NationStates

Shame is a psycho-sociological weapon for controlling thought. If a society creates a shame around the belief or support of X, then people in this society are less likely to believe or support X despite what their reason tells them. From this, we can see that the process of shaming beliefs is in opposition to the rational analysis of belief, for by practicing shame, we do not participate in an objective, rational discourse, but instead one that relies on psychological tactics and negative emotional epithets. This is, of course, not how our discourse should be driven.

We have many real and imagined shamings in some societies, in this case, the United States. Fat shaming. Rape shaming. The list that we could conjure is seemingly infinite. I suggest that we conjure a new, real shaming: Trump Shaming.

I prefer to make intellectual thought practical and relevant. Therefore, I will explore the dangerous phenomenon of Trump Shaming in NSG discourse and its negative impact on the forum. As an example, I once stated my support of Trump in the 2016 Republican nomination thread. A user, who I will not name out of politeness, responded that Trump is understandably synonymous with farting in some countries. I feel that this an outrageous example of Trump shaming. The only public official who deserves such a comparison is Robert Tinton. We are shaping our discourse around bodily functions and not the fact that Donald Trump went to the Wharton School of god damn business.

I'm sure we all have examples of egregious Trump shaming on this forum. As I explained, this is a horrible occurrence for the discourse on NSG and the rest of the forum.

Let's stop the Trump-shaming.

No.

#notallTrumps

No, but really, Trump being synonymous with a fart is the best press he's going to get, unless shitting on Fox News and being racist suddenly makes you a folk hero.

New Grestin wrote:#notallTrumps

No, but really, Trump being synonymous with a fart is the best press he's going to get, unless shitting on Fox News and being racist suddenly makes you a folk hero.

I agree with you in that he is not going to get any good press. This is a manifestation of the problem of Trump-shaming, for the press environment has created conditions where it is simply conventional to mock a respected businessman and turn him into a laughing stock, even for such childish reasons as his physical appearance. I disagree that Donald Trump is a racist. Racists don't hire thousands of minorities for minimum wage in order to work on projects that make millions in profit.

Comparing Trump to a fart in order to ruin his reputation is like attempting to raise the temperature of a volcano by throwing a lit match into it.

LA Cheese wrote:

New Grestin wrote:#notallTrumps

No, but really, Trump being synonymous with a fart is the best press he's going to get, unless shitting on Fox News and being racist suddenly makes you a folk hero.

I agree with you in that he is not going to get any good press. This is a manifestation of the problem of Trump-shaming, for the press environment has created conditions where it is simply conventional to mock a respected businessman and turn him into a laughing stock, even for such childish reasons as his physical appearance. I disagree that Donald Trump is a racist. Racists don't hire thousands of minorities for minimum wage in order to work on projects that make millions in profit.

I can agree that mocking his physical appearance is childish. It's far easier to mock his being out of touch with reality, social media exploits, and general absurdity.

He's a very hard man to take seriously, if you catch my drift. Given the option, I'd choose Vermin Supreme over Trump, and he wears a goddamned boot on his head and promises free horses.

New Grestin wrote:

LA Cheese wrote:
I agree with you in that he is not going to get any good press. This is a manifestation of the problem of Trump-shaming, for the press environment has created conditions where it is simply conventional to mock a respected businessman and turn him into a laughing stock, even for such childish reasons as his physical appearance. I disagree that Donald Trump is a racist. Racists don't hire thousands of minorities for minimum wage in order to work on projects that make millions in profit.

I can agree that mocking his physical appearance is childish. It's far easier to mock his being out of touch with reality, social media exploits, and general absurdity.

He's a very hard man to take seriously, if you catch my drift. Given the option, I'd choose Vermin Supreme over Trump, and he wears a goddamned boot on his head and promises free horses.

I take him seriously. I've found that it's not that it's hard to take him seriously, but that he's peculiar. His peculiar style can be explained by the conditions that he has been in for the last few decades. The New York real estate market is a cutthroat, dangerous, rules-less place that takes a unique method and personality to succeed in. He succeeded in growing his wealth in such an environment, and that's because he's such a peculiar man. That's why he's peculiar today.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:No.

Then you likely are a force for the deterioration of our discourse.

LA Cheese wrote:

New Grestin wrote:I can agree that mocking his physical appearance is childish. It's far easier to mock his being out of touch with reality, social media exploits, and general absurdity.

He's a very hard man to take seriously, if you catch my drift. Given the option, I'd choose Vermin Supreme over Trump, and he wears a goddamned boot on his head and promises free horses.

I take him seriously. I've found that it's not that it's hard to take him seriously, but that he's peculiar. His peculiar style can be explained by the conditions that he has been in for the last few decades. The New York real estate market is a cutthroat, dangerous, rules-less place that takes a unique method and personality to succeed in. He succeeded in growing his wealth in such an environment, and that's because he's such a peculiar man. That's why he's peculiar today.

I'd take him seriously if he was on Comedy Central, because that's where he belongs.

LA Cheese wrote:

New Grestin wrote:I can agree that mocking his physical appearance is childish. It's far easier to mock his being out of touch with reality, social media exploits, and general absurdity.

He's a very hard man to take seriously, if you catch my drift. Given the option, I'd choose Vermin Supreme over Trump, and he wears a goddamned boot on his head and promises free horses.

I take him seriously. I've found that it's not that it's hard to take him seriously, but that he's peculiar. His peculiar style can be explained by the conditions that he has been in for the last few decades. The New York real estate market is a cutthroat, dangerous, rules-less place that takes a unique method and personality to succeed in. He succeeded in growing his wealth in such an environment, and that's because he's such a peculiar man. That's why he's peculiar today.

You know, I can respect that you didn't flip out on me. I really do. It's rare not to see that on NSG.

I think my main problem is that he still has a very "business" attitude, even in politics, which I don't see as our lord and savior for the current crises in the country. The idea of a businessman getting into office and using that kind of attitude as a model just really doesn't sit right with me, honestly.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:

LA Cheese wrote:
I take him seriously. I've found that it's not that it's hard to take him seriously, but that he's peculiar. His peculiar style can be explained by the conditions that he has been in for the last few decades. The New York real estate market is a cutthroat, dangerous, rules-less place that takes a unique method and personality to succeed in. He succeeded in growing his wealth in such an environment, and that's because he's such a peculiar man. That's why he's peculiar today.

I'd take him seriously if he was on Comedy Central, because that's where he belongs.

I appreciate that you've decided to post, merely substantiating my thesis that serious arguments are often being replaced by glib mockery and scorn.

New Grestin wrote:

LA Cheese wrote:
I take him seriously. I've found that it's not that it's hard to take him seriously, but that he's peculiar. His peculiar style can be explained by the conditions that he has been in for the last few decades. The New York real estate market is a cutthroat, dangerous, rules-less place that takes a unique method and personality to succeed in. He succeeded in growing his wealth in such an environment, and that's because he's such a peculiar man. That's why he's peculiar today.

You know, I can respect that you didn't flip out on me. I really do. It's rare not to see that on NSG.

I think my main problem is that he still has a very "business" attitude, even in politics, which I don't see as our lord and savior for the current crises in the country. The idea of a businessman getting into office and using that kind of attitude as a model just really doesn't sit right with me, honestly.

I'm never trying to "flip-out" on this forum. I have gotten upset with people before, but I always apologize for my bellicose posting shortly afterward.

I think this is a coherent view: the same business environment that has led Trump to be successful in American politics will harm him at the international stage. He's too far ingrained in American (specifically, New York) culture for his strategies to be as effective in every aspect of international negotiations. However, this claim should be qualified, as Trump has been demonstrably successful in complicated international business negotiations.

LA Cheese wrote:

Washington Resistance Army wrote:
I'd take him seriously if he was on Comedy Central, because that's where he belongs.

I appreciate that you've decided to post, merely substantiating my thesis that serious arguments are often being replaced by glib mockery and scorn.

There are no serious arguments to take him seriously. He hasn't stated a single solid position on anything, he hasn't given details on what he'll do as President he just rants about building a wall, Mexicans and China. He's a walking stereotype of the Republican party.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:

LA Cheese wrote:
I appreciate that you've decided to post, merely substantiating my thesis that serious arguments are often being replaced by glib mockery and scorn.

There are no serious arguments to take him seriously. He hasn't stated a single solid position on anything, he hasn't given details on what he'll do as President he just rants about building a wall, Mexicans and China. He's a walking stereotype of the Republican party.

Earlier, I suggested that Trump's behavior and statements come from his upbringing in a business environment. I believe this holds here as well. Trump understands that any framework for what he wants to do as President will be thrown away once he actually gets into office because of political realities. It's classical Trumpian pragmatism.

LA Cheese wrote:

New Grestin wrote:You know, I can respect that you didn't flip out on me. I really do. It's rare not to see that on NSG.

I think my main problem is that he still has a very "business" attitude, even in politics, which I don't see as our lord and savior for the current crises in the country. The idea of a businessman getting into office and using that kind of attitude as a model just really doesn't sit right with me, honestly.

I'm never trying to "flip-out" on this forum. I have gotten upset with people before, but I always apologize for my bellicose posting shortly afterward.

I think this is a coherent view: the same business environment that has led Trump to be successful in American politics will harm him at the international stage. He's too far ingrained in American (specifically, New York) culture for his strategies to be as effective in every aspect of international negotiations. However, this claim should be qualified, as Trump has been demonstrably successful in complicated international business negotiations.

I can see that.

Like I said, and I understand it may not be the most logical way of quantifying my view, but I find the idea of someone with a background like his entering the White House to be profoundly unsettling. I feel as though it sets a precedent that anyone with the right money and power can get into office, and frankly, the possibilities that might create are extremely unsettling to me.

Is it the most logically sound point of view? No. Is it implying a slippery slope? Kinda.

I don't know, I can really only say that I don't agree with him and that I'm still voting for Bernie Sanders, given the chance.

Cliche, I know.

New Grestin wrote:

LA Cheese wrote:
I'm never trying to "flip-out" on this forum. I have gotten upset with people before, but I always apologize for my bellicose posting shortly afterward.

I think this is a coherent view: the same business environment that has led Trump to be successful in American politics will harm him at the international stage. He's too far ingrained in American (specifically, New York) culture for his strategies to be as effective in every aspect of international negotiations. However, this claim should be qualified, as Trump has been demonstrably successful in complicated international business negotiations.

I can see that.

Like I said, and I understand it may not be the most logical way of quantifying my view, but I find the idea of someone with a background like his entering the White House to be profoundly unsettling. I feel as though it sets a precedent that anyone with the right money and power can get into office, and frankly, the possibilities that might create are extremely unsettling to me.

Is it the most logically sound point of view? No. Is it implying a slippery slope? Kinda.

I don't know, I can really only say that I don't agree with him and that I'm still voting for Bernie Sanders, given the chance.

Cliche, I know.

The discomfort is historical. Our present economic conditions smack to the earlier 20th century under Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover. However, if you like Bernie Sanders, then you might find that Trump and Sanders are not as diametrically opposed as they would sound. Trump has recently supported higher taxes on the rich, and he stood in front of the Republican debate arguing that he wanted universal health care.

LA Cheese wrote:

New Grestin wrote:I can see that.

Like I said, and I understand it may not be the most logical way of quantifying my view, but I find the idea of someone with a background like his entering the White House to be profoundly unsettling. I feel as though it sets a precedent that anyone with the right money and power can get into office, and frankly, the possibilities that might create are extremely unsettling to me.

Is it the most logically sound point of view? No. Is it implying a slippery slope? Kinda.

I don't know, I can really only say that I don't agree with him and that I'm still voting for Bernie Sanders, given the chance.

Cliche, I know.

The discomfort is historical. Our present economic conditions smack to the earlier 20th century under Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover. However, if you like Bernie Sanders, then you might find that Trump and Sanders are not as diametrically opposed as they would sound. Trump has recently supported higher taxes on the rich, and he stood in front of the Republican debate arguing that he wanted universal health care.

I feel like not supporting higher taxes on the rich would be political suicide at this point.

The affluent have been demonized, sometimes with good reason, to the point that I wouldn't be surprised if the term "Robber-Barons" starting coming into vogue again.

LA Cheese wrote:Shame is a psycho-sociological weapon for controlling thought. If a society creates a shame around the belief or support of X, then people in this society are less likely to believe or support X despite what their reason tells them. From this, we can see that the process of shaming beliefs is in opposition to the rational analysis of belief, for by practicing shame, we do not participate in an objective, rational discourse, but instead one that relies on psychological tactics and negative emotional epithets. This is, of course, not how our discourse should be driven.

Most people see him as a joke, so they joke about him. If it's trolling, then I think you should report it to the Mods.

LA Cheese wrote:Shame is a psycho-sociological weapon for controlling thought. If a society creates a shame around the belief or support of X, then people in this society are less likely to believe or support X despite what their reason tells them. From this, we can see that the process of shaming beliefs is in opposition to the rational analysis of belief, for by practicing shame, we do not participate in an objective, rational discourse, but instead one that relies on psychological tactics and negative emotional epithets. This is, of course, not how our discourse should be driven.

We have many real and imagined shamings in some societies, in this case, the United States. Fat shaming. Rape shaming. The list that we could conjure is seemingly infinite. I suggest that we conjure a new, real shaming: Trump Shaming.

I prefer to make intellectual thought practical and relevant. Therefore, I will explore the dangerous phenomenon of Trump Shaming in NSG discourse and its negative impact on the forum. As an example, I once stated my support of Trump in the 2016 Republican nomination thread. A user, who I will not name out of politeness, responded that Trump is understandably synonymous with farting in some countries. I feel that this an outrageous example of Trump shaming. The only public official who deserves such a comparison is Robert Tinton. We are shaping our discourse around bodily functions and not the fact that Donald Trump went to the Wharton School of god damn business.

I'm sure we all have examples of egregious Trump shaming on this forum. As I explained, this is a horrible occurrence for the discourse on NSG and the rest of the forum.

Let's stop the Trump-shaming.

No, because then, in all fairness, I would have to stop the Hillary-shaming, and that is just not going to happen.

LA Cheese wrote:Shame is a psycho-sociological weapon for controlling thought. If a society creates a shame around the belief or support of X, then people in this society are less likely to believe or support X despite what their reason tells them. From this, we can see that the process of shaming beliefs is in opposition to the rational analysis of belief, for by practicing shame, we do not participate in an objective, rational discourse, but instead one that relies on psychological tactics and negative emotional epithets. This is, of course, not how our discourse should be driven.

We have many real and imagined shamings in some societies, in this case, the United States. Fat shaming. Rape shaming. The list that we could conjure is seemingly infinite. I suggest that we conjure a new, real shaming: Trump Shaming.

I prefer to make intellectual thought practical and relevant. Therefore, I will explore the dangerous phenomenon of Trump Shaming in NSG discourse and its negative impact on the forum. As an example, I once stated my support of Trump in the 2016 Republican nomination thread. A user, who I will not name out of politeness, responded that Trump is understandably synonymous with farting in some countries. I feel that this an outrageous example of Trump shaming. The only public official who deserves such a comparison is Robert Tinton. We are shaping our discourse around bodily functions and not the fact that Donald Trump went to the Wharton School of god damn business.

I'm sure we all have examples of egregious Trump shaming on this forum. As I explained, this is a horrible occurrence for the discourse on NSG and the rest of the forum.

Let's stop the Trump-shaming.

There are some things you should be ashamed of.

*nods*

Grave_n_idle wrote:

LA Cheese wrote:Shame is a psycho-sociological weapon for controlling thought. If a society creates a shame around the belief or support of X, then people in this society are less likely to believe or support X despite what their reason tells them. From this, we can see that the process of shaming beliefs is in opposition to the rational analysis of belief, for by practicing shame, we do not participate in an objective, rational discourse, but instead one that relies on psychological tactics and negative emotional epithets. This is, of course, not how our discourse should be driven.

We have many real and imagined shamings in some societies, in this case, the United States. Fat shaming. Rape shaming. The list that we could conjure is seemingly infinite. I suggest that we conjure a new, real shaming: Trump Shaming.

I prefer to make intellectual thought practical and relevant. Therefore, I will explore the dangerous phenomenon of Trump Shaming in NSG discourse and its negative impact on the forum. As an example, I once stated my support of Trump in the 2016 Republican nomination thread. A user, who I will not name out of politeness, responded that Trump is understandably synonymous with farting in some countries. I feel that this an outrageous example of Trump shaming. The only public official who deserves such a comparison is Robert Tinton. We are shaping our discourse around bodily functions and not the fact that Donald Trump went to the Wharton School of god damn business.

I'm sure we all have examples of egregious Trump shaming on this forum. As I explained, this is a horrible occurrence for the discourse on NSG and the rest of the forum.

Let's stop the Trump-shaming.

There are some things you should be ashamed of.

*nods*

Being Hillary. *nods*

LA Cheese wrote:

Let's stop the Trump-shaming.

no

trump supporters should be ashamed of falling for a carnival barker.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:

LA Cheese wrote:
I appreciate that you've decided to post, merely substantiating my thesis that serious arguments are often being replaced by glib mockery and scorn.

There are no serious arguments to take him seriously. He hasn't stated a single solid position on anything, he hasn't given details on what he'll do as President he just rants about building a wall, Mexicans and China. He's a walking stereotype of the Republican party.

He's actually given some details, the media Faux included just keep repeating he hasnt over and over.
Not the smartest shit admittedly, but I think LAcheeses description of his peculiar style, really its a reality tv style, is right.

Like it or not, he is dominating air time, and it keeps working.

Big Jim P wrote:

Grave_n_idle wrote:
There are some things you should be ashamed of.

*nods*

Being Hillary. *nods*

*nods*

NSG is pretty much left-wing, so it's normal to see "Trump shaming".
However if you ever go on Facebook you can see that shaming also extends to Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, Jeb Bush, etc...
It's internet politics.I don't think it has much impact on the real facts.