Jump to content

GW Hayduke

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    1663
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GW Hayduke

  1. We are supposedly gonna find out how the fbi potentially took missteps around the Hillary email investigation that may have helped trump win
  2. Yes, I agree. I think in the cases of the last page of this thread they would be though. Analogies are great when used for clarification or explanation but not when used to distract or justify.
  3. Again, whataboutism is strong in this thread. Responding to whataboutism (trump twitter/phone) with your own whataboutism (Clinton foundation) has driven this thread off the rails
  4. Never said it wasn’t both sides. Whataboutism is strong in this thread. It’s a fallacy that should be frowned upon
  5. Yes, I suggest you learn from Anastasis. Whataboutism is a sign of weakness and a fallacy.
  6. Whataboutism is strong in this thread. Equating the POTUS use of twitter and potentially insecure phones to anything about anyone, such as hillary’s server or the Clinton Foundation, is classic whataboutism. Whataboutism is a logical fallacy and sign of a weak argument or position. FYI: whataboutism is a key component of Russian propaganda. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism The honest way to address the issue without the fallacy is to look at the last comments by Anastasis. He is addressing the issue and not trying to divert or equate with some other situation
  7. Honestly, I don’t blame “gun nuts” all that much. We hope that all citizens, including gun owners, would understand the need for change and welcome measures that better society. For some reason, that isn’t the case. We could chalk this up to social media and an education system that is weak in critical thinking and citizen responsibilities. I would also lay blame to weak media regulations and dark money in politics.
  8. You might be right. Though the CIA is supposed to take the lead on combatting these types of foreign threats so they need to have some large role to go along with their large availability of resources. If the CIA isn’t flexible enough to monitor and divulge Russian activities, then they need more flexibility. Though it is always possible, since the CIA doesn’t really have a public face, that Watts is actually acting as the CIA’s public mouthpiece on this. Dealing with the right’s acceptance of these methods and the difficulties in parsing witting and unwitting actors is going to require some huge some huge solutions imo.
  9. Watts always has good things to say. I wish the CIA or FBI would give him a large task force and big budget. He speaks of “awareness” as an important method to combat. I think that is important. However, considering the difficulties in parsing witting and unwitting actors and the right’s acceptance of these methods, we are going to need a much stronger approach IMO.
  10. I recommend that they vote and that they use their platform to remind others to vote and to bring awareness to others on whatever issues they feel is important. I would also recommend that they specifically call out trump for manufacturing a conflict to sow discord in the US. i would also recommend that they use their platform to remind fans about the ideas of citizenry.
  11. Are most folks under the impression that this entire conflict is manufactured by trump to drive a wedge in America to further solidify tribalism/identity politics/us vs them? Is there anyone out there who can’t see this?
  12. You are free to provide examples of the filters, active measures, or propaganda that you mention. I’m curious. I would add that I have had many long, healthy debates on issues surrounding firearms. Most healthy debates provide both sides with new perspectives and information to ponder. They usually end up with disagreeing on values, e.g., Liberty/freedom from low regulations outweigh the fact that the US’s gun violence is on par with the third world, or agreeing that a particular topic needs further research.
  13. There are active disinformation campaigns going on. Most have accepted that as reality. The purpose of those campaigns is to sow discord and push sides further away, tribalism, identity politics, culture war. One strategy is replacing logic/science with feelings/emotions. The right has increasingly become the side that is anti-science, anti-government, anti-education. The right has replaced those things with “feelings,” “emotions,” and “identity” (this is why the right have become snowflakes over the last few years). We see it with global warming, gun control, football kneelers, immigration. The examples are many. Disinformation campaigns have pushed the right further into this place. However, your difficulty in maintaining a mature conversation/debate on firearms may be the result of this recent emotional/anti-science phenomenon being pushed by active propaganda or it may just be who you have always been. For example, calling “ad hominem” when someone provides counter evidence or “strawman” when someone attempts to get you to take a clear position, is classic right-wing response grounded in feelings/emotions/anti-science. My recommendation is to reflect back on where the sensitivity and feelings come from and ponder whether it may be the result of this culture war, tribalism, identity politics being pushed into or population.
  14. IMO gonna need a new set of politicians capable of representing the interests of common citizens before we can start making progress at addressing firearm violence. First steps should include reforms to campaign finance and dark money, solving this Russian/Israeli/right-wing propaganda problem, and increases in gun violence research. We aren't going to make any meaningful steps at addressing gun violence for several more years.
  15. David Hogg’s home was swatted. "I think it's really a distraction from what we're trying to fix here," Hogg told Liane Morejon. "Which is the massive gun violence epidemic in this country." https://www.local10.com/news/family-of-stoneman-douglas-advocate-david-hogg-swatted-at-home
  16. Here is an example of a thread on r/texas that was blasted with a large amount of questionable users, some I would definitely consider right-wing trolls. I'm able to identify some of them based on a reddit extension I have that shows me the amount of karma folks have from certain trollish subs, like r/the_donald.
  17. There isn’t one troll, and not all trolls are the same. The trolls I am talking about either push false information or try to trigger discord. We shouldn’t be scared of them. And ignoring them works only if they are obviously stupid, like the guy “sugar.” But the trolling I’m talking about is more sophisticated. I suspect some is Russian. Ignoring sophisticated trolling on reddit helps no one and just allows the disinformation campaign continue IMO. The trolls that drop false or dishonest information. Simply describe it’s falseness/dishonesty and provide accurate information with sources. Don’t just ignore and leave only the false info. The trolls that try to sow discord. That troll wants to trigger an emotional response and get you (or someone else) to take any extreme position. Don’t give him that but instead, point out to everyone what exactly the troll is doing. Subreddit r/texas gets a lot of organized sophisitcated trolling. They show up whenever something big happens, like after a mass shooting. Also, they were there in force when the CATO institute came out with a study showing how immigrants (including illegal immigrants) have much lower rates of criminal activity when compared to native born. Im not sure who you are talking about when you say “you got caught in a trap” or “you got fooled.”
  18. I don’t think she is referring to how to deal with a troll. I think she is referring to how to deal with larger scale propaganda, I.e, army of trolls using a mix of media to push a narrative or to sow discord. She is saying don’t plan to confront each and every instance when one of their trolls pops up. She is saying develop a strategy to target the audience, e.g., deveolpe your own organized media blitz to push a counter narrative or to address the discord. I argue that the best way to deal with a troll that is being dishonest, is to point out the dishonesty. Pointing out their dishonesty, fallacy, and purpose isn’t what the troll wants. Most of the time, the troll wants you to be triggered and to emotionally respond with an extreme position. I’m agreeing with your position on exposing the troll. I think you can absolutely shame a troll, but you are right you can’t change his mind.
  19. It depends how you do it. Debunking a trolls lies, calling out his fallacies, and describing motives isn’t giving him legitimacy. Obviously if you get into the mud and let the conversation get bogged down then yeah, a reader will tune out. However ignoring a troll and letting another user bite is pretty much letting the troll do whatever he’s intending.
  20. Idk. Maybe this works on Twitter. I don’t use twitter. It seems she may be talking about large scale anti-propaganda efforts. Like something a company like Yeti might do to combat the NRA and right wing trolls. I routinely engage on reddit folks that are apparent right wing trolls. Reddit allows a discourse with the troll and for viewers to see the conversation. I usually specifically identify the fallacy or falsehood and then provide evidence supporting whatever is appropriate. If it’s obvious, I’ll also point out their motives, e.g., push a wedge between two groups, identity politics. Hopefully this allows any random viewer to understand what the troll is doing.
  21. Fox News has presented a new idea for dealing with school shootings: using cannons to blow up walls and create openings for kids to escape. https://www.vox.com/2018/6/1/17418748/school-shootings-cannon-fox-news
  22. Hmmmmm....you are 12 times less likely die by firearm in Australia, so I think Thomas has a point. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
  23. https://m.imgur.com/r/PoliticalHumor/jVxtGtv
  24. From the Quinnipiac poll from yesterday: Texas voters support 50 - 44 percent a nationwide ban on the sale of assault weapons. https://poll.qu.edu/search-releases/search-results/release-detail?What=&strArea=31;0;&strTime=28&ReleaseID=2543#Question002
  25. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/623145 CONCLUSIONS: Among women, mental illness and living alone increase the risk of suicide in the home, and household use of illicit drugs and prior domestic violence increase the risk of homicide. Instead of conferring protection, keeping a gun in the home is associated with increased risk of both suicide and homicide of women. Household use of illicit drugs, domestic violence, and readily available firearms place women at particularly high risk of homicide at the hands of a spouse, an intimate acquaintance, or a close relative. Many factors place women at increased risk of violent death in the home. Community- and clinic-based interventions should target those with identifiable risk factors.
×
×
  • Create New...