As a professor, I suppose this dimwit represents the intellectual ranks of today's left.
http://cernovich.com/clemson-university-republicans/
http://cernovich.com/clemson-university-republicans/
Clemson University Professor Calls For Violence Against All Republicans
- Thread starter GunsOfFrankEaton
- Start date
That's triggered to the point of being delusional and worthy of some mental health evaluation. How can seemingly educated people become so damn retarded? I'm starting the believe the folks that say progressivism is a mental illness. I've seen schizophrenics in crisis with a better grip on reality.
You're coming around.
*and I'm not saying it is a stand alone illness, or that all Progressives suffer from it, but that there's certainly a lot of overlap between the diagnostics in other mental maladies and the behaviour and thought patterns we see out of the loudest of that fringe.
Like a coalesce of people suffering from, most likely, multiple minor (and some major) issues which include emotional trauma, estrangement, lack of an acceptable mentor/role model, and genuine mental health issues.
http://www.newsweek.com/trump-alex-jones-infowars-violence-639912
Is conservatism a mental illness too?
There's some ignored content in this thread that I'm positive is sparkling.
Reading the Daily Wipe and eating the tripe that Lincoln Riley is the "second coming" of the three B's - Bud, Barry, Bob - would be a good starting point for clinical analysis.
The Daily Jokelahoman is saying this? All of the folks I know have realistic expectations for a first year coach who is still in diapers. Plus, we still have the roid rage Stoops on the defensive side. That guy can screw up your wet dreams JB.
This seems like completely self inflicted trauma. They've gone from "it's a joke" to "Ermagawd, Hitler invaded the White House and he thinks we're all Jews!" How can reasonable people do that to themselves?
Would a sufficiently robust echo chamber suffice to cause the damage over time, like the mini concussions football players reportedly experience?
The trauma isn't a big, notable event but an accumulation of small events sustained over time.
Yes, but concussions are real. The boogeyman they've made Trump out to be isn't based in any reality. I do get what you're saying though. Honestly, it more resembles cult brainwashing than purebred mental illness.
not to hijack...but, I guarantee ole bob had a big hand in the defense on and off the field and no one has mentioned any of that yet. I think we will see a big difference, especially as the season rolls along.
Oh I know he had a big hand in it. That's why Brent V now looks brilliant. He got the hell away from Bob. But I'm not sure Meathead Mike is any better without Bobby. We've had the same defensive coordinators for 400 years and outside a few good years early on, the defense hasn't been good.
Yes.
Far right and far left (sadly, not as far on either side as it seems) are both mentally ill. The mental acrobatics to justify any evil from "their", and absolute inability to give the opposing side credit when due takes a severe mental defect.
https://giphy.com/gifs/forrest-gump-12ZEA2Na4KfKGQ
That guy kinda looks like Jenny's boyfriend at the D.C. protest in Forrest Gump.
That guy kinda looks like Jenny's boyfriend at the D.C. protest in Forrest Gump.
Fair point and consistent (which is a novelty on this board).
With that said, I don't believe either progressivism or conservatism is a mental illness. The problem is the individual person who feels the need to advocate hate and/or violence in defense of his or her political ideology. And yes, that tends to come from the extreme fringes.
No. The individual is relatively benign. The masses on each end are what are dangerous. En masse, bad and irrational ideas and concepts, are lauded. Individuals with bad and irrational ideas are loons.
Not at all. The individual is what matters. I know a number of rabid progressives and conservatives who have never and would never advocate for violence. And then, there are those individuals who do.
Gee, that's hard hitting.
Tell me Sir Knows It All, which one is likely to do more damage, one crazy dude with a bat or 1,500 crazy dudes with bats? If you need help, see the LA riots for a fairly paint by number example.
One person can do a lot of damage...
Again, it is the individual. Those 1,500 crazy dudes are 1,500 individual crazy dudes.
The choices those individuals make.
btw, I am not disagreeing with the ideas behind groupthink or group polarization, or other notions. Not even disagreeing that an individual isn't influenced by their environment. But in the end, it is the individual that makes the choice to advocate for or engage in political violence.
The problem still exists that the group can, and does, make an individual more dangerous. Whether it be building more anger, more violence, or being egged on, or whatever. An individual can do bad things. An individual, within a group situation does more extreme things. No different than the bystander effect. In a group, behaviors are more extreme, as do the actions. Those actions can be carried out by an individual, whereas that same individual is less likely (notice less likely, not that an individual cannot do it on their own) to carry out someting like that on their own. You are talking about exceptions, I am talking about the rule.
Why do you always focus on the gutter? You know how many right wing nitwits i could post? Epic, ridiculous buffoonery?
Groups will always outperform individuals.One person can do a lot of damage...
Again, it is the individual. Those 1,500 crazy dudes are 1,500 individual crazy dudes.
Sure, but in the end, it is the individual that makes the choice to advocate for or engage in violence. Heck, it is even the individual's choice to associate with others who advocate for or engage in violence.
It all comes back to the individual.
I have to assume, at this point, that you are intentionally skipping the point. True, the individual is responsible for his/her actions, but that still evades the point. That individual is made more dangerous by the group effect (aka, group polarization). One suicide bomber is responsible for blowing shit up. But there were many actions, involving a larger group that leads to that final action.
Again, I am not disagreeing with you about the group dynamic.
My original point was simply that not all progressives or all conservatives are suffering from a mental illness. Not all progressives or all conservatives advocate for violence. Individual conservatives or progressives may do so (and those individuals may then form or be part of an extremist group), but that is an individual choice.
Translated:
I'm clueless, but I can help. Just trust my talking points. I got them straight from Hillary's mouth.
