RE: The left and the right......

RE: The left and the right...... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

stef -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 11:33:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY I really don't need to address anything of your last post, stef. I've made my point, and you've done nothing but confirm it. It would save you a lot of typing to just stick your fingers in your ears and say "LALALALALALA!! I'M NOT LISTENING!!!!" Be careful though, you might fall off your imaginary high horse doing that. ~stef

FirmhandKY -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 11:44:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stef quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY I really don't need to address anything of your last post, stef. I've made my point, and you've done nothing but confirm it. It would save you a lot of typing to just stick your fingers in your ears and say "LALALALALALA!! I'M NOT LISTENING!!!!" Be careful though, you might fall off your imaginary high horse doing that. ahhh, so you like attention as well, I see. [:D] Can't stand being ignored? Well, until you have something of value to add, rather than insults, sarcasm and a desperate need to be noticed, you'll have to learn how to deal with it. FirmKY

NorthernGent -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 11:51:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy On the other hand, I tend to promote things like fiscal conservatism in government. Sinergy, I'm never quite sure what people mean when they talk about fiscal conservatism - any chance of putting some meat on the bones? quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy Where I get branded a socialist sympathizer is when I point out, taking universal health care as an example, is that we in the United States already provide this, at a lousy level of service for an exorbitant price. We're talking the same language here. I don't believe in throwing good money after bad - I believe health and education are more important than tridents. Taxation levels do not need to be increased - the money has to be redirected. In fact, the more I learn, the more I think education has to be the top priority - it's the only way the majority of people will begin to understand the establishment and their propaganda. quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy On a similar thought, I have an issue specifically with this administration because they fostered, for example DHS, which got a bunch of leaders of industry in a room and divvied up the money available to rebuild New Orleans. Then provided a lousy product at exorbitant prices. The consequence of an environment where the market over-rides humanity. quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy and let the rest of the world either sink or swim. Sinergy I agree - a) there's such a thing as the likes of Britain and the US getting their own house in order and b) even if the house was in order, who's to say it is a better house? Sinergy, I take the point that your pragmatic on policy, but is there a common denominator in the policies you like? if so, what is it in your make-up which leads you towards this common denominator?

NorthernGent -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 12:03:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy I believe it is entirely possible to think that side A has good points, and side B has good points, and to vote accordingly. I agree that the right have some good points. Left and right aren't in disagreement on everything. Sections of the right are committed to social provision, as are the left. The right place emphasis on private charity, the left tend to think an organised body such as government is the answer. On this particular issue, I think the right are misguided for various reasons, but I can't dislike anyone who believes in social provision, regardless of the tool of provision (even though I think private charity is like pissing in the wind). In other words, some of us have a difference of opinion in terms of technique, but we're trying to do the right thing and arrive at the same place. What I can't abide are the people who support the likes of Blair, Bush and what is basically genocide (we can dress it up in all sorts of spin and politics and excuse it, but, at it's core, it is genocide). The supporters of these are on the right, that's not to say that all on the right support them (those right-wingers who don't support them are alright in my book). Some democrats support this? Well, if they do, they are not left-wingers - plain and simple. quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy I am still waiting for Monkeyboy's side to come up with good points, but hope springs eternal. Could be a while, best bet is to kill the fucker. If there's a petition going 'round, I'm game enough for signing it.

NorthernGent -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 12:15:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mixielicous i guess i dont know enough about either, coz i cant even BS a reply, LOL I can understood why people think those on the left and right are full of shite and not worth the bother, but the likes of Blair and Bush are not left or right. They're puppets ran by interest groups - they don't have principles and beliefs - they're only interested in power. This doesn't detract from the fact that there are people on the left and right who have a genuine vision based on core principles. I'm disillusioned with the democratic process myself, but turning away from politics isn't the answer. If you don't like the way something is done, then change it............seriously, why not help me overthrow all 'the fuckers and put me in charge? It'll be a tight ship I can tell you...heads on spikes...Spanish Inquisition for dissenters.....witch drowning.....no sex between the hours of 12 and 4 in the afternoon.....lets' do it.

popeye1250 -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 12:26:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn Both sides, instead of drawing a line ... would rather have a real length of line, with which to hang the other side. Why don't you dig a little deeper and start thinking about the works of some of the great thinkers in history - both left and right - you'll find some clues. Why don't you think about the people you know who consider themselves to be left or right and what drives them? My comments were related to how these dynamics exist today. At least in America, the right and left seem so polarized, that they are willing to use any tactic at hand in order to get their way ... hell be damned. The right doesn't really have a vision for our nation. The only vision they have, is the dreaded "liberal" between two slices of bread. They use fear mongering and "Americana" to promote this meal. The same holds true of the left. There is no vision past destruction of the right. They use self-superiority at their weapon. Meanwhile, we have media for profit, healthcare for profit, education system for profit, and serfdom of citizens to multinational corporations ... and BOTH sides blame the other for the way things are. I'm glad Americans have guns ... because I think the day may be coming, where we have to take out nation back by force. Caitlyn, that'd be fun, eh? Surround Washington, D.C. with 20 million armed citizens and shoot anything that moves as they close the circle. Only capture the lobbyists on "K" street and torture them before we kill them! Even Thomas Jefferson said that we should have a Revolution every 20 years! This thing we call government now is totally dysfunctional. If it's not working why have it? I really do think that third, fourth and fifth partys are going to surprise everyone in the next election. Too many people are FED UP with government!

NorthernGent -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 12:47:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Well, like Sinergy I think that the U.S. should have a National Healthcare plan. (The Right doesn't) Agreed. The right look to the market and private charity. The left believe in an organised elected body acting in our interests. For me, the difference between the principles of private charity and government is this: government is regulated (in principle) and well organised whereas private charity is not. I see our government as a corrupt and disgusting manifestation of what a government should be. Ultimately, a government should be a committee of the people elected to ensure fairness (just as we all expect parity in terms of law, it should apply to tax and wealth). We have an ogre of a government because we let them get away with it and we, as a species, are as guilty as them of self-interest and corruption, but in principle, they should simply be you, the lass down the street and I...all working to ensure life is grand for all. quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 I think that we should end all foreign aid programs. (Many onthe left don't some on the Right don't) I don't have a strong opinion here, but I'll add that, per head, the US is way down the list of aid donators. I put a link up a while back of 8 developed nations in terms of state and private aid provision and the US was bottom - I think The Netherlands and Germany were the top two. My point: US aid per head isn't a legitimate conscience crutch when supporting reduced taxation. I'm not saying it applies to you, Popeye - it's a general point. quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 I believe in free speach. (Most on the Left and Right do also.) This is a grey area for me. It's far from clear cut. I value civil liberties more than most, but I'm caught between a rock and a hard place when it comes to extremism. I remember you saying you wanted people who advocate terrorist attacks on US soil to be jailed. This is believing in freedom of speech with limits. quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 I don't believe in "political correctness." (Some on the Left do) I don't have the first fuckin' clue on the meaning of political correctness and, whenever I ask someone, they don't know either. It is a term which invariably has people reaching for dictionaries and if 20 people were asked on this board, they would have different answers. I think political correctness is a propaganda tool to use against the left. So many times I hear "the PC brigade"...hang on, what is PC and who the fuck are the brigade? quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 I believe in labor unions. (Many on the Right don't) Now this is an interesting point. I know Sinergy is a union man so you both may find this interesting. The British Labour Party, which has been in government several times since 1930, is, in effect, a Trade Union party. As far as I'm aware, the Trade Unions' organic link with the Labour Party is unique world-wide. The Unions are the Labour Party. The party was borne out of a backlash to an establishment taking the piss and fought for workers' representation in terms of enfranchisement and working conditions - pay, hours etc. This is the interesting point: the Trade Unions and left-wing government have exactly the same underpinning core principle and that is regulating the economy to ensure fairness and a quality of life for all. The Trade Unions believe in wealth distribution through guaranteeing workers' pay, as does a left-wing government. In Britain, the two are related. Popeye, while fair enough, your above points are policies rather than values. What, at your core, leads an independent to these policies?

NorthernGent -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 1:13:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: darkinshadows Yes it 'exists'-as an ideal- however it is still subject to ones personal ethics so if that is the case - then it cannot exist? But the discussion here has taken on one of politics, not selflessness, and altruism does not exist within it. If you are asking - are you left or right in a non political sense - it would not exist because that would mean taking and choosing a side in which someone is going to 'loose'... only the 'majority' wins. What is the greater good? According to Hitler and the nazis - the greater good is genocide of the jews. In the middle east conflicts - where is the greater good there? I'm hard pushed to champion altruism, but I do believe it is more than possible to help yourself whilst helping society. We all benefit from knowledge sharing and education. Not one of us would be where we are today without the collective effort in our environment - electricity, sanitation, education, innovation, respect, friendship, love, employment - all of these take two to tango. quote: ORIGINAL: darkinshadows the human race would still be scrabbling on the floor for food or climbing through trees - not making tools and living in brick (or should that be glass for some?)houses. True and we've developed through knowledge sharing and creating opportunity i.e. through the group looking after the group - not through the individual looking after number one. The framework to prosper is the group and, without this framework, the individual cannot thrive. quote: ORIGINAL: darkinshadows I love your posts still by the way....[:)] Me too.....ermm I mean I love your posts too [;)] not that you've been about for a while....

NorthernGent -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 1:46:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn My comments were related to how these dynamics exist today. At least in America, the right and left seem so polarized, that they are willing to use any tactic at hand in order to get their way ... hell be damned. In Britain, the influential elements of both the main parties are in the pockets of big business. They've lost sight of any principles and beliefs they once held. They're not left and right - they simply pander to interest groups. This doesn't mean that the grass roots of our left and right wing parties have lost sight of their values. I cannot believe there is no grass roots left and right in the US who cannot abide both the democrat and republican policy makers for selling their souls to the highest bidder. quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn The right doesn't really have a vision for our nation. The only vision they have, is the dreaded "liberal" between two slices of bread. They use fear mongering and "Americana" to promote this meal. The same holds true of the left. There is no vision past destruction of the right. They use self-superiority at their weapon. There will always be a case of the individual believing his/her way is the right way. You could call this a superior complex, or you could call it an opinion that the opposite view is a misguided one. I agree that those at the front of the main parties are a joke...like kids in a playground, but these people are not the grass roots activists who genuinely have a vision. quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn Meanwhile, we have media for profit, healthcare for profit, education system for profit, and serfdom of citizens to multinational corporations ... and BOTH sides blame the other for the way things are. Here, the left place humanity before the market. quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn I'm glad Americans have guns ... because I think the day may be coming, where we have to take out nation back by force. Do it at the election booths. There's no point insinuating you need guns to take ownership of your country. Bush and his cronies were elected, just as Blair and his cronies were elected. You can't wash your hands of them, just like we can't wash our hands of ours. The government reflects the majority. Education and information is the key. If the majority knew what these wankers are doing, and their motives, there would be change. It's too easy at the moment because the establishment flood the news with propaganda, some of it subtle and some of it blatant, but an educated population would seek the truth. Iraq is the best example I can give of blatant genocide staring people in the face and, yet, the majority either do not care, excuse it or refuse to believe it and, consequently, buy the spin - this is a result of sub-standard education and the power of propaganda.

farglebargle -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 1:51:24 PM)
quote: Do it at the election booths. There's no point insinuating you need guns to take ownership of your country. Bush and his cronies were elected, just as Blair and his cronies were elected. You can't wash your hands of them, just like we can't wash our hands of ours. Go reread The Declaration of Independence. Nothing says The Constitution can't be tossed out tomorrow, like the Articles of Confederation prior.

NorthernGent -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 2:03:24 PM)
The way it works in Britain is this: the establishment tap the phones of anyone who poses a threat to their interests e.g. Union leaders etc in an attempt to dig up any dirt which will descredit them. They then have their media allies print any old bollocks - the people read it and believe it. The result: the people turn on those with common interests and the establishment retain their privilege. These people retain their position through propaganda rather than force. I doubt they would use force - they didn't use large scale violence when the people gained the vote and better working conditions and pay (all of which are against the interests of the establishment). Try it and see. Vote them out of government and elect a group who work for the people. It won't happen, but not because the government threaten to use force, it won't happen because the government will use propaganda and the people will lack the education and information to understand their position is based on lies and only serves to maintain the status quo.

NorthernGent -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 2:30:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY I think it's more about a basic difference in how people process what they observe, through their emotional/logical framework of how they understand the world. Sounds reasonable. quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY For example, many talk of "Christians" as if they are all right wingers, but fail to take into account of some very liberal Christian denominations. Just as some think that all atheists are automatically lefties, when in reality, you have some very conservative people who aren't religious. Not here. Many Victorian Christians identified themselves as Socialists - values of charity, equality, fairness etc. The Church of England has vociferously opposed the invasion of Iraq (I'm not religious, but give me Christian opposers of war over market-obsessed secularists any day of the week). The Quakers were major players of the abolition of the slave trade in Britain. I have no problem whatsoever with Christian values - my problem is with the dogma and mobilisation potential of organised religion. quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY One of the things that I look for, when I talk with people, or read their words, is some basic indications of their framework. I mentioned one quick test: looking for "I feel" versus "I think". More detailed: Idealist (Dionysian) : Normative and socially oriented. Emotionally based. "You know, people should ... " "Why can't everyone ..." "Everyone's opinion has equal value ... " "Why can't we just all ... " Idealist are often relativist and get caught up in the "fact-value" fallacy, the error of attempting to reduce normative judgments to statements of empirical fact. Realist (Apollonian): Empirical and pragmatic. Fact based. "Because that's how things are ... " "Prove it! ..." "No one will ever ... " "Everyone is .... " "You think you can change that ... ? " Realist are often absolutists and skeptics. They often fall into the trap of confusing authority for truth. They tend to be less flexible and accepting of new ideas. An Idealist, taking his ideas to an extreme loses touch with reality and becomes a Utopian. A Realist, taking his ideas to the extreme becomes a Cynic. Neither is particularly healthy or productive for society in general. But I think it takes a Utopian dreamer to see possibilities, and a hardnosed Cynic to make them happen. Trying to pigeon-hole "Realist" as "right wing" or "Idealist" as "lefties" isn't always possible, either. Generally, you can place them in those small, straight-jacketed categories, but not always. But you can have someone whose esposed beliefs seem to be "conservative", who, in reality, is a dreamer, and a "liberal" who actually is very reactionary. Personally, for example, I have a core of Idealism that I've learned over time to control with a strong dose of Realism. My guiding belief system is Dionysian, but I've been hit in the head enough times to understand that just because "I believe" something, that if the facts on the ground don't support it, then I need to adjust to them. So much so, in fact, that I'm generally perceived as an Apollonian or even a Cynic. It's one of the reasons that I claim to actually be a classical liberal, although with a slight difference in the belief of man's inherent spirituality - (religion friendly). Operationally, one of the best ways to determine how someone actually processes the world is to ask them the question: Do you believe that man is inherently "good", and that it is social and political forces that cause him to be "bad", or do you believe that man is inherently "bad" and that social and political forces are required for him to be "good". If you believe people to be inherently "good", then, regardless of your stated beliefs, you'll almost always end up on the "liberal" side of the political equation. Likewise, if you believe people are inherently "bad", you'll likely end up on the "conservative" side of the house, when it comes to the political and social programs, and controls that you espouse. FirmKY I must say that was an interesting read, Firmhand. Out of interest, what do you mean by classical liberal? I remain unconvinced with your idealism/realism because of their subjective nature. It's hard to pin them down as representative of a state of mind. For example, you may see the free-market as an idealistic utopia which can never exist because of the interference of left-wingers and their wish to see government intervention - I may see the free-market as hell on earth, but assess it as realistic due to the advantages held by the establishment and their vested interest. In other words, realism is a matter for opinion rather than a state of mind - what you see as utopian, I may see see as realistic and vice versa.

FirmhandKY -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 3:51:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent Out of interest, what do you mean by classical liberal? Classical Liberalism: Classical liberalism (also known as traditional liberalism and laissez-faire liberalism) is a doctrine stressing the importance of human rationality, individual property rights, natural rights, constitutional limitations of government, the protection of civil liberties, an economic policy with heavy emphasis on free markets, and individual freedom from restraint ... ... Classical liberalism places a particular emphasis on the sovereignty of the individual, with private property rights being seen as essential to individual liberty. This forms the philosophical basis for laissez-faire public policy. The ideology of the classical liberals argued against direct democracy "for there is nothing in the bare idea of majority rule to show that majorities will always respect the rights of property or maintain rule of law." ... Classical liberalism holds that rights exist independently of government. Thomas Jefferson called these inalienable rights: "...rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law', because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." ... For classical liberalism, rights are of a negative nature — rights that require that other individuals (and governments) refrain from interfering with individual liberty, whereas social liberalism (also called modern liberalism) holds that individuals have a right to be provided with certain benefits or services by others. My addition - a component of spirituality - means that while I believe in the rationality of man, I also believe that non-rational beliefs are an important part of the human makeup, and critical in making and keeping a human civil society. This makes me "pro-religion" in other words, and the conclusion that ethics and morals can't always simply be "rational" things arrived at by logic. Logic can lead us astray from important truths at times, and cause horrendous suffering and destruction. quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent I remain unconvinced with your idealism/realism because of their subjective nature. It's hard to pin them down as representative of a state of mind. For example, you may see the free-market as an idealistic utopia which can never exist because of the interference of left-wingers and their wish to see government intervention - I may see the free-market as hell on earth, but assess it as realistic due to the advantages held by the establishment and their vested interest. In other words, realism is a matter for opinion rather than a state of mind - what you see as utopian, I may see see as realistic and vice versa. I'll have to delay response on this part for now, but I will get back to it. FirmKY

stef -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 5:23:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY ahhh, so you like attention as well, I see. [:D] I think that's what they call projection, but you tell yourself whatever you need to hear. ~stef

Sinergy -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 5:59:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave I think Left wingers may have a more compassionate view of the way a society should be run based on a sympathetic outlook especially if that sympathy can be expressed by spending other people's money. As opposed to say, Right Wingers who invade Iraq spending other people's (money they borrowed from China, and money the emotionally blackmailed Congress to give them) money. Sinergy

pinksugarsub -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 7:07:39 PM)
This is not an easy topic. The Right (as i identify it) believes in the smallest possible goverment esp when it comes to people's private lives. The Left believes market forces deprive the poor of a dignified existence and seek to create a social safety net. There is room to argue both sides are correct. There is also room to argue that people act in their own self-interest and that neither side holds true to its (perceived) values. i identify as fiscally conservative, socially liberal, anti-Bush and anti War. i think You'd be hard pressed to find many "true believers" on either side. pinksugarsub

Sinergy -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 8:04:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pinksugarsub This is not an easy topic. The Right (as i identify it) believes in the smallest possible goverment esp when it comes to people's private lives. The Left believes market forces deprive the poor of a dignified existence and seek to create a social safety net. Four words: Department of Homeland Security It used to be that apologists for the right wing could make the statement that the Right meant smaller government, but in actual fact Reagan and Monkeyboy broke the mold for adding layers of useless bloat to our government. Sinergy p.s. I like the government when it provides for the common good. Been a long time since I actually saw any of that happening, no matter who was running the show.

juliaoceania -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 8:11:16 PM)
I think these terms are mostly meaningless...I have more in common with Pat Buchanon than I do with Hillary Clinton when it comes to the direction that I think this country should go. I think that I have some very conservative leanings in some ways, my motivation for my positions are different from many conservatives, but nonetheless I hold some of the same positions. I will say this, neoliberalism as far as economic theory, and neoconservatism as a form of enforcement of that economic theory share much in common... they are basically the same thing.

farglebargle -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 8:19:29 PM)
quote: Sinergy, I'm never quite sure what people mean when they talk about fiscal conservatism - any chance of putting some meat on the bones? "Fiscal Conservatism" is what NEOCON PARTY WHORES (NPH) call the policy of "Fiscal Responsiblilty" which, until the NPH's chased all the REAL CONSERVATIVES out of the party, was a central tenant of Conservative philosophy. Fiscal Responsibility means living within your means. Balanced Budgets/Paying Down the Debt/etc. Under Bush, we've created both the Largest Government Ever AND the Largest Debt Ever. (That "Largest Gov't" part SHOULD piss off the "Reagan Republicans". They got their own problem with Party Whores, it seems. To the NPH, it's optional, to the REAL CONSERVATIVE, it's what makes NPHs just Party Whores, and not really worthy of the oxygen they consume. But I'm bitter about the whole NPH takeover, others may have differing opinions.

dcnovice -> RE: The left and the right...... (3/23/2007 8:32:46 PM)
quote: I'm disillusioned with the democratic process myself, Churchill reportedly said that democracy was the worst form of government except for all the others. I think the old boy was onto something.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.09375