How do you feel about the foot in the mouth or don't you care?

[Redemption Q]

I posted this subject a couple of days ago and it got move to a different forum because it was not in the proper format for the political end of things here.

https://www.livemint.com/news/world/i-l ... 20002.html

Is it any wonder why the otherside is so down on him?

[boatsnguitars]

Turns out, he was talking to an entirely different group, not to the families of the shooting victims.
But most of the posts omit the context of Biden's remarks. His speech was not intended to address the shooting, but was held for a very different event.

As the transcript shows, the president was actually speaking at the Small Business Administration's Women's Business Summit hosted at the White House.
https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-bidens ... a-65159845

Apparently, the usual people ran out of things to be offended about, so they manufactured something.

But the MAGAts don't care. They will repeat the lie, even knowing it's a lie.

The power, as a professor of Authoritarianism said, is not in the lie, or trying to convince people of the lie. The power for the Authoritarian and his followers is that they can look you in the eye and lie - as if to say, "You and I know I'm lying and there's nothing you can do about it. This lie will spread and I will laugh as you try to correct it."

The power they seek is the ability to lie with impunity, then they can undermine everything.

It's the same with religion: "You and I know I don't believe in the Rez, but you can't do a thing about it. I will claim God demands that the gays can't marry, and you will have to spend your valuable time and money to contradict what is so cheap and easy for me to say."

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #11

The power, as a professor of Authoritarianism said, is not in the lie, or trying to convince people of the lie. The power for the Authoritarian and his followers is that they can look you in the eye and lie - as if to say, "You and I know I'm lying and there's nothing you can do about it. This lie will spread and I will laugh as you try to correct it."

The power they seek is the ability to lie with impunity, then they can undermine everything.

It's the same with religion: "You and I know I don't believe in the Rez, but you can't do a thing about it. I will claim God demands that the gays can't marry, and you will have to spend your valuable time and money to contradict what is so cheap and easy for me to say."

It's definitely not the same with "religion", as "religion" is not a singular, monolithic thing. Assuming it to be such is like saying, "Dog is unfriendly." There's more than one dog, and they aren't the same.

At the same time, I sometimes wonder if the more radical of Christians have, at least subconsciously, given up on Jesus returning and are lashing out in frustrated disappointment.

[boatsnguitars]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #11

The power, as a professor of Authoritarianism said, is not in the lie, or trying to convince people of the lie. The power for the Authoritarian and his followers is that they can look you in the eye and lie - as if to say, "You and I know I'm lying and there's nothing you can do about it. This lie will spread and I will laugh as you try to correct it."

The power they seek is the ability to lie with impunity, then they can undermine everything.

It's the same with religion: "You and I know I don't believe in the Rez, but you can't do a thing about it. I will claim God demands that the gays can't marry, and you will have to spend your valuable time and money to contradict what is so cheap and easy for me to say."

It's definitely not the same with "religion", as "religion" is not a singular, monolithic thing. Assuming it to be such is like saying, "Dog is unfriendly." There's more than one dog, and they aren't the same.

At the same time, I sometimes wonder if the more radical of Christians have, at least subconsciously, given up on Jesus returning and are lashing out in frustrated disappointment.

I'm OK with my superficial generalization of religion. I find that we use the single term "religion" to describe a certain group of things with common characteristics, and those common characteristics appear to me to include what I described.

I am refering to the concept of Social Identity Theory, which suggests that individuals derive their sense of self and self-esteem from the groups to which they belong. In this case, the in-group members feel a sense of loyalty or allegiance to their group, and may prioritize the interests of their group over those of the out-group, even if it means lying.

I think religion - all religion, and I can't think of an exception - is built on this "In-Group vs Out-Group" and each have built an invented world view to establish as their "In-Group Belief" that identifies that group. Unless one can prove one or more religions don't hold at least one belief that is false, but the In-Group holds sacrosanct, I'll skew to my side of my use of the term "religion".

Religion is defined as a set of beliefs, practices, and values that form the basis of a distinct in-group identity. Social identity theory suggests that individuals derive their sense of self and self-esteem from the groups to which they belong. In the case of religion, individuals who belong to a particular religious group may feel a strong sense of belonging and identity with their in-group, based on shared beliefs, values, and practices.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #13

I am refering to the concept of Social Identity Theory, which suggests that individuals derive their sense of self and self-esteem from the groups to which they belong.

Then Social Identity Theory can apply just as easily with race, profession, national origin and any number of other catagories.

It can even apply with atheism.

[boatsnguitars]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #13

I am refering to the concept of Social Identity Theory, which suggests that individuals derive their sense of self and self-esteem from the groups to which they belong.

Then Social Identity Theory can apply just as easily with race, profession, national origin and any number of other catagories.

It can even apply with atheism.

We are starting to argee. Remember, my point was about Authoritarianism, then I said "same with religion," and in that I was pointing out how SIT - in many groups - even supports lying - because it identifies one as a member of the group.

I'll expound:
Authoritarian leaders often use lies and propaganda to justify their rule and to suppress dissent. In a study of Chinese leaders, for example, researchers found that the Chinese Communist Party had created a "mythical history" of its own rule that portrayed the party as the savior of the Chinese people, despite evidence to the contrary (Chan, 2014). Similarly, in North Korea, the government has created a cult of personality around its leaders, portraying them as infallible and all-knowing (Myers, 2015).

One of the underlying premises of authoritarianism is that the leader or leaders have a monopoly on knowledge and wisdom, and that they are uniquely qualified to solve the problems facing society. (Trump, "I alone can solve this") However, research has shown that this is not the case. In a study of the economic performance of authoritarian regimes, for example, researchers found that authoritarian regimes do not necessarily perform better than democratic regimes (Przeworski et al., 2000). Similarly, in a study of political stability in authoritarian regimes, researchers found that authoritarian regimes are not necessarily more stable than democratic regimes (Geddes, 1999).

Furthermore, authoritarian regimes often fail to address the needs of their citizens, particularly marginalized groups such as ethnic minorities and the poor. In a study of authoritarian regimes in Africa, for example, researchers found that these regimes often perpetuate poverty and inequality, and that they fail to provide basic services such as health care and education (Diamond, 2002).

This is the "Big Lie" of Authoritarianism, but it is the common lie accepted by it's adherents. Supporters of Authoritarian Governments tell everyone that only "their guy" can fix the problem, when they know most of the outgroup will be marginalized - but they don't care. They want the power, and they get it by getting people to join in the lie, or believe the lie until they get to the voting booth.

Likewise, religions have at their core a belief about the supernatural, or the overall effectiveness of their "product". Take Christianity's big lie about the resurrection of Jesus.

Did you know only 57% of Protestants believe Jesus rose bodily from the dead?

Both authoritarians and religious leaders make the claim that they alone (or their mechanism) have the power to solve all problems and create a better world. Authoritarian leaders may promote the idea that they are the only ones who can effectively manage a country's economy, maintain national security, and protect the interests of the majority. Similarly, religious groups =claim that they alone have the truth about the nature of reality, the path to spiritual enlightenment or salvation, or the only pathway to solving social ills (e.g., Christians claiming they could solve school shootings if they allowed prayer back in school, etc.).

These claims can be understood as a "Great Lie"; a lie that forms the core of these beliefs, which is the idea that they have the power to make sweeping changes that will benefit everyone. In reality, however, no political or religious system has been able to completely solve all problems or create a perfect world, and any claim to do so should be viewed with skepticism.

Furthermore, the idea that one group or individual has a monopoly on truth and the ability to solve all problems can be dangerous, as it can lead to a disregard for alternative viewpoints and a willingness to use authoritarian methods to achieve their goals. This can be seen in both authoritarian governments and certain religious groups that seek to control the beliefs and behaviors of their followers and suppress dissenting voices.

Now, you said it can be said the same for everything, even atheism. First, atheism is too broad. One can be an atheist and have no other plan on how to solve the world's problems. There is no connection.
However, you could say it's the same for Humanism - and I'd agree. Humanism is a religion, an atheistic one, but a religion. Which would make my point.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #15

Now, you said it can be said the same for everything, even atheism. First, atheism is too broad. One can be an atheist and have no other plan on how to solve the world's problems. There is no connection.
However, you could say it's the same for Humanism - and I'd agree. Humanism is a religion, an atheistic one, but a religion. Which would make my point.

I'm OK with my superficial generalization of atheism. I find that we use the single term "atheism" to describe a certain group of things with common characteristics, and those common characteristics appear to me to include what I described.

[boatsnguitars]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #15

Now, you said it can be said the same for everything, even atheism. First, atheism is too broad. One can be an atheist and have no other plan on how to solve the world's problems. There is no connection.
However, you could say it's the same for Humanism - and I'd agree. Humanism is a religion, an atheistic one, but a religion. Which would make my point.

I'm OK with my superficial generalization of atheism. I find that we use the single term "atheism" to describe a certain group of things with common characteristics, and those common characteristics appear to me to include what I described.

That's fine. I, of course, backed up my claim and I think you're using the term "Atheist" wrong, since I didn't say Theists, I was talking about religions, which are made up of a collection of beliefs. While atheists can be adherants of a religion, atheism captures a very narrow set of beliefs, as does "Theism", but, I will allow you to be wrong and let everyone see that you are.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #17

I, of course, backed up my claim and I think you're using the term "Atheist" wrong, since I didn't say Theists, I was talking about religions,

Ah, but you didn't say "religions"; you said "religion", as if to lump religious beliefs into an indistinguishable mass.

[boatsnguitars]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #17

I, of course, backed up my claim and I think you're using the term "Atheist" wrong, since I didn't say Theists, I was talking about religions,

Ah, but you didn't say "religions"; you said "religion", as if to lump religious beliefs into an indistinguishable mass.

I think I explained myself well enough. I'm not sure what your larger point is.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #19

I think I explained myself well enough. I'm not sure what your larger point is.

Then I'll just let everyone else get the point.