Republicans, Religion and the Triumph of Unreason

ArghMonkey · Jan 6, 2010

deanhills said:
I can't understand how anyone can have a clear picture of exactly what the Republican Party presently stands for. Most of the content of your thread fits in with Fox News reports and the media focussing on extreme right movements etc. The closest I can get is "confused". It probably will require a leadership as well as a few thinktank sessions of the Republicans to decide where they stand on most of the issues, and when they come out, I'm sure it will sound very different to the contents of your opening posting.

You have got maybe 3 kinds of conservatives, the neo-cons (nearly dead or in hiding), small c conservatives (paid for by business and push business rights) and libertarians (a small group but one that has members that identify themselves with either neo-cons or small c conservatives, they lack the morals and ethics of the small c conservatives).

All three of these groups (did I miss one?) are crap, their ideas of either giving the middle class the finger or handing power over to businesses or destroying democracy or pushing religion or pushing no government or reliving some ancient u.s. history that will never apply to the modern world, its all junk and thats exactly why conservatives are in shambles.

The best thing that can be done to destroy conservatives is to give them power, because they screw everything up *L*

If your media was better your people wouldnt believe the lies they are fed.

ArghMonkey · Jan 6, 2010

Dirk said:
Traditionally, "libertarian" has always meant "socialist" in Europe. A Frenchman or German might wonder about being a libertarian and a capitalist at the same time.

Britain, interestingly, actually changed definitions. Which is very odd. What happened was that in the 80s, rich capitalists bought out a hardcore socialist party, called the "United Kingdom Libertarian Party". Since then, "libertarian" began to mean "hyper-capitalist".

In Central and Eastern Europe it still means socialist. There are "libertarians" in Die Linke. France has a very strong Libertarian Socialist tradition, right from the Revolution and even the Enlightenment. In Eastern Europe - particularly Poland, the "libertarians" played a large part in a socialist movement called "Solidarity".

Americans dont believe that the rest of the world has different definitions for politics, this is another thing I have come across frequently.

deanhills · Jan 7, 2010

ArghMonkey said:
Americans dont believe that the rest of the world has different definitions for politics, this is another thing I have come across frequently.

I'm not that comfortable with this statement. I looked how a Canadian definition of politics would differ from an American one and found the following discussion in Yahoo? I liked this very simple reply, kind'a cute

Best Answer - Chosen by Voters
Canada has stronger provincial powers and elect their representatives to the House of Commons to serve the needs of the general populus.

In the U.S. they have a bloated Federal government that is fought over by both parties like pigs in a trough.

Hope this explains it clearly.

3 months ago

This answer was also cute!

Canada is a huge exporter.
45% of their GDP is exports. They are literally swimming in money.
BTW, $300 billion a year of that money comes from US - the USA!
Our imports from Canada are second only to our imports from China.
Canada has huge reserves of oil and natural gas, and they drill for it and sell it.

So their politics differ from ours, because they know how to run a business and they're not shy about selling what they produce.
We, on the other hand, spend all day saying it's more "efficient" to go broke with a huge trade deficit that adds a TRILLION DOLLARS A YEAR to our debt.

We are spenders and consumers, Canada is producers and sellers.
We go in debt, they rake in cash.

That's the difference in our politics. Their politics is the politics of prosperity. Our politics is the politics of going broke in a handbasket.

Canadians have a very interesting way of looking at politics. Sort of different from the text books. They also just don't seem to get away from the US of A when they try to explain their definitions either.

ArghMonkey · Jan 7, 2010

deanhills said:
I'm not that comfortable with this statement. I looked how a Canadian definition of politics would differ from an American one and found the following discussion in Yahoo? I liked this very simple reply, kind'a cute

This answer was also cute!

Canadians have a very interesting way of looking at politics. Sort of different from the text books. They also just don't seem to get away from the US of A when they try to explain their definitions either.

No no, the REST OF THE WORLD uses different terms for politics *L* that includes Canada.

Liberal is what americans call conservative in Europe, for example.

Other then that fact the post about pigs at a trough is kind of silly, obviously not very serious and the other post is just as silly, if someones viewpoint is that business and money are all that matters then they could have come up with some real points.

ArghMonkey · Jan 7, 2010

Heres some other responses to the question:

What is the difference between US politics to European politics?

- American politics are extremely right wing by comparison. That is the most pronounced difference.

- You dont need to be a millionaire to get into politics in Europe.

- Geography. More intelligent discussion in Europe.

- European politics is a broad pallete of political choices, (thus generally requiring a Parlimentary system of coalitions to govern at all effectively), whereas the US really only offers two viable choices. Unfortunately for the future of America, those "two choices" are becoming ever more indistinguishable from one another, the irony being of course that most Americans think there is a "chasm" between Democrats & Republicans, rather than the actual fartsworth of difference that is really there!

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091217005825AAzAvHn

American versus European use of the term "liberalism"

Today the word "liberalism" is used differently in different countries. (See Liberalism worldwide) One of the greatest contrasts is between the usage in the United States and usage in Continental Europe. According to Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. (writing in 1956), "Liberalism in the American usage has little in common with the word as used in the politics of any European country, save possibly Britain."[16]
According to Girvetz and Minogue writing in Encyclopedia Britannica, "contemporary liberalism has come to represent different things to Americans and Europeans: In the United States it is associated with the welfare-state policies of the New Deal program of Democratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt, whereas in Europe liberals are more commonly conservative in their political and economic outlook."[15] Continental Europeans often apply the term "liberal" mainly to an individual's economic liberties, such as free markets and hence they have many positions in common with American libertarians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern...sus_European_use_of_the_term_.22liberalism.22

deanhills · Jan 7, 2010

ArghMonkey said:
Other then that fact the post about pigs at a trough is kind of silly, obviously not very serious and the other post is just as silly, if someones viewpoint is that business and money are all that matters then they could have come up with some real points.

Exactly the point that I wanted to get across, SILLY being the operative word in some of your stereotyping of American thinking:

Americans dont believe that the rest of the world has different definitions for politics, this is another thing I have come across frequently.

I was trying to stereotype Canadian thinking exactly at the same level that you did for Americans. If one should do serious searches on the Internet, one would likely find that American students of political science are far more expert on the definitions of politics in the rest of the world than the rest of the world. For example, at one stage of my life I was passionately interested in the Boer/English War in South Africa, and the literature that was superior about the subject did not come from South Africa or England, but from a Historian in the United States. The United States invest in billions for research in almost every category and through a vast network of institutes and research grants.

ArghMonkey · Jan 7, 2010

deanhills said:
Exactly the point that I wanted to get across, SILLY being the operative word in some of your stereotyping of American thinking:
I was trying to stereotype Canadian thinking exactly at the same level. If one should do serious searches on the Internet, one would likely find that American students of political science are probably more expert on the definitions of politics in the rest of the world than the rest of the world. For example, at one stage of my life I was passionately interested in the Boer/English War in South Africa, and the literature that was superior about the subject did not come from South Africa or England, but from a Historian in the United States. The United States invest in billions for research in almost every category one can think about.

Your right about research but the u.s. spends the 7th most on R&D.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_res_and_dev_spe-economy-research-and-development-spending

Your right, stereotypes arent the whole picture, my beef is with conservatives, conservative thinking, fascism and the propaganda that follows everything conservative, to the intelligent, engaged, progressive, thoughtful and compassionate americans, I was aiming my comments at the worst of the u.s. and not those that make the u.s. better.

deanhills · Jan 7, 2010

ArghMonkey said:
Your right about research but the u.s. spends the 7th most on R&D.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_res_and_dev_spe-economy-research-and-development-spending

Your right, stereotypes arent the whole picture, my beef is with conservatives, conservative thinking, fascism and the propaganda that follows everything conservative, to the intelligent, engaged, progressive, thoughtful and compassionate americans, I was aiming my comments at the worst of the u.s. and not those that make the u.s. better.

You mean Fox News? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApUoQdRU35I
I thought how Peter Mackay responded when Fox insulted the Canadian Military, was really excellent.

ArghMonkey · Jan 7, 2010

deanhills said:
You mean Fox News? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApUoQdRU35I
I thought how Peter Mackay responded when Fox insulted the Canadian Military, was really excellent.

Peter Mackay is one of the worst Canadians going, frankly he is a P.O.S.

Canadians are dying because of u.s. problems ... ok, I can go off on this so I will bring it back to what we are talking about.

Peter Mackay is a horrible person, in matter of fact his thinking is aligned with fox news and its viewer base, he just needs to be seen as distancing himself from such disgusting comments, otherwise there is no doubt that he would agree with fox news reporting on other topics.

I think its funny when fox news gets whipped up, its when it actually effects us that I get outraged, like open sales of marijuana in Vancouver, its because of fox news that a popular place was shut down (granted there were 50 other locations that sprung up).

What can I say? Peter Mckay and fox news should both be ignored and to throw out a really controversial comment, I think any Canadians that volunteer for a pointless war are stupid fools.

deanhills · Jan 8, 2010

ArghMonkey said:
I think its funny when fox news gets whipped up, its when it actually effects us that I get outraged, like open sales of marijuana in Vancouver, its because of fox news that a popular place was shut down (granted there were 50 other locations that sprung up).

Now this is very interesting. How do you link up Fox News with sales of marijuana in Vancouver? And as you also pointed out, what difference could they really make, other than a mere irritation?

ArghMonkey · Jan 8, 2010

deanhills said:
Now this is very interesting. How do you link up Fox News with sales of marijuana in Vancouver? And as you also pointed out, what difference could they really make, other than a mere irritation?

Where did I say that?

They might deserve to be ignored but like religious people, at times they take it a step too far and thats when people should be ready to slap them down.

Fox news found out about a marijuana store in Vancouver, it was openly selling pot to customers, fox did a story about it and the city of Vancouver and gov of Canada was flooded with quacks from the u.s. saying they were going to boycott this and that, so the city shut down the marijuana store (called Da Kind, check it out here http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/articles/4018.html).

DodgeFB · Jan 8, 2010

ArghMonkey said:
Where did I say that?

They might deserve to be ignored but like religious people, at times they take it a step too far and thats when people should be ready to slap them down.

Fox news found out about a marijuana store in Vancouver, it was openly selling pot to customers, fox did a story about it and the city of Vancouver and gov of Canada was flooded with quacks from the u.s. saying they were going to boycott this and that, so the city shut down the marijuana store (called Da Kind, check it out here http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/articles/4018.html).

I just want to know how to get a marijuana store in my neighborhood. I don't smoke it, but could make some extra money growing it. Farmers in Kentucky can grow anything. But if they grow pot, they not only take their land, they take the truck!

Dirk · Jan 8, 2010

DodgeFB said:
I just want to know how to get a marijuana store in my neighborhood. I don't smoke it, but could make some extra money growing it. Farmers in Kentucky can grow anything. But if they grow pot, they not only take their land, they take the truck!

Wow that's a bit... police-state-ish...

I mean, weed is far less harmful than alcohol and tobacco... and doesn't give you a headache in the morning - though i suppose they can't tax it or something?

DodgeFB · Jan 8, 2010

Dirk said:
Wow that's a bit... police-state-ish...

I mean, weed is far less harmful than alcohol and tobacco... and doesn't give you a headache in the morning - though i suppose they can't tax it or something?

When farmers stopped growing tobacco they found it easy to grow weed and make a little money. So someone got the big idea to just take their land, their trucks, tractors anything used in the process. Oh I almost forgot, all bank accounts or property gained from the illegal business can be grabbed too.

Dirk · Jan 8, 2010

DodgeFB said:
When farmers stopped growing tobacco they found it easy to grow weed and make a little money. So someone got the big idea to just take their land, their trucks, tractors anything used in the process. Oh I almost forgot, all bank accounts or property gained from the illegal business can be grabbed too.

How awful, you mean ordinary people could actually make money from it? Well, then the operation must be shut down!

How dare people feed their families.

[/sarcasm]

DodgeFB · Jan 8, 2010

Dirk said:
How awful, you mean ordinary people could actually make money from it? Well, then the operation must be shut down!

[/sarcasm]

These people have farm payments to make and food to buy. But since most people around here are afraid to take the chance the weed smokers have to get it imported. Which brings in more than weed.

Dirk · Jan 8, 2010

DodgeFB said:
These people have farm payments to make and food to buy. But since most people around here are afraid to take the chance the weed smokers have to get it imported. Which brings in more than weed.

Yah, i get the drift. Thugs, pushers and crime. Ah well, can't let ordinary people get away with it, can you? And it gives a good excuse for increasing the police presence.

ArghMonkey · Jan 8, 2010

Its funny, but another example of when Dodge has to deal with something head on he sees the light, so to speak *L*

He probably has heard or seen the harm that marijuana prohibition has caused and its made him question things.

Now if only americans questioned things more, they would come to a lot of the same conclusions the attentive crowd already knew.

ArghMonkey · Jan 8, 2010

DodgeFB said:
I just want to know how to get a marijuana store in my neighborhood. I don't smoke it, but could make some extra money growing it. Farmers in Kentucky can grow anything. But if they grow pot, they not only take their land, they take the truck!

In the u.s. south? I doubt they would ever tolerate it down there, too much religious ferver and puritanism, if you enjoy anything they want to make it difficult/impossible or shame you for doing it, smoke, masterbate etc.

In Vancouver there are probably close to 100 pot shops spread all over, we had marijuana stores set up 5 years before california caught on.

Anyway I barely care about marijuana itself, I am not a teenager anymore and I hardly have time to go drinking or smoking with friends but like dodge I see the harm caused by stupid laws and its such a simple law to change that would effect many peoples lives positively.

Plus marijuana is very popular in Canada, here is one of Canadas top authors describing how he likes to roll his joints, its pretty funny, even more so when you consider he is not an activist or a radical.

[youtube]puB7wSy8i-c[/youtube]

deanhills · Jan 8, 2010

ArghMonkey said:
In Vancouver there are probably close to 100 pot shops spread all over, we had marijuana stores set up 5 years before california caught on.

Right, I seem to recall once when I was in Vancouver, that the "Vancouver Sun" reported on people who had been growing the stuff in the basement of their condo. Making lots of money but they did get apprehended for it. So Dodge, all you need to do is go for a short holiday in Vancouver, and spend some time in the right Coffee Shops, perhaps around Seymour Street or in Yale Town, and when tongues loosen quite a number of people would be able to tell you how and where to get the marijuana plants for growing and harvesting on your property!

Republicans, Religion and the Triumph of Unreason

Similar threads