Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Reblogged:Trump Rage and Psychological Projection

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, whYNOT said:

how can I love America if I don't want ...etc.

Come on man, what do you expect? Maybe you do, but you still choose not to become American. Yet people who immigrate, on average, care less than you? Unless being an immigrant is something that would make life less valuable even though South Africa is inferior to America. You can't expect to criticize immigrants and not apply it to yourself. -You- told me all those kinds of reasons of old habits. 

 

Edited by Eiuol
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

23 hours ago, Eiuol said:

Come on man, what do you expect? Maybe you do, but you still choose not to become American. Yet people who immigrate, on average, care less than you? Unless being an immigrant is something that would make life less valuable even though South Africa is inferior to America. You can't expect to criticize immigrants and not apply it to yourself. -You- told me all those kinds of reasons of old habits. 

 

Hey, you've heard of objectivity? One (I) may recognize the objective value of an action/enterprise (immigration) and in particular, a specific destination (USA) which represents a high objective value, but not wish or need to go there one/myself? One may value a lot of things without having to enact and achieve them. Next you have to be aware of one's hierarchy of values. You are effectively telling me that I can't "know" and understand and value (nor empathize with) what immigrants (most of them) undertake, if I don't "do" it myself, which has non-objective undertones. And then, I may also recognize and stress the dis-value of arbitrarily admitting migrants through open borders, upon the host country.

Edited by whYNOT
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, whYNOT said:

You are effectively telling me that I can't "know" and understand and value (nor empathize with) what immigrants (most of them) undertake

I said it sounds like you don't understand, there's a difference.

6 minutes ago, whYNOT said:

if I don't "do" it myself, which has non-objective undertones.

Nope, I was saying that it would help me understand you. I'm asking because I don't understand why someone who claims to love America doesn't want to become American. It's a relevant question to me, because I would better understand your overall viewpoint if you tell me more information about yourself. But since you didn't answer, that also gives information to me, which I posted about. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Eiuol said:

I said it sounds like you don't understand, there's a difference.

Nope, I was saying that it would help me understand you. I'm asking because I don't understand why someone who claims to love America doesn't want to become American. It's a relevant question to me, because I would better understand your overall viewpoint if you tell me more information about yourself. But since you didn't answer, that also gives information to me, which I posted about. 

 

Man, you gratuitously tried to pin "apartheid mindset" and xenophobia on me: no dice. You have found I''m extremely liberal about ~legal~ immigrants. More than most, in fact. You understand my words. All this trying to "understand" ~me~ is sophistry. As for whether immigrants are going to be good or bad citizens, I think it's an bad error of intrinsicism for officials to make that judgment call - I've repetitively said you can't know. I said one assesses what is known about what they've done, not what one believes is their ideology, nor where they come from, race and nationality. This is thrown out the window with illegal migrants, except some O'ists presume these to be extraordinary "immigrants". That's intrinsicism, too, I reckon. 

 I've noticed from several debates you gotta unearth racist motives in anything I say. Pretend you haven't learned my locale, that I am an average American Objectivist, and all your concerns over me will go away--right? Because you sure as hell do not pounce on other members and their varying positions in this debate the same way. As a mod, I'd believe your function is to be even handed.

Edited by whYNOT
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, whYNOT said:

Man, you gratuitously tried to pin "apartheid mindset" and xenophobia on me: no dice.

You're the one who told me that old habits die hard, so if I were to use your reasoning, being stuck in an apartheid mindset would make sense. But that's not really a good theory here, mostly because old habits don't die hard. The reason it can't apply to you is because the premise is false (in which case what you said is false). That's why brought I it up: that specific reason is absurd. Although that doesn't necessarily mean it's not true.

I am saying though that your refusal to talk about why you haven't immigrated (discussing your values and things like that), I can tell it is a sensitive topic, it bothers you, and even saying that I don't have any negative intentions still wasn't enough. It's a kind of hostility that when I put it together, it doesn't seem like you're thinking very clearly about immigration (yeah, I did suggest it might be some self-loathing, precisely because your bad reasoning would apply to you). 
 

1 hour ago, whYNOT said:

All this trying to "understand" ~me~ is sophistry.

Is it that hard to believe? Understanding doesn't just mean knowing the words you said, it's *understanding* why you say what you say, how you learned what you say, the emotions related to what you say, the reason you care about what you say. You said none of those things, so I ask. That's why said the word empathy before. I'm not talking about compassion, I'm talking about what's going on in your mind. If you did tell me, what do you think would happen?

1 hour ago, whYNOT said:

I've noticed from several debates you gotta unearth racist motives in anything I say.

For one, xenophobia isn't necessarily racism. I said xenophobia because of what you say about immigrants, which are primarily negative, or at least extremely skeptical. I doubt you wanted me to be PC and tone it down for you because you might be sensitive to that word. Like I was saying about Trump, I don't think he's racist, but I think he's ignorant. 

I don't know, but I also would be far less interested in what you have to say. I would get bored much sooner. Why do I pounce harder and you in general? Not because of your positions per se, but because of what you get wrong to reach those positions, or simply because it is factually incorrect about immigrants. 

My meta-concern though, about our discussion, is that too many Oist types take discussions to be a fight where somebody has to win. And if someone asks a relevant personal question, it's a cheap shot and an attempted personal attack. Actually, that's the Internet in general.

Edited by Eiuol
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Eiuol said:

 

For one, xenophobia isn't necessarily racism. I said xenophobia because of what you say about immigrants, which are primarily negative, or at least extremely skeptical. I doubt you wanted me to be PC and tone it down for you because you might be sensitive to that word. Like I was saying about Trump, I don't think he's racist, but I think he's ignorant. 

 

Of course "xenophobia" is the common argument beloved of leftists: Either "you" are for open borders - or - "you" must be a xenophobe! 

Don't worry, they say the same here, and I gather, everywhere. 

What does that impose upon one,  but a false alternative. I.e. You either love "the people" or you are evil, you hate the people. Never mind that you ~primarily~ value your own country and its just laws -- which is why "the people" presumably, want to be there in the first place (not of course, the criminals among them...). 

For the ~supposed~ 'xenophobe' who is not "necessarily" a racist he/she has every right to speak up and question their nation's immigration policies. They cannot apply force. Nearly all do not. Which is the converse to what has been happening this week in waves of attacks against "illegals" from other African countries (some of them are legal immigrants) and their modest shops around the RSA. Violent xenophobia, and its pretext for looting and burning by vile mobs is the most evil of acts. The victims who lose everything fully deserve one's compassion.. 

The "xenophobia", fear of others, you speak of there is a tame and non-violent reaction by US citizens who have that right to complain, whether one thinks irrationally and unfounded, or not. Where does "ignorance" enter when someone perceives a disvalue to his country? The issue is hardly true/false, rather it's good/bad.

Not "necessarily racism", is correct. However "apartheid" certainly implies racism.

Edited by whYNOT
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/10/2019 at 5:14 AM, Eiuol said:

I can't even... I've never even referenced anything you said about open borders. I thought we made progress in discussion, too, because we were working out what you thought I actually was disagreeing about. 

Well, I'm sorry if I seem to be picking on you, but not entirely. You have made unearned presumptions about me too. There is the principle, I'm only concerned about here. Iow, for wherever one's location, what do we do with immigration, in principle and in reality? The problem I have with Yaron's and Binswanger's arguments is they appear to be dropping context, akin to rationalism. The ideal, or principle, is that every human has as his right, free access across borders. There was a time, for instance, the USA admitted just about everybody -- but not without briefly checking on and documenting them, not through "open" borders (do they know the function of Ellis Island? which is one dropped context) - and, unfortunately, some periods of racial quotas. The main context being dropped was that every immigrant back then, was literally left to his own devices. He couldn't seek aid from the government nor have to pay them back in any way. That's as close to complete freedom as anyone has known. 

Those glory days are not going to be recovered by the device of open borders. One could consider the attempt as "the tail-trying to-wag-the-dog-syndrome". Most importantly, if there were full individual rights there (or anywhere), the problem would become moot. People coming from other rights-respecting nations could simply jet in, remain and gain citizenship if they chose; even and although, from other countries, there would still have to be some process for prospective immigrants.

The present reality and context cannot be subsumed to the moral principles (ideals) we all wish for: freedom of movement and individual rights. Similarly, no more than one should ~always and categorically~ practice the virtue of honesty and tell just anyone who asks, the truth, when at potential cost to one's values in certain identifiable contexts and situations. We are not going to bring about the essential transformations of politics by such limited means. It will need a comprehensive overhaul. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Going more into how several contexts can be dropped in favor of a principle, I think it's valid to raise the psychological effects on a populace as well. If a country altruistically welcomes tens of thousands of undocumented refugees/migrants/economic migrants e.g. in Germany, or if they slip over borders into the country like SA, and/or tacitly accepted at times, like the USA, it is a logical assumption that in every sample of - any - people, while there are a greater number of good or harmless ones - also - there're x percentage of hard criminals, y percentage of religious fanatics, z, of psychotics--etc.

There will be those many who are prepared to work - and -  if the government enforces minimum wage laws as most do, they will be willing to labor at much lower rates than the local citizens, and will usually find informal employment. 

What happens in outcome is a great increase in the numbers of unrecorded people of all kinds, good, mediocre and bad, and worsening social (not racial) tensions. The influx of anonymous, untraceable people over a period, has to validly cause citizens to harbor worry, fear, resentment, suspicion and so on. Since one can't visibly see ~specifically and accurately~who is legal and who not (obversely, in Europe, the average citizen will begin to indulge in racial stereotyping of individuals of other races he sees at large), you'll get what seems like "xenophobia" from many. "Morbid dislike of foreigners". Concise Oxford. In parts of EU nations where many incomers haven't at all assimilated, by choice or circumstance, there's the feeling those areas have been "taken over", in rejection of the locals who had earlier invited them in.

If one bears in mind that a large majority of Western citizens are by long exposure~not~ racist - nor often, xenophobic, one can imagine the self-conflicts that each non-racist person has, knowing that there must be many undocumented people around who might be harmful  (or be costing him some livelihood) - and many more who are decent civilians like he. But which?  Against their good will and convictions, the conceivable result is many will begin to dislike such "foreigners".

From the minority of genuine racists or pathologically frustrated individuals, one could anticipate the odd racist attack upon innocent people.

A government cannot have the right to arbitrarily or unilaterally relax its border control. Although its function isn't the psychological well-being of the people, permitting open access to floods of people which so predictably risks creating general social unease, amounts to psychological sacrifices on the populace, and is wrong. Its mandate is the rights of existing citizens above potential/future ones. 

Edited by whYNOT
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...