World Politics

Page 157 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
rhubroma

rhubroma

Apr 2, 2009
8,660
16
17,510
Thoughtforfood said:
Now if you would please refer me to the governments established by left winged radicals that didn't turn into oppressive dictatorships, I will buy the idea that radicals serve a purpose other than developing ideas that, once moderated, produce beneficial results.

Sorry, but radicals will never be of use to real government of people because they fail to recognize the right of people to think and act differently than do they. Radicals kill people who don't agree with them when they get into power. If you think Facism cannot come from either end of the economic spectrum, I would suggest that you have missed a couple of things in 20th century history.
Click to expand...


Perhaps I wasn't being clear. My point about radical political thought, so called, was not connected to extremist and oppressive dictatorships, but rather as, and you should know this better than anyone else TFF, an anecdote to that type of enemic centrist ideology which results in the bland and insipid political debate we get today, that never touches upon the heart of matters, nor informs the masses in any useful way, because it doesn't take a real position on anything since is terrified to loose votes by actually informing well and actually making folks think seriously about the issues.

In Europe the parliamentary democratic governments, of course, have much more liberty than in the simple two-party American democracy, to express in bold and direct ways through parties at the fringes. And the difference in quality and richness of the political debates is apparant.
 
ChrisE

ChrisE

May 18, 2009
3,757
0
0
rhubroma said:
Perhaps I wasn't being clear. My point about radical political thought, so called, was not connected to extremist and oppressive dictatorships, but rather as, and you should know this better than anyone else TFF, an anecdote to that type of enemic centrist ideology which results in the bland and insipid political debate we get today, that never touches upon the heart of matters, nor informs the masses in any useful way, because it doesn't take a real position on anything since is terrified to loose votes by actually informing well and actually making folks think seriously about the issues.

In Europe the parliamentary democratic governments, of course, have much more liberty than in the simple two-party American democracy, to express in bold and direct ways through parties at the fringes. And the difference in quality and richness of the political debates is apparant.
Click to expand...

Also, the mass media is owned by corporations in the US. That would tend to stifle controversial left wing "extreme" views, unless they could be demagogued and easily ridiculed. If those views were taken seriously and debunked part of the trash from the right that would be bad for business.

Instead, we have "fair and balanced" where allegedly both sides of a debate are given equal opportunity to express their views, without any actual journalism to see who is actually telling the truth. You decide. See, Fox is fair and balanced because they have 100 pretty wingnuts and goofy fark Allen Colmes as the other side "debating" issues. Other stations are the same way; in general, they have neutered cenrist Dems on as opposition and it pulls the argument way to the right.

The right will always win arguments when the fallback tools the populace has are just basic human emotions. It takes an effort to learn the law and to understand and take to heart the principles of democracy. That's alot harder to do than to just fall back on tribalism, racism, nationalism, etc.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
rhubroma said:
Perhaps I wasn't being clear. My point about radical political thought, so called, was not connected to extremist and oppressive dictatorships, but rather as, and you should know this better than anyone else TFF, an anecdote to that type of enemic centrist ideology which results in the bland and insipid political debate we get today, that never touches upon the heart of matters, nor informs the masses in any useful way, because it doesn't take a real position on anything since is terrified to loose votes by actually informing well and actually making folks think seriously about the issues.

In Europe the parliamentary democratic governments, of course, have much more liberty than in the simple two-party American democracy, to express in bold and direct ways through parties at the fringes. And the difference in quality and richness of the political debates is apparant.
Click to expand...

Then I did misunderstand your original post, as I agree with your above statements. I do find radical ideas useful in that sense, which is what I was trying to say regarding taking their ideas and moderating them so to be of use to a governing body. I agree that in the US we have a watered down political discourse based mainly on issues that are of little use to anyone. We debate flag pins and whether to use the term "terrorist" with every breath. It is politics for the stupid in most cases, and you are very correct, the real issues are rarely debated by the populace, which is different than in many countries. In fact, I am quite sure that there is more substantive debate regarding our issues in other countries argued by people who are not US citizens and never will be. Our country is the big dumb jock of the world, and our politics is dumbed down to make each choice a good vs evil showdown akin to professional wrestling. It is a sad commentary to see such people discuss "American Exceptionalism" indeed.
 
rhubroma

rhubroma

Apr 2, 2009
8,660
16
17,510
Thoughtforfood said:
Then I did misunderstand your original post, as I agree with your above statements. I do find radical ideas useful in that sense, which is what I was trying to say regarding taking their ideas and moderating them so to be of use to a governing body. I agree that in the US we have a watered down political discourse based mainly on issues that are of little use to anyone. We debate flag pins and whether to use the term "terrorist" with every breath. It is politics for the stupid in most cases, and you are very correct, the real issues are rarely debated by the populace, which is different than in many countries. In fact, I am quite sure that there is more substantive debate regarding our issues in other countries argued by people who are not US citizens and never will be. Our country is the big dumb jock of the world, and our politics is dumbed down to make each choice a good vs evil showdown akin to professional wrestling. It is a sad commentary to see such people discuss "American Exceptionalism" indeed.
Click to expand...

Indeed more substantive debate regarding US issues is often gotten outside America, that's because the US is a point of reference that everybody is watching, because it effects everybody's lives globally.

To return though to the radical views, dear TFF: in short, between Stalin and Mr. Roger's there must be a happy middle road.
 
rhubroma

rhubroma

Apr 2, 2009
8,660
16
17,510
ChrisE said:
The right will always win arguments when the fallback tools the populace has are just basic human emotions. It takes an effort to learn the law and to understand and take to heart the principles of democracy. That's alot harder to do than to just fall back on tribalism, racism, nationalism, etc.
Click to expand...

If the right "always wins" because of its capacity to stroke the emotions of the masses, what's missing in America is a political culture which pressuposes understanding not only legal and democratic principles, as you suggest, but a basic comprehension of history and the reference points it provides that are necessary to any developed critical thinking. Yet what is mostly gotten in the US is information that considers being culturally "well prepared" snobbish and anything "intellectual" to be devious, and thus the political debate is brought down to the lowest common denominator, so that a rather unprepared public feels confortable with how they are addressed.

This, yes, certainly favors the right wing and the popularity of Fox News.

I realize many in the US think that it has to be the same everywhere else around the world, though from my experiences this really is not the case.
 
Hugh Januss

Hugh Januss

Jul 9, 2009
7,966
1,391
20,680
ChrisE said:
Also, the mass media is owned by corporations in the US. That would tend to stifle controversial left wing "extreme" views, unless they could be demagogued and easily ridiculed. If those views were taken seriously and debunked part of the trash from the right that would be bad for business.

Instead, we have "fair and balanced" where allegedly both sides of a debate are given equal opportunity to express their views, without any actual journalism to see who is actually telling the truth. You decide. See, Fox is fair and balanced because they have 100 pretty wingnuts and goofy fark Allen Colmes as the other side "debating" issues. Other stations are the same way; in general, they have neutered cenrist Dems on as opposition and it pulls the argument way to the right.

The right will always win arguments when the fallback tools the populace has are just basic human emotions. It takes an effort to learn the law and to understand and take to heart the principles of democracy. That's alot harder to do than to just fall back on tribalism, racism, nationalism, etc.
Click to expand...

And yet the right wing constantly harps about the "liberal slanted media" as a precaution in case any real news should happen to sneek through.
 
rhubroma

rhubroma

Apr 2, 2009
8,660
16
17,510
patricknd said:
my problem is with the whole strategy of shouting the opposition down to prevent their opinion from being heard by others. if you are right in your beliefs, why are you so afraid the opposing side having their say? i think both sides are guilty in this, and unfortunately it seems more and more to be the accepted norm. the loudest shouter wins the argument.
Click to expand...

Usually when someone starts shouting it is an indication that they have no argument, and that somehow the sheer volume and ferocity of their attack is supposed to compensate for their lack of points.

I don't get to see much American TV in Italy, though I watch the Italian political debates often and it is really telling of a certain human nature, even before being a certain political nature, that those that raise their voices the quickest and usually try and block what's being said by the rival position, are almost always coming from the right.

Seems to me that under pressure, there is always a little fascist in every right wing politician. Prepotency seems to be inbred in them, and they are always right on que. Unfortunately the left side often lets themselves be drowned out by the right's noise, on the principle of maintaining a certain dignified decorum which at times should really be put to the side and one should come out fighting
 
Oncearunner8

Oncearunner8

BANNED
Dec 10, 2009
312
0
0
You reside in Italy.

How in the hell do you know what the good Ole Folks in the USA use for a media source?

I had an opinion about your political stance before but it is very clear for me now.
 
rhubroma

rhubroma

Apr 2, 2009
8,660
16
17,510
Oncearunner8 said:
You reside in Italy.

How in the hell do you know what the good Ole Folks in the USA use for a media source?

I had an opinion about your political stance before but it is very clear for me now.
Click to expand...

Being informed only in the US is clearly a disadvantage to your world view, for, believe it or not, the world knows perfectly well what the "good Ole Folks in the USA use for a media source," and it is rather embarassing.

I'm not sure why you even bothered to have an opinion about my political stance at all, not least of which because I thoroughly anoy you, so it seems you were better off disregarding me totally. That you have not, makes me think you might be confused.

Cheers
 
usedtobefast

usedtobefast

Jul 2, 2009
3,406
1
13,485
28blitt_art-popup.jpg
 
buckwheat

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
Hugh Januss said:
And yet the right wing constantly harps about the "liberal slanted media" as a precaution in case any real news should happen to sneek through.
Click to expand...

Well, they get away with it. Just as they got away with the Chickenhawks such as Mr. 5 Times "I have priorities other than Military Service" being strong on Defense, and the Higher Father telling GWB to start a war. These clowns always go for the big lie and because they know that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public, they get away with it. They know that even if they come out with their "patriotic" insanity, the vast majority of Americans are either idiots or self serving garbage, so they get away with it.
 
ChrisE

ChrisE

May 18, 2009
3,757
0
0
buckwheat said:
Well, they get away with it. Just as they got away with the Chickenhawks such as Mr. 5 Times "I have priorities other than Military Service" being strong on Defense, and the Higher Father telling GWB to start a war. These clowns always go for the big lie and because they know that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public, they get away with it. They know that even if they come out with their "patriotic" insanity, the vast majority of Americans are either idiots or self serving garbage, so they get away with it.
Click to expand...

" Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”

Wash, rinse, repeat.
 
usedtobefast

usedtobefast

Jul 2, 2009
3,406
1
13,485
fatandfast said:
usedtobe did you read the article that went with the art work?
Click to expand...

yes.................
it is similar to some other op-ed things of late. well said i thought.
the funny thing is, i drink tea. f 'em i say. and they look like me . old,white,
grumpy. f 'em! and get off my lawn! *******s...
 
Oncearunner8

Oncearunner8

BANNED
Dec 10, 2009
312
0
0
rhubroma said:
Being informed only in the US is clearly a disadvantage to your world view, for, believe it or not, the world knows perfectly well what the "good Ole Folks in the USA use for a media source," and it is rather embarassing.

I'm not sure why you even bothered to have an opinion about my political stance at all, not least of which because I thoroughly anoy you, so it seems you were better off disregarding me totally. That you have not, makes me think you might be confused.

Cheers
Click to expand...

Have fun this coming summer break.

Me confused maybe, in my opinion your a good example of stupid.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom