You’re projecting a little bit. Just because you’re not educated on the politics of nations outside your own, doesn’t mean folks from other nations aren’t educated about yours. And I’m not trying to be an asshole here and call you stupid, because you’re not! It doesn’t make sense for you to learn about Belgian politics because in the end, nothing they can do will ever really affect you.
The converse is not true. American politics affects the rest of the world a great deal, and so we’re almost forced to learn about it. You’d be surprised how many Italians have an opinion about the electoral college, or gerrymandering.
You may not know about protests in Spain, but we sure as shit see yours. And we see you getting shot in the streets. And yes, you look like fucking clowns letting what semblance of a democracy you had slip from your fingers.
You may not know about protests in Spain, but we sure as shit see yours. And we see you getting shot in the streets. And yes, you look like fucking clowns letting what semblance of a democracy you had slip from your fingers.
So you can see that some of us are trying to fight this shit, but in the next sentence say we “look like fucking clowns.” I’m not sure what the message here is supposed to be. Why would the protesters, whom you acknowledge risk getting themselves shot in the streets, deserve to be insulted for actually doing something? Or did you mean that other Americans look like fucking clowns, and it’s just an unfortunate juxtaposition?
I’m so glad the internet is a recent thing so past citizens of fallen empires didn’t have to be called names by outsiders while being utterly powerless themselves.
doesn’t mean folks from other nations aren’t educated about yours.
That’s what some folks from other nations presume. How does this “education” happen? Is it standardized, in textbook form, and presented in class? Or is it the whiff of familiarity that comes with seeing the same words smeared on random internet posts?
Not to dismiss the point, frequently made, that American politics has outsized influence; but to clarify that understanding what our electoral college is and what gerrymandering is are just the most basic building blocks of understanding one aspect of American politics.
More to the point, politics in America is, perhaps more than some other nations, suffused into daily life in almost every public interaction in some way, shape, or form. And presuming to have an understanding of that while never participating in that public life - and furthermore judging such aspects based on one’s non-involvement with the assuredness of a wise veteran participant - is bullshit.
More to the point, politics in America is, perhaps more than some other nations, suffused into daily life in almost every public interaction in some way, shape, or form. And presuming to have an understanding of that while never participating in that public life - and furthermore judging such aspects based on one’s non-involvement with the assuredness of a wise veteran participant - is bullshit.
I don’t accept this epistemology at all. The idea that the only way to meaningfully know about a thing is to live the thing itself is complete nonsense. “Oh you think light behaves simultaneously as a wave and as a particle? Well have you ever been a particle?” Such a joke
Yeah sure whatever, let’s pretend your question wasn’t rhetorical. What you’re doing here is called weaponised standpoint epistemology. Starting from a very valid base, namely “some aspects of things you can’t know without having experienced them” you extend to “you can’t know anything unless you were there”, which is not valid. You don’t want to talk about how Americans are flushing their democracy down the toilet and doing nothing to prevent it? Fine. But I’m not going to pretend that this is anything other than you putting your head in the sand.
Y’know who are really complicit? Belgians! Yeah. That’s right!
Because I don’t live there either and also don’t know how any of their politics works.
You’re projecting a little bit. Just because you’re not educated on the politics of nations outside your own, doesn’t mean folks from other nations aren’t educated about yours. And I’m not trying to be an asshole here and call you stupid, because you’re not! It doesn’t make sense for you to learn about Belgian politics because in the end, nothing they can do will ever really affect you.
The converse is not true. American politics affects the rest of the world a great deal, and so we’re almost forced to learn about it. You’d be surprised how many Italians have an opinion about the electoral college, or gerrymandering.
You may not know about protests in Spain, but we sure as shit see yours. And we see you getting shot in the streets. And yes, you look like fucking clowns letting what semblance of a democracy you had slip from your fingers.
So you can see that some of us are trying to fight this shit, but in the next sentence say we “look like fucking clowns.” I’m not sure what the message here is supposed to be. Why would the protesters, whom you acknowledge risk getting themselves shot in the streets, deserve to be insulted for actually doing something? Or did you mean that other Americans look like fucking clowns, and it’s just an unfortunate juxtaposition?
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/dancing-frogs-unicorns-protest-portland-war-zone-rcna236887
I’m so glad the internet is a recent thing so past citizens of fallen empires didn’t have to be called names by outsiders while being utterly powerless themselves.
That’s what some folks from other nations presume. How does this “education” happen? Is it standardized, in textbook form, and presented in class? Or is it the whiff of familiarity that comes with seeing the same words smeared on random internet posts?
Not to dismiss the point, frequently made, that American politics has outsized influence; but to clarify that understanding what our electoral college is and what gerrymandering is are just the most basic building blocks of understanding one aspect of American politics.
More to the point, politics in America is, perhaps more than some other nations, suffused into daily life in almost every public interaction in some way, shape, or form. And presuming to have an understanding of that while never participating in that public life - and furthermore judging such aspects based on one’s non-involvement with the assuredness of a wise veteran participant - is bullshit.
I don’t accept this epistemology at all. The idea that the only way to meaningfully know about a thing is to live the thing itself is complete nonsense. “Oh you think light behaves simultaneously as a wave and as a particle? Well have you ever been a particle?” Such a joke
Such an ignorant takeaway from their comment. Great job. Read a book on anthropology or sociology.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Are you familiar with the terms “hard sciences” and “soft sciences”?
Are you familiar with the term “thought terminating cliché”?
Yes. Are you familiar with answering a simple question?
Yeah sure whatever, let’s pretend your question wasn’t rhetorical. What you’re doing here is called weaponised standpoint epistemology. Starting from a very valid base, namely “some aspects of things you can’t know without having experienced them” you extend to “you can’t know anything unless you were there”, which is not valid. You don’t want to talk about how Americans are flushing their democracy down the toilet and doing nothing to prevent it? Fine. But I’m not going to pretend that this is anything other than you putting your head in the sand.
You sure know a lot about what I’m not talking about.
Which, in a manner of speaking, was my point.
Good job, everyone! Lunch break!