Total posts: 755
Posted in:
-->
@SirAnonymous
Biden just took the lead in Michigan. He's only got a 0.64% lead in Nevada, though. It's really, really close right now.
Absente/mail-in ballots are the remaining ballots left in these states I believe.
Created:
Posted in:
Biden's likely to win here. It's up in the air ofc but those ballots that are coming in in Michigan are going to be blue I think.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Look at that. Already cases of ballot tampering lmao. The Dems are rigging this election
Source?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SirAnonymous
Thanks, I just found this.
Election looks close.
Created:
Posted in:
I see no other election thread tonight, but if someone could point me to one I'd go there.
My summary - this early news is bad for Biden. Florida's done, Texas is going as expected (though it's still very early) , and N.C. and Georgia are pretty far gone.
The good news for him is that Ohio might be skewed but it looks promising, and obviously wins in Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota and Pennsylvania are still very feasible winning paths. Arizona too.
Thoughts?
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Hume's Guillotine: you can NEVER logically derive an "OUGHT" from an "IS".There's your kritik.
I think I know what you mean, but elaborate?
Created:
-->
@Lemming
Would you say moral skepticism is similar to agnosticism?
Moral skepticism, in some form or another, doubts the logical truth of moral claims. In that way it's a statement of what is false rather than a statement of agnosticism.
I mean I imagine that a lot of moral skeptics are much more agnostic about non-metaethical issues given that in their view, morality doesn't exist.
Created:
bump
Created:
bump
Created:
I'm going to keep bumping this thread because I still need help with this.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
The way I understand debate in Lincoln-Douglas, all arguments are predicated on the value of the framework, or criteron/value if you're old school. You must show that your framework is the most morally correct (morality is typically the value of a Lincoln Douglas debate, whereas your actual framework is your criterion to meet the value), and since your arguments seek to uphold that framework, indirectly, they uphold morality. If there is no right or wrong, there is no morality, and so that entire chain falls apart. The source is destroyed and the contentions themselves wither away without them. Thus, I don't see why Moral Skepticism can't work against any normative claim.
health, efficiency, prosperity, sustainability
I mean these all are indirectly based on moral claims. Why is health/efficiency/prosperity/sustainability good? Why must states exist at all if there are no moral harms to anarchy?
Created:
-->
@Lemming
Nothing to say on the topic really, just wanted to say nice profile picture.Feels more fitting per your username.
Thanks, I plan on keeping this for a bit.
Created:
-->
@Sum1hugme
Lol how do you get moral skepticism from that topic? I think I'm missing the angle
"ought" is in the resolution. If we don't ought do do anything, we don't ought to institute a jobs guarantee. My impression is that it'd work the same with any normative topic.
Created:
-->
@Sum1hugme
What's the topic? And Is LD "live debate"?
The United States ought to institute a federal jobs guarantee.
SirAnonymous is right. And Lincoln-Douglas is 1v1 debate.
Created:
Hey everyone,
I do LD and I'm planning on running a moral skepticism kritik in the future. Ofc I know that some won't take kindly to it so I'll be running it quite selectively. I had a couple questions about the concept for anyone who knows enough about debate/metaethics to answer them.
1. How do you create solvency/establish negative impacts without making moral claims? I know Nietzsche wrote some stuff about crafting orientations towards living in light of the subjectivity of morality but I'd like some more specificity here.
2. What are some common/instinctive rebuttals that you'll get if you run moral skepticism and how can you counter them? I don't know exactly what I'll be hearing yet.
3. Any good (preferably online) resources for cards/support for nihilism/skepticism?
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
Politically, China is a communist-led country. It's economy is quite another thing.
I mean if you have political leaders who are in a communist country yet fail to implement any important aspect of their ideology, (and themselves persue policies that are antithetical to communism) are they really communists?
Created:
-->
@BearMan
Also, my impression is that countries that are left-wing (i.e. care about equality, etc.) don't put ethnic minorities in re-education camps.
Created:
-->
@BearMan
Pretty sure China has been doing economic reforms since the 70s. China may call itself communist, but in reality it's a mixed market economy.
If China is communist, the DPRK is democratic.
Created:
-->
@Vader
This is what the Left will do. China is a left country
How is China a left country?
Created:
Posted in:
If Biden loses people will get angry, but my intuition is that he'll probably handle it alright. It'll be a normal loss... Biden will give some kind of speech, etc.
If Trump loses it'll probably be a shitshow.
Created:
Posted in:
My 2 year anniversary came up just 4 days ago lol.
Only 6 real debates to show for it :/
Created:
Posted in:
Honored to be here.... even if I just narrowly made the cut.
"Brick Breaking Rebuker" is epic. I love it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
I assume they’re not voting GOP cause Trump is the anti-thesis of socialism. It’s more likely he’s voting for Joe cause the DNC platform is the most like socialist
More likely, sure. Plenty of socialists aren't voting this year. In addition not all socialists are left wing outside of their socialist views.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
He’s a socialist. Nuf said
You assume all Socialists are Democrats?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
@Death23
By telling your own party to end gerrymandering in states that they control
Is Death a democrat?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
I don't see how what you're saying here follows. Lassiez-faire economies don't lead to ancapistan. In fact, despite there being plenty of free market economies in past and present, there's never been an ancapistan. Government intervention in the economy does not necessitate government intervention in the political systems either. Socialism doesn't neccesarily lead to authoritarianism.
Created:
I think the particular article refers to one ICE doctor in particular. Whether he just did these things without permission or whether this is part of a bigger problem remains to be seen.
Regardless, human rights violation reports at the ICE Detention centers are consistient and seem to be happening often. The Project South document details a lot of reports regarding the mishandling of COVID-19 by ICE.
Created:
Here's the report.
"with some clients describing experiences where parts of their Fallopian tube and their ovaries had been removed while in custody."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Minimum wage does not apply to illegal migrant labor and the left supports that.
I guarantee you that living in america without a minimum wage is 10x better than living in Honduras or some impoverished country in Africa/south america. That's what republicans support for illegal immigrants.
You're delusional if you think that leftists support immigration out of some right-wing obsession with improving the lives of Americans at the cost of immigrants, which is what you're trying to imply. Immigration is complicated.
The parties absolutely switched. The republicans control areas that the democrats used to control at the time of the civil war, and vice versa.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Then you have made a choice. That is not force
The bottom line is this: both governments and private corporations can make unjust rules. If you don't like those rules, you can always leave the country or company. Problem is, some people can't.
I reject the assertion that only governments are capable of tyranny or authoritarianism, as that is completely absurd and unsupported.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Democrats don't support slave labor, which is why they want to raise the minimum waige
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
To importing slave labor composed of illegal migrants? Some switch.
What a loaded response
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I guess if you want to say the Democrats are right-wing then it would all finally make sense.
They were back in the 1800s. Over time, ideologies of both parties have basically switched.
How? Examples?
I gave one directly after I said that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Stawmanning me and trying to make me look badly motivated doesn't become legitimate if you say "in my opinion" beforehand. Just so you know.
I said forced or allowed. If a certain heirarchy is allowed to exist (like slavery for example), that's still right wing.
Private sectors can force you to do things, what are you talking about? What do you think will happen if your employer tells you to do something and you don't do it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mharman
Then how come we see many counter-examples, i.e. people who do rise to the top off of their own labor? Jeff Bezos, Steve Jobs, Robert Herjavec, John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, Fred Trump (Donald's dad), Barack Obama, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, etc. If these people can make it, anyone can. Heck, even my father is well off because of his own work and my family still is not in the upper class.
You must have literally no idea how adverse the circumstances are for America's extreme lower class. Yes, everyone could theoretically make it. But many have terrible education systems, extremely negative role models, only one parent at home, barely any food, and a quick path to riches that is literred with risks, violence, and drugs. On a macro level, poverty repeats itself. Thinking that poor people could come out of poverty and encouraging them to is one thing. Expecting it to happen is another. I guarantee you that if you were born to the circumstances that the average poverty-stricken man/woman is in America, your chance of making it out would be extremely low.
But let's say you're right and that some people are destined to stay in poverty and it's not their fault. What do we do about it then?
Destined is the wrong word. Likely is better. And that's a tough question to which I can't be sure of the answer. But the mentality you have, where we look at those in poverty and tell them to "do better" won't change the statistics.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Ok so now I don't even understand how this is relevant to the initial topic.
Why women choose different jobs and whether this can be attributed to genetic or enviornmental factors is extremely complicated, and I'm not going to pretend like I have the knowledge neccesary to participate in that discussion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
I view left leaning thinking as all encompassing govt control of everything and everyone and right wing thinking as all personal responsibility for everything and minimal govt interference.
Is an abortion ban left wing? How about not letting gay people get married? How about closing borders? How about protectionism? Why is Fascism right-wing?
To me hierarchy is an unaccountable govt with no limits on its power over me and to you, in my opinion, is anyone who makes more money than you that you can't manipulate and bend to your will.
You have a very limited understanding of what heirarchy is. Heirarchy isn't just present in government or economics. Heirarchy is any time one person or group is allowed or forced to be above another. It's not restricted to authoritarianism or libertarianism.
You're wrong to think that my definition of heirarchy is restricted to the wealthy. I oppose unjust wealth, but I also oppose ethnic nationalism, imperialism, and gender traditionalism because I oppose heirarchy, and thus, usually oppose the right.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Women have entered the workforce en masse, and are participating at levels approaching or exceeding equality in many of the domains that were male majority prior to the 1960s
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
That's an interesting phenomenon, though I don't know enough about the study to confirm or deny it's validity. But legal equality for men and women still increases the amount of equality for men and women, and your article admits as much.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Then your view of the political compass is backwards
Created:
Posted in:
The most right wing society would be the society with the greatest amount of heirarchy/traditional social institutions. The most left wing society would be the society with the least.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Crocodile
rich people work harder than poor people.
No. Being rich (say a millionaire) is extremely influenced by things like your race, education, and income level. The average rich person is much more likely to have rich kids than the average poor person. It's not like everyone has an equal starting point and then those who are destined for greatness just work their way up to the top.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
How do we get you started on trying to find solutions with the rest of us rather than just sitting in a corner bitching about how much the world supposedly sucks?
The problem is that most people don't think that there is a problem with the 1% having so much. We're never going to get anywhere with regards to solutions if people don't agree that a problem exists. You're being incredibly disingenuous.
That figure would only be relevant to people that care how poor people are doing, which is not a trait I have seen to be common among those who complain about how rich the upper classes are.
Leftists have advocated for the poor more than any other political group, so I don't know what you're talking about here.
Of course you are going to end up being miserable if you just focus on what others have rather than what you have.
Those two aren't mutually exclusive.
Created: