Post Reply 198 posts
Politics
  • User avatar
    EvilDan
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2897
    Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 7:05 am
    Location: Dallas

    Politics

    by EvilDan » Fri Mar 29, 2013 6:20 am

    We have already established that I have very different values than everyone. (And I over-analyze things.) I have come to the conclusion that liberalism is as immoral as religion.

    What issue or set of issues make people vote liberal and why?
    Never take anything I say seriously.

    Am I Evil? I am Dan. Yes, I am! :twisted:
  • User avatar
    ShoreSlayer
    Captain
    Posts: 11137
    Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:56 pm
    Location: Vancouver, BC
    Contact:

    Re: Politics

    by ShoreSlayer » Fri Mar 29, 2013 10:38 am

    EvilDan wrote:I have come to the conclusion that liberalism is as immoral as religion.

    Do tell... (legitimately curious here)


    EvilDan wrote:What issue or set of issues make people vote liberal and why?

    I'm not from your country so my response may have little meaning to you. I'm assuming that, for you, liberal = democrats? Up here, one of our major parties is actually called 'The Liberal Party' or 'The Liberals' and they are the current provincial party in power here where I reside (British Columbia) but they are, in fact, anything but. Our NDP (New Democratic Party) is actually far more liberal in their policies and politics than are the liberals and they are my party of choice on most issues and in most elections.

    My personal reasons for voting liberal are quite simple. The more liberal parties tend to have policies and profess values that are most closely aligned with my own. They pledge to spend our tax dollars in areas where I'd like to see them spent and support policies and laws that I agree with. Of course there are areas where I disagree with them but this is as true or more so with all the other parties as well.

    I'm guessing this simple explanation will hold true for most others as well but maybe not. Hope that helps a bit. :cheers:
    So far at least, 2011, 2012 & 2015 were enough for me
    :shred:Book 'em ANDO!! :headbanger:

    :boobs: 2018/2019 Hockeyagi Champion :boobs:
  • sageoftruth
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2021
    Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 9:08 pm
    Location: Boston, MA

    Re: Politics

    by sageoftruth » Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:26 pm

    I'm with Shoreslayer. If you have something insightful, maybe I can run it by my boss and see what he has to say in response.
  • User avatar
    WizardBeast
    Captain
    Posts: 11966
    Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 4:11 pm
    Location: Denver, CO
    Contact:

    Re: Politics

    by WizardBeast » Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:30 pm

    unfortunately, conservatives have been totally saddled with the religious right and their social policies, which are entirely judgmental and awfully intrusive.

    I am pro choice. i am for public transit, good schools for our kids, safe communities, and equality for all types of people. i am for a sensible pathway to citizenship for legal and illegal immigrants. i see positive contributions they have made in my community.

    did i mention i'm pro-choice?

    also, i'm pro choice.

    as "anti-commi" as a lot of conservatives are, i don't know how they get off telling women they can't have abortions, or putting people to death in the penal system. that shit is WAY invasive and something that smacks of communism type laws to me.
    Last edited by WizardBeast on Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    2011, Barge to Hell, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2020 SOOOOON
  • User avatar
    Jaimie38
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2150
    Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 8:29 pm
    Location: Edmonton,Canada
    Contact:

    Re: Politics

    by Jaimie38 » Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:35 pm

    Lenin-Marxist!!!!!




    Federally, I tend to lean Liberal, provincially I tend to lean Conservative( but wow our Premier is bat shit crazy! LOL )


    Like anything, I like to see balance... not too much one way or the other. Like Rob said, we're not American, so our views may be not what you are looking for.
    8 Time Vet.
    Wishlist-West of Hell,Hibria,Powerwolf,WASP,DioDisciples,Loudness,
    DangerousToys,Triumph,UDO,SkullFIST,Striker,Kobra&theLotus,
    TheOrderofChaos,Diemonds,Riot City, WMD,Demons & Wizards
  • User avatar
    WizardBeast
    Captain
    Posts: 11966
    Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 4:11 pm
    Location: Denver, CO
    Contact:

    Re: Politics

    by WizardBeast » Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:36 pm

    Jaimie38 wrote:Lenin-Marxist!!!!!




    Federally, I tend to lean Liberal, provincially I tend to lean Conservative( but wow our Premier is bat shit crazy! LOL )


    Like anything, I like to see balance... not too much one way or the other. Like Rob said, we're not American, so our views may be not what you are looking for.


    Canadians are so reasonable!!!!!!!!!!!! :bangers:

    I'm listening to Rush right now!
    2011, Barge to Hell, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2020 SOOOOON
  • sageoftruth
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2021
    Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 9:08 pm
    Location: Boston, MA

    Re: Politics

    by sageoftruth » Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:36 pm

    Personally, I just want someone who can bring us back economically. However, I can't tell how our country is doing economically, and I have no idea what would be the best approach, so in the end, I just listen and nod my head.

    Anyway, hurry up Dan. The suspense is killing me. I promise I'll read it, even if it's 10 pages long.
  • User avatar
    Jaimie38
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2150
    Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 8:29 pm
    Location: Edmonton,Canada
    Contact:

    Re: Politics

    by Jaimie38 » Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:43 pm

    WizardBeast wrote:Canadians are so reasonable!!!!!!!!!!!! :bangers:

    I'm listening to Rush right now!


    While I support health care, and social support( to an extent) I also want gov'ts to be run like businesses. Why not make money?
    Here in Alberta, obviously the Big Oil provides huge revenues to the gov't that pays for the social programs, infrastructure etc. Then we have people protesting the source of that income. This is where I hate the left---where do you think funding comes from??? Taxes and revenues are what funds the things you like and need.

    The Economic Crisis, gladly, was not felt too bad in Canada. Our banking system is a very solid, conservative, well structured entity. Very regulated.
    8 Time Vet.
    Wishlist-West of Hell,Hibria,Powerwolf,WASP,DioDisciples,Loudness,
    DangerousToys,Triumph,UDO,SkullFIST,Striker,Kobra&theLotus,
    TheOrderofChaos,Diemonds,Riot City, WMD,Demons & Wizards
  • User avatar
    WizardBeast
    Captain
    Posts: 11966
    Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 4:11 pm
    Location: Denver, CO
    Contact:

    Re: Politics

    by WizardBeast » Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:45 pm

    Jaimie38 wrote:
    WizardBeast wrote:Canadians are so reasonable!!!!!!!!!!!! :bangers:

    I'm listening to Rush right now!


    While I support health care, and social support( to an extent) I also want gov'ts to be run like businesses. Why not make money?
    Here in Alberta, obviously the Big Oil provides huge revenues to the gov't that pays for the social programs, infrastructure etc. Then we have people protesting the source of that income. This is where I hate the left---where do you think funding comes from??? Taxes and revenues are what funds the things you like and need.

    The Economic Crisis, gladly, was not felt too bad in Canada. Our banking system is a very solid, conservative, well structured entity. Very regulated.


    i agree, we should spend what we have and do a better job managing revenue. i'm willing to PAY for the services we have via taxes. i'm not just some lib who thinks the money should continue to come from China and debt should just be allowed to skyrocket.

    i also think our welfare system encourages too many people to have a ton of kids and not work, and that has disastrous results.

    i am fiscally conservative in that we should be responsible and yes why not profitable (USA grade A choice weed! haha) but certainly not socially conservative.
    2011, Barge to Hell, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2020 SOOOOON
  • User avatar
    mooyagi
    Captain
    Posts: 21237
    Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 8:25 pm
    Location: Tucson, AZ, USA

    Re: Politics

    by mooyagi » Fri Mar 29, 2013 2:38 pm

    I'm finding it hard to jump into this conversation because liberal and conservative are so loosely defined these days I'm not sure how to really define what they mean. It's different depending on who's part of the discussion.

    I guess to use a really, really broad brush, I look at the world through a much less individualistic point of view. I prefer a society where we all work together towards improving ourselves as a whole instead of fighting it out to see who is best. I believe in the values of shared sacrifice (for example, taxes used for public services with some obvious restraint and responsibility).

    To answer Dan's question, although I do see myself as leaning much more "left" than pretty much anyone I know, I don't believe I've ever voted for someone that represents my values nor do I ever feel like I've voted liberal. Sadly, my votes are strategic in nature. I do not liked the current Republican party platform (I guess you can take my list of issues from there) and I really don't want them running things. This means that I feel like I must vote for the Democratic party candidate simply to try and keep the Republicans out. This becomes a vote for the lesser of two evils as opposed to a vote for what I truly believe in. I would love to feel that I can vote for a third party or write-in candidate but I'm so far at odds with one of the major parties that I feel like I can't. It's really a shame. Let's use an example of the last Presidential election. I voted for Barack Obama mostly because I did not want Mitt Romney as my president. It wasn't just because Mitt is Mitt, but because it would give executive power to a party I dislike. Arizona was considered somewhat of a battleground state, meaning it was projected to be at least somewhat close between the two. Because the state allocates all of its electoral votes to the one with the most votes, I strategically voted for the person that was most likely to challenge Romney for those votes. If I lived in a state that was obviously going to vote for one or the other, I would have felt more compelled to research the other candidates so I could log my vote for the one I most agreed with.
    I should get around to updating my signature
  • sageoftruth
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2021
    Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 9:08 pm
    Location: Boston, MA

    Re: Politics

    by sageoftruth » Fri Mar 29, 2013 2:49 pm

    EvilDan wrote:We have already established that I have very different values than everyone. (And I over-analyze things.) I have come to the conclusion that liberalism is as immoral as religion.

    What issue or set of issues make people vote liberal and why?



    So, I just realized you ended your post with a question. Since we're making you share your insight, I'll give mine. Although I was considering not voting for most of the last election, I eventually gave in. I didn't trust Romney, since a biography on his background suggested that he had no problem with lying (which became clearer during the debates) but I was willing to vote for him if I could be convinced that he and he alone could help the US economy recover. Also, out of all the republican candidates, he was the one who came across as the least scary. If he hadn't been picked as the republican candidate, I would have voted Obama without question. I was genuinely afraid of all of Romney's former opponents, like Michelle Bachman, Rick Perry, etc. My father has met them all personally and they all came across to him (and me) as huge extremists. My father is no liberal, so I knew he was not under any liberal bias when he said that. Lots of things they said publicly reeked of black and white, comic book-style portrayals of the political situation. Regardless, Romney was picked from among them, so that left me feeling indecisive about who to vote for. Just like the Economist said recently, I believed that we needed to be less divided to succeed and one of my favorite things about Obama was that he let both parties in on the discussion and didn't lock the Repulicans away in a corner just because the Democrats won the last election. I was a bit put off when I heard about Romney's stance on abortion, but I felt that he, more than any of the others, could at least keep that on a leash when important things were being discussed.

    Deep into the election, both of them had revealed a number of flaws and mistakes, but I was still indecisive. What changed my mind was when I was told that Romney's campaign had been backed by all of his former opponents financially, and that if he got elected, he would be in their debt. The thought of Romney's choices as president being influenced by Michelle Bachman, or Sarah Palin, or any of the others I had mentioned before was enough to finally get me to cast my vote for Obama.
  • User avatar
    EvilDan
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2897
    Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 7:05 am
    Location: Dallas

    Re: Politics

    by EvilDan » Fri Mar 29, 2013 3:27 pm

    sageoftruth wrote:
    EvilDan wrote:We have already established that I have very different values than everyone. (And I over-analyze things.) I have come to the conclusion that liberalism is as immoral as religion.

    What issue or set of issues make people vote liberal and why?



    So, I just realized you ended your post with a question. Since we're making you share your insight, I'll give mine. Although I was considering not voting for most of the last election, I eventually gave in. I didn't trust Romney, since a biography on his background suggested that he had no problem with lying (which became clearer during the debates) but I was willing to vote for him if I could be convinced that he and he alone could help the US economy recover. Also, out of all the republican candidates, he was the one who came across as the least scary. If he hadn't been picked as the republican candidate, I would have voted Obama without question. I was genuinely afraid of all of Romney's former opponents, like Michelle Bachman, Rick Perry, etc. My father has met them all personally and they all came across to him (and me) as huge extremists. My father is no liberal, so I knew he was not under any liberal bias when he said that. Lots of things they said publicly reeked of black and white, comic book-style portrayals of the political situation. Regardless, Romney was picked from among them, so that left me feeling indecisive about who to vote for. Just like the Economist said recently, I believed that we needed to be less divided to succeed and one of my favorite things about Obama was that he let both parties in on the discussion and didn't lock the Repulicans away in a corner just because the Democrats won the last election. I was a bit put off when I heard about Romney's stance on abortion, but I felt that he, more than any of the others, could at least keep that on a leash when important things were being discussed.

    Deep into the election, both of them had revealed a number of flaws and mistakes, but I was still indecisive. What changed my mind was when I was told that Romney's campaign had been backed by all of his former opponents financially, and that if he got elected, he would be in their debt. The thought of Romney's choices as president being influenced by Michelle Bachman, or Sarah Palin, or any of the others I had mentioned before was enough to finally get me to cast my vote for Obama.


    You, sir, are fucking brilliant! :bangers:
    Never take anything I say seriously.

    Am I Evil? I am Dan. Yes, I am! :twisted:
  • User avatar
    X-Thor
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2891
    Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 11:11 am
    Location: Mexico City, Mexico
    Contact:

    Re: Politics

    by X-Thor » Fri Mar 29, 2013 4:17 pm

    Oh noes! A politics thread!

    And now a political scientist will post. This can only go wrong, so be warned. :P

    I find it funny that right-wing Americans say liberalism is communism, and that they compare Obama to a communist president. You can seriously tell you've never had anything close to communism in politics. I mean, look at TRUE communist organizations in Latin America or Europe... Obama is far more to the economic right that any conservative president in México or (most of) Latin America, I think. Another funny thing is that political theorists that endorse many of the policies promoted by "liberals" (i.e. "extreme" Democrats) do not identify themselves as "liberal". But, well, who the hell listens to political theorists anyway? :lol:

    By the way, "liberal" means something closer to "Classical Liberal" almost anywhere else.

    And to answer your question as to why vote for what is called "liberal" in the US, I'd answer with what John Rawles called the "veil of ignorance". according to this, the only way to design a society in a fair way is to put yourself behind a "veil" of ignorance. What does this mean? You don't get to know what will you be in the society. You won't know your race, gender or economic situation (but you can know, say, history, sociology or economics). How would you make a society then? Rawles said the only answer was to try to maximize the situation of those who'd be worse off, while respecting freedoms and human rights. What does that mean? Well, provide a "safety net" and good "basic" oppotunities (education, health care, etc.) for everyone, so that the little guys don't be that bad, but also give room for economic and social mobility, so that those that work hard are rewarded.

    tl;dr: "liberalism" means making sure the little guy is somewhat taken care of and has good opportunities to grow.

    I guess it really depends on the country. Living in one with the richest man in the world and some regions with poverty levels equal to those in Haiti or Africa, I can only think it makes sense.
    70K 2013 SURVIVOR (Cabin 2120)
    70K 2014 SURVIVOR (Cabin 2565)

    In perpetual post-cruise depression/pre-cruise anxiety.

    Doing my best to be there for 2015.
    --
    Wishlist: Blind Guardian and Saurom. Will probably like 90%+ of the bands onbroad anyway.
  • sageoftruth
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2021
    Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 9:08 pm
    Location: Boston, MA

    Re: Politics

    by sageoftruth » Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:48 pm

    X-Thor wrote:Oh noes! A politics thread!

    And now a political scientist will post. This can only go wrong, so be warned. :P

    I find it funny that right-wing Americans say liberalism is communism, and that they compare Obama to a communist president. You can seriously tell you've never had anything close to communism in politics. I mean, look at TRUE communist organizations in Latin America or Europe... Obama is far more to the economic right that any conservative president in México or (most of) Latin America, I think. Another funny thing is that political theorists that endorse many of the policies promoted by "liberals" (i.e. "extreme" Democrats) do not identify themselves as "liberal". But, well, who the hell listens to political theorists anyway? :lol:

    By the way, "liberal" means something closer to "Classical Liberal" almost anywhere else.

    And to answer your question as to why vote for what is called "liberal" in the US, I'd answer with what John Rawles called the "veil of ignorance". according to this, the only way to design a society in a fair way is to put yourself behind a "veil" of ignorance. What does this mean? You don't get to know what will you be in the society. You won't know your race, gender or economic situation (but you can know, say, history, sociology or economics). How would you make a society then? Rawles said the only answer was to try to maximize the situation of those who'd be worse off, while respecting freedoms and human rights. What does that mean? Well, provide a "safety net" and good "basic" oppotunities (education, health care, etc.) for everyone, so that the little guys don't be that bad, but also give room for economic and social mobility, so that those that work hard are rewarded.

    tl;dr: "liberalism" means making sure the little guy is somewhat taken care of and has good opportunities to grow.

    I guess it really depends on the country. Living in one with the richest man in the world and some regions with poverty levels equal to those in Haiti or Africa, I can only think it makes sense.


    I was a bit confused by the veil of ignorance. Were you saying that whoever designs the societal laws must do so while assuming that he could be anyone in that society, thus preventing him from favoring those from his group?
  • User avatar
    X-Thor
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2891
    Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 11:11 am
    Location: Mexico City, Mexico
    Contact:

    Re: Politics

    by X-Thor » Fri Mar 29, 2013 9:32 pm

    sageoftruth wrote:
    X-Thor wrote:Oh noes! A politics thread!

    And now a political scientist will post. This can only go wrong, so be warned. :P

    I find it funny that right-wing Americans say liberalism is communism, and that they compare Obama to a communist president. You can seriously tell you've never had anything close to communism in politics. I mean, look at TRUE communist organizations in Latin America or Europe... Obama is far more to the economic right that any conservative president in México or (most of) Latin America, I think. Another funny thing is that political theorists that endorse many of the policies promoted by "liberals" (i.e. "extreme" Democrats) do not identify themselves as "liberal". But, well, who the hell listens to political theorists anyway? :lol:

    By the way, "liberal" means something closer to "Classical Liberal" almost anywhere else.

    And to answer your question as to why vote for what is called "liberal" in the US, I'd answer with what John Rawles called the "veil of ignorance". according to this, the only way to design a society in a fair way is to put yourself behind a "veil" of ignorance. What does this mean? You don't get to know what will you be in the society. You won't know your race, gender or economic situation (but you can know, say, history, sociology or economics). How would you make a society then? Rawles said the only answer was to try to maximize the situation of those who'd be worse off, while respecting freedoms and human rights. What does that mean? Well, provide a "safety net" and good "basic" oppotunities (education, health care, etc.) for everyone, so that the little guys don't be that bad, but also give room for economic and social mobility, so that those that work hard are rewarded.

    tl;dr: "liberalism" means making sure the little guy is somewhat taken care of and has good opportunities to grow.

    I guess it really depends on the country. Living in one with the richest man in the world and some regions with poverty levels equal to those in Haiti or Africa, I can only think it makes sense.


    I was a bit confused by the veil of ignorance. Were you saying that whoever designs the societal laws must do so while assuming that he could be anyone in that society, thus preventing him from favoring those from his group?


    It's a thought experiment. But yeah. the idea is that if you don't know where you'll end up, you try to make it so that even those who are worse off are not that bad (Did that make sense? It's hard for me to explain in English). So if you were to design a society, without knowing what your place would be in it, what would you do? Rawles argues that you'd guarantee some sort of basic services for everyone (education, health...). Did I made more sense? I can try going through my university notes and see if I find something more clarifying.
    70K 2013 SURVIVOR (Cabin 2120)
    70K 2014 SURVIVOR (Cabin 2565)

    In perpetual post-cruise depression/pre-cruise anxiety.

    Doing my best to be there for 2015.
    --
    Wishlist: Blind Guardian and Saurom. Will probably like 90%+ of the bands onbroad anyway.
  • sageoftruth
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2021
    Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 9:08 pm
    Location: Boston, MA

    Re: Politics

    by sageoftruth » Fri Mar 29, 2013 10:03 pm

    X-Thor wrote:
    sageoftruth wrote:
    X-Thor wrote:Oh noes! A politics thread!

    And now a political scientist will post. This can only go wrong, so be warned. :P

    I find it funny that right-wing Americans say liberalism is communism, and that they compare Obama to a communist president. You can seriously tell you've never had anything close to communism in politics. I mean, look at TRUE communist organizations in Latin America or Europe... Obama is far more to the economic right that any conservative president in México or (most of) Latin America, I think. Another funny thing is that political theorists that endorse many of the policies promoted by "liberals" (i.e. "extreme" Democrats) do not identify themselves as "liberal". But, well, who the hell listens to political theorists anyway? :lol:

    By the way, "liberal" means something closer to "Classical Liberal" almost anywhere else.

    And to answer your question as to why vote for what is called "liberal" in the US, I'd answer with what John Rawles called the "veil of ignorance". according to this, the only way to design a society in a fair way is to put yourself behind a "veil" of ignorance. What does this mean? You don't get to know what will you be in the society. You won't know your race, gender or economic situation (but you can know, say, history, sociology or economics). How would you make a society then? Rawles said the only answer was to try to maximize the situation of those who'd be worse off, while respecting freedoms and human rights. What does that mean? Well, provide a "safety net" and good "basic" oppotunities (education, health care, etc.) for everyone, so that the little guys don't be that bad, but also give room for economic and social mobility, so that those that work hard are rewarded.

    tl;dr: "liberalism" means making sure the little guy is somewhat taken care of and has good opportunities to grow.

    I guess it really depends on the country. Living in one with the richest man in the world and some regions with poverty levels equal to those in Haiti or Africa, I can only think it makes sense.


    I was a bit confused by the veil of ignorance. Were you saying that whoever designs the societal laws must do so while assuming that he could be anyone in that society, thus preventing him from favoring those from his group?


    It's a thought experiment. But yeah. the idea is that if you don't know where you'll end up, you try to make it so that even those who are worse off are not that bad (Did that make sense? It's hard for me to explain in English). So if you were to design a society, without knowing what your place would be in it, what would you do? Rawles argues that you'd guarantee some sort of basic services for everyone (education, health...). Did I made more sense? I can try going through my university notes and see if I find something more clarifying.


    Nope. I get it now. Thanks. That's a pretty good idea. The challenge would be adopting that mindset. Too many people mistakenly believe that they understand exactly what it's like to be from another group.
  • User avatar
    mooyagi
    Captain
    Posts: 21237
    Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 8:25 pm
    Location: Tucson, AZ, USA

    Re: Politics

    by mooyagi » Sat Mar 30, 2013 6:22 am

    sageoftruth wrote:
    X-Thor wrote:
    sageoftruth wrote:I was a bit confused by the veil of ignorance. Were you saying that whoever designs the societal laws must do so while assuming that he could be anyone in that society, thus preventing him from favoring those from his group?


    It's a thought experiment. But yeah. the idea is that if you don't know where you'll end up, you try to make it so that even those who are worse off are not that bad (Did that make sense? It's hard for me to explain in English). So if you were to design a society, without knowing what your place would be in it, what would you do? Rawles argues that you'd guarantee some sort of basic services for everyone (education, health...). Did I made more sense? I can try going through my university notes and see if I find something more clarifying.


    Nope. I get it now. Thanks. That's a pretty good idea. The challenge would be adopting that mindset. Too many people mistakenly believe that they understand exactly what it's like to be from another group.


    That certainly is a great challenge in this thought experiment though it is a great idea. I'm sure we've all been guilty of making that mistake at one point or another.
    I should get around to updating my signature
  • User avatar
    EvilDan
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2897
    Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 7:05 am
    Location: Dallas

    Re: Politics

    by EvilDan » Sat Mar 30, 2013 9:25 am

    Thanks for the responses so far. I'm interested in hearing more.

    And sage, I saw something "brilliant" in your post last night that I did not see this morning. This morning, I read it far more literally.

    ShoreSlayer wrote:
    EvilDan wrote:I have come to the conclusion that liberalism is as immoral as religion.

    Do tell... (legitimately curious here)


    I plan on fully explaining both positions, separately. It will be far more than 10 pages. It's going to take some time and most likely will be published elsewhere. While it is written more for an US audience, I do discuss the rest of the world. So insight is welcome from everyone.

    I tend to delve too deep, too broad, too quickly for most people to follow, so I've had to back up and explain some basic concepts that many don't know, provide and explain my evidence (pro and con), and show how I've arrived at my conclusions on a position-by-position basis. So I want to start with some people's "hot button" topics. So much of (what I'm currently calling) liberalism appears to me to be consistently intellectually dishonest and logically inconsistent at best. Disinformation abounds.

    While my target audience is the Metal community, I expect the end result to be applicable to all outsiders, artists, and supposed free-thinkers interested in individual liberty. In talking with many, most simply don't understand the implications of their political opinions, cannot articulate them correctly, cannot support them in a debate, and have no grasp of the consequences of their opinions.

    I was considering discussing everything from an economic point-of-view, since it touches almost every policy, intentional or not. However, I don't know if that would be the most entertaining direction to go. Still, I will need to cover some basics initially.

    I want to say so much more, but it'll have to wait. :twisted:
    Never take anything I say seriously.

    Am I Evil? I am Dan. Yes, I am! :twisted:
  • User avatar
    mooyagi
    Captain
    Posts: 21237
    Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 8:25 pm
    Location: Tucson, AZ, USA

    Re: Politics

    by mooyagi » Sat Mar 30, 2013 9:49 am

    EvilDan wrote:So much of (what I'm currently calling) liberalism appears to me to be consistently intellectually dishonest and logically inconsistent at best. Disinformation abounds.


    I think it would help the discussion if you could share what defines liberalism to you.
    I should get around to updating my signature
  • sageoftruth
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2021
    Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 9:08 pm
    Location: Boston, MA

    Re: Politics

    by sageoftruth » Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:31 pm

    mooyagi wrote:
    EvilDan wrote:So much of (what I'm currently calling) liberalism appears to me to be consistently intellectually dishonest and logically inconsistent at best. Disinformation abounds.


    I think it would help the discussion if you could share what defines liberalism to you.


    Patience, Ryan. Can't we just wait to read his article? I am a bit nervous however. Somehow, I'm expecting the "brilliant" thing Dan mentioned to be a logical inconsistency from my last post.
    Last edited by sageoftruth on Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
  • User avatar
    mooyagi
    Captain
    Posts: 21237
    Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 8:25 pm
    Location: Tucson, AZ, USA

    Re: Politics

    by mooyagi » Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:32 pm

    sageoftruth wrote:
    mooyagi wrote:
    EvilDan wrote:So much of (what I'm currently calling) liberalism appears to me to be consistently intellectually dishonest and logically inconsistent at best. Disinformation abounds.


    I think it would help the discussion if you could share what defines liberalism to you.


    Patience, Ryan. Can't we just wait to read his article?


    Nope :P I would like the discussion to continue not stall.
    I should get around to updating my signature
  • sageoftruth
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2021
    Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 9:08 pm
    Location: Boston, MA

    Re: Politics

    by sageoftruth » Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:35 pm

    mooyagi wrote:
    sageoftruth wrote:
    mooyagi wrote:
    I think it would help the discussion if you could share what defines liberalism to you.


    Patience, Ryan. Can't we just wait to read his article?


    Nope :P I would like the discussion to continue not stall.


    Perhaps, but you'll never get at the truth if we aren't free to think and deliberate before we post.
  • User avatar
    mooyagi
    Captain
    Posts: 21237
    Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 8:25 pm
    Location: Tucson, AZ, USA

    Re: Politics

    by mooyagi » Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:37 pm

    sageoftruth wrote:
    mooyagi wrote:
    sageoftruth wrote:Patience, Ryan. Can't we just wait to read his article?


    Nope :P I would like the discussion to continue not stall.


    Perhaps, but you'll never get at the truth if we aren't free to think and deliberate before we post.


    I'm not saying it needs to happen in real time. Dan mentioned his writing will take time. ;)
    I should get around to updating my signature
  • sageoftruth
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2021
    Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 9:08 pm
    Location: Boston, MA

    Re: Politics

    by sageoftruth » Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:43 pm

    mooyagi wrote:
    sageoftruth wrote:
    mooyagi wrote:
    Nope :P I would like the discussion to continue not stall.


    Perhaps, but you'll never get at the truth if we aren't free to think and deliberate before we post.


    I'm not saying it needs to happen in real time. Dan mentioned his writing will take time. ;)


    This is tough. I really want to hear Dan's thoughts, but I also want to give him time to fill in all the logic gaps that come when you don't have time to proofread. So, Dan, is there any chance you could break it into segments, or chapters?
  • User avatar
    KDibildeaux
    Captain
    Posts: 13904
    Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:07 pm
    Location: Tucson, AZ

    Re: Politics

    by KDibildeaux » Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:59 pm

    sageoftruth wrote:
    mooyagi wrote:
    sageoftruth wrote:Perhaps, but you'll never get at the truth if we aren't free to think and deliberate before we post.


    I'm not saying it needs to happen in real time. Dan mentioned his writing will take time. ;)


    This is tough. I really want to hear Dan's thoughts, but I also want to give him time to fill in all the logic gaps that come when you don't have time to proofread. So, Dan, is there any chance you could break it into segments, or chapters?

    I really doubt Dan's ever gonna come out and say anything other than a few cryptic lines here and there. We're too stupid, uninformed and slow to understand :roll: :lol:
    La sabiduría me persigue................pero yo soy más rápida
  • User avatar
    Michael D.
    Ensign
    Posts: 1262
    Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 6:41 pm
    Location: Inver Grove Hts., MN. USA

    Re: Politics

    by Michael D. » Sat Mar 30, 2013 1:42 pm

    :| I’m an Independent Moderate and agree with Kate that expecting Dan to reply to us in his own post makes us uninformed and slow to understand his point of view from his seat which is in the far left field bleachers of life. :roll: :P :? :D
  • sageoftruth
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2021
    Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 9:08 pm
    Location: Boston, MA

    Re: Politics

    by sageoftruth » Sat Mar 30, 2013 1:48 pm

    Well, you guys know him better than I do. I think I'll just back off for now and watch events unfold.
  • User avatar
    DemonNIN
    Midshipman
    Posts: 699
    Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 4:11 pm
    Location: PA
    Contact:

    Re: Politics

    by DemonNIN » Sat Mar 30, 2013 1:53 pm

    I completely agree with Kate's reply... his tid bits of info are VERY cryptic and even I can't figure him out yet..and I have supposedly heard more than everyone so far...eekk this is tough! It all boils down to him being evil :twisted:
    \m/(-_-)\m/
    CABIN #5073 70K : 2011
    CABIN #2027 70K: 2012
    CABIN #2521 BTH 2012
    CABIN #2095 70K : 2013
    CABIN # NONE : 2014 :(
    CABIN #9669 70K: 2015
    CABIN #6707 ; 2016
    CABIN #6407 ; 2017
  • User avatar
    Laura
    Commander
    Posts: 5880
    Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 7:28 am
    Location: cloud 9 chicago
    Contact:

    Re: Politics

    by Laura » Sat Mar 30, 2013 3:47 pm

    What?? Everyone is waiting on The Great and Powerful.....

    Evil :twisted: Dan to speak??

    :beerwink:

    Jk Dan - you know I like to read what you write.
    2009-Wacken-2010-Wacken-2011-70K-Lollapalooza-HoleInTheSky-2012-70K-ColdWaves-2013-Lollapalooza-ColdWaves-2014-ProgNationAtSea-Pitchfork-RiotFest-ColdWaves-2015-RockLegendsCruise-CruiseToTheEdge-2016-ChicagoOpenAir-2017-70K!!
  • User avatar
    EvilDan
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2897
    Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 7:05 am
    Location: Dallas

    Re: Politics

    by EvilDan » Sun Mar 31, 2013 6:33 am

    No worries, sage. I just read something into what you said that wasn't there. Maybe I can find a way to illustrate it another time. I like the way you think and always highly value your input.

    Laura, I did attempt to engage you in a political discussion in December, but you were having none of it. :D

    KDibildeaux wrote:I really doubt Dan's ever gonna come out and say anything other than a few cryptic lines here and there. We're too stupid, uninformed and slow to understand :roll: :lol:


    Thanks, Kate. pbththbth I apologize that I am often cryptic, but sometimes it is necessary in order to protect my IP. (I've literally lost out on hundreds of millions of dollars because I didn't protect myself better in the past.)

    I've been working on this for quite some time. The question I am asked most often is WHY do you think like you do? So unfortunately, I've decided to start actually answering starting with politics.

    I will be breaking this into topics. (I have thousands of pages scattered everywhere, so even the stuff that's already completed needs to be found and polished.) Initially, it'll be pretty basic stuff to provide the foundation, along with my values, but I plan on addressing just about everything: role of government, the economy, taxes, women's issues, marriage, healthcare, drugs, the Constitution, Amendments, privacy, public services, education, immigration, welfare, banking, the media, international relations, safety, special interests, war, compassion, tolerance, personal responsibility, indoctrination, utopia, etc. (What the fuck am I getting myself into?) If there's a specific topic that people are interested in, I will attempt to prioritize it. I'm having a bit of an issue organizing things right now, since I'll start on a topic and get completely derailed because things are so interconnected. (Yes, I derail myself.)

    It would be easy for me to state a certain conclusion (say, that I think our current potus is one of the most despicable, deceitful, mean, vile, disgusting, repulsive, self-absorbed human beings I've ever come across) and just watch the fallout, but I fully expect to be attacked for my purposely incendiary comments. As a result, I need to provide the basis for my opinions... I need to provide the WHY. I have no interest in emotional arguments. I am interested in what can be proven. I expect to learn from others if I make a faulty argument, use fallacious information, misunderstand or misrepresent something. However, I have no interest in baseless personal attacks. (Above was not baseless, since I can support it.)

    I think differently from everyone. I have a different knowledge set. When I just say what I think, people freak. They don't attempt to understand. They don't do their own research. They just insult, accuse, and run. I get exactly the same reaction from liberals when I question their politics as I do from fundamentalists when I question their religion. They just have different nannies.
    Never take anything I say seriously.

    Am I Evil? I am Dan. Yes, I am! :twisted:
  • User avatar
    Laura
    Commander
    Posts: 5880
    Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 7:28 am
    Location: cloud 9 chicago
    Contact:

    Re: Politics

    by Laura » Sun Mar 31, 2013 4:31 pm

    EvilDan wrote:Laura, I did attempt to engage you in a political discussion in December, but you were having none of it. :D


    Oops, think I forgot about that. Was that the group Skype thing you mentioned specifically about politics? If it is, yeah - not so interested in skyping, nor discussing politics unless one on one face to face.
    Last edited by Laura on Mon Apr 01, 2013 4:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
    2009-Wacken-2010-Wacken-2011-70K-Lollapalooza-HoleInTheSky-2012-70K-ColdWaves-2013-Lollapalooza-ColdWaves-2014-ProgNationAtSea-Pitchfork-RiotFest-ColdWaves-2015-RockLegendsCruise-CruiseToTheEdge-2016-ChicagoOpenAir-2017-70K!!
  • sageoftruth
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2021
    Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 9:08 pm
    Location: Boston, MA

    Re: Politics

    by sageoftruth » Sun Mar 31, 2013 8:19 pm

    EvilDan wrote:No worries, sage. I just read something into what you said that wasn't there. Maybe I can find a way to illustrate it another time. I like the way you think and always highly value your input.

    Laura, I did attempt to engage you in a political discussion in December, but you were having none of it. :D

    KDibildeaux wrote:I really doubt Dan's ever gonna come out and say anything other than a few cryptic lines here and there. We're too stupid, uninformed and slow to understand :roll: :lol:


    Thanks, Kate. pbththbth I apologize that I am often cryptic, but sometimes it is necessary in order to protect my IP. (I've literally lost out on hundreds of millions of dollars because I didn't protect myself better in the past.)

    I've been working on this for quite some time. The question I am asked most often is WHY do you think like you do? So unfortunately, I've decided to start actually answering starting with politics.

    I will be breaking this into topics. (I have thousands of pages scattered everywhere, so even the stuff that's already completed needs to be found and polished.) Initially, it'll be pretty basic stuff to provide the foundation, along with my values, but I plan on addressing just about everything: role of government, the economy, taxes, women's issues, marriage, healthcare, drugs, the Constitution, Amendments, privacy, public services, education, immigration, welfare, banking, the media, international relations, safety, special interests, war, compassion, tolerance, personal responsibility, indoctrination, utopia, etc. (What the fuck am I getting myself into?) If there's a specific topic that people are interested in, I will attempt to prioritize it. I'm having a bit of an issue organizing things right now, since I'll start on a topic and get completely derailed because things are so interconnected. (Yes, I derail myself.)

    It would be easy for me to state a certain conclusion (say, that I think our current potus is one of the most despicable, deceitful, mean, vile, disgusting, repulsive, self-absorbed human beings I've ever come across) and just watch the fallout, but I fully expect to be attacked for my purposely incendiary comments. As a result, I need to provide the basis for my opinions... I need to provide the WHY. I have no interest in emotional arguments. I am interested in what can be proven. I expect to learn from others if I make a faulty argument, use fallacious information, misunderstand or misrepresent something. However, I have no interest in baseless personal attacks. (Above was not baseless, since I can support it.)

    I think differently from everyone. I have a different knowledge set. When I just say what I think, people freak. They don't attempt to understand. They don't do their own research. They just insult, accuse, and run. I get exactly the same reaction from liberals when I question their politics as I do from fundamentalists when I question their religion. They just have different nannies.


    I hear you. I think I've seen some of that in the past on this forum (and plenty of others). Heck, I see some of the worst of it on the Escapist, where everyone's trying to sound like the voice of reason, but they make me feel embarrassed to back them even when I agree with them, because they argue just like you described when religion or politics is mentioned. Too bad we couldn't get together and discuss it sometime. I've got a friend from the NRA who likes to talk politics with me, so I'm pretty much used to hearing things that my liberal heritage might not agree with.
  • User avatar
    EvilDan
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2897
    Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 7:05 am
    Location: Dallas

    Re: Politics

    by EvilDan » Mon Apr 01, 2013 7:52 am

    I've been going back and forth on what the best forum would be to share my thoughts. So it could change again.

    I am interested in debating with adults who can rationally support their views when challenged. We can learn from each other.

    I may also solicit non-political questions. I still have my own interpretations and may be lighter and more fun. I already have a few rants lined-up.
    Never take anything I say seriously.

    Am I Evil? I am Dan. Yes, I am! :twisted:
  • User avatar
    EvilDan
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2897
    Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 7:05 am
    Location: Dallas

    Re: Politics

    by EvilDan » Tue Apr 02, 2013 12:14 pm

    What a monumental distraction from what I should be working on.
    Never take anything I say seriously.

    Am I Evil? I am Dan. Yes, I am! :twisted:
  • User avatar
    EvilDan
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2897
    Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 7:05 am
    Location: Dallas

    Re: Politics

    by EvilDan » Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:43 pm

    So I've been considering saying what i think without justification. (That's the hardest part. Making sure that all my references are available.)

    However, it may be best for me to say what I know, and ask people to not believe a word I say, until they verify it for themselves. Prove me wrong.

    EDIT: I can't learn if I'm not exposed to new ideas.
    Never take anything I say seriously.

    Am I Evil? I am Dan. Yes, I am! :twisted:
  • User avatar
    viathyn
    Commander
    Posts: 5638
    Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 4:35 pm
    Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    Contact:

    Re: Politics

    by viathyn » Wed Apr 03, 2013 3:30 pm

    I'll keep this brief.

    My mindset is pretty simple. I believe that every person has the right to chose what they want to do with their lives, provided that
    A) They aren't directly harming other people or taking away their personal freedoms
    B) They allow others to make their own decisions and live their own lives
    C) They take responsibility and cover the costs of their own choices without resorting to huge taxpayer-funded government programs

    I support complete personal and social liberty, small federal governments, privatization, less social programs (but an emphasis on truly helping and motivating those in extreme poverty [ie; on the street], and those with mental conditions such as schizophrenia where integration is much more difficult).

    Anyways, true libertarianism isn't necessarily a feasible way of life. There would always be outliers of people taking things to anarchistic extremes (because not all of us are decent people), and of course those that would fall through the cracks and suffer (and I'm not heartless enough to want to see that happen).


    You want to do drugs? Go for it. Be safe about what you take. Self-regulate. Don't force anyone else to take them. Don't put others in harm's way if you're in an impaired state.

    You want to practice a religion? By all means. Don't force others to live by your personal guidelines, though.

    You want to have an abortion? It's your body, you make the choice. Do it at a professional and safe place.

    You want a sex change? Have one! I sincerely hope you are happier in whatever vessel you end up in. Please cover the bill, though.



    Now, there are areas where I am unsure about how this would work out, such as universal healthcare and civil maintenance. How much government spending is the ideal amount? What kind of quality of life changes could we see with a political philosophy like this? These are questions to ask someone who actually knows about political science. I'm just a dude who wants everyone to be happy and have equal opportunities.
    2011: Cabin #5549
    2012: Cabin #2581
    2013: Cabin #2077
    2014: Cabin #2583
    2015: Cabin #3242


    Please check out my band
    http://www.facebook.com/VIATHYN

  • User avatar
    X-Thor
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2891
    Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 11:11 am
    Location: Mexico City, Mexico
    Contact:

    Re: Politics

    by X-Thor » Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:11 pm

    viathyn wrote: These are questions to ask someone who actually knows about political science.


    Bah, we don't know shit. Neither do economists. :P (OK, they know a bit more than us. Just a bit).
    70K 2013 SURVIVOR (Cabin 2120)
    70K 2014 SURVIVOR (Cabin 2565)

    In perpetual post-cruise depression/pre-cruise anxiety.

    Doing my best to be there for 2015.
    --
    Wishlist: Blind Guardian and Saurom. Will probably like 90%+ of the bands onbroad anyway.
  • User avatar
    EvilDan
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2897
    Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 7:05 am
    Location: Dallas

    Re: Politics

    by EvilDan » Wed May 15, 2013 10:25 am

    viathyn wrote:I'll keep this brief.

    My mindset is pretty simple. I believe that every person has the right to chose what they want to do with their lives, provided that
    A) They aren't directly harming other people or taking away their personal freedoms
    B) They allow others to make their own decisions and live their own lives
    C) They take responsibility and cover the costs of their own choices without resorting to huge taxpayer-funded government programs

    Sorry for the absence. I had to distance myself from humanity for a bit. It's been educational (to say the least) to watch the difference between the treatment of Hugo Chavez and Margaret Thatcher, to watch what happens versus what is reported, etc. :roll:

    Jake - you make it tough. With you being Canadian, and me being far more familiar with American politics, makes this more difficult. I understand Canada (taken as a whole) to be more liberal than the US.

    However, if we were to take your values A, B, C, which I would hope most people here find a reasonable starting point, I would expect people to be outraged at what's been happening for years, instead of blindly following and actively justifying (with faulty facts at best) what they claim to oppose. Emotion trumps reason.
    Never take anything I say seriously.

    Am I Evil? I am Dan. Yes, I am! :twisted:
  • sageoftruth
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2021
    Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 9:08 pm
    Location: Boston, MA

    Re: Politics

    by sageoftruth » Wed May 15, 2013 9:10 pm

    EvilDan wrote: Emotion trumps reason.

    Especially when emotion is supported by said faulty facts which keep making me uncertain what to think. Neither side can agree on what's happening in this world. In every debate I've seen one politician say something about the state of the world/economy/etc. and then the other politician says, "That's not true. This is what's really happening."
    I ran into a similar roadblock with Hugo Chavez today while chatting with my boss. The Economist has been claiming that he's been using Kim John Il/Un's strategy of garnering popularity by portraying his rule as a rebellion against the "Evil American Empire". However, I then hear from my boss that Chavez also worked cooperatively with one of the Kennedys. How could he do that, if was trying to uphold an image as an anti-American revolutionary? In the end, I just didn't know who he was anymore.

    That aside, I definitely see what you mean about Jake's principles and the execution of them in the US. It seems both parties are hell bent on opposing them. The left want to control businesses, the right wants to control immigration, the left wants to oppose gun rights, the right wants to oppose abortion rights... The list goes on. And as you said, both have the gall to act like the other party is the only one that's doing it.
  • User avatar
    EvilDan
    Lieutenant
    Posts: 2897
    Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 7:05 am
    Location: Dallas

    Re: Politics

    by EvilDan » Fri May 17, 2013 5:41 am

    It does seem we've entered a period where people are highly emotionally-invested in their political party. Regardless of the actions of that party, they will find a way to justify them. It kinda seems like die-hard fans of a sports team. Usually they only talk to people who are also fans of the same team, so as a result, all their arguments reinforce each other, with little regard to facts because of their cognitive bias. Introduce a fan of the rival, and all rationality is lost. (However, fans seem to be far more aware of, and honest about, their team's shortcomings/faults than they are when it comes to politics.)

    The problem really is that you can't trust what any media outlet is saying. You have to go to the source yourself. Find corroborating or refuting evidence yourself. Weigh all arguments yourself. Too often, people are lazy. They believe what they want and never challenge themselves on why. They find sources that will reinforce their beliefs, and they don't stray beyond them. For example, it's extremely easy to see the pattern of sources for "news" posted on this forum. (Again, cognitive bias.)
    Never take anything I say seriously.

    Am I Evil? I am Dan. Yes, I am! :twisted:
Post Reply 198 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests