Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

There's a lot of meat on the bone here. I don't dispute much of it, although it predictably treats the Right as more monolithic than it is

https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/05/01/n ... -struggle/

The biggest mistake that these types of analyses make is to put all the blame on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh for the mistrust of the institutions. No, the institutions provided a lot of bullschit to help that tree grow.

It's well documented in experiments (for example) that in the social sciences when you publish a paper with a conclusion favorable to a conservative world view that reviewers are more likely to nitpick at problems with the methodology than if the exact opposite conclusion is reached. These social science departments often help form the basis for policy decisions (at least by Dems and liberals) and have helped give rise to the many of the failed, shitty education and social programs over the decades.

The universities have not been about objective inquiry (except for maybe in some hard science departments) for a while and that is just made worse by the idiotic obsession with "diversity™" (which just means diversity of appearance of course) and kowtowing to demands of students who don't want to hear opinions not like their own.

As far as the media goes, it is a circle-jerk of left-center people. I think a big turning point was the whole Dan Rather (who was supposed to be Mr Trustworthy) Bush national guard non-story. After that it's been a downward spiral exacerbated by the media that showered Obama with praise and never did anything to take him to task.

When you take this toxic soup and add to it Jim Bob who is struggling to make ends meet being told he needs to check his privilege because female senior corporate executives aren't getting CEO jobs and that the wonderful, cherubic Mike Brown was shot for being black, you end up in the predicament we're in.

It takes two to tango.

Both paradigms have shifted more and more to their extremist edges over the last few decades. To the point where those who share aspects of both viewpoints are vilified as "not true [insert here]".

If there was any time in American history for a true multi-party system to come to fruition (and the parlimentary style government that would have to come along with it), it would be now.

And ironically, we can thank Trump for that.

One way or another, he's going to go down in history as one of the most influential world leaders. So in a way, he's already surpassed Obama...

And you complain about MY posts being long and rambling.

JohnStOnge wrote:And you complain about MY posts being long and rambling.

The difference is his are readable and not the 15th iteration of the same theme


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

TL/DR

DSUrocks07 wrote:Both paradigms have shifted more and more to their extremist edges over the last few decades. To the point where those who share aspects of both viewpoints are vilified as "not true [insert here]".

If there was any time in American history for a true multi-party system to come to fruition (and the parlimentary style government that would have to come along with it), it would be now.

And ironically, we can thank Trump for that.

One way or another, he's going to go down in history as one of the most influential world leaders. So in a way, he's already surpassed Obama...

JohnStOnge wrote:And you complain about MY posts being long and rambling.

And boring.

A piece of shit. Typical lefty elitist garbage. I stopped reading where the guy claimed that Vox....VOX! ... "aspires to be a NEUTRAL gatekeeping institution."

Ivytalk wrote:A piece of ****. Typical lefty elitist garbage. I stopped reading where the guy claimed that Vox....VOX! ... "aspires to be a NEUTRAL gatekeeping institution."

My impression is that that is true- Vox does imply that claim. I think the author explains that it isn't the case

He probably thinks they are more centrist than I think they are, but still

CID1990 wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:A piece of ****. Typical lefty elitist garbage. I stopped reading where the guy claimed that Vox....VOX! ... "aspires to be a NEUTRAL gatekeeping institution."

My impression is that that is true- Vox does imply that claim. I think the author explains that it isn't the case

He probably thinks they are more centrist than I think they are, but still

The problem with Vox is that it's the archetypal echo chamber. All of its major contributors are to the left and think the same way, so they think they're arbiters of moderation. At least the NYT hires intellectual/ideological outliers like Ross Douthat once in awhile.

CID1990 wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:And you complain about MY posts being long and rambling.

The difference is his are readable and not the 15th iteration of the same theme

Uh huh. That was REALLY readable. Of course anything is readable if you're determined to get through it. But good GRIEF that was bad. And I DID force myself to read every word of it just so I could honestly say I did it before I posted. I'd almost rather read a Federal Regulation. That guy is awful.

JohnStOnge wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
The difference is his are readable and not the 15th iteration of the same theme

Uh huh. That was REALLY readable. Of course anything is readable if you're determined to get through it. But good GRIEF that was bad. And I DID force myself to read every word of it just so I could honestly say I did it before I posted. I'd almost rather read a Federal Regulation. That guy is awful.

^^^^this right here

You sound just like Donald Trump


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ivytalk wrote:A piece of shit. Typical lefty elitist garbage. I stopped reading where the guy claimed that Vox....VOX! ... "aspires to be a NEUTRAL gatekeeping institution."

You probably should have kept reading then instead of commenting. It gave decently fair treatment to both sides, especially towards the end of the piece. I get why CID enjoyed it.

The overall impression is of a widespread norm, well-understood by both liberals and conservatives, that we have a category of space we call “neutral” and “depoliticized”. These sorts of spaces include institutions as diverse as colleges, newspapers, workplaces, and conferences. And within these spaces, overt liberalism is tolerated but overt conservativism is banned. In a few of these cases, conservatives grew angry enough that they started their own spaces – which began as noble attempts to avoid bias, and ended as wretched hives of offensive troglodytes who couldn’t get by anywhere else. This justifies further purges in the mainstream liberal spaces, and the cycle goes on forever.

I'm a liberal outcast in uber conk Eastern Washington and immensely enjoy it. I think part of the issue the article implies is conservatives being butt hurt over too many of their ideas losing popularity. See: Pwns post.

I welcome and appreciate it when my views get challenged. People will often remark that you'll never change anyone's opinion arguing politics on cs.com or Facebook. My opinions have been changed numerous times over the years by some of you rat bastard conks and that's a cool thing.

On a side not, I posted quite a bit last fall on the AGS poli board, and my neutrality on certain things or "inconsistencies" drove the conks over their absolutely bat shit crazy. They'd rather have you pick a side than be objective.

That board is un-fucking-readable.