Are there any conservatives on this forum?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Republican Reptile here (P.J. O'Roarke's term for libertarian fiscal conservative). I do see mostly liberal thinking on this board, but I think it is helpful to acknowledge and know that there are two sides to a debate and find out what that other side is (Did you know anthropomorphic global warming is not a complete fraud, that there are people with good reason to think it is happening?!?). This other political site seems to my radical right: http://www.politicalforum.com/forum.php A good place to go to get the another side of story.

aelreth:
In case if anyone is bored here is a simple chart to determine how liberal, conservative, libertarian or statist you are.

http://www.nolanchart.com/survey.php

Alright, I'll bite *taking survey, DING!* Nolan Survey says: Centerist with a heavy tilt toward conservative. A little further right than normal but GodDAMN those questions were biased as all hell.

xDarc:

Da Orky Man:
And I, like other here, find myself agreeing with Revnak. Relative to most gaming forums, this one is surprisingly international, with less than half our populaation from the US.

Yeah, I need to find another forum.

What is about Europeans to obsess about America anyway? I have US/Italian dual citizenship and I have been to Europe enough to no longer look forward to going there.

My first visit was in 1987 when I was 5, and jesus christ were the other children all so jealous and so rude. Americans aren't indoctrinated to bad mouth Europeans from a young age. Americans don't care about Europe. The average American only even considers what is happening in Europe when they are thinking of going somewhere for a vacation.

Why is the reverse not true? Why are they so quick to tell you what is wrong with your country- but if you even mention anything about theirs they will instantly dismiss your stupid American opinion because what could what could you possibly know about it? -and it never seems to dawn on them how hypocritical this is.

I just have better things I should be doing.

As Thaluikhain said, the US is more important on a global scale than just about any other nation on its own (the EU is probably on-par with the US economically, but not individual nations within it). As such, someone who lives in a smaller nation is much more likely to have read and learnt extensively about the global superpower, than someone in that superpower is to have read extensively about that smaller nation. That's not to say that American's necessarily know little about a certain country, but as a relatively average Australian, I daresay I know much more about political systems and issues in the US, than the average american knows about Australian politics. That's not designed to be an insult to americans, or an indication of my lack of modesty, it is simply how nations of different sizes view each other.

You said it yourself. Americans don't care about europe, and only checks out what's going on when they're going on holiday. I don't know about you, but I'd be a little snarky if a huge number of people saw my nation as nothing but a big playground for them to visit when they're bored.

I fancy myself as a conservative because I uphold the conservative ideals.
Just happends that said ideals are considered Socialist by American conservatives.

So I just call myself a social-liberal if I really need a label.

Also xDarc. I don't know about you, but if a large country.

1: Attempts to police my country.
2: Attempts to bribe my countries leadership, completely disregarding democratic elections, and lawss.
3: Only stops to see whatever is going on there if they wish to go sight-seeing.

You can be pretty sure I wouldn't take it lying down. The US has means to do a lot of really dubious things, and the moral thing to do then would be to 'not' do any of those things. But it does.

Haven't heard too much under Obama, but I have little reason to believe that the practice stopped once George Bush stepped down, although he was a bit more open about it.

As for our knowledge about the US...

In schools I've been taught just as much about the Middle East and Africa (Not so much about South America/Asia) As I've been taught about the middle east. I've been taught equally about the various major religions of the world, creating a larger understanding of the situation on the world in terms of religion.

And the knowledge sticks. There are some theories as to why, you can say Europeans are more international. Which is probably true, and can be attributed in large to the EU.

A more sensible one is that the countries use a more liberal policy internationally, and as such knowledge about foreign nations is vital. Whereas for Americans, their country is large enough (And indeed, very much conservative enough in their international dealings) for the vast majority of their country to never have to learn about the rest of the world. There is simply little need for such things as second-third languages and geography/world history.

And Americans interest in Politics are just seems to be generally lower (Bet they feel that nomatter what they do their goverment is controlled by corpora---- Oh, nevermind)

As such the political news cannot really be extended out to something they cannot relate to (60 seconds around the world anyone? When I first heard of it I headdesked)

Xan Krieger:
This is because the staff deem certain conservative views to be bannable offenses.

Is it the views, or how they are presented though? I'll get onto your example in a second, but I think that claiming the moderators (who are from various places and very rarely post their opinions on religion and politics threads) have an inherent bias is unfounded, and comes across as trying to claim victimisation.

For example, here's one I got suspended for a long time ago (my forum health was red when the forum health bar first started). There was a thread asking people the first law they'd pass if they ruled the world. I said I'd ban gay marriage and I said it that way, not in some offensive manner. That law would be like many US states so I didn't see the problem with it. Other people said they'd allow gay marriage. I got suspended for my conservative viewpoint while the liberals didn't even get a warning.

I am not going to inherently disagree with your example, I would have to see the post in full to comment properly. I would suggest that the moderators deemed it to be either 1) a low-content post (if it were just "I would ban gay marriage") and/or 2) it was seen as being offensive to groups who visit the escapist, and/or 3) it was seen as an intent to troll. This can be something of an issue generally, and hence why there was a thread created by a moderator to discuss moderation of R&P stickied at the top of this forum. Were it neither of the above, then that is why an appeals system exists (and did exist before the health bar was instituted if I remember correctly, even if not so openly) - either because it was unfair moderation on your post, and/or you could have contacted a staff member about the discrepancy between the moderation of your posts and the "liberals".

After all, it could indeed have been unfair moderation at the time, and were it so I would have supported you in any sort of appeal.

However, it is hard to claim that there is some form of liberal bias when people are currently allowed to post opinions against gay marriage (as I note that you do, albeit from a more general anti-marriage standpoint) - it is only once they cross the line into being offensive and derogatory that they get moderator action. For an example, see pro_family_lover and how, until the poster became outwardly offensive and hostile, no moderator action was taken against their viewpoint - but it was taken against those who disagreed in an impolite manner (there were many warnings and bans handed out to those who called them a troll or got too angry and offensive back). That hardly sounds like "liberal bias" to me.

Also, you claim that "conservative views [are] bannable offences" but clearly that is false - the fact there are conservative posters here (see previous posts for why, even if you do not think they are conservative, they may be) and there are discussion topics that come up all the time that are not just "circle-jerks" that merely holding a conservative viewpoint does not get someone banned. There would not be anyone speaking out against gun control or socialised healthcare or against evolution if your claim was true, yet clearly there are such posters who are still on the boards and have received no moderator action when such views are presented in a pleasant and non-combative manner. I would almost wager that more "liberal" posters have been banned in the last twelve months than "conservative" posters, which also hurts the credibility of such a claim.

generals3:

Hardcore_gamer:
Of course I am a conservative, I already made it obvious that I am and why on my other thread that the liberals had to drag into the gutter.

To be fair that topic was already in the gutter the moment you posted it. I mean "Slightly less disgusting than..." when describing left leaning ideologies isn't really gonna spark a lot of interesting discussion.

I have yet to see any liberals or socialists get punished on the forum for their endless talk about how right-wingers are nazi-fascists who want to enslave the world. Yet when I say the same about the left, the completely lose their shit and report bomb me.

Superbeast:
snip

Good news
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.125750.2626861
Suspension Details
Duration: 3 days
Post: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.125750.2626861
Reason: We don\'t like intolerance around here.

Actually got probation for the same post
Probation Details
Duration: 3 days
Post: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.125750.2626861
Reason:

Hardcore_gamer:

I have yet to see any liberals or socialists get punished on the forum for their endless talk about how right-wingers are nazi-fascists who want to enslave the world. Yet when I say the same about the left, the completely lose their shit and report bomb me.

I have yet to see any liberals or socialists talk on the forum about how right-wingers are nazi-fascists who want to enslave the world.

And have you missed the bans on people like Stagnant, Rustlin' Jimmies, and a couple more whose names (and reasons for getting banned, really) escape me at the moment?

@Xan Krieger
Dunno, I'd point to the fact that this was OT. Moderation is (or at least is supposed to be) more lenient regarding political views in R&P. I wonder whether you would've received a suspension in this subforum for the content. Or maybe you would've received a warning for the post in question, but for low content rather than the statement therein.

@Hardcore_gamer
You were extremely confrontational in that post. I even recommended you EDIT it to defuse it. You declined. I also can't help but notice that you are strawmanning right now. I'm not aware of similarly confrontational left-wing posts that remained unmoderated. As was already stated in this thread, numerous left-wing posters were moderated and even banned for their attacks on right-wing posts that drove them to lose their manners. It's less the content and more the way in which we conduct ourselves that ends up costing folks of any political persuasion their accounts on here.

Skeleon:
@Xan Krieger
Dunno, I'd point to the fact that this was OT. Moderation is (or at least is supposed to be) more lenient regarding political views in R&P. I wonder whether you would've received a suspension in this subforum for the content. Or maybe you would've received a warning for the post in question, but for low content rather than the statement therein.

@Hardcore_gamer
You were extremely confrontational in that post. I even recommended you EDIT it to defuse it. You declined. I also can't help but notice that you are strawmanning right now. I'm not aware of similarly confrontational left-wing posts that remained unmoderated. As was already stated in this thread, numerous left-wing posters were moderated and even banned for their attacks on right-wing posts that drove them to lose their manners. It's less the content and more the way in which we conduct ourselves that ends up costing folks of any political persuasion their accounts on here.

Sad fact: That post was before R&P existed. My views are different now though, I'd have said something like outlawed marriage and replaced it with civil unions for everyone. As for it being low content, the same could be said of 90% of the posts in that thread. You are right though, mods are more lenient here now.

Skeleon:

@Hardcore_gamer
You were extremely confrontational in that post. I even recommended you EDIT it to defuse it. You declined. I also can't help but notice that you are strawmanning right now. I'm not aware of similarly confrontational left-wing posts that remained unmoderated. As was already stated in this thread, numerous left-wing posters were moderated and even banned for their attacks on right-wing posts that drove them to lose their manners. It's less the content and more the way in which we conduct ourselves that ends up costing folks of any political persuasion their accounts on here.

I can vouch for this personally, i have pretty low forum health

I'm sure there is a black conservative on these forums somewhere. Anyways, I usually just say a couple things and leave it at that. Especially when most responses are met with extreme vitriol from the outset. Most people here aren't really for a discussion, just approval from their own or to beat up on the one or two opposing views. That pretty much sums up the site as far as the religion and politics section is concerned.

However the rest of the site is pretty amazing, so be sure to peruse the rest of it.

BlackConservative:
-snip-

All I'll say is that this guy is one of those conservative posters I can respectfully disagree with most of the time.

I'll also have to agree that many people here aren't genuinely interested in serious discussions (which sometimes puts off those who are), but, OP, I think you'll be able to form your own opinion on who's who if you stick around for a while.

The black conservative, most rare and mythical of men.

Anyway, maybe part of it is, a conservative post a viewpoint, and suddenly he's got a dozen people shouting at him. He gets angry because he feels like he's not being allowed to put his viewpoint, and since he's angry he post something in heat. Suddenly everyone reports that post and he's getting a warning message.

I have in fact gotten a warning message AFTER I apologized for a post and made peace with the person it was targeted at, openly and on the forum, but chose not to edit the original post so people know that yes, I did it, though I did stamp on their an edit that pointed out the post below that apologized for the original.

I have conservative viewpoints regarding individual freedoms and economics. I'm non-religious.

But there is a definite 'Post a viewpoint that doesn't agree with the majority, prepare to get smothered by a bunch of people jumping in to tell you why you're wrong and how you cannot possibly be right in any manner', whether it's conservative fiscal policies or religion.

Bentusi16:
The black conservative, most rare and mythical of men.

Anyway, maybe part of it is, a conservative post a viewpoint, and suddenly he's got a dozen people shouting at him. He gets angry because he feels like he's not being allowed to put his viewpoint, and since he's angry he post something in heat. Suddenly everyone reports that post and he's getting a warning message.

I have in fact gotten a warning message AFTER I apologized for a post and made peace with the person it was targeted at, openly and on the forum, but chose not to edit the original post so people know that yes, I did it, though I did stamp on their an edit that pointed out the post below that apologized for the original.

I have conservative viewpoints regarding individual freedoms and economics. I'm non-religious.

But there is a definite 'Post a viewpoint that doesn't agree with the majority, prepare to get smothered by a bunch of people jumping in to tell you why you're wrong and how you cannot possibly be right in any manner', whether it's conservative fiscal policies or religion.

Again, I'm going to point at the likes of Stagnant and Rustlin' Jimmies and mention that kind of fate is not conservative-exclusive on this forum. There were a couple of conservative posters that really could make a person forget their manners. Not naming names of course. Nor will I name a couple liberal posters who I wish were not liberals cause they'd make me look bad by proxy.

Oh for crying out loud, did I just pull a "Both sides do it" here? Jeez.

Quoting two of your posts as I feel they link together.

Xan Krieger:

Good news
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.125750.2626861
Suspension Details
Duration: 3 days
Post: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.125750.2626861
Reason: We don\'t like intolerance around here.

Actually got probation for the same post

Well, I would certainly have appealed the double-punishment you got for that post to begin with. I reckon that had you explained more fully you would have avoided any mod wrath (though I take on board that your views regarding marriage have changed since then, and you have developed a fuller perspective/ability to explain). I reckon that you could have made the case that the post was not intolerant, but that might have required a fuller explanation when you made said post.

I also would have raised the responses you got for that post with the moderation team - one with no discussion value (#43), one calling you a troll (#46), and the post that is largely abuse (#51).

It could also be because your views were conflated with those of another poster (who also received mod wrath, though in my opinion justly) saying "Ban all gays.. any homosexual activity is too be dealt with in any way possible." Or, as Skeleon pointed out that it was Off Topic, and moderation in R&P is a little different (as I said earlier, hence the stickied thread from a Moderator).

So yes, you probably could have been able to challenge that suspension/probation - although I would not have been surprised if it stuck for "low content" reasons (see below).

Xan Krieger:
Sad fact: That post was before R&P existed. My views are different now though, I'd have said something like outlawed marriage and replaced it with civil unions for everyone. As for it being low content, the same could be said of 90% of the posts in that thread. You are right though, mods are more lenient here now.

To be fair, if I was a Mod (and it is probably a good thing I am not in light of this), I would have either punted that thread across for Forum Games (assuming it existed at the time), or locked it and given the starter a warning for a thread with no (as in pointless) discussion value, or handed out warnings like candy for "low content". I would not have just targeted your post - but then again forum standards have shifted since then (a new Code of Conduct was created which made it an offence to call people trolls, I believe things like that were permissible before).

I still do not think it shows moderator bias - particularly as I have pulled up examples of other posters (which have said far worse things than you on the subject) which received no action, and the moderators even stated that it was because the poster had not directed their attacks at any member of the forum.

Also, we have to go back to societal perspectives too. There is nothing which says that an anti-gay marriage stance is necessarily a "conservative" view. For example, in Britain our Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative party (the most right-wing mainstream political party) is the one who proposed a bill to legalise gay marriage. Admittedly over half of his party voted against the bill, but he did have triple-figure support from his own party MPs (and the bill passed thanks to support from Labour, the Liberal Democrats, Independents, Scottish and Welsh members of parliament - so politicians running the spectrum from just-right-of-centre, centrist to the left wing). Naturally such a position may, from your own perspective, prevent said right-wing politicians from being "proper conservatives" or "properly right wing" - and that is an opinion you are allowed to hold, but it does show the utter clusterfuck that trying to label things as "liberal" or "conservative" can be on an international forum (and hence seriously dents the idea of a "liberal bias" amongst the moderators).

I also think you might be wrong on R&P not existing back then, I am sure that I joined up to debate in this part of the board seven months before your post - but I accept that I could be misremembering (I may have originally joined to ask for computer/console advice or something).

spartandude:
I can vouch for this personally, i have pretty low forum health

Yup, I have been involved in a fair number of very charged discussions but (thus far) have never received any moderator action in the entire four years I have been posting on this website, with the vast (vast) majority of my posts in Religion and Politics.

Gorfias:
Did you know anthropomorphic global warming is not a complete fraud, that there are people with good reason to think it is happening?!?

Anthropological Anthropogenic. Sorry about the stupid nitpick.

That was embarrassing. I got it right in the other thread. I'm still hating myself for my own stupidity.

EDIT: It was a good discussion. Learned a bit about the sequester from everyone.

Personally I feel that some people don't get a warning because of what they say, but the way they say it. I've seen enough posts like that. Take pro family lover for example. He/She had objectionable opinions, but largely remained unmolested by the moderation until he/she/it started to rave about how everyone was destroying the united states with gay marriage.

As long as you're not insulting someone, you can get away with a lot. Maybe that's just me.

It's interesting to get a view of the "other side" either way.

EDIT: It seems someone ninja'ed me about pro family lover. Oh well.

I got my first warning when I called someone numb nuts, and the second time when I went on a long tirade about another person.

I deserved both of them.

Superbeast:
Yup, I have been involved in a fair number of very charged discussions but (thus far) have never received any moderator action in the entire four years I have been posting on this website, with the vast (vast) majority of my posts in Religion and Politics.

Ditto. My two black marks were (a) linking a wikipedia article explaining futanari to an inquiring poster (which unfortunately had a picture) and (b) a low content post that I disputed but ultimately could not really get around it.

Gorfias:
Republican Reptile here (P.J. O'Roarke's term for libertarian fiscal conservative). I do see mostly liberal thinking on this board, but I think it is helpful to acknowledge and know that there are two sides to a debate and find out what that other side is (Did you know anthropomorphic global warming is not a complete fraud, that there are people with good reason to think it is happening?!?). This other political site seems to my radical right: http://www.politicalforum.com/forum.php A good place to go to get the another side of story.

Apparently the other side of the story is that white supremacism is a myth, science is a cult and people are unable to confront the truth about ufos.

Would I get banned for trolling if I joined and started offering Marxist criticism of all the right-wing talking points?

Superbeast:
snip

I do love the last post in that thread
"Am I the only one who finds it kind of ridiculous that people are free to talk about executing entire countries, murdering anyone who annoys them with the mods taking no action yet someone mentions outlawing gay marriage and only then do they do something?

Seriously people, priorities. You are free to disagree with these people but taking no action against death threats but acting on a little homophobia is a bullshit kneejerk reaction.
Furthermore it tends to annoy people and thus cement them in their position making them turn against whatever group even more."

As for R&P not existing, the oldest thread in R&P dates back to Nov 4th 2012, the post I was suspended for dates July 18th, 2009. Feel old yet?

Xan Krieger:

Suspension Details
Duration: 3 days
Post: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.125750.2626861
Reason: We don\'t like intolerance around here.

Moderation used to much more uneven back then. It's one of the things that has improved greatly.

I don't really believe in the "conservative victimisation" argument. If you go back and look at the many banned conservatives (Harmonic, Bandaidone, Joshing, XpowderX, etc.), you will see that they were nearly all pretty awful at adhering to the forum rules: frequently disrespectful, contemptuous, nettling, abusive and generally disruptive to polite discourse. I can't think of one banned conservative who did not deserve it, and I'd argue some were even lucky to last as long as they did.

It is no doubt however tiring for many conservatives to find half a dozen replies (some snarky) for every comment they put down because of the numbers imbalance, so I'm not surprised plenty back out.

The Gentleman:
Ditto. My two black marks were (a) linking a wikipedia article explaining futanari to an inquiring poster (which unfortunately had a picture) and (b) a low content post that I disputed but ultimately could not really get around it.

That fist one must have sucked! I have nearly done that once or twice but have noticed a source I was linking to either had inappropriate adverts/banners or just contained random spam, and stuff like that. Also, looking back on some of the debates I have had in the past I think I am quite lucky to have escaped mod wrath once or twice, I remember some conversations regarding the conduct of the Israeli government/Israeli troops that became incredibly heated, with snide remarks hurled from both sides.

Xan Krieger:
I do love the last post in that thread (snip)

Yeah, I agree with that one, though someone earlier makes a good point about potential tongue-in-cheek responses (though I have already said what I would have done with that thread had it been in my power, for better or for worse). It is also amazing how many people have been banned when looking through old threads!

As for R&P not existing, the oldest thread in R&P dates back to Nov 4th 2012, the post I was suspended for dates July 18th, 2009. Feel old yet?

Oh hell yeah I am feeling old right now.

Although I was apparently wrong about R&P existing back then, the date you posted has something to do with forum archiving and space. I went back through my post history, and my first post in R&P was "POSTED: 23 November 2009 1:41 am". So I do not know when this sub-forum was actually created, but at the least I was right about the year...

I was also wrong on why I joined the Escapist, my first post(s) were in some sort of thread about Archery. The vast majority of my posts usually have something to do with Religion and Politics (and associated things) though, even if they were in Off Topic. I cannot believe this sub-forum did not exist when I joined, that really does make me feel old (my first post was before I went back to uni...and I graduated last year).

Frission:

As long as you're not insulting someone, you can get away with a lot. Maybe that's just me.

A 2nd big deal: I've gotten warnings for too brief a post (linking and youtubes and pictures with statements not enough to equal a post) and thread necro.

It's interesting to get a view of the "other side" either way.

In spite of what I've read, you can actually get someone to change their mind on a topic.

Agema:

Moderation used to much more uneven back then. It's one of the things that has improved greatly.

That, or we cover our tracks better. I used to be down right rude but learned to chill some. Then I just responded in kind and that could get me spanked without the opposition also getting spanked until people pointed it out that I got spanked but the guy that started the spat did not. In the case I have in mind, they did end up spanking the other guy.

But I've lost some liberal/leftist/opposition types that I really enjoyed arguing with, such as Dr. Vornoff. Happens.

I still write, this is a great place to exchange ideas. We just have to work harder on being civil (which sometimes isn't fun... but it does force me to try to back up my claims and post things that are material.)

Overhead:

Apparently the other side of the story is that white supremacism is a myth, science is a cult and people are unable to confront the truth about ufos.

Is it? I can believe that there are extreme opinions left and right out there, but honestly, on major issues (abortion, gay marriage) the left seems to not even know there are rational, grounded, non-despositive arguments out there. I think they need to know them and not react snidely, comparing genuine dissent to alien kidnappings.

Would I get banned for trolling if I joined and started offering Marxist criticism of all the right-wing talking points?

Depends if you really believe the Marxism and can have something to write that isn't just a link or youtube or necro sort of thing or deliberately antagonizing. Ie, calling someone a capitalist pig vs. showing a graph displaying greater revenues and wealth spread in societies that went from capitalist to Communist.

I wouldn't join up with any group labelling itself conservative but if someone else reviewed my individual stances it's the group I would be tossed into.

I try to evangelize logical thinking and point out actions that, when repeated by all in the long term, leads to the end of actor's society or represent a hypocrisy on their part when applied to another situation that has the same base idea but differs in flavor.

Since were talking about warnings, I got a warning for saying that people only voted for Obama because they wanted their free shit, "gimmies." Gimmies in this case is being used as a synonym for shit. Skeleon, who I am assuming does not know English as a first language being from Germany, got offended because he felt I was calling him a gimmie...

I even explained it. Got the warning anyway. Didn't even bother writing an appeal because in my experience, not just here, but in forums in general- it is a complete waste of time (more so than posting on forums themselves.)

My political views are all over the place, so putting myself on one end of the political spectrum is a little hard for me.

I tend not to pigeon hole myself into lib/con

There are some topics, issues, ideas where I am lib and some whee I am conservative. I would not like myself as a human being if I was staunchly one or the other since they are both presently and historically bat shit crazy.

xDarc:
Since were talking about warnings, I got a warning for saying that people only voted for Obama because they wanted their free shit, "gimmies." Gimmies in this case is being used as a synonym for shit. Skeleon, who I am assuming does not know English as a first language being from Germany, got offended because he felt I was calling him a gimmie...

I even explained it. Got the warning anyway. Didn't even bother writing an appeal because in my experience, not just here, but in forums in general- it is a complete waste of time (more so than posting on forums themselves.)

while i dont know the actual post, from the way you described it i can understand why you got into trouble. saying people only voted form obama because they wanted free stuff is flame baiting.

Kopikatsu:

Ha! I agree with him on all points, and had a few good laughs along the way.

And so, I have to ask you now. You disagree with the ideology, but can you deny the truth behind his assertions? Your rights are only guaranteed by power alone. Say you have a sandwich, that you've bought with your own money. You claim you have a right to that sandwich, and it is yours. I can walk up, punch you in the face, and take that sandwich. You can still say that I have no right to the sandwich and it's yours...but unless you can physically take it back from me, then it has become mine. Words with no strength to enforce them are empty. But, this is why walled city-states and government itself came to be. People banded together to protect themselves from the roaming gangs of bandits.

The idea that the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts, that society is more important than the individual, is a very Eastern belief. Unfortunately. The things they accomplish are really quite amazing. When the Fukushima Nuclear Plant suffered a critical meltdown and had distributed a large amount of radioactive material around the land and sea, a large number of people volunteered to help with the cleanup, despite knowing that they would be heavily irradiated in doing so. Shortly afterward, over two hundred 60+ year old retirees, mostly Engineers, asked to be replaced with the younger volunteers, because the younger people still have their entire lives ahead of them, but having a few years shaved off what little they have left wasn't a concern for the seniors.

That, to me, was beautiful. Simply stunning. The sheer selflessness of the Japanese people was truly moving. I only wish I could say the same about the US. The closest I ever came to being proud of the US was shortly after 9/11, but that's pretty much it.

I was worried it was a rather satirical point since the website that is hosting said article service has a libertarian bent.

In your sandwich example, if the state has a monopoly on force then I must then rely on the state to employ force on my behalf. As far as I'm aware the US (as a people/mechanism) has yet to acknowledge that we have surrendered that natural right to the state. It also makes sense that those that believe in an all powerful state would hate gun ownership, these people could use force on their own and be independent of the state. This divide exists in rural vs urban culture. Back to the issue of property, if the state does not protect the right to my sandwich (which is my property) then I would see it as an illegitimate government. Not only that it would be creating a system of legal plunder.

What I recall shortly before and during the events of 9/11 we were told to be docile if your plane was hijacked. Not to resist and the experts in government will help us. Eventually the militia woke up after the 3rd plane struck. At that point the 4th plane occupants formed an impromptu militia and fought back. After the incident we were told to go back to sleep by the state and go shopping.

While I do concede that there are people that need force employed to be better individuals I believe that the state allows people to atrophy their responsibilities to themselves and others. The fiction identified in the above video explains this. This is cancerous to the individual and would need a larger state to corral them. Thus creating a death spiral for liberty.

michiehoward:
I tend not to pigeon hole myself into lib/con

There are some topics, issues, ideas where I am lib and some whee I am conservative. I would not like myself as a human being if I was staunchly one or the other since they are both presently and historically bat shit crazy.

I like this. I dont like using labels like that because people attatch all sorts of baggage to them. So id rather just state my views and let others decide what they should call them in their own heads.

Im pretty socially open minded. I do not believe there is ANYTHING two consenting adults shouldnt be able to do as long as it doesnt harm others. I think drugs should be legal (to a point, that point being where they induce a violent state quite often or are addictive to a soul crushing degree). I think socialized healthcare for ALL is not only good but necessary for a morally just world but tax should be implimented to make those who take risks pay a fairer share. I think taxes on the rich should be higher than those on the poor. I think business though has a right to keep a lot of its earnings as long as said earnings are dealt with honestly. Tax evasion and tax havens should be met with severe punishment. Stay inside the system and the system will reward you.

I believe minimum wage is important and the only thing that kills an economy is money being hoarded. I dont believe the poor hoard money like the rich which is why im ok with most welfare programmes. You tax money from companies so they dont hoard it and give it to people who will ALWAYS give it right back to companies for food and neccessities because if they dont they starve. As such the company sees a return and the person gets a decent living standard to give them a chance to become richer ergo contribute more from themselves later in life. Anything that keeps money from stagnating in overseas banks and from not moving is good. Hoarding is bad.

I believe society should be more self policing. "Snitching" should be a moral imperative to society. We do we defend those who would harm us? Its totally stupid. We should feel a debt to those around us, to give them a life we would wish to live ourselves by defending their property and rights as we would defend our own. I am disgusted by apathy toward crime, real crime that hurts people, and lazy ruining of our own country. You dont need such a restrictive police force if the populace is willing to do some of the easier stuff by itself like ostracizing and shaming anti social aggressive assholes.

BiscuitTrouser:

michiehoward:
I tend not to pigeon hole myself into lib/con

There are some topics, issues, ideas where I am lib and some whee I am conservative. I would not like myself as a human being if I was staunchly one or the other since they are both presently and historically bat shit crazy.

I like this. I dont like using labels like that because people attatch all sorts of baggage to them. So id rather just state my views and let others decide what they should call them in their own heads.

Im very socially liberal, libertarian would be a better word perhaps. I do not believe there is ANYTHING two consenting adults shouldnt be able to do as long as it doesnt harm others. I think drugs should be legal (to a point, that point being where they induce a violent state quite often or are addictive to a soul crushing degree). I think socialized healthcare for ALL is not only good but necessary for a morally just world but tax should be implimented to make those who take risks pay a fairer share. I think taxes on the rich should be higher than those on the poor. I think business though has a right to keep a lot of its earnings as long as said earnings are dealt with honestly. Tax evasion and tax havens should be met with severe punishment. Stay inside the system and the system will reward you.

I believe minimum wage is important and the only thing that kills an economy is money being hoarded. I dont believe the poor hoard money like the rich which is why im ok with most welfare programmes. You tax money from companies so they dont hoard it and give it to people who will ALWAYS give it right back to companies for food and neccessities because if they dont they starve. As such the company sees a return and the person gets a decent living standard to give them a chance to become richer ergo contribute more from themselves later in life. Anything that keeps money from stagnating in overseas banks and from not moving is good. Hoarding is bad.

I believe society should be more self policing. "Snitching" should be a moral imperative to society. We do we defend those who would harm us? Its totally stupid. We should feel a debt to those around us, to give them a life we would wish to live ourselves by defending their property and rights as we would defend our own. I am disgusted by apathy toward crime, real crime that hurts people, and lazy ruining of our own country. You dont need such a restrictive police force if the populace is willing to do some of the easier stuff by itself like ostracizing and shaming anti social aggressive assholes.

To encompass all of my socio-economic ideals/ my politics/ my beliefs/ my morals/ my ideas of peace and justice and general place to be and live, I would need to create my own "fill in the blank" group/party. And really who has time for that. I would hope that most of us stray from extreme anything. Don't get me wrong I see some things in a black/white right/wrong but when making decisions, passing laws and legislation for millions of people the fatal mistake of political parties and groups is to favor themselves (ala their own ideals) and fuck the rest.

Gorfias:

That, or we cover our tracks better. I used to be down right rude but learned to chill some.

I'm still struggling with that.

Anyone who's been on the receiving end of an argument with me has probably noticed how the IM you get showing how I responded to you is usually significantly ruder than the post when viewed on the forum page.

God Bless the edit button. Shame you can't do that in real life.

Oh and to back you up: it is indeed possible to change minds on here. TheIronRuler changed mine about the Israeli army, for example.

spartandude:

while i dont know the actual post, from the way you described it i can understand why you got into trouble. saying people only voted form obama because they wanted free stuff is flame baiting.

Flame baiting? Like saying that Republicans only care about rich people and all the southern bill swilling NASCAR fans are tricked into voting for them?

I was listening to NPR on election night and they were doing live interview exit polling. This one girl, I shit you not, she said I voted for Obama because I'm Latina and he's gonna give my people, you know, STUFF.

Now granted it's one person, but the sentiment was wide spread. He had all the minority special interests covered, he was gonna hand out free birth control like candy, he was going to let gays get married- and if you were a straight white guy you should feel ashamed and guilty and vote for him anyway.

Barrack Obama did not run on a plan last election, he did not run on change- he ran on republicans are evil, rich people are evil, and don't let them trick you and oh, hi, here's some free t-shirts and other stuff.

And that's my opinion, if it's offensive, I'm sorry. But I am not some dyed-in-the-wool conservative... I'm in the center. I was at WTO/TABD demonstrations as early as 2000, I was a demonstrator at Dubya's first inauguration in 2001. I have been around, I have seen some shit- and I am sick and tired of watching this system fail.

Frission:

Anthropological. Sorry about the stupid nitpick.

It's actually anthropogenic. Sorry for the stupid stupid-nitpick nitpick.

xDarc:

spartandude:

while i dont know the actual post, from the way you described it i can understand why you got into trouble. saying people only voted form obama because they wanted free stuff is flame baiting.

Flame baiting? Like saying that Republicans only care about rich people and all the southern bill swilling NASCAR fans are tricked into voting for them?

I was listening to NPR on election night and they were doing live interview exit polling. This one girl, I shit you not, she said I voted for Obama because I'm Latina and he's gonna give my people, you know, STUFF.

While it may be true that some people think like that, it is not fair to apply that to the entire voting bloc. For example, some people who voted against Obama because they think he's a muslim, and that for some reason that inherently makes him evil. Now, if I made a post saying that everyone who voted for Romney or Mccain were racist xeno/islamophobic idiots, I would be wrong, and would expect to receive a warning, if not a suspension or ban for it.

Moreover, even if you accept the premise of poor people voting for Obama only because he was going to tax the rich and use the money to increase assistance for the poor, is that really any different from rich people voting for the republican party because they would cut some assistance from the poor, and give more tax cuts to the rich? Either way, something is being taken from one group and used to give benefit to another, and honestly, I'd prefer it went the way of those with very little receiving from those who have more than enough.

xDarc:
-snip-

Not that you're bitter or anything. The way you talk about Obama, xDarc, it's like he personally slighted you or something. I can understand hating a politician, but my goodness. The guy's not even the worst candidate that was on the ticket. Better to give handouts to the underprivileged than to lump them into a 47%-sized quarantine zone.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked