The Next Election, Political News, and Other Forms of Comedy (US, UK, & Intl)

OfficePants said:
Not to come at you too hard over this, so I mean this with respect, but don't you feel you're joining the banality of evil doing this stuff?
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter if it is public service or private industry, there are different levels of need to know.

I often use "I could tell you but I would have to kill you".

Usually telling people you are not at liberty to discuss the issue suffices.
 
Thruth said:
Doesn't matter if it is public service or private industry, there are different levels of need to know.

I often use "I could tell you but I would have to kill you".

Usually telling people you are not at liberty to discuss the issue suffices.
Click to expand...

Unless I don't get it, I don't think that's what's going on here. This sounds like political/campaign Q & A with the media. In which case it's intentional obfuscation with the end goal of furthering this kind of nonsense political theater, and the banality comes in because we look at the state of the nation and can't get a strait answer from a pol. It's all about message and framing with no substance.

In the end, it's the media's fault. They shouldn't let people get away with it, but it's an access club and if you're too pushy, you get excluded. Same thing happens in sports media with athletes.
 
OfficePants said:
Unless I don't get it, I don't think that's what's going on here. This sounds like political/campaign Q & A with the media. In which case it's intentional obfuscation with the end goal of furthering this kind of nonsense political theater, and the banality comes in because we look at the state of the nation and can't get a strait answer from a pol. It's all about message and framing with no substance.

In the end, it's the media's fault. They shouldn't let people get away with it, but it's an access club and if you're too pushy, you get excluded. Same thing happens in sports media with athletes.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. Certainly politicians do not provide substantive answers. The only ones who do haven't been elected yet.

Honest and forthright people generally do not become politicians as it is the antithesis of who they are.
 
Thruth said:
Yes and no. Certainly politicians do not provide substantive answers. The only ones who do haven't been elected yet.

Honest and forthright people generally do not become politicians as it is the antithesis of who they are.
Click to expand...

This does not excuse participating in such a dynamic. If you are not intent on resisting the banality of evil, then stay away from the whole thing.
 
Thruth said:
The banality of evil is all encompassing. We are all touched by it
Click to expand...

Of course we are. Excusing it through generalities kinda defines the banality. You're preclusion is it's own form of evil. It's like saying 'because everyone takes a shit you should eat the shit'.
 
Last edited:
OfficePants said:
Not to come at you too hard over this, so I mean this with respect, but don't you feel you're joining the banality of evil doing this stuff?
Click to expand...

No offense taken, but I don't think people view this in the correct context at all. Or at the very least, hold politicians and bureaucrats to a completely different standard than anyone else. My job is a job. I have a boss. I would love to tell how I really feel, drop the mike, and walk away. But I can't, no more than 99% of people in their jobs can. Hell, 99% of people don't answer questions from their significant other directly. The example I used above is little different than "hey sweetheart, how'd your night out go?", "Good, is that a new dress?"

And especially in politics, where people are scrutinizing everything you say for some sort of ammunition against your political affiliation as a whole, why the hell would you ever say anything controversial?
 
John Lee Pettimore III said:
No offense taken, but I don't think people view this in the correct context at all. Or at the very least, hold politicians and bureaucrats to a completely different standard than anyone else. My job is a job. I have a boss. I would love to tell how I really feel, drop the mike, and walk away. But I can't, no more than 99% of people in their jobs can. Hell, 99% of people don't answer questions from their significant other directly. The example I used above is little different than "hey sweetheart, how'd your night out go?", "Good, is that a new dress?"

And especially in politics, where people are scrutinizing everything you say for some sort of ammunition against your political affiliation as a whole, why the hell would you ever say anything controversial?
Click to expand...

I'm glad you're not offended. Your answer is a CC of the behavior you describe during an interview. You've shifted the context, provided an example every guy can relate to, and then finished with a true statement "why would you ever say anything controversial".

Because the original question was re-framed, most are left to believe that telling the truth is controversial.

It's like the ghost of Harold Falcon once said: you don't need a reason to lie, you need a reason to tell the truth. He's a drunk nutter, but he may not have spoken a truer word in his life. You're not lying (that was just his direct quote) but you deflected, invoking these tactical shifts, and the original question "don't you feel you're joining the banality of evil doing this stuff?" went unanswered. An answer would be appreciated, though you may not have enough of a reason to tell the truth.
 
Wow. Okay. See how you did the almost the same thing to my post? I stated I was shifting the context. And I never said "telling the truth is controversial."

I'm not sure I even know what "joining the banality of evil" is. So I'm going to construe it (ooohhhh, politician trick! watchout) as "do you feel like you're selling your soul by giving evasive answers to questions?" The answer is: No. I do not. And I'm not sure why you would think I should feel evil for it.

How do you feel about joining the banality of evil?
 
John Lee Pettimore III said:
Wow. Okay. See how you did the almost the same thing to my post? I stated I was shifting the context. And I never said "telling the truth is controversial."

I'm not sure I even know what "joining the banality of evil" is. So I'm going to construe it (ooohhhh, politician trick! watchout) as "do you feel like you're selling your soul by giving evasive answers to questions?" The answer is: No. I do not. And I'm not sure why you would think I should feel evil for it.

How do you feel about joining the banality of evil?
Click to expand...

I'll provide 2 answers.

No, I don't feel like I've shifted anything. You said "why the hell would you ever say anything controversial", which drew a clear inference that telling the truth was controversial. I don't believe I'm mistaken in this, as you were referring to telling is strait or facts that are inconvenient providing ammunition.

The "banality of evil" is a book, the phrase was coined by political theorist Hannah Arendt. It describes WW2 behavior of Germans as "doing their jobs" or "following orders". Your original post didn't question the phrase so I assumed you knew, but I have a thread about it as it's a meaningful human condition: The Banality of Evil | DressedWell

Second answer, as Thruth Thruth pointed out, I am part of the banality of evil in more ways that I can probably understand. We all are while beholden to the elite. It simply struck me how seemingly "play the game, get ahead" you were about it, so I decided (perhaps against my better judgement) to challenge it. The distinction I guess I'm drawing is that the BOE pivots on a different inflection point when it becomes part of the political/elected arena.

We're probably a lot alike as we recognize the dynamic, but where we differ is that political bullshitting crosses a line. Maybe that's a point of debate, but regardless.

So, after understanding the meaning of how I frame BOE, do you have the same answer?
 
OfficePants said:
I'll provide 2 answers.

No, I don't feel like I've shifted anything. You said "why the hell would you ever say anything controversial", which drew a clear inference that telling the truth was controversial. I don't believe I'm mistaken in this, as you were referring to telling is strait or facts that are inconvenient providing ammunition.

The "banality of evil" is a book, the phrase was coined by political theorist Hannah Arendt. It describes WW2 behavior of Germans as "doing their jobs" or "following orders". Your original post didn't question the phrase so I assumed you knew, but I have a thread about it as it's a meaningful human condition: The Banality of Evil | DressedWell

Second answer, as Thruth Thruth pointed out, I am part of the banality of evil in more ways that I can probably understand. We all are while beholden to the elite. It simply struck me how seemingly "play the game, get ahead" you were about it, so I decided (perhaps against my better judgement) to challenge it. The distinction I guess I'm drawing is that the BOE pivots on a different inflection point when it becomes part of the political/elected arena.

We're probably a lot alike as we recognize the dynamic, but where we differ is that political bullshitting crosses a line. Maybe that's a point of debate, but regardless.

So, after understanding the meaning of how I frame BOE, do you have the same answer?
Click to expand...

We all withhold the truth at times and it is not always about the BOE and serving one's MasterElites. As you say it has a variety of pivot points. Suppressing information is nuanced. Not everyone needs to know everything all at once unless we all live in a commune or we are part of the Occupy movement, neither of which are effective governance structures.

Having been a public/civil servant I have both suppressed information and shared it. It is not just doing a job, it is strategically managing risk. If it is managing risk for the Elite, so be it. Everything funnels into some higher control. The government minister tried to have me fired three times for speaking in a forthright manner and not playing the game but my Board Chair blocked it. That said, in my position I routinely filtered information not because i was just doing my job and not acknowledging the evil above me. I was doing my job as I saw fit and differential information sharing was central to it.
 
But you're completely disregarding the "evil" part of the "banality of evil". I'm not running a concentration camp. I'm running a social services agency.
 
That is my only issue with the premise of the BOE. The original definition derives from something so different than how it is being used in this thread. That said, I will anticipate OfficePants OfficePants disagreeing with this because of his POV on the Elites and control of society. I can dig that, it makes for interesting debate.
 
John Lee Pettimore III said:
But you're completely disregarding the "evil" part of the "banality of evil". I'm not running a concentration camp. I'm running a social services agency.
Click to expand...

The perspectives here obfuscate from the perspective of the elites to the common people. It's presented as a fair and balanced argument much like some news networks present issues that are so obviously on one side of the fence that way. They're not. They're only projected dishonestly.

Nobody here is running a concentration camp, that's just a tactical 'fact'. Of course. State the obvious and folks will moderate to your views.

Social service agencies play a public and vital role in the function of a state. If there are fundamental flaws in it's operation, then it's people are responsible for telling the flat out honest truth about the state of affairs or they cowtow to the banality of evil and grease the political line. If anyone needs evidence of what this "line" represents, then simply read this extraordinary piece from the creator of The Wire that @Rambo posted.

For risk of being fired, many do play ball. It's his decision, just like it's ours in our daily lives. I don't pretend about it, and as long as a participant is aware of his choices I respect his self preservatory interests. Nobody can be faulted for their desire to survive... as long as the elite understands that, we will always be their pawns in the accumulation of power.
 
Last edited:
Thruth said:
That is my only issue with the premise of the BOE. The original definition derives from something so different than how it is being used in this thread.
Click to expand...

It definitely does not. You are only plastering it with labels for a reason as yet undefined. Don't detract from the simplicity, the common good trumps self interest, and it always will.
 
OfficePants said:
It definitely does not. You are only plastering it with labels for a reason as yet undefined. Don't detract from the simplicity, the common good trumps self interest, and it always will.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, my meds are not titrated well enough to appreciate the simplicity of the argument. Certainly the common good is the gold standard. But to preserve the common good sometimes one needs to modulate the message otherwise it will be misinterpreted leading to antithetical results.

Your arguement is partially rooted in the abstract. The common good is something that we strive for, it is not absolute. The elites control all so all is outside of our control. If one seemingly does things that one perceives to be in concert with the elites, it is proof of the BOE.
 
Thruth said:
I'm sorry, my meds are not titrated well enough to appreciate the simplicity of the argument. Certainly the common good is the gold standard. But to preserve the common good sometimes one needs to modulate the message otherwise it will be misinterpreted leading to antithetical results.

Your arguement is partially rooted in the abstract. The common good is something that we strive for, it is not absolute. The elites control all so all is outside of our control. If one seemingly does things that one perceives to be in concert with the elites, it is proof of the BOE.
Click to expand...

Then post when the meds wear off. It's a simple construct. The only truth that needs moderation is one that is in the interests of the elite. Your argument is rooted in the abstract.

The world needs truth and not banality cloaked as "reality". There is a difference between "reality" and "the reality" which is usually followed by "is" (the reality is...), which when examined leads to a fundamental lie. It's like the mechanic that says "the reality is your brakes must be replaced now"... the truth is there is 10% of wear left which is enough to substantiate a lie cloaked as "must be changed".
 
Last edited:
OfficePants said:
Then post when the meds wear off. It's a simple construct. Your arguments are frankly bullshit. The only truth that needs moderation is one that is in the interests of the elite. Your argument is rooted in the abstraction, or rather abstraction.

Absolut is vodka. The real world needs truth and not banality cloaked as "reality". Your definition of reality is a lie. There is a difference between "reality" and "the reality" which is usually followed by "is" (the reality is...), which when examined leads to a fundamental lie. It's like the mechanic that says "the reality is your brakes must be replaced now"... the truth is there is an 7% chance they will fail which is enough to substantiate a lie cloaked as "must be changed".
Click to expand...

This only works with your point of view and no one else's. Yes the world needs truth, love, equality, freedom and all things that comprise the greater good.

My definition of reality is just that: my interpretation of what I see, do and experience just as you and everyone else does.

Continually falling back to all is lost because the elites control everything is a cop out. Do you lack control of your daily life?

So what is it? Are you a minion of the BOE or are you fighting the power at every turn?

Provide an example of what you do. John Lee Pettimore III John Lee Pettimore III has and you found fault with his explanations. I have to and it wasn't satisfactory for your purposes. So in terms of the common good where do you stand.

Give me something concrete to ruminate on.
 
Thruth said:
Continually falling back to all is lost because the elites control everything is a cop out. Do you lack control of your daily life?

So what is it? Are you a minion of the BOE or are you fighting the power at every turn?

Provide an example of what you do. John Lee Pettimore III John Lee Pettimore III has and you found fault with his explanations. I have to and it wasn't satisfactory for your purposes. So in terms of the common good where do you stand.

Give me something concrete to ruminate on.
Click to expand...

No, I don't. Reality is mostly controlled by the elite. It may not touch you daily, but in an overall, high level yet granular sense, your life is governed by them.

I am part of the BOE because I lack the $/power to unplug. I suspect it's the same position most of us is in which is what the elite want. When you have choice you can exercise what Hollywood and athletes call "fuck you money", and they want as few of these people as possible.

It's not a cop out, Thruth Thruth . It's quite the opposite, you just accept of the state of play and your part in the machine. You're forced in.

I explained the difference, which is the public eye. Otherwise we're just shitbirds trying to raise families/get a bit ahead. You're taking it a step further than it really is, which leads to conspiracy or labeling me a nutter. I don't pretend by being a millennial hipster above it all buying organic peas and drinking fair trade coffee. The most powerful intentionally mask their influence as quietly as possible. You don't think daily about the military industrial complex, but that's where most of the communal wealth is sapped, you think about iPhone upgrades, which is exactly what they want.
 
Last edited:
OfficePants said:
No, I don't. Reality is controlled by the elite. It may not touch you daily, but in an overall, high level yet granular sense, your life is governed by the elite.

I am part of the BOE because I lack the $/power to unplug. I suspect it's the same position most of us is in which is what the elite want. When you have choice you can exercise what Hollywood and athletes call "fuck you money", and they want as few of these people as possible.

It's not a cop out, Thruth Thruth . It's quite the opposite, you accept of the state of play and your part in the machine.

I explained the difference between me and him, which is the public eye. Otherwise we're just shitbirds trying to raise families/get a bit ahead. You're taking it a step further than it really is, which leads to conspiracy or labeling me a nutter.
Click to expand...

Nutter? No. Conspiracy? No. Overly philosophical, pedantic with a definition of reality different than mine? Yup. Which is fine. I just have to pass the baton to someone else to continue this line of discussion as we run the risk of just rehashing what has come before
 
Thruth said:
Nutter? No. Conspiracy? No. Overly philosophical, pedantic with a definition of reality different than mine? Yup. Which is fine. I just have to pass the baton to someone else to continue this line of discussion as we run the risk of just rehashing what has come before
Click to expand...

There is no baton to pass. Like it or not, you're controlled. I wont comfort you about it, you have your television for that. Rev up for that iPhone 6i, baby.
 
OfficePants said:
There is no baton to pass. Like it or not, you're controlled. I wont comfort you about it, you have your television for that. iPhone 6i, baby.
Click to expand...

The conversation baton. Passed to whomever wishes to discuss. I am controlled & it is comforting.

Don't have or watch TV
 
Thruth said:
The conversation baton. Passed to whomever wishes to discuss.
Click to expand...

insert-quarter.jpeg
 
Under your incredibly abstract yet black-and-white view, everyone living in America can be labeled as part of the banality of evil. If that's the case, then what's the sense of having the label in the first place?

With that said, I saw an environmentalist friend of mine riding in a car. I need to go chastise him.
 
John Lee Pettimore III said:
Under your incredibly abstract yet black-and-white view, everyone living in America can be labeled as part of the banality of evil. If that's the case, then what's the sense of having the label in the first place?

With that said, I saw an environmentalist friend of mine riding in a car. I need to go chastise him.
Click to expand...

It's a gradient, some choices live on the sharper side of things. And I had a couple of Negronis.

Nobody is going to escape the BOE. We all breathe air, thus we shouldn't have a word for it? Just because something is universal does not negate it.

From your last sentence, I hope you don't feel chastised. I had a couple of Negronis.
 
Pauly Chase said:
Bernie Sanders jist threw his bid in, a self described Democrat socialist. I am going back to China.
Click to expand...
Am I mistaken or doesn't he have profoundly scruffy professor presence that makes Ron Paul look sexy in comparison? I think they just tossed him in to make HRC look more palatable.
 
Economics professor to be specific. I remember back in college, the economics apartment had a few outspoken socialist professors.
 
Truly. The Dems are jokes, chosen more because the fit a demographic checklist than anything else. Marco Rubio is really likable, but has some baggage I don't like. Jeb Bush is decent, but he's tainted by his brother and his stance on Teri Schiavo really turned me away. The other Republicans aren't worth mentioning. I'd actually like Scott Walker as a novelty, if only because he'd be the first non-college graduate since Truman (and Grover Cleveland previously). And Truman fought in WWI, despite being exempted from conscription.
 
Is Rand Paul officially running? He's probably the only candidate with any mild interest, if for nothing but to shake up the establishment, which needs one very badly.

I don't see how anyone can rationalize voting for these 2 parties anymore.
 
Hell yeah Rand is running. Did nobody catch the great story about how he got a cease and desist letter for selling Ray-Bans that had his name printed on the temples?
Ray-Ban Bans Rand Paul's Use of Its Brand
OfficePants said:
I don't see how anyone can rationalize voting for these 2 parties anymore.
Click to expand...
"Voting third party is wasting your vote. I'm voting for one of these schmucks that I don't agree with cuz I back winners!:herpderp:"
Better to for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
 
Russell Street said:
Hell yeah Rand is running. Did nobody catch the great story about how he got a cease and desist letter for selling Ray-Bans that had his name printed on the temples?
Ray-Ban Bans Rand Paul's Use of Its Brand

"Voting third party is wasting your vote. I'm voting for one of these schmucks that I don't agree with cuz I back winners!:herpderp:"
Better to for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
Click to expand...

Ray Ban and Rand Paul: "the intersection of politics and cool". Right. Wait a minute, he is totally cool!
o-RAND-PAUL-SNAPCHAT-facebook.jpg
 
Honestly I take a Mantonian Machiavellian approach in that whatever delivers the message/votes is necessary. Satire is game. Also, this is the election comedy threak.
 
Russell Street said:
Honestly I take a Mantonian Machiavellian approach in that whatever delivers the message/votes is necessary. Satire is game. Also, this is the election comedy threak.
Click to expand...

Man, I long for the days when the candidates were the only joke items
 
John Lee Pettimore III said:
Under your incredibly abstract yet black-and-white view, everyone living in America can be labeled as part of the banality of evil. If that's the case, then what's the sense of having the label in the first place?

With that said, I saw an environmentalist friend of mine riding in a car. I need to go chastise him.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I glazed over the last few posts in that discussion. I mean, heck, this is all I've been learning in law school - how to carefully drip information when and where I want rather than throw everything on the table at once.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top Bottom