"Moral Truth and Objective Truth vs. Perceptions and Subjectivity."
This is beyond intellectual laziness. This is offensive.
Dennis Prager is a convenient idiot. The Conservative Movement in the US has been spearheaded by convenient idiots for so long now that we have no incentive to discuss their message. They are cooking stone soup every fucking day.
Obama's speech on the grand jury decision yesterday in Ferguson bothers us because it insulted our intelligence. Intelligent people may or may not be liberal, but they aren't stupid. Obama should not be afraid to speak truth when the underlying assumption is that he is a fool.
The intellectual wing of the US Conservative Movement left the cocktail party long ago, and we've been left standing next to Dennis Prager.
Fuck Dennis Prager.
This whole paragraph, like what the fuck. How are you not able to recognize that labeling behavior traits as belonging to a racial class is racist? Like, so I guess "white behavior" involves "not being charged with and prosecuted for committing crimes"? LOL Like, why are we even listening to the voice of someone who does not get discriminated against when we are talking about whether discrimination occurs?Many blacks see racism almost everywhere -- especially in arrest, conviction and incarceration rates, and in white police interactions with blacks. On the other hand, whites (specifically, whites who are not on the left) think that white racism has largely been conquered, and therefore blacks' disproportionately high arrest and conviction rates are the result of black behavior, particularly the high out-of-wedlock birth rate that has deprived the great majority of black children of fathers, not white racism.
specifically, whites who are not on the left
To him objective truth is what he believes as a conservative Christian white man. So the liberal whites, blacks and certain other denominations of Christians are incorrect, misguided people fit to be derided for not holding the same powerful, personal convictions as him. See? Objectivity.
White supremacy's insidious nature latches on to the Dunning–Kruger effected mediocrity that white people have gotten fat on in 300 years. We have gotten fat swallowing the stripped and stolen artifacts of slavery, Jim Crow, and the long tail of a de jure and then de facto apartheid states.
Why don’t I sense such animosity towards other “slave” traders that go back in history far beyond the “white guys” you allude to. Slavery has been around long before England and the US ever engaged in it to such a large degree (and it is immoral and wrong nonetheless no matter who does it). Some of the earliest were middle eastern which is neither fully “black” or “white”, and the early slave traders were black on black traders selling to the “white” guy (all guilty IMHO). Did “white” guys profit wrongly from slavery; yes, is the resounding answer. Do black guys profit today from slavery, especially in the African continent; yes, is the resounding answer. Why don’t I hear equal indignation over the cruelty, genocide, and brutality commonly practiced there? Where is the outcry from the American pundits over this as well as any wrongs that may occur on our own soil? Let’s not forget that a main proponent that helped end the slave trade in England was William Wilberforce (an English “white” guy) and the likes of John Adams (an English/American “white” guy) and a whole lot of other “white” guys and “black guys” working together to end slavery. What about all those "white" guys who died (by the thousands) bringing an end to slavery in the Civil War (every see the movie Glory)? What about all those "preachers" (the right you allude to as well) who preached against slavery to their own peril?It was also what could be considered those on the “right” (Republicans) who helped pass civil rights legislation and anti-discrimination legislation in the 1950’s and 1960’s. It was a “Republican” who issued the “Emancipation Proclamation”. So all those on the “right” are NOT those who don’t understand and don’t have a “clue” and to allude to that affect only shows one’s own bias and predisposed “judgmentalism” towards those who may differ . Mr. Prager certainly does not represent “all conservative thought” as the title tract alludes to any more than all those on the “left” are immoral or unethical (which is also not true). Bunching all those on the “right” as morons because they differ in opinion is just as mistaken as bunching all those on the “left” as morons because they differ in opinion as well. My concern, in today’s climate, is that civil discourse seems to be a disappearing art, and we seem to be devolving into a factious society where groups are pitted against groups: black against white, rich against poor, male against female, heterosexual against homosexual, young against old, left against right, etc. ad nauseam. It is the Saul Alinsky doctrine of fragmenting people into opposing factions that “war and fight” each other and demand for group rights instead of what is good for the country. We lose the art of discussion and end up with name calling and expletives, name calling and fail to explore both the symptoms (many times mistaken for the root causes) and causes, and then find solutions. It makes me wonder if we could ever arrive at a Constitution in today’s world after reading both the Federalist and Anti-Federalist positions and how they expressed their postulates. I could find just as ludicrous examples of someone on the “left” as well, but it would be a mistake to bundle them up as the whole of the “left” as the first thread title bundles the author of this article as the representative of all “conservative” thought. I heard a whole lot of complaints – not many proposals of solutions.
What the actual fuck is this guy smoking? I'm going to go ahead and assume that the average conservative does not think this about the left, because I can't imagine that they could all be that ignorant and divorced from reality. Is this guy an actual well read and respected conservative or is he more of a Glenn Beck or Anne Coulter conservative entertainment troll? Really hoping (for conservative's sake) it's the latter...But according to the it's-all-a-matter-of-perceptions view, there is no moral truth, only black perceptions and white perceptions. This all accords with the left's views of truth and morality.
And, of course, for the left there is no moral truth. Morality is entirely subjective. "Good" and "evil" are individual or societal preferences. No more, no less.
Oh I see. Religious nut. For him, the left are inherently evil creatures by nature. Makes sense now. Saddned to see that this guy is not fringe and is totally serious. Holy shit he sees universities, civil rights groups, and labor unions literally as playgrounds of the Devil. How pernicious.Prager states that the United States is engaged in a culture war over the fundamental moral values on which American society was built.[7] He argues that influential institutions including universities, labor unions, the American Civil Liberties Union, civil rights groups, as well as trial lawyers and most large newspapers and television networks are dominated by "secular leftists".
He's only as serious as we all allow him to be, in the public arena, at least. Poor dude, life must be a scary experience for him. Going about believing that his way of life is the one and only way to be. That's gotta be rough. There's so many other extremists out there waiting to get him, only they're on a different team. Just a scared old man with a similar scared audience.
As someone who has taken a class on Shakespeare, this is pretty hilarious. Because trying to decode what Shakespeare said WITHOUT the tools of deconstruction would be very very very hard. To Mr. Prager I give you this lesson, you do not understand riots, you do not understand racism, you do not understand waking up in fear that your child might die from a trusted person and that there will be no justice for your family. Mr Prager, your heart seems cold and unwilling, I would not have such a heart in my bosom, for the dignity of the whole body. But don't read too much into it, it's probably not truth.The left is philosophically deconstructionist. Shakespeare doesn't say what he wrote, Shakespeare says what the reader perceives. The notion of "original intent" as applied to the Constitution is, to the left, farcical. We cannot know the original intent. It's all a matter of individual perception -- or, more precisely, the perception of different socioeconomic classes, different genders and different races.
I'm not even joking when I say the soup tastes as delicious as prime time television is easy to watch. The soup is delicious and the entertainment is easy… EASY. Eating something different takes effort and education. Eating something different makes people uncomfortable. I eat different stuff now… and it's exhausting. but I sleep better at night.They are cooking stone soup every fucking day.
"In Ferguson, either the black (and left-wing whites') "perception" is not truth-based or the (non-Left) white (and black) "perception" isn't." I mean, writing a statement like this, especially (oh, the irony) in an article about truth, is all you need to know about his intellectual ability. It's completely dominated by reductionism and segregation of people and ideas into non-overlapping camps (in-groups vs. out-groups, anyone?), because binary thinking (yes vs. no, right vs. wrong, us vs. them) is really the only mental toolkit people like him have. There is simply a lack understanding of nuance or overlap to a greater degree than there is in the more accurate observers, interpreters, and analyzers of reality, and it seems little will ever change that in them, because they may simply not have the variegated intellectual machinery that is required to do better.
