Scapegoats for Secular Progressives

[Greta]

Nick is 100% correct, as always. Truly an unrecognised philosophical genius.

To prove Nick's excellent point, I once met a secularist and he was evil incarnate - a cannibal who raped and ate babies afterwards. Conclusive proof! He told me that his god, The Great Beast, orders all of its converts to do this. Apparently there are secular covens everywhere, run by Obama, his Reptilian succubi and the Clinton clan, and they are dedicated to complete state control and the destruction of all traces of humanity in anticipation of the return of the Great Beast's overlord, Satan.

Lacking guidance from the Holy Bible, of course, secularists have no problem with mass murder, cannibalism,infanticide, torture, rape and humiliation - all atrocities are desirable for secularists because they are intrinsically evil, with flawed souls.

This is why almost all deaths are caused by secularists and almost none by religious people. Oh yes, some will say "what about the middle east" but they miss the point - they are not true religious people but evil secularists pretending to be religious. In truth, hardly anyone is properly religious, aside from Nick and precious few others. The rest are just secularist wolves posing as religious sheep.

Secularists will only stop once they have scoured the Earth of all life. So yea verily, listen to Nick, for he understands these things far more deeply than anyone.

[Sir-Sister-of-Suck]

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand Nick_A. His incentives are extremely subtle, and without at least a solid grasp of secular progressivism, most of his remarks will go over a typical reader's head.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand Nick_A. His incentives are extremely subtle, and without at least a solid grasp of secular progressivism, most of his remarks will go over a typical reader's head.

Is this a joke?

[uwot]

Freedom requires accepting people as people, as individuals, and not judged as parts of collectives.

Given the "secular progressive" collective that you have fabricated, are we to take it that you think freedom is a bad thing?

[uwot]

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand Nick_A.

Do you mean as high as yours?

His incentives are extremely subtle...

If you call crass religious and social conservatism "subtle".

...and without at least a solid grasp of secular progressivism...

If you read Nick_A, you will discover that 'secular progressivism' is anything Simone Weil didn't say.

...most of his remarks will go over a typical reader's head.

Ah. So if we disagree with Nick_A and his White Knight, it is because we don't understand "secular progressivism", we lack subtlety and our IQ is less than Sir-Sister-of-Suck's.

[Greta]

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand Nick_A. His incentives are extremely subtle, and without at least a solid grasp of secular progressivism, most of his remarks will go over a typical reader's head.

Exactly. You don't talk to Nick. You listen to him. The man's enlarged my mind. He's a poet-warrior in the classic sense. I mean, sometimes you'll say hello to him, right? And he'll just walk right by you, and he won't even notice you. And suddenly he'll grab you, and he'll metaphorically throw you in a corner, and he'll say, "Do you know that Trump is the middle word in life?".

He can be terrible, he can be mean, he can be right. He's fighting the war. He's a great man. I mean, I wish I had words ... (which is why I had to borrow from John Milius and Francis Coppola)

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I suppose you have to have read him extensively to appreciate him

[vegetariantaxidermy]

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand Nick_A.

Do you mean as high as yours?

[Greta]

I suppose you have to have read him extensively to appreciate him

Curl up in bed with his writings and a few bottles of Scotch and some MDMA pills and I'm sure he will eventually start making sense to you.

[Nick_A]

Why this obsession with me? Why is it that the weakest minds are always the loudest?

“Strong minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, weak minds discuss people.” ~Socrates

OK, so they don’t understand the question. For those still open to it, this may help. Secular progressives judge collectives. Some become scapegoats. The only individual they recognize is themselves or respected S-Ps. The Greta types prefer to discuss me. If you think it is a worthy discussion, we can avoid the Greta types and explain why we are primarily drawn to either collectivism or individualism

https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/is ... lectivism/

The fundamental political conflict in America today is, as it has been for a century, individualism vs. collectivism. Does the individual’s life belong to him—or does it belong to the group, the community, society, or the state? With government expanding ever more rapidly—seizing and spending more and more of our money on “entitlement” programs and corporate bailouts, and intruding on our businesses and lives in increasingly onerous ways—the need for clarity on this issue has never been greater. Let us begin by defining the terms at hand.
Individualism is the idea that the individual’s life belongs to him and that he has an inalienable right to live it as he sees fit, to act on his own judgment, to keep and use the product of his effort, and to pursue the values of his choosing. It’s the idea that the individual is sovereign, an end in himself, and the fundamental unit of moral concern. This is the ideal that the American Founders set forth and sought to establish when they drafted the Declaration and the Constitution and created a country in which the individual’s rights to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness were to be recognized and protected.

Collectivism is the idea that the individual’s life belongs not to him but to the group or society of which he is merely a part, that he has no rights, and that he must sacrifice his values and goals for the group’s “greater good.” According to collectivism, the group or society is the basic unit of moral concern, and the individual is of value only insofar as he serves the group. As one advocate of this idea puts it: “Man has no rights except those which society permits him to enjoy. From the day of his birth until the day of his death society allows him to enjoy certain so-called rights and deprives him of others; not . . . because society desires especially to favor or oppress the individual, but because its own preservation, welfare, and happiness are the prime considerations.”1…………………………………

[uwot]

“Strong minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, weak minds discuss people.” ~Socrates

Socrates didn't say that.

OK, so they don’t understand the question.

By "they", presumably you mean some collective you feel qualified to judge.

Secular progressives judge collectives.

Which makes you a "Secular progressive".

[Nick_A]

“Strong minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, weak minds discuss people.” ~Socrates

Socrates didn't say that.

OK, so they don’t understand the question.

By "they", presumably you mean some collective you feel qualified to judge.

Secular progressives judge collectives.

Which makes you a "Secular progressive".

If you don't know the qualities that define seculqr progressives as a collective, how can you accuse me of being a secular progressive?

[uwot]

...how can you accuse me of being a secular progressive?

I didn't. It follows from your own definition and behaviour.

[Greta]

The Greta types prefer to discuss me. If you think it is a worthy discussion, we can avoid the Greta types and explain why we are primarily drawn to either collectivism or individualism

How typical of your dishonesty. So you won't tell "the gallery" of the hundreds of posts over the years I wasted trying to seriously engage you, as though there might be some substance beneath your bigotry. Meanwhile you never once addressed issues raised by me or anyone else.

You either own a conversation or it's a fight, and you cannot admit how reflexively manipulative and dishonest you are, like your hero Trump.

As for your OP, it is so shallow that there's no actual content to address. It says nothing of collectivism or individualism - broad brush stereotyping used to abuse groups of people you hate is not an observation of collectivism. It is just one more assertion of your philosophical naivete and political and theistic prejudices.

You don't seem to have the slightest knowledge or understanding of what collectivism or individualism actually are, what they mean, or how those dynamics may play out on large scales in different circumstances. To you they are just ideological toys of your conservative and misogynist tribe that you serve with far greater enthusiasm than your god.

I'll leave you to your kindergarten philosophy class now.

[-1-]

The Greta types prefer to discuss me. If you think it is a worthy discussion, we can avoid the Greta types and explain why we are primarily drawn to either collectivism or individualism

I think you are a type, Nick_A. You are the Nick_A type. Although I admit that "the Greta types" rolls off the tongue easier than "the Nick_A types".

It's the underscore that keeps throwing me off. There is an undercurrent of under-handedness with that underscore.

Maybe you are a Nickel-Cadmium Type A battery, Nick_A. The same type that drives the Energizing Bunny type.