User Tag List

First 45678 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 85

  1. #51
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Seems like they almost revel in their anti-intellectualism anti-academia these days. A present day William F. Buckley would be disgusted.

    And now they are being run by people so stupid they have to write "budget cuts" and "lift American spirits" on their hand. And that almost gives Palin street cred to them. Like, you have to prove how stupid you are to not be considered an elite.
    Although admittedly liberals as a group tend to be more educated in general (amounts main political identifications of liberal/conservative/populist and libertarians). The tea party shift is primarily a libertarian shift against the neocons "conservative" within the Republican party. And the libertarians tend to be significant more educated, 2nd only to the liberals.

    These tea partiers reflect more of WF Buckley's roots (i.e. Goldwater)than his subsequent Trotskyesq/Neocon conversion. Thus if he is turning in his grave it is more likely because of ideological differences and his true disgust would be on the issue of how low his neocon schism has gone the way of Bush Jr/Rush Limbaugh etc.

    Although some may attempt to court the Tea Parties like Palin (although her credentials raises disparities with their ideology), in general the current leadership of the GOP are more warry of them than than the liberals.

    I don't know what to make of them long term as they are more of a backlash of various groups some against both Obama and the others against the Neocon leadership within the GOP and some against both. Who they become depend on their leadership. Right now as a constitutional and antiNeocon I currently see them amicably as enemy of my (i.e. our constitutions) enemy.
    I redact everything I have written or will write on this forum prior to, subsequent with and or after the fact of its writing. For entertainment purposes only and not to be taken seriously nor literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Spamtar - a strange combination of boorish drunkeness and erudite discussions, or what I call "an Irish academic"

  2. #52
    Senior Member ChildoftheProphets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    121

    Default

    @Lux Aeterna: I don't have a problem with America or any other country trying to be the best it can be; I do, however, take issue with countries trying to bully and exploit one another.

    @Spamtar: thanks for the synopsis.

    @Mercury and Blaise: Yeah, since a lot of progressives happen to be intellectual, a lot of conservatives equate intellectualism itself with their ideological "enemy." With attitudes like that, I doubt the culture wars will be ending anytime soon.

    A shame too, since civil debate is the only honorable way to move forward past all the contention.
    "In the opening and shutting of heaven's gate, are you able to play the feminine part?" -- Lao Tzu

    "For when the One Great Scorer comes
    To write against your name,
    He marks - not that you won or lost -
    But how you played the Game."
    -- Grantland Rice

    “Life is a game, boy. Life is a game that one plays according to the rules.” -- from The Catcher in the Rye

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do, and what a man can't do." -- Jack Sparrow

  3. #53
    Senior Member ChildoftheProphets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    121

    Default

    Oh, and Spamtar, do you have any evidence that libertarians are overall more educated than conservatives (i.e. gradute from college at a higher rate or with a higher gpa)?

    I was under the impression that there are currently several different types of libertarians, all quite different from each other:

    1. Blatent nonconformists, eccentrics, and potheads (normally found within the Libertarian Party itself)
    2. Older businessmen who don't really care much for moral crusades (usually found within the Republican Party)
    3. Younger conservatives who find themelves less moralistic than their elders (usually found within either of the above parties)
    And 4. Constitutionalists (usually found within the Constitution Party)

    Any thoughts on this?
    "In the opening and shutting of heaven's gate, are you able to play the feminine part?" -- Lao Tzu

    "For when the One Great Scorer comes
    To write against your name,
    He marks - not that you won or lost -
    But how you played the Game."
    -- Grantland Rice

    “Life is a game, boy. Life is a game that one plays according to the rules.” -- from The Catcher in the Rye

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do, and what a man can't do." -- Jack Sparrow

  4. #54
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChildoftheProphets View Post
    Oh, and Spamtar, do you have any evidence that libertarians are overall more educated than conservatives (i.e. gradute from college at a higher rate or with a higher gpa)?

    I was under the impression that there are currently several different types of libertarians, all quite different from each other:

    1. Blatent nonconformists, eccentrics, and potheads (normally found within the Libertarian Party itself)
    2. Older businessmen who don't really care much for moral crusades (usually found within the Republican Party)
    3. Younger conservatives who find themelves less moralistic than their elders (usually found within either of the above parties)
    And 4. Constitutionalists (usually found within the Constitution Party)

    Any thoughts on this?
    See statistics noted in the following link: In Search of Ideologues in America - Pew Research Center.
    I redact everything I have written or will write on this forum prior to, subsequent with and or after the fact of its writing. For entertainment purposes only and not to be taken seriously nor literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Spamtar - a strange combination of boorish drunkeness and erudite discussions, or what I call "an Irish academic"

  5. #55
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,628

    Default

    I'd seriously not confuse indoctrination with education, being very well schooled in the ideology of libertarianism does not mean you're well educated. I cant believe that I'm reading the same things from the political right wing that I read from the political left wing in the eary ninties.

    I'm actually interested in what would happen if nation no. 1 decided to radically restructure their economy and obey the orthodoxy they've had others, particularly dependent developing world economies, observe until now.

    It would be in direct contradiction of golablisation and global trends, I'm not sure that US corporations would remain embedded in the US if they found they could make greater profits elsewhere for one. I also dont believe that the US could be the catalyst to a global change to the gold standard and pre-war economy by itself, capitalism in one country is about as liable to succeed as communism in one country.

    To put it very, very simply a country with a welfare regime (lets be honest libertarians do not want ANY welfare regime, other than private charity, its not a question of generosity) vs. a country with no welfare regime which sells more coca-cola?

  6. #56
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,628

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blank View Post
    Fuck, people. Why do we even have this dumbass preconceived notion that we need to be #1 at everything anyway?

    Every other country in the rule seems to be fine with not getting up on a moral high horse and feels as though its their duty to police the world, so why do we?

    If the U.S. isn't #1 militarily or economically, it won't be the end of the world. The invisible "bad guys" won't suddenly invade us, and we won't suddenly become defenseless. Get over it. If we change the system, and we're no longer "#1," then we don't deserve to be "#1." IMO, it's a shit ton better to be number 2 or 3 or even 4 compared to following a path to ruin at all costs.
    Because whoever is world military hegemon will also be world cultural hegemon in all likelihood and I would prefer an nominally anglo-saxon nation to either the Chinese or Russians. If only for the fact that I speak english.

    The record on human rights is far better, even the fact that the UK or US could be embarrassed by poor human rights records is very, very telling. To suggest that alternatives to the status quo are all preferable is grossly naive and the privilege of the uninformed or idealistic in the extreme.

    We really and truly are not living in a world were anything would be preferable to this or there is no alternative, there are alternatives, they suck, there could be a lot worse realities.

    Its not the US' duty to police the world alone, it IS fair for US tax payers to at last ask who foots the bill. It is also fair for the rest of the world to question mandates for war, foreign policy and refuse to pay the price in lives and taxes if there isnt a consensus (mainly because the regimes of the world do not circulate the money with warfare, some do it with welfare and prefer it that way).

  7. #57
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    I'd seriously not confuse indoctrination with education, being very well schooled in the ideology of libertarianism does not mean you're well educated. I cant believe that I'm reading the same things from the political right wing that I read from the political left wing in the eary ninties.

    I'm actually interested in what would happen if nation no. 1 decided to radically restructure their economy and obey the orthodoxy they've had others, particularly dependent developing world economies, observe until now.

    It would be in direct contradiction of globalization and global trends, I'm not sure that US corporations would remain embedded in the US if they found they could make greater profits elsewhere for one. I also don't believe that the US could be the catalyst to a global change to the gold standard and pre-war economy by itself, capitalism in one country is about as liable to succeed as communism in one country.

    To put it very, very simply a country with a welfare regime (lets be honest libertarians do not want ANY welfare regime, other than private charity, its not a question of generosity) vs. a country with no welfare regime which sells more coca-cola?
    Yes I agree I didn't distinguish badly educated with educated but that would generally apply to all camps across the board to a degree (however in US universities the idealism of the liberal predominates among the professors as opposed to libertarianism which tends to flow more from independent study or substantial fringes within the narrower law school/economics/political science fields). I'm unaware of a European counterpart beyond the individual nationalists who are resentful of an overbearing EU.

    I doubt even the most fervent libertarian believes that the US can return to the 'traditional libertarian ideal'. I personally in fact am glad of this as to some issues (i.e. environmental issues) yet socialism and globalization 'ideals' likewise seem to run contrary to the US national interest, its federal constitution as well as federalism/nationalism in general. It appears this tea party phenominon is a backlash against against both against GOP and Democratic Party and is strongly influenced by liberatarian ideals but also populists and paleoconservative ideology (Barry Goldwater and Senator Robert Alphonso Taft 1889 –1953)
    I redact everything I have written or will write on this forum prior to, subsequent with and or after the fact of its writing. For entertainment purposes only and not to be taken seriously nor literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Spamtar - a strange combination of boorish drunkeness and erudite discussions, or what I call "an Irish academic"

  8. #58
    Senior Member ChildoftheProphets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    121

    Default

    @ Spamtar: very interesting research. Thanks for that PEW link.

    @ Lark: Education was being measured in self-reported college degrees, college enrollment, and high school diplomas. Nothing about "indoctrination."

    Also, I don't see human rights as a product of Western culture, but rather as a product of republican democracy (a system, which like science, is a mechanism open to all, regardless of a culture's geographic origin). Nor do I see the need for any country, whether European or American, to protect its own human rights through military imperialism.

    If you want to make the case that America has a moral calling to "spread democracy" that's one thing, but saying that we make ourselves safer by that interventionism is completely different. Since 9/11 we've weakened our global power, not increased it.
    "In the opening and shutting of heaven's gate, are you able to play the feminine part?" -- Lao Tzu

    "For when the One Great Scorer comes
    To write against your name,
    He marks - not that you won or lost -
    But how you played the Game."
    -- Grantland Rice

    “Life is a game, boy. Life is a game that one plays according to the rules.” -- from The Catcher in the Rye

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do, and what a man can't do." -- Jack Sparrow

  9. #59
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spamtar View Post
    Although admittedly liberals as a group tend to be more educated in general (amounts main political identifications of liberal/conservative/populist and libertarians). The tea party shift is primarily a libertarian shift against the neocons "conservative" within the Republican party. And the libertarians tend to be significant more educated, 2nd only to the liberals.

    These tea partiers reflect more of WF Buckley's roots (i.e. Goldwater)than his subsequent Trotskyesq/Neocon conversion. Thus if he is turning in his grave it is more likely because of ideological differences and his true disgust would be on the issue of how low his neocon schism has gone the way of Bush Jr/Rush Limbaugh etc.

    Although some may attempt to court the Tea Parties like Palin (although her credentials raises disparities with their ideology), in general the current leadership of the GOP are more warry of them than than the liberals.

    I don't know what to make of them long term as they are more of a backlash of various groups some against both Obama and the others against the Neocon leadership within the GOP and some against both. Who they become depend on their leadership. Right now as a constitutional and antiNeocon I currently see them amicably as enemy of my (i.e. our constitutions) enemy.
    Teabaggers are more WF Buckley in rhetoric, than the neocons, but not much different. Still hawkish on foreign policy, generally. But a little more liberal on social policy.

    But the neocons were generally smarter and more educated than the average teabagger, who is barely literate. It's more of a populist blue-collar thing, but funded by corps.

  10. #60
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,628

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spamtar View Post
    Yes I agree I didn't distinguish badly educated with educated but that would generally apply to all camps across the board to a degree (however in US universities the idealism of the liberal predominates among the professors as opposed to libertarianism which tends to flow more from independent study or substantial fringes within the narrower law school/economics/political science fields). I'm unaware of a European counterpart beyond the individual nationalists who are resentful of an overbearing EU.

    I doubt even the most fervent libertarian believes that the US can return to the 'traditional libertarian ideal'. I personally in fact am glad of this as to some issues (i.e. environmental issues) yet socialism and globalization 'ideals' likewise seem to run contrary to the US national interest, its federal constitution as well as federalism/nationalism in general. It appears this tea party phenominon is a backlash against against both against GOP and Democratic Party and is strongly influenced by liberatarian ideals but also populists and paleoconservative ideology (Barry Goldwater and Senator Robert Alphonso Taft 1889 –1953)
    The thing is that I dont believe the coalition of libertarians and paleocons which support the tea party movement acknowledge any limit, they are pressing for nothing less than the wholesale jettisoning of welfare spending and modern economic regulations. Its not a question of tax cuts or changed spending priorities it is a demand for revoking all that's been in place since before the New Deal. It is a very simple message, long on platitudes and short on practical policies which suits agitators only, which was true of Marxism before it.

    If you ask me I think the entire campaign is populist, so are the paleocon and libertarian ideologies, they mobilise vague grievances against those perceived as the undeserving beneficiaries of taxation, whoever they are. The class war has been inverted but its just as ugly and abstract as when the Marxists raged against the rich as a single, homogenous entity.

    You'll have to define your terms if you're going to talk about "socialism" because, especially in US rehetoric, it is only used in a prejorative sense, its often a misnomer for paternalism, planning and keynesianism, not what I woud consider socialism properly understood.

Similar Threads

  1. [NT] What Strategy Would Win Ron Paul the Republican Nomination/Presidency
    By Vizconde in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 01-18-2012, 03:28 AM
  2. Bob Barr or Ron Paul?
    By 6sticks in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-28-2008, 08:42 PM
  3. Ron Paul
    By Paul3144 in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 03-06-2008, 11:14 AM
  4. Ron Paul Tea Party... will you be donating?
    By file cabinet in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 95
    Last Post: 12-20-2007, 03:19 PM
  5. Ron Paul Wins Another Presidential Debate
    By FranG in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 05-18-2007, 12:31 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO