Fe politics versus Fi politics

[Kiddo]

Kiddo... you lump INTJs and ESFPs together?

I lumped Fe shadow people together.

Classical liberalism = conservatism?

Something you apparently haven't realized is that there are two different types of classical liberalism. Social liberalism and Free Market liberalism. You, and most others who identify themselves as "libertarian" are Free Market liberals, which is an ideology that falls to the right, whereas social liberalism, such as your classic hippy, falls toward the left. Very few people are truly "classical liberals" because ideas like a "free market" and "social equality" did not exist the same way in the 18th century as they do today.

 

[ByMySword]

I do. I think you are making a broad generalization about me. Whereas in the past I have made broad generalizations about conservatives, Christians, and INTJs in jest, if you go back and read my pre-Texan invasion posts on those subjects, it will reveal a different picture of who I am. I'm just easily polarized when I encounter members from the Meta group and naturally tend to overgeneralize as an emotional reaction to encountering you "right-wing" minded folks.

How does my assessment of you a broad generalization?

It is something that I notice that you do everytime we interact. I didn't say that you do it all the time, but you do it enough to the point where I just expect it everytime you post.

In jest? Really?

Regardless, this isn't the past. This is now. And now you're justifying your generalizations because to put in better words: you don't like us Texans?

Edit: And like Meta said, I've seen your threads/posts that blatantly generalize when none of us were even in it.

 

[SillySapienne]

I do. I think you are making a broad generalization about me. Whereas in the past I have made broad generalizations about conservatives, Christians, and INTJs in jest, if you go back and read my pre-Texan invasion posts on those subjects, it will reveal a different picture of who I am. I'm just easily polarized when I encounter members from the Meta group .

Wow, Meta, you should feel honored*!!!


*While others should feel highly offended...to even think!!!!

 

[miss fortune]

NOT good for everyone else- how narrow minded can some people be?

I think that everyone who drove Uber to his demise are just as responsible as he is for what ended up happening- y'all would have HAD to have seen it coming, or else you're really super dense yourselves. He viewed you as friends and you were merely concerned about your own entertainment :rolli:

 

[Mr Galt]

I lumped Fe shadow people together.



Something you apparently haven't realized is that there are two different types of classical liberalism. Social liberalism and Free Market liberalism. You, and most others who identify themselves as "libertarian" are Free Market liberals, which is an ideology that falls to the right, whereas social liberalism, such as your classic hippy, falls toward the left. Very few people are truly "classical liberals" because ideas like a "free market" and "social equality" did not exist the same way in the 18th century as they do today.

Republicans (right wing)
Economy: liberal
Social issues: centrist but conservative leaning

Democrats (left wing)
Economy: centrist but liberal leaning
Social issues: liberal

Libertarian
Economy: liberal
Social issues: liberal

Leads me to believe that libertarians don't fall into either category.

NOT good for everyone else- how narrow minded can some people be?

I think that everyone who drove Uber to his demise are just as responsible as he is for what ended up happening- y'all would have HAD to have seen it coming, or else you're really super dense yourselves. He viewed you as friends and you were merely concerned about your own entertainment :rolli:

Who are you to decide what is good for "everyone else"?

Nobody is responsible for Uber's behavior but Uber. I had NO problem with what he was doing, so why should I have told him to stop? I actually enjoyed it. If people had problems with what he was doing, they should have:
a. told him to stop
b. ignored him
Now on to the issue of breaking the rules. He broke the rules. He received a ban. I don't agree with the rules, and I would seek to change them if they began to bother me enough, but being banned for breaking the rules is not something I'm going to call an outrage.

 

[Hexis]

I do. I think you are making a broad generalization about me. Whereas in the past I have made broad generalizations about conservatives, Christians, and INTJs in jest, if you go back and read my pre-Texan invasion posts on those subjects, it will reveal a different picture of who I am. I'm just easily polarized when I encounter members from the Meta group and naturally tend to overgeneralize as an emotional reaction to encountering you "right-wing" minded folks.

Im amused that our mear presence would spawn such a reaction, seriously this makes me go ...

On a side note I dont consider myself "right-wing", more so an omnicrat. There are many things I enjoy about democratic points of view and some liberal ones. But im more for absolute freedom, or as close as it can get. So of course there are things with both left and right winged thinking that I dont like. Its just due to the eminent shift in power in the white house many more right wing issues are in the spot light at the moment.

 

[Kiddo]

Edit: And like Meta said, I've seen your threads/posts that blatantly generalize when none of us were even in it.

Bull. I don't tend to generalize unless either you or one of the CCs is in the thread. You are welcome to prove me wrong though.

Republicans (right wing)
Economy: liberal
Social issues: centrist but conservative leaning

Democrats (left wing)
Economy: centrist but liberal leaning
Social issues: liberal

Libertarian
Economy: liberal
Social issues: liberal

Leads me to believe that libertarians don't fall into either category.

Hey, however you want to put it. Then there are very few true "libertarians" because most people either do value a "free market" or "social equality". Liberalism literally means a rejection of authority, so if you were truly liberal then you would be an anarchist. But all that doesn't matter since I know you value free market liberalism and are thus a right-wing minded person. Of course, you and your other "libertarian" buddies can prove me wrong by marching in a gay pride parade and sending me some pictures. If you demonstrate just as much social liberalism as you do free market liberalism, then I wouldn't be inclined to believe you lean to the right.

 

[miss fortune]

Who are you to decide what is good for "everyone else"?

Nobody is responsible for Uber's behavior but Uber. I had NO problem with what he was doing, so why should I have told him to stop? I actually enjoyed it. If people had problems with what he was doing, they should have:
a. told him to stop
b. ignored him
Now on to the issue of breaking the rules. He broke the rules. He received a ban. I don't agree with the rules, and I would seek to change them if they began to bother me enough, but being banned for breaking the rules is not something I'm going to call an outrage.

If you hadn't gotten the point by now, this is an internet community of sorts- and a part of being a community is to look out for others. That's what the madmins do with the rules (which are here to protect members from different things) and what a member should do for another member who they see in danger of getting banned. I, for one, did send Uber PMs warning him when he was going over the line, but I didn't read all of his posts because sometimes all of the warped flirting/drivel was really boring and annoying to read. As long as he was getting the encouragement from you guys, he felt accepted. You took advantage of that for your own amusement.

I'm guessing you're the sort of friend who would let one of your friends drive drunk as well

 

[Kiddo]

Im amused that our mear presence would spawn such a reaction, seriously this makes me go ...

I can't help it that I have an emotional reaction to you right wing (and Fe shadow) folk. I grew up in Wyoming and was ostracized and discriminated against for who I am because of people who share similar political views (and personality traits) to you guys.

 

[SillySapienne]

Bull. I don't tend to generalize unless either you or one of the CCs is in the thread. You are welcome to prove me wrong though.

What do you mean by "one of the CCs"?

And regardless, why would you generalize when either he, or "one of me", participates in a thread.


*very confused*

 

[Mr Galt]

Hey, however you want to put it. Then there are very few true "libertarians" because most people either do value a "free market" or "social equality". Liberalism literally means a rejection of authority, so if you were truly liberal then you would be an anarchist. But all that doesn't matter since I know you value free market liberalism and are thus a right-wing minded person. Of course, you and your other "libertarian" buddies can prove me wrong by marching in a gay pride parade and sending me some pictures. If you demonstrate just as much social liberalism as you do free market liberalism, then I wouldn't be inclined to believe you lean to the right.

The only reason I care more about the free market than I do about issues such as gay rights or abortion is that the latter two don't affect me NEARLY as much as the state of the economy. I simply support them on principle.

 

[Metamorphosis]

Hey, however you want to put it. Then there are very few true "libertarians" because most people either do value a "free market" or "social equality". Liberalism literally means a rejection of authority, so if you were truly liberal then you would be an anarchist. But all that doesn't matter since I know you value free market liberalism and are thus a right-wing minded person. Of course, you and your other "libertarian" buddies can prove me wrong by marching in a gay pride parade and sending me some pictures. If you demonstrate just as much social liberalism as you do free market liberalism, then I wouldn't be inclined to believe you lean to the right.

Why does that matter? If I vote for the right to abortion, it doesn't count because I don't want the top 5% of the country to pay 60% of the taxes while many people don't pay any taxes (i.e. barely a citizen)? That's ridiculous.

So we can't really be socially liberal because we don't want to screw the people who get paid well. Ok. Apparently you have to be a democratic socialist to have any liberal ideology.

 

[Kiddo]

Why does that matter? If I vote for the right to abortion, it doesn't count because I don't want the top 5% of the country to pay 60% of the taxes while many people don't pay any taxes (i.e. barely a citizen)? That's ridiculous.

Not to get off topic, but it is also ridiculous that the top 1% owns 33% of the nation's wealth and has enjoyed, since the 1970s, 94% of the nation's income growth.

So we can't really be socially liberal because we don't want to screw the people who get paid well. Ok. Apparently you have to be a democratic socialist to have any liberal ideology.

No, as I said before, social liberals aren't true "classical liberals" either. In case you hadn't noticed, life has gotten a bit more complicated since the 18th century and many of the concepts we deal with today could not have even been conceived of by the founding fathers. However, you could own a slave and subjugate women and still be a "classical liberal".

 

[EffEmDoubleyou]

I imagine it makes life a lot easier when you're able to intuit every one of a person's values, allegiances and sympathies simply from their birthplace and political persuasion. That's a neat trick.

 

[Metamorphosis]

Not to get off topic, but it is also ridiculous that the top 1% owns 33% of the nation's wealth and has enjoyed, since the 1970s, 94% of the nation's income growth.

Frankly, people aren't equal. What's ridiculous to me is social welfare policy that promotes not working, seperated families, and progressive taxation that excludes some people from paying anything.

 

[Kiddo]

I imagine it makes life a lot easier when you're able to intuit every one of a person's values, allegiances and sympathies simply from their birthplace and political persuasion. That's a neat trick.

You forgot personality traits.

I never said I "intuit every one of a person's values, allegiances and sympathies simply from their birthplace and political persuasion." I said I have an emotional reaction that leads me to overgeneralize or jest when confronted by those who who are right wing minded. I also have an emotional reaction to those who try to put words into my mouth, but I think I'll leave this thread before you see it.

 

[ByMySword]

Not to get off topic, but it is also ridiculous that the top 1% owns 33% of the nation's wealth and has enjoyed, since the 1970s, 94% of the nation's income growth.

And how did they get to be the 1%? They earned it.

Plus, they pay the highest percent of taxes.

Edit: Damnit. Meta already mentioned that fact.

 

[ByMySword]

Is it just me, or does The Meta Group sound like a mutual funds company?

Edit: And I love how two different conversations are going on at the same time.

 

[SillySapienne]

Is it just me, or does The Meta Group sound like a mutual funds company?

Edit: And I love how two different conversations are going on at the same time.

Totally, and lol.

 

[Kiddo]

And how did they get to be the 1%? They earned it.

Over 80% who are in the top 1% were born into it. Of the less than 20% who graduated to the the top 1%, over half were in the top 5%. I believe the figure was 4-6% of those who are in the top 1% "earned" it. How of many those do you imagine are lottery winners? One of the biggest American myths is that the bottom can get to the top by tightening their boot straps and working hard. The statistics don't lie. America has low social mobility.

Plus, they pay the highest percent of taxes.

The top 1% who own 33% of the nation's wealth pay about 33% of the taxes. That is called paying your share.