Because they humiliate themselves when they try?
Disappointed in the level of debate here.
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
Because they humiliate themselves when they try?
zappasguitar
Well-known member
Well, ya see, it's like this.
You and I?
We have what's known as a "triple digit IQ".
ILA, FreeDUMB, Big Phoney and Truth Deflector's IQ's topped out at "room temperature".
So you say.
tekkychick
New member
Cawacko you're one of the good guys even though you're a rightie.*I learn things from you because you ask questions and present your comments in a respectful manner. You're the kind of rightie that gives me an iota of hope for the rest.
*Not intended to be damning with faint praise.
I agree, and glad he got the humor of your footnote!!!
That's very generous, its 72 degrees in my office today!
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
true, but you are used to it being at your expense having grown up in Ohio and gone to USC... so you have far more practice at 'taking it' than others... especially when in reference to your professor
Oh look, Tom the Tourist is getting all literary!
Let's go a little bit deeper into that literary genre shall we Tom the Tourist?
"The most elementary definition of ideology is probably the well-known phrase from Marx's Capital: "Sie wissen das nicht, aber sie tun es" ("they do not know it, but they are doing it"). The very concept of ideology implies a kind of basic, constitutive naïveté: the misrecognition of its own presuppositions, of its own effective conditions, a distance, a divergence between so-called social reality and our distorted representation, our false consciousness of it. That is why such a 'naive consciousness' can be submitted to a critical-ideological procedure. The aim of this procedure is to lead the naïve ideological consciousness to a point at which it can recognize its own effective conditions, the social reality that it is distorting, and through this very act dissolve itself. In the more sophisticated versions of the critics of ideology -that developed by the Frankfurt School, for example — it is not just a question of seeing things (that is, social reality) as they 'really are', of throwing away the distorting spectacles of ideology; the main point is to see how the reality itself cannot reproduce itself without this so-called ideological mystification. The mask is not simply hiding the real state of things; the ideological distortion is written into its very essence.
"We find, then, the paradox of a being which can reproduce itself only in so far as it is misrecognized and overlooked: the moment we see it 'as it really is', this being dissolves itself into nothingness or, more precisely, it changes into another kind of reality. That is why we must avoid the simple metaphors of demasking, of throwing away the veils which are supposed to hide the naked reality.
"But all this is already well known: it is the classic concept of ideology as 'false consciousness', misrecognition of the social reality which is part of this reality itself. Our question is: Does this concept of ideology as a naive consciousness still apply to today's world? Is it still operating today?"
"Cynicism as a Form of Ideology" from SLAVOJ ŽIŽEK. THE SUBLIME OBJECT OF IDEOLOGY (LONDON; NEW YORK: VERSO, 1989), PP. 28-30.
In other words, “Žižek would say that upholding ‘individuality,’ ‘freedom,’ ‘justice,’ and even ‘rights’ by the ‘ruling culture’ is cynical.
“It is a mask. Žižek would say that they all don’t really believe in these things but act ‘as if’ they do. And for his reason, they are all cynical: ‘the model of cynical wisdom is to conceive probity, integrity, as a superior form of dishonesty, and morals a supreme form of profligacy, and truth as the most effective form of a lie’ (30).”
“For Žižek, cynicism is knowing that you are lying while acting ‘as if’ you are telling the truth. This masking operation, for Žižek, discloses a near universal dishonesty that touches everything that advances freedom, justice, equality, etc. According to his logic, we act as if these ideals, principles, etc are real when, in fact, we know they are not.”
I guess it really comes down to what you term "cynical" or how you define your terms, doesn't it Tom the Tourist! And by all means let's start discussing things in a more intellectual, educated and in-depth manner because so many people here seem to want to do that. In short, let's get down! Let's talk about how we got here instead of making stupid statements like these:
"Carbon dioxide is portrayed as harmful. But there isn't even one study that can be produced that shows that carbon dioxide is a harmful gas.'' ~ Rep. Michelle Bachmann
Or:
''The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians.'' ~ Pat Robertson
http://www.egs.edu/faculty/slavoj-zizek/articles/cynicism-as-a-form-of-ideology/
http://schlemielintheory.com/2013/04/30/zizeks-comic-dilemma-kynicism-or-cynicism/
http://thestir.cafemom.com/in_the_news/109323/Top_50_Dumbest_Conservative_Quotes
Last edited:
zappasguitar
Well-known member
My new theory is that the more intelligent conservatives are so embarrassed by the direction of the Republican and especially the Tea Party they are embarrassed to discuss politics anymore. Those representing their point of view have taken positions that are impossible for them to defend, so they stick to discussing the weather and sports.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
/shrugs.....an opposing theory might involve the activities of Howie, OCA and Maineman turning this board into a platform to attack another board, inciting a response from several folks here who post at both, eventually escalating into Howie's ban and him sending a flock of shit-stirrers here to cause trouble.....
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
You're kidding, right??
Guess not. Explain it.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
you think Bijou just happened along?......
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
to follow up on this peeps....it's "just plain politics", that's all this place should be. Meaning a spirited debate, even a RANCOROUS (bitter/hostile) debate is OK, as long as it's over IDEAS, and not personalities.
Especially not personal attacks. It just defeats the whole purpose of a board, when we don't hold ourselves to some kind of standard.
We blame the mods (some of us) - and i'm not part of this conflict, so I won't blame anyone.
I do know this whole episode could have turned out better, with a little more goodwill, and a little more personal restaint.
My 2.cents worth.
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
Yes, if only us right wingers were like the left wingers. I mean we are always calling other right wingers Tea Baggers and things like that
