Heated Bread Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 You as an individual are not held responsible for another person takes. Okay so then you're retracting your original statement of responsibility? What I am talking about is not blame but a call to action or an appeal to change opinion. I could argue on humanitarian grounds for action but I feel that falls too much on deaf ears. I don't find that objectionable. Bring people's attention to it all you want, and try to get them involved. What I find objectionable is the idea that I'm somehow to blame for something that I had nothing to do with. If you're no longer saying that, then I don't really have a problem, so long as whatever action(s) you are proposing is/are not too radical, dangerous, or just plain stupid. I just think that it should be my choice to be involved or not, and not everyone can have the luxury to do so, or even to have a well thought out opinion on the matter, and so you shouldn't necessarily be pointing fingers at anyone for not being involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gone Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 Stupid like quota. I want to give out more likes to Charlie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlaqkAudio Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 I did not mean it as an expression. I meant it as shared responsibility. Jesus Christ, dude. You are indeed taking it way too personally. Ok, so it's not your fault. Big whoop. The nation, ya doofus!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heated Bread Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 I did not mean it as an expression. I meant it as shared responsibility. Jesus Christ, dude. You are indeed taking it way too personally. Ok, so it's not your fault. Big whoop. The nation, ya doofus!!!! ... I'm very sure he meant "we" as a country. People always say "we went to war with so and so" or "we helped out this one country" "We" as in a nation. Not meaning you... You're taking this far too personally. It's a very common saying.. Hence the saying, "aren't we to blame?" Okay... You can easily see how I would think you were talking about a figure of speech. In fact, the phrase "shared responsibility" or anything similar doesn't even appear. And quit saying I'm taking it personally. You have literally nothing to base that on. Don't presume to tell me the contents of my own head. THAT I do take personally. I've already told you once, and it's rude for you to keep insisting it. edit: okay I think I see what you actually mean by "taking it way too personally". While it sounds like you think I'm finding something offensive to me, what you're actually trying to say is that is that I'm taking his "we" as inclusive of me when that's not how he meant it, right? Well if he doesn't mean it to include me since I am part of the country he is referring to, then again I have to say that the usage you're talking about is pretty meaningless. It only makes sense in the abstract, and a more narrow definition is necessary in order to have a useful conversation about it. Refer to my earlier posts about why. I think I made it pretty clear, and if you're not getting it by now, then we're just going in circles. Wow, this is the first time I've really hated a conversation on this forum. UGH. Listen people: if you make broad statements like "we are fully responsible", you better have something really substantial to back that up. That's a serious claim that you just can't make flippantly and then back away from. I still call bullshit on it, and I haven't seen anything to demonstrate why I should think that the claim itself makes any rational sense at all. It disregards the role of other populations and governments in their own lives and places the burden for that on what is ultimately an abstraction. If instead you wish to say "Hey, you should seriously consider becoming proactive about X issue because it's the right thing to do", that at least makes some rational sense, even if it is making a moral claim which you then have the burden of supporting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimes Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 ... Okay... You can easily see how I would think you were talking about a figure of speech. In fact, the phrase "shared responsibility" or anything similar doesn't even appear. And quit saying I'm taking it personally. You have literally nothing to base that on. Don't presume to tell me the contents of my own head. THAT I do take personally. I've already told you once, and it's rude for you to keep insisting it. edit: okay I think I see what you actually mean by "taking it way too personally". While it sounds like you think I'm finding something offensive to me, what you're actually trying to say is that is that I'm taking his "we" as inclusive of me when that's not how he meant it, right? Well if he doesn't mean it to include me since I am part of the country he is referring to, then again I have to say that the usage you're talking about is pretty meaningless. It only makes sense in the abstract, and a more narrow definition is necessary in order to have a useful conversation about it. Refer to my earlier posts about why. I think I made it pretty clear, and if you're not getting it by now, then we're just going in circles. Wow, this is the first time I've really hated a conversation on this forum. UGH. Listen people: if you make broad statements like "we are fully responsible", you better have something really substantial to back that up. That's a serious claim that you just can't make flippantly and then back away from. I still call bullshit on it, and I haven't seen anything to demonstrate why I should think that the claim itself makes any rational sense at all. It disregards the role of other populations and governments in their own lives and places the burden for that on what is ultimately an abstraction. If instead you wish to say "Hey, you should seriously consider becoming proactive about X issue because it's the right thing to do", that at least makes some rational sense, even if it is making a moral claim which you then have the burden of supporting. Am I the only one who thinks Bread deliberately talks in a complicated and roundabout manner, making him almost impossible to follow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heated Bread Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 Am I the only one who thinks Bread deliberately talks in a complicated and roundabout manner, making him almost impossible to follow? If you're having trouble with anything, ask me and I will clarify. I try to use precise descriptive language to avoid confusion and ambiguity, not create it. That does tend to make me a bit more verbose than some people are probably used to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlaqkAudio Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 Did you know that we fought the Japanese in World War 2? Did you know that we landed on the moon? I don't see how you can take something such as that^ and confuse it to you actually being a part of it. Actually, I don't see how this how and why something such as this caused this thread to derail so horribly. @Grimes - I'm out of likes :c Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimes Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 If you're having trouble with anything, ask me and I will clarify. I try to use precise descriptive language to avoid confusion and ambiguity, not create it. That does tend to make me a bit more verbose than some people are probably used to. I didn't mean to offend you (if I did). Maybe I'm just so used to illiterate outpost users that I can't handle reading proper English. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heated Bread Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 Did you know that we fought the Japanese in World War 2? Did you know that we landed on the moon? I don't see how you can take something such as that^ and confuse it to you actually being a part of it. Actually, I don't see how this how and why something such as this caused this thread to derail so horribly. @Grimes - I'm out of likes :c If I'm not a part of it and you're not either, don't say "we". It makes no sense. What you mean to say is something entirely different than what the word you're using actually means. How is that so hard to understand? I didn't mean to offend you (if I did). You didn't offend me. Thanks for being considerate of me, though. Sincerely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F CHARLIE Posted September 17, 2014 Author Share Posted September 17, 2014 @heatedbread Please refrain from celebrating 4th of July, Memorial and your birth day (you didnt give birth to yourself, trust me you were peripherally involved in the effort made on that day). Ofcourse I mean a shared responsibility. People who represent you pass laws that you live under and we are all apart of the process that produces those laws. What you are espousing is what divides people and makes it impossible to respond to situations or direct situations to arrivec at a better outcome. We all get to claim the good and bad of this country just like accepting the good and bad things about the people you love. Nothing is perfect but many things are worthwhile. How about this. Because of our drug laws, and the fact that people are still gonna use drugs, there exists an unintended consequence of drug gangs in central America. Not all of that problem is our fault. A large amount of it has to do with those countries vastly unequal distribution of wealth that crushes its citizens and the corruption that situation has brought about. None the less, the fact that this nation has a large black market for drugs, that is supplied thru these countries, is a major contributor to suffering in other countries. We have helped create this situation. Here is a way you do have personal responsibility. You have some small power to help change the situation. If you can agree that you have a responsibility to call 911 if, while driving along, you come upon a car accident and there's an unconscious person in the car then you can at least see that you can be responsible to exorcise your right to vote for a change in policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heated Bread Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 Please refrain from celebrating 4th of July, Memorial and your birth day (you didnt give birth to yourself, trust me you were peripherally involved in the effort made on that day). Funny thing is that I actually don't celebrate any of those things, but not for whatever silly reason you're trying to give. It's not clear what you're trying to say there, if I'm honest. If there's some kind of argument buried in there, I'm not seeing it. It might just be empty rhetoric. Ofcourse I mean a shared responsibility. People who represent you pass laws that you live under and we are all apart of the process that produces those laws. I don't even vote. I'm pretty sure I'm not part of the process. The vast majority of laws I live under were also instituted before I was born. Sure, I could try to change things now that I am alive, but I'm only one person, and I most likely don't care about all of the same issues that you do, nor would it be reasonable for you or anyone else to expect me to devote my time to them. Being involved in politics takes time and especially money that most people don't have. It's a luxury. Even trying to fully grasp a single complicated issue can take months or years of study. For the record, the things I care about most are personal liberties and rights including proper healthcare, gender and racial equality, separation of church and state, and freedom of speech. Immigration is actually not on there because I have no strong convictions about it one way or another, and don't know that I necessarily should. I don't live in a state where it's an issue. As far as drug legalization goes, I'm for the legalization of marijuana. That's about it. I'm open to the idea of legalising other drugs, but am highly skeptical and I think it's a very complicated issue which some people such as yourself tend to oversimplify when they're trying to make a point. What you are espousing is what divides people and makes it impossible to respond to situations or direct situations to arrivec at a better outcome. This goes back to what I was saying earlier about your attitude which seems to be "you're either with us or against us". Look, I'm an individual person. I'm not part of a hive brain or collective or whatever. I have a right to choose not to be involved with things that I don't want to be involved with. Right now, I see no reason that I necessarily ought to do anything about immigration or drug laws beyond the vocal advocacy of pot legalization, or that I have any ability to do something effective about any of those issues if I wanted to. You can't force me or anyone else to "join the cause". I'm not in your way just because I'm not helping your cause. I'm simply uninvolved. In military terms, I'm a non-combatant. You don't get to classify me as the enemy. You don't get to say that I'm obstructing you if I'm not even in the picture. We all get to claim the good and bad of this country just like accepting the good and bad things about the people you love. Nothing is perfect but many things are worthwhile. um... okay... How about this. Because of our drug laws, and the fact that people are still gonna use drugs, there exists an unintended consequence of drug gangs in central America. What about the gangs here? Why not focus on our own back yard? Why must we suddenly be responsible for the internal affairs of other countries? That is unreasonable. Not all of that problem is our fault. Then you're retracting your earlier claim? Specifically I am referring to the part where you use the phrase "fully responsible". A large amount of it has to do with those countries vastly unequal distribution of wealth that crushes its citizens and the corruption that situation has brought about. None the less, the fact that this nation has a large black market for drugs, that is supplied thru these countries, is a major contributor to suffering in other countries. We have helped create this situation. Mostly agreed, but again, I take strong issue with your use of the word "we". We does not include me. The situation existed before I was born and has been perpetuated by people that I have zero involvement with on any level. It has nothing to do with me, and that would probably be true for most people. If you want to choose to become involved and try to make a difference, good for you. I wish you luck. I may even join you at some point. But you don't get to claim that I or anyone else am necessarily responsible for the situation without some kind of evidence and reasoning to support that claim, or that I have a duty or moral obligation to act upon it without providing a reason to justify that claim. Here is a way you do have personal responsibility. You have some small power to help change the situation. If you can agree that you have a responsibility to call 911 if, while driving along, you come upon a car accident and there's an unconscious person in the car then you can at least see that you can be responsible to exorcise your right to vote for a change in policy. The only power that I believe in is self-control and the ability to communicate ideas and persuade others. Oh, and the power to disrupt or kill others with force, which don't believe in using except in special circumstances. So the best you're going to get out of me is an argument that is hopefully persuasive if not at least informative. I believe in ideas. That's what I fight for. If you want me to fight YOUR fight, that's how I would do it. Spreading ideas is far more powerful to me than casting a vote on something when I know that my vote doesn't matter anyway because it gets drowned by a sea of other votes so that whether I cast it or not is effectively irrelevant to the outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlaqkAudio Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 At this point, this just looks like a personal issue^ Yeah, ok. We doesn't include you. Why get so hacked up about it? You are the only person here saying that. If you are the individual, then just say so. We obviously didn't mean as in "ITS YOUR FAULT TOO!!" He meant we, the nation. Not as we, every single individual person within the nation. What part of that don't you understand? Why are you trying so hard to say you aren't part of this? Of course you aren't. We believe you. Nobody ever said it was specifically you. Nobody here is blaming you. There's so many questions I can ask about this but I don't think it's going to go through that thick skull of yours. Lemme say it one more time: He meant we, the nation. Not as we, every single individual person within the nation. What part of that don't you understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heated Bread Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 ^ That's an abstraction and it does nothing to draw the line that he is trying to draw which is to say that somehow I and everyone else has a "shared responsibility" (his words) to act on this issue in some way because "we" somehow caused it. It's playing with words. It's nebulous and doesn't apply to real specific people, and yet he is trying to use it to get actual people to feel bad and agree with him. I don't know whether it's intentional manipulation or not, but it's complete nonsense when you actually stop and think about it. It's like saying "we are responsible for hundreds of years of slavery and racism". Kinda makes you feel bad, huh? Kinda makes you feel like you should do something, huh? Except that it has nothing to do with you whatsoever. Slavery has been illegal for several generations now, and I'm assuming you're not a racist. Do you get it now? Do you understand my objection? Please tell me you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F CHARLIE Posted September 17, 2014 Author Share Posted September 17, 2014 @heatedbread Drugs are still illegal, today, and this has a detrimental effect outside this country due to the black market it being illegal creates. Its a valid arguement. I dont want people joining a cause. I wanted discussion on the validity of the arguement. Now I will withdrawal the term "fully". I will excuse you personally from any responsibility to humanity as wrong as that is. Gender issues do not personally effect me but I can sympathize with those the issue does effect and support their efforts. This is actually not an immigration topic as much as it is a topic about human rights and this country's over 200 year history in pursuit of human rights here and internationally. The thread is derailed and I am abandoning it. I am sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nazi ϟϟ Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 They start a war in their country. They need to take them in. No argument needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F CHARLIE Posted October 4, 2014 Author Share Posted October 4, 2014 They start a war in their country. They need to take them in. No argument needed. What? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.