Who is this "we" you speak of?

[ClydeCoulter]

I do it. I mean no offense. I'll try to keep that in mind when I post.

We certainly hope so

 

[LibertyEagle]

Personally, I think the idea stemmed from the idea that most of us here, used to agree with most of what Ron Paul stood for and advocated during most of his life. Hence, the "we".

 

[angelatc]

Personally, I think the idea stemmed from the idea that most of us here, used to agree with most of what Ron Paul stood for and advocated during most of his life. Hence, the "we".

That's true, but I think it's also an attempt to claim dominance in an argument. Like insisting that "we" have to fund solar and wind energy projects because it's wrong headed to assume that a market will produce an alternative to fossil fuels. Or "we" have to have bases all over the whole word because "our" enemies are everywhere.

 

[mrsat_98]

I keep reading posts that refer to "we" and "us" as if there is some sort of collective here that can be driven or directed by persuasive speech..

I'll read what you write but make no mistake, this inclusive verbiage is a big red flag to me.

There has been a whole lot of this BS going on since Mr. Bundy stood up.

I am just me, I don't speak for you and you damn sure don't speak for me!



Thought I'd reiterate this sentiment due to recent threads...

You don't speak for us.

We, hmm somebody got a mouse in their pocket ?

 

[otherone]

That's true, but I think it's also an attempt to claim dominance in an argument. Like insisting that "we" have to fund solar and wind energy projects because it's wrong headed to assume that a market will produce an alternative to fossil fuels. Or "we" have to have bases all over the whole word because "our" enemies are everywhere.

argumentum ad populum

 

[klamath]

I have made it pretty clear I am not one of the "we" "Us" libertarian/anarchists or anygroup else on here. I have been told specifically that "We have rejected your ideas" a number of times. I will call out bullshit here just as quick as I would call out bullshit on dailycos or redstate. That is why when people try and put down a point I have made by ridiculing my small number of rep points (pieces of flair) I bust a gut laughing.

 

[donnay]

 

[osan]

I keep reading posts that refer to "we" and "us" as if there is some sort of collective here that can be driven or directed by persuasive speech..

I'll read what you write but make no mistake, this inclusive verbiage is a big red flag to me.

There has been a whole lot of this BS going on since Mr. Bundy stood up.

I am just me, I don't speak for you and you damn sure don't speak for me!



Thought I'd reiterate this sentiment due to recent threads...

I have pointed this very thing out many times and it bears endless repetition because people are in VERY bad thought- and communications habits. Otherwise highly intelligent people mkde this very mistake. I myself make it on rare occasion, though it is usually due to momentaary laziness than a lack of awareness. But one should also be cognizant of the judicious use of such terms, usually enclosed in quotes. And so long as the terms are given explicit definitions within the context of usage, I see no problem with it, though I remain sorely aware of the hazards that remain.

There is no real "we" in the sense of a homogeneous monobloc for which too many statements may be said to hold universally. This is the same problem as with the common usage of terms such as "state", "government", and so on. Way bad juju because it leads to all manner of grossly false perceptions and thought. But on the whole, people are lazier than shit - lassitude being the 'L' in F.A.I.L., the Four Necessities, and the tyrants are having a field day with it.

It must also be revognized that the tyrant has every advantage of human nature on his side, save one: defiance. The Four Necessities speak to the tendency to entropy in human action. Being children of this universe, there is no reason that entropy should not of necessity apply to us as well, and it does. It is easier to be lazy, to fear, to want, and to be ignorant because it requires less energy. Defeating ignorance requires energy. Overcoming fear requires energy. Working for what one has requires energy. It is easier to want than to do. Tyrants have known this forever and have take immensely successful advantage of it.

Freedom is a state of lower psychological entropy than are serfdom and slavery, and it is the psychological aspects of our existences that are the most powerful in the long run. The unwitting slave is sufficiently content to remain at his toil because it is psychologically less taxing than a state of true freedom, which requires much of his mind. He'd prefer to be body-worn than thought-worn. No idea why this is so, but only that it is.

 

[osan]

Im selfish and dont do it. I often call out others when they do it.

"We like Obama!" Uh, no, you like Obama.

---

The Lone Ranger AND Tonto?
(lone + "and" = contradiction)

That always made me laugh...

Perhaps he was the Rump Ranger? Gets a mite lonely out there in the desert by oneself.

 

[osan]

We, hmm somebody got a mouse in their pocket ?

Better than a gerbil up the butt.

 

[DGambler]

Better than a gerbil up the butt.

Richard Gere disagrees

 

[acptulsa]

We, hmm somebody got a mouse in their pocket ?

Never log in without him.

 

[Origanalist]

Better than a gerbil up the butt.

And you know this....how?

 

[William Tell]

We will keep this in mind.

 

[otherone]

We will keep this in mind.

“Badges? We don't need no stinking badges!”

 

[ProIndividual]

I'm guilty...I make myself angry with myself when I say "we" when referring to the actions of the United States government all the time too. Tough habit to break. I'll try harder.

 

[William Tell]

Is the Royal 'we' okay, or are we opposed to that? We would like to know...

 

[DamianTV]

Better than a gerbil up the butt.

Armageddon!

 

[enoch150]

Is it OK for those who continue to support collectivist concepts like national borders to continue using "we" "us" and "our", because they're just being consistent?

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Is it OK for those who continue to support collectivist concepts like national borders to continue using "we" "us" and "our", because they're just being consistent?

If it's logical. For example, "we live in North America" (when discussing people who live in N.A.).