi-cultural reality of modern Britain and with its language of fear and violence, is a threat to our way of life.

I realized after the fact that political politeness doesn’t characterize all aspects of what I want to capture. But in the US, I don’t see PC as being as active a force as the anti-equalitarian reaction against it. Early on recording studios and then later radio and then even later television networks provided diverse products and programming, yes...but I think only in response to sells and ratings for that kind product. It wasn’t a political decision on the part of the record industry or radio and television networks.

I do think diversity in television and in television ads (I want to teach the world the sing) had a great deal of influence on the American mindset, but again I have to think it was more marketing than politics.

I need to take the time to reread your post more carefully before I respond more fully. Thanks for the response and thanks for the thoughtful dialog in the Brexit thread.

"Political Correctness thus sets itself against all of the major trends that have taken place in our society.."
-Just to clarify I mean, of course, the campaign against political correctness, although I think the argument overall was clear enough.

Economically(plutocratic oligarchy) ,both the Dems and Reps,Labs and Cons, are on the same page, so culture wars(identity politics, political correctness ,islamophobia,blm,diversity, blah , blah ,)are the only fireworks that are going off, on both of sides of the pond.
Demographics however will take care of these problems in the not so distant future.I believe the West, and the other rich countries,who's having the kids will take care of the Culture wars. The sjw's ? No! The alt-right?No!
Demographics ,and AI will frame the next set of global problems . On a personal note, the sjw's(I have to tolerate sharia's intolarance towards faggits) and western religious conservatives(I have to tolerate,"get out of my store faggit, I don't have to serve you") equally dangerous.

One other things, just to put a finer point on this. I fear the Muslim conservatives are worse for our community than the, "get out of my store", born agains, because of demographics. I don't like this...https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=...trip%3Dall&f=1...this is worse than ,"get out of my bake shop , I don't want to serve you". And the apologists, and sjw regressives, need to be taken to task . You folks give an excellent dressing down of the right all over this forum, and you will get no argument from me on that score. But COME ON, face it, this is soooo much worse , and if you don't think so , you've lost touch.

Stavro..θα μας φάνε!

Yes , I too have noticed the more strident British grousing about political correctness , as I watch a few British TV and comedy shows regularly , and found it puzzling. My impression has been that the British felt like it was being "shoved down their throat " and I could see that I was missing something with regard to context since I don't live there.
Thanks Stavros for such a robust explanation , but it's still a very nuanced difference which is difficult for us Yanks to understand.

Quote:

---

θα μας φάνε!

---

They can eat me!

I had to look up sjw. I never met one. But I got a hand to you paranoid anti-eqalitarians, you know how to invent pejoratives that don't sound at all pejorative. But yeah, ya gotta really hate the Bill of Rights, the First Amendment and especially the whole notion of social justice or anyone who might support it. Can't have any sort of justice messin' up our cultural values and endangerin' our way of life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nitron

Economically(plutocratic oligarchy) ,both the Dems and Reps,Labs and Cons, are on the same page, so culture wars(identity politics, political correctness ,islamophobia,blm,diversity, blah , blah ,)are the only fireworks that are going off, on both of sides of the pond.
Demographics however will take care of these problems in the not so distant future.I believe the West, and the other rich countries,who's having the kids will take care of the Culture wars. The sjw's ? No! The alt-right?No!
Demographics ,and AI will frame the next set of global problems . On a personal note, the sjw's(I have to tolerate sharia's intolarance towards faggits) and western religious conservatives(I have to tolerate,"get out of my store faggit, I don't have to serve you") equally dangerous.

---

You did not mention the elephant in this room -nationalism. The critics of political correctness one associates with Bill Etheridge, UKIP, some elements in the Conservative and Labour parties, and the English Defence League are not just angry with their perception that 'minorities' are protected and defended, they are arguing for a concept of what it means to be 'British' and 'English' that is reluctant to admit anyone whose colour and religious belief does not conform to their definition of what those terms mean.

This whole argument about 'the death of Britain' is at its nationalist core wholly in synch with the belief that a nation is defined by people who share the same geography (territory), language, religious belief and cultural practice. In some but not all cases, those who make claims to the 'British identity' cite 'Race' as a factor, but as far as the current discourse is concerned, 'the Islamic threat' in the 21st century has merely replaced the 'threat' of 'the Blacks' in the late 20th and 'the Jews' in the early 20th century. The material impact of the EU's single market has been expressed in the influx of EU migrants since the 1990s, adding an additional layer of anxiety for those 'white British' who feel 'their country' is being 'taken over' by foreigners, even though the extent to which immigration was a decisive factor in the EU referendum is hard to ascertain, it might have been in some parts of the country rather than others.

From this point of view, demographics have always been a key issue for nationalists (just as religion has become so today) because the obsession with 'outsiders' is that they breed more, so that ten children in one family will each have another ten, and another -until the minority becomes the majority. And if you say today that the predictions made about Jewish immigrants from the Russian Empire never happened, it will of course be said that 'Muslims are different', yet the argument is the same.

The question is thus the fundamental question nationalism poses: Do you Belong Here?

More islamist apologist bs, living in propaganda machine Islamic Republic of Sweden has completely obliterated your ability to think critically.

ALL respected research centers on the planet, including die hard left political correct ones like Pew Research are projecting Muslim majority in the next century in almost all European countries.

People like you, who side with islamism are destroying our world and needs to be held accountable.

Sane people who don't want to live under a Muslim state and sharia law are called racist and Islamophobic by regressive leftists illiberal people like you.

Your persistence in help Islam trying to conquer Europe for the third time (but this time from within) is driving divisions and the destruction of the European Union, the majority of the people, including non white immigrants, are voting for the far right, because they are our last hope to stop people insane people like you. Austria far right elections is practically won, Lepen is twice as popular and will be France next prime minister, same with Wilders in the Netherlands. Trump will be a silent winning majority. Just sit and watch while we crush islamism in our secular societies that you brought here and held you accountable.

Get your "muslims won't make it" Russian roulette insane prediction and take it to another planet, move to the middle east where you can share sharia law with them.

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavros

'Muslims are different', yet the argument is the same.

The question is thus the fundamental question nationalism poses: Do you Belong Here?

---

Sure, King George I was crazy, but I'll bet the Founding Fathers were LOLROTF when they put that little part in the Constitution that it was their considered opinion that once every four years the people would get to decide who would speak for them by all getting together once every four years and everybody who's anybody would write their vote on that new social phenom known as a piece of paper. I mean, it's perfect: when everything goes to shit you can blame it on the voters.
That's an ironclad contract. The Supreme Court decided: 5-4.
The only Arabs I saw in Europe wore fifty thousand dollar suits made from oil. Of course, as a tourist, I didn't go to the slums of Paris.
I don't think you have to be a racist to know in your Heart that if you got stuck an entire workday with the average Palestinian or Egyptian Woman that would be a day nailed to Hell.
And I apologize for that statement.
I assure you, the Democrats believe every bit as much in WHITE POWER as the Republicans.

TEAM TRUMP has ascended higher than ever before into the Political Stratosphere with it's incorporation of Ailes, Guiliani, Breitbart, and that white hot foxcunt Laura Ingraham.
Oooooh, I gotta stop right there........

I don’t see anyone here apologizing for ISIS or any other Islamist group. What I do see is a poster or two offering vague threats and making excuses for their ugly religious bigotries by spreading fear and pointing to islamist radicalism as if its existence justified their phobia of all Muslims.

Whining is considered ammo in some fighting styles, OK if that ISIS tank down your street is fictional.

https://s14.postimg.org/nr39a4wxt/Sean_Hannity.jpgfree photo upload