I’ve seen the same thing with people in general. A while back, one acquaintance got indignant because I told her I didn’t want anything to do with her.
“When have I ever done anything wrong to you, RiskyFlush?” she said.
I said it didn’t matter that we’d never had any conflict. She treats plenty enough people like dog shit. I care about their suffering. Whether I’ve personally suffered is irrelevant.
I assume he’s lying or in denial about ever getting offended.
I tried to think of a response to his second point, but it’s difficult for me to do so without knowing how much empathy he has in general.
He said something like “what, are you being offended for them?” I’ve been a dick to him plenty lately but I think it’s an extension of the snowflake thing. That he thinks people shouldn’t get offended by things others do or say.
All my siblings and their significant others say “he has the biggest heart in the family” well I think that’s horseshit. He might care greatly about family and friends but it stops there 100%
I think a lot of people–not in a way that can’t be developed–but a lot of people simply do not have the capacity to even begin to empathize with the suffering of people other than themselves. And I don’t mean that they don’t want to, I mean that it’s easily overwhelming, and a lot of people respond to that by shutting off to it entirely.
My ex has custody of my son during the school year and I have him during the summer. This is due to her moving away.
We had a good talk about a year ago, but along the way she was saying something about herself and I asked “… try putting yourself in my shoes.” Her response was, “I can’t even imagine trying to do that.”
It’s so much simpler to be self-interested and only care about whatever impacts you personally. Maybe we’re the suckers for caring and in a kill or be killed world, they have the leg up. There’s obvious correlation with empathy and intelligence tho. Ignorance is bliss on this shit, I wish I could just be a petulant child in my views - life would a whole lot less complex and conflicting.
I would be quite sad hearing her say that to me.
I hear you on the temptation of ignorance with bliss. That bald guy in The Matrix made some good points about really, his life inside was much better. At least he could eat steak.
I feel like our ambition for something greater than primitive self-interest is sort of the point of being alive. I’m an atheist so don’t believe in any ordained duty or something, but in the words of philosopher Shelly Kagan, just because something doesn’t have cosmic significance doesn’t meant that it doesn’t have ANY significance. The fact that we can consider a greater purpose than self-interest is in itself awe-inspiring.
It’s not really that difficult of a challenge. Making 9/11 jokes or finding an excuse to say “blue lives don’t matter” probably triggers the vast majority of people like that.
No, they are prepared for someone to say “black lives matter” and have responses ready. You want to throw them for a loop by saying something unexpected.
I hope the first response was:
Snowflake
I’ve probably written about it before, but there’s a guy I used to work with a long time ago in Hollywood who I like to call ‘wrong side of history man’. He’ll come in with like the most horrific take about well, anything that might piss you off, and he does it with a smug snark that is super tilting. He hid this very well working at that company. When I saw he claimed ‘Moral Majority’ for his political views on his facebook page, I literally laughed out loud, because I thought it was a joke. It wasn’t.
He’s probably one of the last two or three people who have survived my purge of people like this. What’s odd about him is that I perceive him to be smart, an often cagey debater, and someone who very much walks his talk. You don’t hear of many right wing Christian evangelicals driving Priuses in California, but he did that.
He’s basically said he didn’t vote for Trump (no way he voted for Clinton), but his first hot take wade in to 2020 was basically saying that with all the left wing whack jobs running for the Dems that he might have no choice but to vote for him (lol). Here’s a post he made yesterday on facebook. I tried to let it go, because I’ve ignored every other post he’s made over the last couple of years that have nearly caused me to blow a gasket. But I eventually had to say something. If it eventually results in me dropping him, so be it. The last really heated argument I got in with him was when the ACA was passed.
Moral Majority Guy on fb (bold added for emphasis):
The Donald may indeed be guilty of something illegal, but so far there is literally zero evidence of any high crimes or misdemeanors, yet the efficacy of the press in collusion with Democrats has somehow convinced 51% of the public that Trump needs to be impeached and removed from office.
The only thing he’s clearly guilty of is tweeting like a petulant six-year-old.
Oh, and doing a bunch of things Democrats revile in domestic and foreign policy.
That is just completely divorced from reality, and what astonishes me is that he’s willing to put this stuff out on facebook. I can see people like him thinking this all day, but why would you actually say it? He loves all this monstrous shit Trump is doing, but just wishes he would be less of an oaf about it.
Now nunn, I’ve never really been bothered by anything you’ve posted, but talking up how what you finally said might lead to you dropping him, and then you don’t post what you said? Tsk tsk.
lol, he actually responded in a way I couldn’t resist a dagger at. He said me and him aren’t Constitutional scholars, but one who is says ‘bunch of b.s.’ but doesn’t attribute it. I’ll give you one guess who his Constitutional scholar is.
Here’s what I wrote him:
Here, I’ll give you a little help moral majority guy on fb:
Article I: Obstruction of Justice
Article II: Abuse of Power
Article III: Contempt of CongressOh wait, those are Nixon’s articles of impeachment that he would have been convicted on that apply to an extreme degree to Trump, not even mentioning the Ukraine phone call and myriad of other things. I can easily give you multiple articles of impeachment just related to the Ukraine phone call scandal, but am not going to do that very easy research for you. Take your head out of whatever news sources you’re following, and do some real research on all of this because you are way on the wrong side of history on this, grotesquely so. It’s one thing to think this in private (because I know you actually love all of what he’s doing, which scares me a lot), and not say anything, but quite another to actually be out defending this like you are.
And don’t try to be ‘but but but no quid pro quo’. The Ukrainian president brought up Rudy Giuliani’s name first, so he knew exactly where Trump was headed on that phone call. Even implied quid pro quo is a crime, and there is a massive amount of evidence that there was an actual quid pro quo. The investigation of that was officially obstructed as of when Sondland was blocked from giving his deposition, even though there’s already plenty of evidence related to his role in it.
Trump would not even talk to the president of Ukraine on the phone without an agreement to investigate Biden/Biden’s son (one of Zelensky’s closest advisers said this was the case). Remember this also, no one in Congress outside of Lindsay Graham has defended his actions on this phone call. They all know what he did on that phone call is a crime and an impeachable offense. They are all just pure cowards who absolutely hate the Constitution they claim so much to love.
Here is who is implicated in the Ukraine scandal, and who should be impeached and removed (or resign) due to their roles in the actual crimes or in the cover up:
President Donald J. Trump
VP Mike Pence
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo
Attorney General William Barr
Secretary of Energy Rick PerryDon’t bother responding to this, because I’m not following up with you or anyone else who responds to this. Hopefully someone in your bubble will get something out of this, but I really wish that someone is you.
He actually said he wasn’t surprised I’d write that, because I’ve been for impeachment at least since the time of Sztrok and Page (lol). That makes no sense but whatever.
That’s a tough spot. I sort of get where he’s coming from. It was like that with a lot of us through the Benghazi hearings. It was hard eventually not to tune it all out and assume everything was a political smear that didn’t deserve any attention.
I realize that from your POV, and mine, these scandals are exceptional in that they aren’t political fictions. But how do you get through to someone who now applies an impenetrable filter to facts?
Oh, he’s impossible to get through to which is why I never respond to posts (him saying what he did proves he’s trying to troll people like me, and also showed he reads my posts…lol). Remember, he’s not a Trump voter, but is defending him at his worst possible point. He said there is ‘literally zero evidence’ that Trump has committed a crime, when there are probably hundreds of tons of evidence in the form of paper of evidence against him.
This comes back to something that kre8ive posted that was lost in the massive impeachment news cycle. It’s about the Council for National Policy. This is a secret right wing religious organization dedicated to getting political outcomes they want. These people are wrapped in super tight with with the Trump admin. The Council for National Policy was co-founded by the guy who did the Moral Majority. In the stuff kre8ive dropped were a couple of mission statements. Most of that stuff (from the mid-1980s) is like a laundry list of things the Trump admin has been doing or trying to be doing that is their initiative. Trump is the culmination of the Council for National Policy, but is completely hilariously the opposite of the face they’d like to represent it.
I’m quite certain my friend would completely agree with that agenda (interestingly, the Council for National Policy is explicitly not racist in its language), and is thrilled that Trump is implementing it. He loves the policy, and he can deal with a few kids dying in custody, hundreds if not thousands of families irrevocably broken, and the overt racism to get it. He thinks Trump’s an oaf, and knows if Trump goes this policy will never return the way the CNP (moral majority) wants it. This super duper religious guy is willing to make a deal with the devil to get policy he wants that very few people in this country want. It’s truly disgusting.
He is 
a Trump voter. He’s just seeking attention and trying to seem like he’s woke and that the Dems are chasing a ghost that didn’t do anything.
He’s 100 percent a Trump voter in 2020 just based on defending him on the up slope of all this falling apart. I can’t see a religious guy voting for Johnson, and he doesn’t seem like the kind of guy who would lie about his vote. He definitely did not like Trump in the run up, so I really have no idea who he would have voted for or even if he did.
Anecdote: went home to visit family this week, brother (somewhat) and dad (bigly) are both Trump supporters. I avoid political discussion with them at all costs, but this time, both completely unprompted mentioned how much they thought Trump really screwed up with how we betrayed the Kurds. My dad is a Vietnam vet for context. This swing really shocked me and made me realize that Trump probably lost the support of a ton of veterans with this move.
For gun enthusiasts if you can get a group to chant melt the guns they dont seem to react so well. Then you go why so sensitive we are just joking around…good times.
I’ve seen this enough to know it’s not an isolated thing.
For the life of me, I never thought that if there was one thing most likely to turn Trumpkins it would be “abandoning the Kurds”. Every single other principle they purportedly hold doesn’t mean shit, but this is one they adhere to?
Simulation writers really threw me a curve with this plot twist.
Dont know if its a widespread phenomenon but maybe they are starting to realise he fucks over literally every single person or group in his orbit eventually.