Trump asks U.S. judge to force Twitter to restart his account

[LostinThought]

The problem that the right-wing faces is that most consumers find their ideas to be abhorrent, and corporations play to consumer sentiment. It's a free market, but you all have to paint it as coercion.

Strange, no one has mentioned right-wing ideas yet. Nor that they are "abhorrent".
So when a person is banned for.. say, posting direct CDC information. What about those ideas are abhorrent, and require banning?

 

[JasperL]

I am uncertain what outright lying you refer to. It is too vague a reference.

Now you know how it's difficult to have a debate when one party doesn't adequately define the issue or argument being made. Remind me when you've EVER in this thread been specific about 'corruption' or the means used to brainwash the public, corrupt them, etc.? Oh, right, never, despite repeated requests to clarify your assertions.

So, no, I did not neglect to mention something I knew about. Note that a great deal of lying (misrepresentation, distortion) goes on in the do-called Left-oriented media.

Which so-called left media? That's too vague a reference to even consider. It's "but mom, they did it too!" in prose form.

So I operate from the understanding that lies (as I define them) are common currency.

Of course, both sides and all that.

If that is so, the task is not to unravel lies by one faction, but to unravel general lying.

I do not accept the term ‘Trumpism’. It is not a valid term in my view. It is, I believe, another demonstration on your part of fallaciousness. That term is highly rhetorical and expresses your bias.

And yet there is a vast movement that is devoted to Trump, versus the GOP certainly, or even the 'conservative' movement, and so it's appropriate to use a unique term to describe that movement.

Because the term cannot because in sound, fair discourse, I passed over it.

You may succeed in challenging a fool who does not notice your sophistries, but I have an intellectual reputation to uphold!

And you may succeed in convincing other fools that you're not condemning the 'sophistries' then engaging in the same sophistries, sometimes in the same post.

 

[Alizia Tyler]

That is true. And it is the goal of every agitprop operation in the intelligence world. Including and especially the Russians campaigns that were run for Brexit, and the campaign that the Russians were running in American right wing social media since 2013, and accelerating with the promotion of Trump and Trumpism.

I do grasp that what you assert here you regard, you really believe, are absolute, decided truths. You seem to be making a group of declarations here. I doubt you could absolutely verify them, and as you know they have been used in political and social warfare (lies and distortions) about Trump's presidency, his associations, etc. It is these sorts of accusations that circulate today.

There are no conservative on this board anywhere who ever once expressed any outrage whatsoever when their media lies to them. Indeed, they go right back for more. Fox lies because it knows it has an uncritical and poorly informed audience. Talk radio always did. It may not be a news source, but a lot of its audience thinks it is.

Your accusation now is far too general. But you operate with a pre-established conclusion. It is bad argument. You also imply that they not only accept lies, and must know they are lies, but deliberately 'go back for more'. These are the assertions that power your views.

I do not necessarily accept any of those assertions.

 

[JasperL]

I do grasp that what you assert here you regard, you really believe, are absolute, decided truths. You seem to be making a group of declarations here. I doubt you could absolutely verify them, and as you know they have been used in political and social warfare (lies and distortions) about Trump's presidency, his associations, etc. It is these sorts of accusations that circulate today.

Well, you've made similar assertions and have yet to even clearly identify who engages in things like attempts to corrupt the public, etc. Here you use the passive again to say, "they have been used....about Trump's presidency, but do not name 'they' or what tactics 'they' used, then "it is these" (what is it or these) sorts of undefined 'accusations' that circulate.

Your accusation now is far too general. But you operate with a pre-established conclusion. It is bad argument. You also imply that they not only accept lies, and must know they are lies, but deliberately 'go back for more'. These are the assertions that power your views.

I do not necessarily accept any of those assertions.

LOL, hilarious stuff. That you don't see that finger pointing right back at nearly every argument you've made in this thread is pretty dang funny.

 

[Alizia Tyler]

Remind me when you've EVER in this thread been specific about 'corruption' or the means used to brainwash the public, corrupt them, etc.?

Yes, because I mention ideas in the course of more general assertions. What I said was:

But I have not yet made a comment in respect to the media that you refer to. Now I will. Our nation is in the midst of ideological wars. Ideological wars involve *categories of the mind*. Discourse and the purpose of training in use of reason -- educational formation, paideia -- is essential to the formation of a capable citizen with ordered mental categories. But that 'citizen' is also the field (of battle) that is fought over. The fight turns to devious means to influence that citizen. A non-prepared citizen, a badly-prepared citizen, is the victim of groups of people and power she or he never sees, and never sees clearly.​

​

It is imperative to corrupt that citizen so that she and he are susceptible to the lying and fallacious rhetoric of marketing propaganda and by extension political propaganda. The corruption of the citizen results in the corruption of the political body generally. And we live in a time where *corruption*, on all levels, shows itself plainly.​

​

I have referred to the corruption of the individual, and made reference in regard to Christian categories, and I have also said that corrupt citizens then become 'infection on the social body' and this infection becomes generalized. It is not that I did not explain, if abbreviatedly, what I mean.

I have all sorts of ideas and observations about corruption.

 

[Alizia Tyler]

Which so-called left media?

NYTs, various news channels. What other major media that leans to the Left would one refer to?

 

[Alizia Tyler]

Of course, both sides and all that.

It is more than 'all that'. It has to do, in my view, with a general cultural environment of people who do not seem to be able to distinguish a lie, or a misrepresentation, from a truth. That is why I refer to 'dumbing-down'. The inability to think properly.

It is not a simply topic. The reason people invest in lies is not simple.

 

[Alizia Tyler]

That you don't see that finger pointing right back at nearly every argument you've made in this thread is pretty dang funny.

Except not for nefarious reasons. And for sound reasons based on a grasp of 'the facts'.

 

[Alizia Tyler]

And yet there is a vast movement that is devoted to Trump, versus the GOP certainly, or even the 'conservative' movement, and so it's appropriate to use a unique term to describe that movement.

But in that sense 'Trump' represents something unique to many people, all over the globe. If you said something like 'the rise of Trump' or as I say 'the advent of Trump' I would agree with you perhaps more. At the same time I think there are people who have defined Trump or clarified a platform -- Steve Bannon is one of these. So you might also say Bannonism . . .

 

[LostinThought]

When you say typically protected I think you mean legally protected. Yes, blacks, gays and women are federally protected from discrimination by any business that falls under the category of public accommodation. Unfortunately, being a bitch ass rent boy cuckservative isn't a federally protected class. Boo hoo.

Oh so this is the "master debater" that I've read about on the reviews.

It's good to see that they were correct about your, quality of debate... or lack thereof.

Now I just have to see if the warnings of racist comments, come through as being true as well.

Only time will tell.

 

[Alizia Tyler]

Here you use the passive again to say, "they have been used....about Trump's presidency, but do not name 'they' or what tactics 'they' used, then "it is these" (what is it or these) sorts of undefined 'accusations' that circulate.

It simply seems clear to me that, indeed, they have been used.

 

[JasperL]

Yes, because I mention ideas in the course of more general assertions. What I said was:

But I have not yet made a comment in respect to the media that you refer to. Now I will. Our nation is in the midst of ideological wars. Ideological wars involve *categories of the mind*. Discourse and the purpose of training in use of reason -- educational formation, paideia -- is essential to the formation of a capable citizen with ordered mental categories. But that 'citizen' is also the field (of battle) that is fought over. The fight turns to devious means to influence that citizen. A non-prepared citizen, a badly-prepared citizen, is the victim of groups of people and power she or he never sees, and never sees clearly.​

​

It is imperative to corrupt that citizen so that she and he are susceptible to the lying and fallacious rhetoric of marketing propaganda and by extension political propaganda. The corruption of the citizen results in the corruption of the political body generally. And we live in a time where *corruption*, on all levels, shows itself plainly.​

​

I have referred to the corruption of the individual, and made reference in regard to Christian categories, and I have also said that corrupt citizens then become 'infection on the social body' and this infection becomes generalized. It is not that I did not explain, if abbreviatedly, what I mean.

I have all sorts of ideas and observations about corruption.

“It is imperative to corrupt….”

Can you lay off the passive voice? Who finds it imperative? Corrupt how using what means?

 

[JasperL]

It simply seems clear to me that, indeed, they have been used.

“They have been used….” By whom? Passive is again your friend for muddled arguments.

Examples? Or do we just take your beliefs as the gospel and accept because you assert it?

 

[reflechissez]

“They have been used….” By whom? Passive is again your friend for muddled arguments.

Examples? Or do we just take your beliefs as the gospel and accept because you assert it?

She does that all the time. I wish she would stay in her slavery thread. Eventually, this thread will also die a slow death.

 

[trouble13]

On the basis of your argument, any DP user that is a contributor could sue the board owner for being banned.

No, DP isn't monetizing our personal data and they are not violating their contract terms.

 

[trouble13]

Is this assessment based on your extensive legal experience?

Yes, yes it is.

 

[Luce]

No, DP isn't monetizing our personal data and they are not violating their contract terms.

No, but they are accepting money in exchange for an intangible (you get a nice little banner).

The principle is the same.

 

[Master Debator]

Oh so this is the "master debater" that I've read about on the reviews.

It's good to see that they were correct about your, quality of debate... or lack thereof.

Now I just have to see if the warnings of racist comments, come through as being true as well.

Only time will tell.

What makes me a master is my ability to multitask. I can clown white wingers while also making irrefutable arguments.

 

[JasperL]

But in that sense 'Trump' represents something unique to many people, all over the globe. If you said something like 'the rise of Trump' or as I say 'the advent of Trump' I would agree with you perhaps more. At the same time I think there are people who have defined Trump or clarified a platform -- Steve Bannon is one of these. So you might also say Bannonism . . .

So it’s the term, not that a term was used. Got it.

 

[bearpoker]

Oh so this is the "master debater" that I've read about on the reviews.

It's good to see that they were correct about your, quality of debate... or lack thereof.

Now I just have to see if the warnings of racist comments, come through as being true as well.

Only time will tell.

What reviews might you be referring to?

 

[reflechissez]

Yes, yes it is.

I'm sure.

 

[Lursa]

TC is quite successful at certain moments and I tremendously appreciate him. At other moments he descends into ‘emotionally infused assertions’ (something like this) and plays to his audience.

As with so many there is something solid in his discourse, but also demagogic.

Holy cow, another one demonstrating "an ounce of pretention is worth a pound of manure." Steel Magnolias

 

[Alizia Tyler]

Can you lay off the passive voice? Who finds it imperative? Corrupt how using what means?

The passive voice exists for a reason, and is useful for reasons. I am referring to general things. And for that reason did not use an active, accusatory voice.

You will need to demonstrate that you read, and understood, the post in which I mentioned Kupelian and 'The Marketing of Evil'. If you show me that you grasp, fairly, basic Christian concepts, then if you really want to we can talk further about 'corruption' in that sense.

Similarly, if you cannot grasp with the references to Weaver, that advertising speech is a coercive and often manipulating means of communication, which desires specific results and sets out to get them, often by whatever means are necessary, I believe that I can help you, to the degree possible, in better understanding the idea.

Do you understand nothing about why advertising is often described, philosophically and ethically, as manipulating?

 

[Alizia Tyler]

“They have been used….” By whom? Passive is again your friend for muddled arguments.

Examples? Or do we just take your beliefs as the gospel and accept because you assert it?

If the idea that I have introduced interests you, and if you think it worthy, then fair questions can be asked and will be responded to.

The question "do we just take your beliefs as the gospel and accept because you assert it?" is really silly. You obviously do not imagine that I will answer 'yes'. So this is again a wasteful and non-productive line to pursue.

I also often say 'I suggest thus-and-such'. I am a Latina and we have somewhat indirect ways to go about things. To suggest, to allude, to propose in indirect terms is considered more polite.

 

[Lursa]

The passive voice exists for a reason, and is useful for reasons. I am referring to general things. And for that reason did not use an active, accusatory voice.

Active voice does not = accusatory. It's more engaging and effective. It creates a more clear image of who is doing what.

So now we know you are just bluffing your way thru most of this. Altho I dont think some of us really doubted that.