Shooting at Congressional Baseball Practice

[Rubashov]

I do not care who started it decades ago. I care about who is engaged in it now. They are both clearly engaged in it. The right and it's tea party and religious pandering...the left and it's identity politics dividing by race, orientation... both actively attack those on the other side. I remember the "Obama is a Muslim" and "Republicans want you to die quickly" attacks for example.



Well many things have changed since then that would affect the historical records and how that compares to modern climate. Social media, TV and internet access, firearm tech, different social groups with different aims as opposed to the "good ol' days of yore", improvements in personal transportation...

So there are always variable and things in play as far as that goes.

Yeah cause its the way business is done these days if you catch my drift. Always looking to wedge your opponent on a hot button issue that feeds the media and the news cycle.

If you look at the way parties used to campaign, with a manifesto, broad community support and involvement, speeches at factories and so on, it was a more organic process. These days most political parties are more like media organisations, substance and consultation with the community and their constituency is not as important as dominating the media cycle, spinning the days events and finding media friendly sound bites. It cheapens the whole process and these parties only really exists to further their own interests.

That said politics by nature should be an adversarial process but the language and nature of todays politics is really appalling, it also stops people innovating and taking risks and suggesting difficult solutions to complex problems because their opponent will workshop a cheap line and attack them with it. This culture is a big part of what is wrong with politics, especially in the English speaking world.

 

[Rubashov]

My point is that we remember things that happened recently more than things that happened in the past, and the most distant the past, the less we remember, particularly if we were not alive or were not conscious of such things at that time. The argument seems to be that politically inspired violence is worse today than at some never clearly defined moment in the past. This is an assertion that, it seems to be, suffers from this kind of recency bias and it, also, empirically testable. It might be correct, but my guess is that most people nowadays who make this assertion, are not asserting it with any kind of historical context.

As for the acrimony of the current political climate, my sense is that it is worse today than at other times in my life, but I've read a lot of US history, and I'm pretty certain that even today it does not approach what it's been in other periods of our nation's history, ante and post-bellum periods come to mind.

Depression era politics was incredibly violent, also state violence directed against the anti-Vietnam war movement and black civil rights group dwarf what is going on today.

 

[DutchJazzer]

I do not care who started it decades ago. I care about who is engaged in it now. They are both clearly engaged in it. The right and it's tea party and religious pandering...the left and it's identity politics dividing by race, orientation... both actively attack those on the other side. I remember the "Obama is a Muslim" and "Republicans want you to die quickly" attacks for example.

problem is nobody tried attacking democrats for 8 years!


the left projected and said when trump loses their will be anger and violence in the street! they where jus tprojecting!

 

[Siro]

Well, if you read comments on liberal social media facebook pages, you may be surprised by the amount of people who aren't condemning it, but rather applauding it.
Examples: CNN and Vice.

Welcome back. Was getting bored with the old drivel from Dutch and co, so I am excited for the new drivel you are sure to offer.

 

[Archie Moses]

You guys can be condescending all you want but the things I've said are facts and can easily be looked up.
Btw, I'm not a republican nor am I Trumpster.

 

[JazzGal]

Article was written in 2011 after Gabrielle Giffords was shot.

https://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/article/2011/jan/16/political-vitriol-bad-these-days-experts-say-its-b/

. . . None of the professors lauded the state of political civility today, but two periods were cited most often for having the least civility:

The 1850s, which saw passions over slavery split families and fracture the nation, eventually led to the Civil War.

The 1960s, which were marked by divisions over the Vietnam War and civil rights, and the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr.

In the 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama faced false claims that he was a Muslim and wasn’t born in the U.S. But those attacks "were nothing compared to what was said about Barry Goldwater in 1964," said Jeansonne, who wrote a biography of Obama.

Foes of Goldwater, an Arizona senator who was the Republican presidential nominee in 1964, turned his campaign slogan -- "In your heart, you know he’s right" -- into one of their own: "In your guts, you know he’s nuts."

Obama, at a memorial service for the Tucson victims, characterized today’s public discourse as "sharply polarized." But the experts we consulted said the level of political civility has often been considerably lower.

Some examples:

In 1856, U.S. Sen. Charles Sumner of Massachusetts gave a speech criticizing pro-slavery southerners. Three days later, he was beaten so badly -- on the Senate floor -- by U.S. Rep. Preston Brooks of South Carolina that he didn’t return to the Senate for three years.

In 1950, Republican U.S. Sen. Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin entered the national spotlight by claiming Communists had infested the U.S. State Department. A special Senate committee found the allegations groundless, but McCarthy’s Communism crusade continued for several years, until he was officially censured.

And in 1963, a month before President Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, anti-United Nations demonstrators struck U.N. Ambassador Adlai Stevenson on the head and spit on him following a speech he gave in Dallas.

By the time Kennedy arrived in the city, recalled Lawrence University history professor Jerald Podair, people were circulating handbills with a picture of the Democratic president that read: "Wanted for treason."

"It’s always good to step back and look at what we’re saying about each other," Podair said of political rhetoric today, "but I don’t think what we’re saying is so markedly different from the past."

In the past several years, and particularly in the wake of the Tucson shootings, Obey and other citizens have decried the current state of public discourse. One reason is that many people don’t know history, said Janairo, whose specialties include political rhetoric and politics and the media/Internet.

Another key reason, she said, is the nation is exposed to round-the-clock news and instant communication through the Internet.

"Things get echoed loudly, so it seems like there’s more and it’s more intense," Janairo said.

The instant communication -- and the increased tendency of politicians to take extreme positions and demonize their opponents -- have put political civility at its lowest ebb in the past 25 years, according to University of Wisconsin-Whitewater communication professor Richard Haven.

 

[Siro]

You guys can be condescending all you want but the things I've said are facts and can easily be looked up.
Btw, I'm not a republican nor am I Trumpster.

Oh ya, you're a beacon of rationality. You just say it as it is.

 

[franklin]

Article was written in 2011 after Gabrielle Giffords was shot.

https://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/article/2011/jan/16/political-vitriol-bad-these-days-experts-say-its-b/

I was going to point to a lot of these. The "civil divide is at an all time high" line is utter nonsense. Hell, we used to have prominent figures duel each other. Whiskey Rebellion? Battle of Blair Mountain and all the other coal miner protests such as the Ludlow Massacre where the U.S. Government came to the aid of one of the richest people of all time (that one's especially heinous since the government didn't do a damn thing until the miners got the upper hand). Even the treatment of the early LDS.

Point is, the list goes on and on, and political division has always been around and always will be.

 

[Archie Moses]

Oh ya, you're a beacon of rationality. You just say it as it is.

Can you tell me what I posted you have a problem with? You disliked a post I made because I said this was the second Bernie supporter to go on a mudering rampage in the last month or so. Is that not fair to say or did it hurt your feelings?

 

[Siro]

Can you tell me what I posted you have a problem with? You disliked a post I made because I said this was the second Bernie supporter to go on a mudering rampage in the last month or so. Is that not fair to say or did it hurt your feelings?

Everything. From the nonsense about him being a Sanders supporter, as if it's causal. To that garbage about liberals being supportive of the shooter.

And don't worry about my feelings. I'll be okay. I expect you, on the other hand, to storm out and disappear for a few months.

 

[Archie Moses]

Everything. From the nonsense about him being a Sanders supporter, as if it's causal. To that garbage about liberals being supportive of the shooter.

And don't worry about my feelings. I'll be okay. I expect you, on the other hand, to storm out and disappear for a few months.

So you'd rather that it not be discussed and pretend like what I said isn't true or worthy to note? If so, it's cool. Facts don't care about your opinion or feelings or bias.
Also, I don't care if you make fun of me for leaving for a while. I needed it and it was good for me. I was dealing with a lot in my life and needed to make some changes. Mock it, but it helped.

 

[Siro]

So you'd rather that it not be discussed and pretend like what I said isn't true or worthy to note? If so, it's cool. Facts don't care about your opinion or feelings or bias.
Also, I don't care if you make fun of me for leaving for a while. I needed it and it was good for me. I was dealing with a lot in my life and needed to make some changes. Mock it, but it helped.

The only thing that needs to be discussed is your utter lack of understanding of such elementary concepts as selection and confirmation biases. It is outrageous and embarrassing. You need to rectify that, before letting others suffer thru what you have to say. Get on it ASAP.