Total Posts:7|Showing Posts:1-7
Jump to topic:

Outrage Politics in our Society

Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2016 3:43:18 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
About equally on both sides of the spectrum, there's been a prevalence of what I call outrage politics. In the context of presidential elections, outrage politics is making a big deal about some mundane, insignificant, and often innocent thing that a politician on "the other side" has said or done, in some petty attempt to find reasons why the other side's candidate cannot be allowed to take office, or making a bigger deal over the other politician's shortcomings than is warranted. Outrage politics never stem from any actual moral conviction that what said politician did is reprehensible. Rather, the speaker is trying to talk himself (and people who share his views) into hating or continuing to hate said politician, and therefore into voting for X candidate on election day.
This manifests itself, for example, in an obsession over Hillary's supposed wrongdoings in Benghazi or over comments she made blaming the attack on the "Innocence of Muslims" movie, or over fabricated conspiracy theories about her murdering Clinton's former mistresses. Republicans are just as guilty of outrage politics as Democrats are; I'm not going to pretend otherwise. I'm somewhat guilty of it myself.
However, it also manifests itself in many innocent comments that Trump has made, such as how Democrats became "outraged" whenever he jokingly said the election shouldn't be held because he's going to win anyway, or how, whenever Trump made an off-colour period remark directed towards some woman (Megan Kelly, if I'm not mistaken), Democrats used this to make Trump into some kind of misogynist boogeyman (his "grab them by the p**sy" remark might've actually warranted some degree of outrage, but I digress). The democrat establishment tends to take his words way out of proportion and way out of context, to make mountains out of molehills, as part of an effort to stir up X demographic bloc into voting against Trump. A recent example of this is how Elizabeth Warren, speaking to a crowd of women, tried to convince them that Trump's "nasty woman" remark was, somehow, an attack on women everywhere, and that they needed to stick it to him by voting for Hillary.

I will say this once, because it shouldn't even have to be said: those people who engage in outrage politics are taking human morality, the ability for human beings to discern between right and wrong, the backbone of all civilisations that have ever existed, and warping it beyond recognition in order to win an election. They make it a tool for their own gain, not anything that has intrinsic value for all men. They are behaving in a truly despicable manner, and in doing so they are throwing away their own human decency. They claim to have values where they have none. That is all.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2016 3:56:53 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
Here is something of a litmus test to determine when outrage politics are in play: whenever X candidate's words are being denounced, ask yourself this question. What is the background of the speaker? Did X speaker already oppose said candidate before the comments being denounced were made?
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2016 4:03:15 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
Either respond calmly, or respond out of anger. Do not respond angrily while calm.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
triangle.128k
Posts: 3,673
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2016 4:06:40 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/28/2016 3:43:18 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
About equally on both sides of the spectrum, there's been a prevalence of what I call outrage politics. In the context of presidential elections, outrage politics is making a big deal about some mundane, insignificant, and often innocent thing that a politician on "the other side" has said or done, in some petty attempt to find reasons why the other side's candidate cannot be allowed to take office, or making a bigger deal over the other politician's shortcomings than is warranted. Outrage politics never stem from any actual moral conviction that what said politician did is reprehensible. Rather, the speaker is trying to talk himself (and people who share his views) into hating or continuing to hate said politician, and therefore into voting for X candidate on election day.
This manifests itself, for example, in an obsession over Hillary's supposed wrongdoings in Benghazi or over comments she made blaming the attack on the "Innocence of Muslims" movie, or over fabricated conspiracy theories about her murdering Clinton's former mistresses. Republicans are just as guilty of outrage politics as Democrats are; I'm not going to pretend otherwise. I'm somewhat guilty of it myself.
However, it also manifests itself in many innocent comments that Trump has made, such as how Democrats became "outraged" whenever he jokingly said the election shouldn't be held because he's going to win anyway, or how, whenever Trump made an off-colour period remark directed towards some woman (Megan Kelly, if I'm not mistaken), Democrats used this to make Trump into some kind of misogynist boogeyman (his "grab them by the p**sy" remark might've actually warranted some degree of outrage, but I digress). The democrat establishment tends to take his words way out of proportion and way out of context, to make mountains out of molehills, as part of an effort to stir up X demographic bloc into voting against Trump. A recent example of this is how Elizabeth Warren, speaking to a crowd of women, tried to convince them that Trump's "nasty woman" remark was, somehow, an attack on women everywhere, and that they needed to stick it to him by voting for Hillary.

I will say this once, because it shouldn't even have to be said: those people who engage in outrage politics are taking human morality, the ability for human beings to discern between right and wrong, the backbone of all civilisations that have ever existed, and warping it beyond recognition in order to win an election. They make it a tool for their own gain, not anything that has intrinsic value for all men. They are behaving in a truly despicable manner, and in doing so they are throwing away their own human decency. They claim to have values where they have none. That is all.

+1

This is really making media headlines and political discussion boring nowadays. There's nothing newsworthy or controversial ever discussed anymore, it's always just these "outrage politics" as you described over the stupidest little things.

I honestly can't wait for this election to be over; this election has been an absolute mess.
Bennett91
Posts: 4,237
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2016 4:38:22 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/28/2016 3:56:53 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Here is something of a litmus test to determine when outrage politics are in play: whenever X candidate's words are being denounced, ask yourself this question. What is the background of the speaker? Did X speaker already oppose said candidate before the comments being denounced were made?

What about Republicans who would support Trump, and Democrats who would support Clinton - that denouce the candidates? Does that make their criticism more that valid?
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2016 5:18:04 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/28/2016 4:38:22 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 10/28/2016 3:56:53 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Here is something of a litmus test to determine when outrage politics are in play: whenever X candidate's words are being denounced, ask yourself this question. What is the background of the speaker? Did X speaker already oppose said candidate before the comments being denounced were made?

What about Republicans who would support Trump, and Democrats who would support Clinton - that denouce the candidates? Does that make their criticism more that valid?

More so, yes. Sometimes, however, they're simply trying to distance themselves and perhaps their party at large from the fallout caused by the behaviour, words, or proposals of their party's candidate.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Bennett91
Posts: 4,237
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2016 5:22:38 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/28/2016 5:18:04 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/28/2016 4:38:22 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 10/28/2016 3:56:53 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Here is something of a litmus test to determine when outrage politics are in play: whenever X candidate's words are being denounced, ask yourself this question. What is the background of the speaker? Did X speaker already oppose said candidate before the comments being denounced were made?

What about Republicans who would support Trump, and Democrats who would support Clinton - that denouce the candidates? Does that make their criticism more that valid?

More so, yes. Sometimes, however, they're simply trying to distance themselves and perhaps their party at large from the fallout caused by the behaviour, words, or proposals of their party's candidate.

Doesn't distancing themselves from more deplorable comments, Trump being the prime example, just show how truly wrong those comment are? If he's says such horrid things that even his own party members have to escape the vortex of his ignorance doesn't it show how ignorant and out of line the comments are? Call it political self preservation, but that just proves the the point of how much a political threat Trump is to the GOP and I would argue common decency in general.