The New Republican Party

[myata]

The time to establish it would be after, if it happens, the fateful nomination. The next morning, the latest. Understand it, and be prepared.

You tell people patiently and clearly where the problems are. But they don't have to listen. You warn, but they wouldn't hear. It happened in the history so many times it's not even funny. And then, you have a choice. Thankfully, by this period in the history, it's obvious:

No. You do not participate in the collective insanity; it just doesn't work. The best thing a reasonable and conscientious individual could do is to step aside. Leave it. Don't be in it. There are no explanations or excuses. No: they won't work. It may be a small thing, but one can always do as much.

This failure of reason, conscience and responsibility to the society of this proportion would not be possible to redeem. It would be a black mark forever. Why would anyone need such legacy? The only right road is to start anew and try it better. It's no guarantee, but not a dead end either.

There would be no other options. Just think.

[Rebound]

Matthew 25: 42-46

42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 

43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

 

Edited August 29, 2023 by Rebound

[Deluge]

19 hours ago, myata said:

You tell people patiently and clearly where the problems are.

I'm down for a patient listen if you're prepared to discuss your idea of the problems. 

Let us reason together. 

[myata]

First we have to accept objective facts. What kind of sane conversation can happen if we can make and deny facts on a whim.

Secondly, we would need to establish some common ground. A sane conversation cannot happen without it.

[Deluge]

4 minutes ago, myata said:

First we have to accept objective facts. What kind of sane conversation can happen if we can make and deny facts on a whim.

Secondly, we would need to establish some common ground. A sane conversation cannot happen without it.

Too vague.

What you need to do is lay down a problem you have and then we both can decide how to approach it objectively. 

Edited August 29, 2023 by Deluge

[myata]

1 minute ago, Deluge said:

Too vague.

The problem is of course, that if one doesn't have, or forgot these foundations, a sane conversation cannot happen.

[Deluge]

6 minutes ago, myata said:

The problem is of course, that if one doesn't have, or forgot these foundations, a sane conversation cannot happen.

We lay the foundation around your problem, not before I know what it is. That way I don't have to deal with some bullshit source before we even begin. 

[myata]

1 hour ago, Deluge said:

foundation around your problem

Not my problem but democracy. It requires from citizens responsibility, that includes recognizing objective facts and the ability to have a conversation with compatriots of different views and opinions. Where these don't exist or exit, democracy exits and becomes a mob rule.

[Deluge]

36 minutes ago, myata said:

Not my problem but democracy. It requires from citizens responsibility, that includes recognizing objective facts and the ability to have a conversation with compatriots of different views and opinions. Where these don't exist or exit, democracy exits and becomes a mob rule.

It's YOUR problem until we both agree that it's our country's problem. 

Tell me what your problem is, and we'll discuss it. 

[myata]

It doesn't really work this way until and unless we have a common ground and a language for a meaningful discussion. If I (for example) can make up "facts" on a whim and refuse to acknowledge any factual evidence, we cannot have a rational discussion on any subject. Then, there's no point in wasting the effort and time.

[Nationalist]

This is ridiculous. 

"I have a problem. The people who oppose my position on things, don't agree with me."

What sort of nonsense is this?

@myata why don't you just say plainly that you're overcome with hatred and find discussions are useless to you now?

[myata]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

This is ridiculous. 

Facts are ridiculous? Objective reality is?

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

What sort of nonsense is this?

Indeed.

[Rebound]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

This is ridiculous. 

"I have a problem. The people who oppose my position on things, don't agree with me."

What sort of nonsense is this?

@myata why don't you just say plainly that you're overcome with hatred and find discussions are useless to you now?

We have a problem that large groups of the public do not accept objective facts and instead put their faith in conspiracy theories, rumors, and speculation.  
 

They behave like people in the 1600’s who accused women of witchcraft, and “judged” them by tying them up and throwing them in a river. If she sank, her innocence was proven. But if she survived, it proved that she was impure and the river rejected her.  
 

We have to accept facts for what they are.  A fact is immutable. As Sam Adams said, “Facts are stubborn things.” So common ground means accepting facts and have a willingness to change our beliefs and opinions as facts come to light. 

Edited August 29, 2023 by Rebound

[myata]

25 minutes ago, Rebound said:

They behave like people in the 1600’s who accused women of witchcraft, and “judged” them by tying them up and throwing them in a river.

Looks like there's something in human genes that makes them tired of logic, rationality and reason generally, every so often. Some self-defense mechanism of the Universe against species getting too smart for it.

[Nationalist]

4 hours ago, myata said:

Facts are ridiculous? Objective reality is?

Indeed.

Ur a very strange person...

[Nationalist]

4 hours ago, Rebound said:

We have a problem that large groups of the public do not accept objective facts and instead put their faith in conspiracy theories, rumors, and speculation.  
 

They behave like people in the 1600’s who accused women of witchcraft, and “judged” them by tying them up and throwing them in a river. If she sank, her innocence was proven. But if she survived, it proved that she was impure and the river rejected her.  
 

We have to accept facts for what they are.  A fact is immutable. As Sam Adams said, “Facts are stubborn things.” So common ground means accepting facts and have a willingness to change our beliefs and opinions as facts come to light. 

Indeed. And the facts are...

Biden is a failure. 

America needs a strong, independent leader.

[myata]

30 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Ur a very strange person...

First you cannot read then this. It's really interesting, and scary to observe how grown up people seemingly normal people decide to part with reason, consciously and knowingly. But it wouldn't be the first time happens all the time. Oh well.

Edited August 30, 2023 by myata

[Rebound]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Indeed. And the facts are...

Biden is a failure. 

America needs a strong, independent leader.

The fact is: That is your opinion. 

[myata]

Nomination of a figure like Trump would be a stain on the party for perpetuity. I don't see how it can be redeemed, giving in to a mindless mob, a total and accomplished failure of the democratic duty to the society. A new low and the new normal for the foreseeable perspective, but already beyond the clear boundaries of democracy, a discourse on the level of African dictators. It is better to think about it now as I can see. On the day the decision comes, the layout of options will be exactly the same.

[Nationalist]

9 hours ago, Rebound said:

The fact is: That is your opinion. 

What has Biden done to enrich America?

[myata]

11 hours ago, Rebound said:

The fact is: That is your opinion. 

He / they wouldn't know the difference. Connecting the brain to the a#$ehole of the greatest liar does that in a flick.

[Deluge]

20 hours ago, myata said:

It doesn't really work this way until and unless we have a common ground and a language for a meaningful discussion. If I (for example) can make up "facts" on a whim and refuse to acknowledge any factual evidence, we cannot have a rational discussion on any subject. Then, there's no point in wasting the effort and time.

You're not making any sense. 

Of course we can't just make up "facts on a whim" - that goes without saying, and yet, here you are saying it anyways. 

This is very simple: Lay down one of your problems and then we'll decide together what sources are neutral and what sources aren't. 

 

Edited August 30, 2023 by Deluge

[myata]

1 minute ago, Deluge said:

Of course we can't just make up "facts on a whim" - that goes without saying, and yet, here you are saying it anyways. 

With who it goes without saying? An objective fact is that Tramp's elections claims were thrown out the 50+ courts in a row. Can we acknowledge it as a fact?

[Deluge]

3 minutes ago, myata said:

With who it goes without saying? An objective fact is that Tramp's elections claims were thrown out the 50+ courts in a row. Can we acknowledge it as a fact?

Sure. It's no secret that Trump has had election claims thrown out in multiple courts. I can acknowledge that as a fact. 

So what? 

 

[myata]

21 minutes ago, Deluge said:

I can acknowledge that as a fact. 

Well, it can be a start of a meaningful conversation. I have no ideological bias in this matter and will acknowledge every objective fact. The next question I would ask is this: can we use, that is, put sufficient trust in the existing instruments of democracy such as courts to determine the factual nature of certain events?

For example, if an overwhelming majority of independent democratic courts concluded that cases had no merit, we acknowledge that there is no merit to these claims.