Some folk got ticked off with political correctness, what ever it means, because they thought it went too far.
I can remember a heated discussion at a he pub when the proposition was put forward by someone that the plant all had called "black boys" should not be called that but "grass trees".
What made this seem ridiculous was the fact that the aboriginals present resented the name change.
The locals felt they were being told what to do by city folk who had no idea that the term " black boys" was not offensive to those who could rightfully take offence.
Clearly the person calling for the name change meant well but that did not alter the negative reaction.
I recall on another forum an Australian chap saying his union objected when they were told that "man hole covers" must in the future be called "person covers".
Again the person suggesting these changes presumably meant well however most regarded the change as silly.
I doubt if the folk who objected to the name changes in either case were not unaware of the effort to improve the situation as to racial or sexist problems in the society but I suspect they felt name changes just silly.
I think Trump was able to appeal to those who had had enough of what they saw as nonsence.
And just as the political correctness probably went to far so has the reaction against it.
I find no difficulty in understanding how Trump was able to capitalise on the against reaction.
The lot of aborigines won't improve just because we change the name of a plant no will domestic violence stop because we call safety covers person covers.
We tolerate and demand our entertainment show all these things we reject in the real world, think about the " Fast and Furious" franchise and so many more that promote bad behaviour as masculine and ask why should young males be anything other than objectionable and self centered.
Ask Hollywood how you treat someone who does not fit your world.
And you have movies and series like "Mission Impossible" that glorifies deceit and treachery against anyone who is not on your side, the right side...where is presentation of the principle..."I may not agree with what you say but I will fight to the death for your right to say it".
Trump is probably all his opponents suggest but consider how those supporters have been programmed to hate and act badly via the trash Hollywood offers as entertainment.
Trump didn't create the country he is now finds himself the president. He did not make the gun laws, invent monster trucks or tell folk they need two oven in a huge kitchen to be successful (or happy..is there a difference).
He did not establish LasVagas and the sheer nonsence of founding a city on gambling consuming unbelievable amounts of coal to light up pretty buildings etc.
He is no more than a symptom of the disease.
Just as changing the name of a plant won't change anything getting rid of Trump will not change the fundamentals for a country who believes its way is the only way and that it is everyone's right to own as many guns as you can afford, and that you need 600 HP for your car, or any of the other over the top demands of a selfish self centred society.
Alex
Alex
Alex,
As I mentioned in my previous post the term PC has undergone evolution (devolution) and goes beyond the exercise of political expediency such as the renaming of man hole covers as person hole covers.
These days PC and free speech go hand in hand, being offensive is a right of free speech while opposition to the right of being offensive is the case of PC being out of control.
As Orionskies pointed out the Internet has played a starring role in the offensive behaviour.
We now have a generation of keyword warriors who can state anything with impunity knowing they don't have to face the individuals they are attacking.
They now have the added protection of waving the "PC out of control" card when their behaviour is subject to scrutiny.
When Donald Trump did his disabled person imitation along with his other offensive and inflammatory remarks, he was appealing for the votes of these cowards.
As I mentioned in my previous post the term PC has undergone evolution (devolution) and goes beyond the exercise of political expediency such as the renaming of man hole covers as person hole covers.
These days PC and free speech go hand in hand, being offensive is a right of free speech while opposition to the right of being offensive is the case of PC being out of control.
As Orionskies pointed out the Internet has played a starring role in the offensive behaviour.
We now have a generation of keyword warriors who can state anything with impunity knowing they don't have to face the individuals they are attacking.
They now have the added protection of waving the "PC out of control" card when their behaviour is subject to scrutiny.
When Donald Trump did his disabled person imitation along with his other offensive and inflammatory remarks, he was appealing for the votes of these cowards.
The Internet has a lot to answer for.
Hi Steven.
Your observations are always spot on.
I often wonder how outspoken some folk would be in a face to face situation.
I realised when you mentioned Trumps impersonation that I hardley ever followed his performances and missed so much of his bad behaviour.
I do not understand how folk see PC as hurting free speech as some claim.
I do not understand why folk fail to be decent on the net.
Hiding behind a keyboard and being nasty is certainly the act of a coward.
Thank you for taking the time to bring me up to date.
Alex
I think sjastro's post on PC is well stated. On 'The Internet has a lot to answer for' and related, I think that the Internet is a powerful tool -it is how it is used rather than it itself. The sun is powerful, it is not a bad sun.
Many destructive-consequence (aka evil) doers do NOT so-called hide behind keyboards. They bully openly.
Many who have been or would be bullied have no voice unless in anonymity. So we need to keep them able, too. Please take care, about the notion of 'hiding' behind the keyboard. Beware the so-called "solution" that ends up closing down their voices! There's also a saying (sorry can't recall exact words) about how anonymity allows topics to be examined uncoloured by perceptions of the speaker.
The Internet, as in all mass communication means, is powerful (for positive use too). Any powers and any coup grab the mass-communication means first. The peaceful ones do not think about power, so are powerless. There are solutions, still to be worked out.
Last edited by Sol-Skysailor; 05-02-2017 at 03:37 PM.
Reason: On second thought, my chat might not add anything positive to the discussion. Post was:LOL Perhaps the term P has come to indicate: insincere or/and for own gain. ? [QUOTE: PC...........I
Sorry if unclear.
If you meant item 4 (post #121, on about page 7 unless earlier posts get deleted),
Yes, Trump is or has become or is viewed as the most powerful
because
we as human society have collectively created or allowed or flowed with the way.
In management ‘leadership role’, not only ‘leadership style’, if we go with ‘one person holds the power’ we will get that.
Been reading and puzzling that even the content of my first line “I think we must learn not to judge a person untried (and with care even if tried, because systems have flaws)“, that I thought underpins all values needing no fights, is something that pages of posts took to maybe bring one person around to it.
And the arguments at a *personal level (the word 'robust' sure will come up next)...... I have a feeling that our education systems, not meaning schools but the environment we evolve in, fail to ensure a rational logical and sound basis for interaction.
I can’t say ‘just annoying’, exactly because DT the person and the stage we place them on have been and are currently causing damages to individuals in whatever country –small matters too, others matter too.
(Personally, I shudder whenever I see DJT on the news, and I don't think he has many redeeming features, but, he is shaking up the Establishment....whether for good or bad is to be seen!)
Last edited by Clancy Lane; 05-02-2017 at 09:27 PM.
(Personally, I shudder whenever I see DJT on the news, and I don't think he has many redeeming features, but, he is shaking up the Establishment....whether for good or bad is to be seen!)
Phil, possibly the greatest threat the US nation has ever faced has just had their power increased by Trump. These people have sunk the US and the world into crippling debt, a foe far harder to defeat than any foreign enemy.
Thomas Jefferson said something to the effect that 'banking institutions are more dangerous to the nation than standing armies' and successive US leaders have given similar warnings.
Unfortunately the corporation operates in the shadows unseen by most.
Hitler was a true dictator and employed brutality, murder and fear. His power was greater than the law.
Trump is a bully that seems to be ruling by his own fears. He is not greater than the law and is unable to become so.
I think analogies between both brutes are apt in that Trump may cause global upheaval. However the US president is not all powerful, thankfully.
Many people in the world have the same fears about the same religious extremists, these fears are not unfounded. However, a political leader must rise above those fears and act according to law, thoughtfulness consideration and seek advice/guidance from advisers.
With all due respect Clive, if Ben wishes to accuse me of having extremist views, I don't think it's unreasonable for me to ask him to provide evidence of such. I also don't think it's unreasonable to challenge his false narrative.
As a lighting guy I do get your analogy (I just wish audio engineers from the 80's and 90's had similar thoughts, then my ears wouldn't be constantly ringing!), and I do apologise to all for being inflammatory, but when I'm attacked, I have a tendency to attack back.
As for agreeing with me or otherwise, that's fine. It bothers me not at all. If life were full of people agreeing with each other it would be very boring indeed.
I pity the man.
He is about my age and thinks he enjoys success and yet irrespective of what he does he has to work his but off.
Today I stayed in bed until 11-00 am and can do what ever I please with the rest of the day.
I bet his twitter play is his only joy.
I have had a pretty wife but would now rather the peace I enjoy without one.
The more money you accumulate the harder you work to manage it.
The more possesions you have the longer the lists become to organise maintenance.
I would not change position with him for anything.
I hope the world survives and the fears of what he will stuff up are unfounded.
Alex
Since he came to power there have been quite a few professional and armchair psychologists who have analysed Trump and concluded he is a narcissist.
Perhaps we should more concerned about Trump being a psychopath.
The term psychopath conjures up visions of serial killers but has a more general connotation of individuals who lack empathy and are ruthless in achieving their ambitions.
Psychopathic behaviour is apparently quite common for high flyers in the business world.
Now we have a potential psychopath who holds the nuclear launch codes and doesn't need Congress approval to authorize a nuclear war.
As one Republican adviser to George W Bush commented foreign leaders need to be very careful in not angering Trump.
As one Republican adviser to George W Bush commented foreign leaders need to be very careful in not angering Trump.
And he was being deadly serious............
Deadly serious my R's. At best, this will do absolutely nothing to change the behaviour of any of the other nuclearly armed psychopaths, whether existing or soon-to-be. At worst, well...
I have been a narcissist and can say it is a terrible condition to live with, rather for those around you to live with. People tend to go along with you for fear of angering you whatever but the result is you receive no input from those around you.
Its not that you won't listen its more that you intimidate folk such that that simply don't stand in your way.
In the role of president one could run by using advisors.
The fact is you could surround yourself with the best, you don't even have to present your own ideas just select from the various inputs of your advisors.
However there is something about the condition that has folk neglecting input other than an offering of what they think you want to hear.
So I believe he may have a problem getting advice.
Probably he could take advice but the condition often leaves folk around you unable to contribute.
He would probably say he does not want yes men but the condition creates the mood where they only appear.
The other problem folk will, if they will, act to implement what they think you think is a good idea, which often is not what you would do.
And this type of person is inclined to encourage any personal initiative because few demonstrate it..they find it rare and novel.
I have grown out of my problem so I can feel sorry for him as I suspect I know how he views the world.
The condition makes you feel you alone are capable and those around you tend to reinforce your view.
Exterior criticism does not work cause one tends to believe you are far superior and so those views are not taken on board.
I think he cares mainly because folk around him don't stand up but fall in behind.
Who knows I don't but I can not resist the urge to put in my two cents.
He has the ability to beat others that leaves one somewhat arrogant and uninformed.
And Steven, I mean this, I hope Trump can meet someone like you who has courage and rational thought who is prepared to face up and inform the man. There are few who can deal with someone who has the condition ...I hope you understand what I mean.
Alex
