Tom_Servo (Discord ID: 477396918889218049), page 1
Security Advisory: Links in messages may lead to maliciously operated websites that could track your IP address and reveal your identity, or they may contain harmful files. The DiscordLeaks team does not check links and cannot make any statements about the safety of following these links.
Some ways to protect yourself are:
281 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Page 1/2 | Next
So how long do you give before this is screengrabbed on twitter?
I suspect a lot of SJW's would join your link from twitter just to report back on the evilness
For the record, I don't think invite only is the way to go, probably just end up with an echo chamber
well can we get right to chatting or is there already a topic planned ?
I would like opinions on whether SA has a center (seems we have far left and far right), who would you say represents the center either as a party or public figure
@Jerm they definitely have influence, the question is whether it is unhealthy. There seem to be a handful of organisations publishing fact based "thought leadership" pieces. One would imagine it is wise to let these pieces influence policy or not.
Maybe political parties don't do a good enough job of publishing the thinking that goes into their policy making... too much time selling the policy
@Robzombie I trust no-one, but at least they present facts that can be checked
I like them, but they definitely have a bias
I don't think Shelley Garland helped with that perception (although I loved it)
@Jerm have you been deplatformed completely or just have a lot of cartoons declined?
context was added later - that was a quote from one of the people at the land hearings
yeah, I think the race IQ thing would be a quick way to get deplatformed :-p
@Jerm whats the story behind the beef with you and zapiro?
@Jerm I saw that today, I was wondering where it all started. You origin story if you will.
@Jerm to climb in on the Trump debate. I have a few mates in US some who voted for him and some who didn't. This is a conversation I have had with the ones who voted for him several times. What strikes me is how prevalent identity politics is everywhere in the world.
Trump on balance can't be described as a good person, but because of the bloody nose he gave the left people will defend the indefensible.
His attitude towards women is poor. The amount of woman voters he attracted doesn't change that. The ANC's attitude towards to poor is bad, and they still get the majority of the poor vote.
The MSM definitely overplays his fumbles, but there is no doubt that he used the zero tolerance policy at the border as a negotiating startegy... In my book that is really crappy.
If you took it from a US standpoint, he has played up divisions in society in order to consolidate power. Exactly what EFF and ANC do on this side. In my book that is really crappy.
Sites that log the honesty of leaders (that existed before Trump), show that he is far less honest than previous leaders (that in my book is crappy).
I don't know why people have to take this all or nothing approach to politics... they aren't sports teams, we can agree with some aspects and concede that other aspects are poor.
I also don't get this Trump / Clinton ongoing comparison. Election was ages ago... He should now be judged on his own merit
and if she won, then she should have been
either way, republicans didn't have to put trump up as a candidate, so this false comparison to Hillary gets old... There were some decent conservative candidates early in the primaries but Trumps playground strategy worked
doesnt matter what he does, supporters will defend
well thats your call to make.... but if evidence that contradicts your viewpoint makes you double down on your existing view point then I would suggest that no evidence will ever be enough
all I can say (anecdotally) was that a republican friend sent me this site after obama was elected to show how much he was lying
and on single items I have not encountered clearly biased findings
these graphs are the scores of investigated claims
fair enough - it is possible that they choose not to investigate democrat lies, but you can search the site and see if your favourites are there
I am not trying to be rude (sorry if it comes off that way)
@Jerm I mentioned specific things which I think are relevant. Put simply :
- He is more dishonest than most
- He is willing to increase human suffering in order to make political gains (might not be unique to him, but his
moves seem more arb.
- He is deliberately divisive
I think these are relevant, and these qualities can be witnessed without looking through the lense of MSM
@Jerm Thats fine... you can be wrong if you want 😃
@Jerm whoah.... I gave the reasons why I dont like Trump
not the reasons why I like / dislike Obama
it doesn't have to matter to you for it to matter
Trust is something that matters to markets... and leadership
his dishonesty just hasn't played out there
I agree that he is not as useless as the media portray him
Trumps dishonesty hasnt spilled over into the market.... YET
based on the data we have to make that decision
main thrust of why I say he is a bad leader is because he is untrustworthy and deliberately divisive
okay, so you would say Trump is not divisive and no more dishonest than any other leader?
of course it is subjective thats what an opinion is, that doesnt make it something not rooted in evidence though
fair enough... that was my opinion, but I thought the rest of my point explained why I have that opinion
@Jerm it is hillarious that you do exactly what you accuse the left of
nothing... I didn't realise that I would have to be so specific in everything I said here. The implication was that deliberate divisiveness is what I have an issue with
in the long term, and feeds into identity politics
@Jerm awesome that you outgrew that naivety
So trolling is your criteria for good leadership
well if good or bad leadership can't be defined then what is the point?
do you feel the same when the EFF says it when the media pans them @freeplasma_africa
@Jerm I didnt say it did? This is a discussion forum about politics and identity politics
hard to discuss opinions without venturing one
@Jerm all I did was say why I thought trump was a bad leader. An opinion which I gave reasons for.
i think it was more framed as why I dont like him
why do you ask questions you dont want to hear answers too?
or do you just want people to echo your opinions?
fact - supported by data..... he lies more than other politicians... a lot more
honesty indicates to me how someone will conduct business and deal with the power that office gives you. Zuma is a great example. His dishonesty along with a mobilised supporter base that would defend anything he did laid the path for unprecedented state capture. Based on what we have experienced in this country I am weary of leaders who exhibit these brazen levels of dishonesty and are able to unite large portions of the population by being deliberately divisive towards the rest.
it takes time to empty koffers... I am not saying Trump will or is doing that, but what he the character traits he has exhibited makes me think he is more likely to
he is a level of magnitide different to other politicians
we can get into that economic data, but it would be best to look at it after 4 to 5 years
would you agree that Zuma's corruption was on another level to Mbeki's corruption?
your argument is like saying, well they are all corrupt so we can just except the ridiculous turbo level corruption then
@Jerm please show the numbers on the right
ag come on... you cant say massive and then remove figures
or are you just going to pretend that that was a direct and immediate result of zumas election?
there is no point in discussing if you are going to actively ignore facts because they dont support your position
to drift from this.....
This is the problem, with world politics at the moment... Being unable to concede that Trumps crazy levels of dishonesty, could be a risk to business is a good example of identity politics.
if we concede one point we feel we have to concede them all
economic policies are too left leaning at the moment, some weird SJW stuff going on in the world, but this planting a flag in the ground and defending everything is the real danger
he did a lot to kill it, but 2 years is like a fart in the wind
@Jerm fair enough. I will give you that. Although, I am not implying that Trump would do something as crazy as land grabs.... I do think he is capable of a state capture type project
and when some of his supporters where "I would rather be Russian then Democrat" shirts, I am reminded of a lot of the ANC memebers outside court for zuma
that would be a long term project - 6 years if that is his plan (and that is admittedly very speculative, but it is why trust is a big issue for me on leadership)
by that time it is too late, and we all suffer if that economy gets hollowed out
again... not suggesting he is doing it.... just saying that he is probably the most likely candidate the US has had for a long time
why do you think reps and dems end up landing in the same place on unrelated social issues?
ie... death penalty, abortion, guns, immigration, marijuana
surely some people who support immigration reform think there should be more gun control and legal marijuana
are we all so neatly configured to fit in these boxes - or are we just so easily taken in by properganda
My last comment for the day...
I am not an anti-trumper, I dont have this madness the media has about him.
But on balance, I dont personally think he is going to be good for the US. (I also dont think he is wrong about everything). Economy may do well for a bit, but ultimately the more isolationist they become the more they will struggle. And the social schism he is exploiting and widening, could result a real stuff up for them (they could end up like SA in the social cohesion stakes).
@AcidOverride Do you think we are at a point where war is inevitable, or do you think cool heads can still prevail?
Second question, how do you think landowners would do in a war?
@Robzombie Doesn't really answer it at all actually... but I think you are prob right in what you do say
@Roovdwalt It's hard to see a war result go any way other than to those who control the army here... I know our army isn't the greatest force anymore, but I reckon landowners are simply outgunned (forget the numbers).
Doubt much support would come from abroad. We aren't that strategically important anymore.
@Roovdwalt Maybe... but China is more interested in us than the increasingly isolationist West (economically). Any western power getting involved would be doing so without a real economic upside, plus China would prob side with govt... so there is that to consider
50 bucks says this chat on war makes it into Adriaan's article.
Someone should Pieter that comments like this are bound to make farmers with more than 120k hectares of land panic
he should be more responsible in what he says
I will kick off today with same question as day 1.... Anyone have thoughts on which personalities or parties represent the center in SA or global politics?
@Roovdwalt There has to be a center... We might just not recognise it if we call anyone to the left of us a communist and anyone to the right of us a nazi.
ME : I disagree with BEE
THE LEFT : You alt-right white supremist
ME : I don't think Trump is good for the US
THE RIGHT : You liberal snowflake
so the question remains, who represents an oke like me... my views are not homogenous with either the right or the left... I agree with each on some issues, and disagree on others.
I can't be the only one - I feel like it is an untapped market politically
@Jerm Centarist does not mean 50/50. It's weird that you think that
I think being in the middle is a fair description... I think another would be compromising
it seems as though the far left and far right seem to agree on everything... regardless of how unrelated those issues might be
Its not about the label as it is about the representation
but because outrage generates more activity, truly exploring the grey area is not rewarded
I would agree that we overcomplicate some issues, but most are geniunely complicated (if we are doing a truthful examination of the issue)
lets use the Alex Jones issue as an example
but when companies have grown to the scale of FB, Twitter etc.... then they end up having unfettered power that can no longer really be regulated by the free market
Dont get me wrong Alex Jones is a warped douchebag
but should private companies have that kind of power...
how did all the banks find the same thing at the same time
that was an orchestrated move... and we are all fine with it because it serves our purpose.... but pvt companies often need to be regulated
@Roovdwalt isn't collusion or monopoly the inevitable outcome of successful capitalism.
hence regulations start coming into play?
@Jerm In the technological world that no longer holds true
huge amounts of capital investment have made it impossible to disrupt the existing "production" means
but I assume they saw value in the company
free market can result in some unintended consequences
in this case a situation where free speech is regulated by corporations
dont get me wrong, still our best system by miles
so you are okay with censorship if it is corporate sponsored?
a supremely successful company, that becomes a vital part of freedom of expression should not be bound by their own terms of service... should be bound by consitutional definitions of free speech
and there are tons of these... but it seems political discourse is more about winning an argument than exploring a solution
@Gonzo no company is good or bad... it is a machine. The market can attach a value to morality and in that sense the market is "good" or "Bad" .
But people are generally dense, that is why we dont write a constitution by referendum
@Jerm Not saying I have the answer... but it is something I have been wrestling with, because I do not think it is simple
and I feel certain corporations are starting to have power beyond manufacturing and supplying goods. They are shaping society, and that is a problem
@Jerm how did govt make the FB / Jones issue complicated
@Jerm not following how this relates to FB issue
@Roovdwalt Jones has been banned off all platforms now.. What options does he have?
Again he is a cuckoo nutcase and I disagree with him on literally every single thing he says... but if he has not broken the law (not terms of service), then why should he be deplatformed
didnt they have their serverrs shut down by microsoft
I think you might feel differently if you were deplatformed by FB, twitter etc...
and again, I am not saying free market sucks... just saying that some things are complicated
its is only simple if you willfully choose to ignore the complications
Like I said - I dont have the answer, but I can say that the power to silence held by these companies is not healthy
@Jerm I agree with you on the tobacco.... although I will include the caveat that if smokers are shown to put more of a burden on state funded healthcare, then they should contribute more toward that healthcare
your arguments are really very similar to arguments I have with communists.... Communism presents the following problem. Yes, but this is not pure communism that problem wouldn't exist in pure communism.
if we can both agree that something is problematic, why can't we discuss all possibilities of addressing it
even if one of those thoughts might be in conflict with an existing belief?
you defend the free market using the same logic that communists use to defend communism
I dont know why we got to healthcare frankly... I am raising the issue of FB and free speech.
your argument is that FB is not really operating in a free market
so the problem wouldnt exist if we just did it right
more like... you have 90% of all the guitars.... someone else has the other 10% but none of them can be tuned properly. You refuse to sell me one of your guitars because you dont like the music I will play
or we can skip analogies and look at the actual case I put forward
it is easy enough to understand without a metaphor
@Gonzo This is a valid concern... and I am not dismissing it... as I said, I dont know what the solution is, but I think the solution lies outside of a pure free market solution
I dont think we have had a "pure" free market anywhere
sometimes this has worked out well, and othertimes badly
but I think it is naive to believe that a pure free market can realistically exist. (a lovely ideal, but not realistic)
@Jerm so facebook shouldnt have the freedom to have a political view
but if shareholders dont agree with how they spend money politically they could disinvest
are you even slightly seeing my point here?
theory is just theory and reality is sometimes messier
doesnt mean we should throw the theory out though
@Jerm nope cathy newman... I am concerned about the power Facebook has over free speech and am not convinced that free market theory will address this adequately
@Jerm sorry unneccessarily rude - being said with a smile on my face
if a printer refused to print your newspaper despite your willingness to pay then this would be comparable
your house is not vital to public discourse
281 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Page 1/2 | Next