User Tag List

First 789

Results 81 to 85 of 85

  1. #81
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,905

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spamtar View Post
    ^What concerns me on articles like these is that it infers a disjointed movement by its most wacky fringe. This is dangerous because by framing the core with emphasis on its fringe makes its fringe stronger. Thus by essentially playing the race card again and highlighting those who jump on the band wagon like Beck and Palin credence it reframes the movement and gives those who would otherwise have little voice the spotlight.

    I would say adding the gun nuts (suporters of the 2nd amendment and the movement for its incorporation to the states via the 14th amendment) to this crowd a fair assessment but the inference that Beck, Palin and the racists are in the drivers seat unfortunately opens up the likelihood that said individuals will have a better opportunity at accessing higher ranks of leadership within this well meaning but disjointed movement.
    The fact that Ron Paul (who the media unfairly ignored if not blacklisted during the Republican Primaries) was carving this breach long before it became popular fortunately give its roots integrity as opposed to the other big name Johnny come latelys.

    At least the article emphasis the fact that greater attention by these participants is focused on the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence (and hopefully other key sources of a free society such as the Federalist Papers, the Magna Carta and the writing of Lord Edward Coke)
    Every movement is dependent on ordinary people who are uncertain about their position. Centrists are more common, but unfortunately they are also usually easy to fool and push around. These kinds of movements have many poles, and therefore many extremists, but the extremists of all sorts will generally exert more influence than the moderates. What happens is a sort of elimination contest ends up taking place between the exteme elements, and as time goes on, a small number of them (arguably one) evenly consolidates control as the single exremist force. The victorious extremists now have even more concentrated power and are the sole voice of the movement (moderates don't yell much). Once that happens, they own the whole thing.

    That pattern in history is the reason I think it's perfecty fair and a good idea to look at the fringe groups. I think that's the whole point behind the article putting so much attention on that one Pam Stout. It was a demonstration of how you have a person who moderate strictly through being a-political, an "ordinary person", that winds up subscribing to very eccentric beliefs as she gets caught up in the hysteria.

    Whether or not these sorts of movements get swallowed up by the extremists is all a matter of how good conditions are, and how the mainstream is in turn perceived. If the economy and other factors just get worse, the establishment looks worse, even more moderates will turn away out of sheer practical discontent, and the extremists have more fodder. If things get better, most of the moderates lose the practical underlying reasons they moved away from the establishment anyhow, and the insurgent movement shrinks and is left with only with crazies that no longer sound credible. Note the comment in the article, that in these bad times, conspiracy theories stop sounding so paranoid. The confusion caused by social stress!

    I think there are only three things that happen to a movement like the tea part movement. 1) It dies shortly, save some longterm stragglers, and ends up being a fad without accomplishing things. 2) Its ranks swell, the process I stated above follows, and some commanding extremist ideology makes it a dangerous movement. 3) It becomes co-opted by the establishment, and may remain aesthetically or minorly shift the paradigm of the establishment, but in practical terms, mostly just gets devoured by the same old stuff.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    In the meantime, to peg the such an amorphous and politically diverse group (fringe or otherwise) with a solid political stance would be futile, as they are ever-changing.
    A goup, maybe not. But this is what we could call a trend. Trends can, and often do, produce groups.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  2. #82
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Every movement is dependent on ordinary people who are uncertain about their position. Centrists are more common, but unfortunately they are also usually easy to fool and push around. These kinds of movements have many poles, and therefore many extremists, but the extremists of all sorts will generally exert more influence than the moderates. What happens is a sort of elimination contest ends up taking place between the exteme elements, and as time goes on, a small number of them (arguably one) evenly consolidates control as the single exremist force. The victorious extremists now have even more concentrated power and are the sole voice of the movement (moderates don't yell much). Once that happens, they own the whole thing.

    That pattern in history is the reason I think it's perfecty fair and a good idea to look at the fringe groups. I think that's the whole point behind the article putting so much attention on that one Pam Stout. It was a demonstration of how you have a person who moderate strictly through being a-political, an "ordinary person", that winds up subscribing to very eccentric beliefs as she gets caught up in the hysteria.

    Whether or not these sorts of movements get swallowed up by the extremists is all a matter of how good conditions are, and how the mainstream is in turn perceived. If the economy and other factors just get worse, the establishment looks worse, even more moderates will turn away out of sheer practical discontent, and the extremists have more fodder. If things get better, most of the moderates lose the practical underlying reasons they moved away from the establishment anyhow, and the insurgent movement shrinks and is left with only with crazies that no longer sound credible. Note the comment in the article, that in these bad times, conspiracy theories stop sounding so paranoid. The confusion caused by social stress!

    I think there are only three things that happen to a movement like the tea part movement. 1) It dies shortly, save some longterm stragglers, and ends up being a fad without accomplishing things. 2) Its ranks swell, the process I stated above follows, and some commanding extremist ideology makes it a dangerous movement. 3) It becomes co-opted by the establishment, and may remain aesthetically or minorly shift the paradigm of the establishment, but in practical terms, mostly just gets devoured by the same old stuff.
    .
    Yes there is some truth in what you said but it appears trends need not be limited to becoming too extreme (i.e. French Revolution, although there are those who say cutting off the heads of some of the leaders of the old regime wasn't extreme enough; ultimately it is a value judgement), burning out i.e. Reform Party, or being co-opted (just about everything in between). Some Co opts are better than others. Also one could say this is the death knell for the competing neoCon movement which has become quiet extreme under Dick Cheney.

    The Civil Rights movement impact on the Democratic party (despite strong Dixiecrat opposition) and the (regardless what you think of them) Religious right impact on the Republicans in the 1980s. See also this Wall Street Journal Article which seems on point. For GOP, Embrace of Tea Party Carries Some Risk - WSJ.com
    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"

  3. #83
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  4. #84

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spamtar View Post
    Its less about the ideal (0% taxation) and more about a return away from the antithesis of the ideal (substantial or total slavery/serfdom). The states of USA was similar to Europe sovereigns in many ways. The states essentially saw themselves as separate countries and they entered into a limited agreement to address foreign invasion and commerce. The agreement put into place strong limitations so that the central authority would respect the individual rights and those of the states.

    More and more the central authority have been coming up with contrived reasons to act in ways it never was intended to act. For example most federal domestic acts are done under the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution. The agreement called for a reasonable number of representative per individual for this limited representation. This was a clause intended merely to regulate commerce and is being treated more and more as general authority to regulate health, welfare and safety. The agreement has been violated.

    In other words it is as if the EU took away all the national sovereignty of the European Nations, dropped a huge load of debt and taxes on those nations and to top it off started to invade other countries with the sovereigns having to flip the bill. Prior to Nixon (but after the civil war) the GOP tended be the party of restraint as far as expansive foreign policy/foreign wars as well as domestic policy. After the neoCons took over the GOP there has been little restraint and the deficit just keep on getting bigger and bigger and the value behind the dollar becomes lesser and lesser.

    This is essentially taxation without representation. And we remember the last time the colonies got fed up with this tax related act/omission.
    With respect Spamtar that's ALL rehetoric.

    The minute the states decided to be a single ECONOMY the writing was on the wall, conservatives, liberals and some socialists have all made the mistake of believing that politics trumph economics, I'm afraid that in peace time that's not the case and its only a relative truth at other times.

    I've got to agree with ALL the criticism, left and right, of the French Revolution which described its natural philosophers and rights as "nonsense on stilts", organic instituions and economic development was the unacknowledged harbringer of all talk about rights and if those things are properly threated the concept of rights becomes entirely nebulous.

  5. #85
    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
    The minute the states decided to be a single ECONOMY the writing was on the wall, conservatives, liberals and some socialists have all made the mistake of believing that politics trumph economics, I'm afraid that in peace time that's not the case and its only a relative truth at other times.
    Although it is a sad state of affairs when it conflicts with the will of the people. I nevertheless tend to agree with you on this point in practice as a natural and foreseeable outcome... regardless if it procured by misrepresentation or whatever other means are used to achive this end.

    Similarly campaign contributions from special interests works as bribes and have a similar effect of co-opting/contradicting the will (if not the property and liberty) of the citizenry. Hopefully the EU will avoid a civil war like the US when one or more of its nations wants to part company with the rest of the EU.
    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"

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