sirguym
Posts: 318
Joined: 8/10/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
From this distance the US Republican party seems to have been captured by a coalition of fundamentalist Protestant Christian bigots, Zionists, monopoly capitalism, Big Oil and the temptation to roll out the pork-barrel to all comers who can afford a Washington lobbyist -
quote:
This is, of course, the stereotype of Republicans. Anyone that is defined by their opponents is not likely to appear very attractive, and this stereotype is no more accurate than those that exist for Democrats (athiest bigots, Zionists... Jewish-Americans vote overwhelmingly Democrat... university elitists, welfare mothers, and the temptation to roll out the pork-barrel to all comers with their hands out).
But if the past fifty years has taught us anything, it's that stereotypes get us nothing and nowhere.
I fully accept that distance, in miles or years, has a distorting, averaging effect; it does tend to reduce everything to stereotypes, and I was fascinated when I saw the detailed operation of a US election, whilst over there, which reveals a far richer picture than any national coverage, in the US or UK can show.
I was not in any way claiming that to be an accurate picture; just the one I see through the distorting effects of the UK/US media. (Yes we see USA national news, as broadcast in the US, here, whereas I found when in the US that UK news was minimal.)
quote:
Hardly the kind of things the European emigres from religious persecution and monarchial autocracy, who wrote your consitution, would have been happy with!
quote:
The folks who wrote our constitution specicifically denied voting rights to anyone that did not own land and pay taxes (there was no income tax then, and transactional taxes such as tariffs, etc. and land taxes were the only source of governmental income) in order to avoid the very situation we have today.... where enough people who do not pay taxes can outvote those that do pay taxes in order to spend money that is not theirs (ie: they vote for programs to benefit themselves, because there is no cost to them).
Smart folks those founding fathers.
I suspect that they were simply folowing the model they knew from the UK. We didn't get universal male suffrage until the 19th century, and universal female suffrage until the 20th century. I have some sympathy for your point; but the fact is that a limited suffrage led to obvious corruption and injustice, and as a result 'the people' fought for universal suffrage and won. I hope you would not want to reverse that now?
I can see well enough the weaknesses that universal suffrage leads to; but see also that any other system will lead toward a totalitarian state. I fear that is the way your country (and mine) has going in under the last two presidents, who've been unable or unwilling to even try to counter the drift in that direction. It is your right, of course, to choose to be in thrall to big business, I would not suggest otherwise. But be aware of the consequences!
quote:
Oh, and the current US President? He is certainly a Republican. He is most certainly not a conservative.
Maybe so.
I certainly accept the point that your current president is not an ultra-conservative; he seems to me to be a slightly right of centre populist, just like Clinton was before him, though perhaps a little more principled, and a lot less well informed. I don't much like his principles, but I notice and respect the fact that he has some, if not enough in my view. (You may agree, though we'd probably disagree on the principles he should have!)
quote:
Having said that, I like the look of John McCain; he is someone whom the rest of the world can respect; unlike any other Republican candidate I can see. It is your right to elect a religious nutter, or a fundamentalist bigot if you like; but that is how the rest of the world sees the other main Republican candidates. It will be a disaster for your great country, and make her even more of a laughing-stock than she is already, if you do.
quote:
I can imagine how the rest of the world might feel as you do, if they are similarly ill-informed. But I would hope that my countrymen vote on the facts and the issues (whether that be for Democrat or Republican), not to placate European ignorance.
John
I would hope so too. But I would hope that they did so in full knowledge of the likely repercussions. If your country comes to be led by someone who claims a direct line to a Protestant Christian God, or is part of a cult, you will find yourself even more alone in the world, than your country is now.
You may not realise it, but your country needs more allies, and an overly religious leader alienates secular countries, as your current leader has already, and those who share a different view of religion. There were good reasons for your founding fathers insisting on a separation of church and state.
But broadly, my point is that you and I may quite enjoy the cut and thrust of rhetorical debate, and rarely appear to agree in theory, I would be unsurprised if we discovered ourselves more often in agreement with each other, than either of us agreed with the centrists or populists, if we ever found ourself in the same Council Chamber; when it came to real political issues that affect real people in the real world.
Certainly, when I went back, 15 years after my political career ended, to a friend's funeral, it struck me that the people who remembered me with most respect were the hard-core conservatives, with whom I had been most deeply and vehemently opposed, apparently, and in public. However that never stopped me co-operating with them in private, in the interests of getting things done for those I represented; and they understood that.
There are those who have their prejudices, preconceptions, presumptions, received wisdom, etc. and judge from that position of comfort, without real knowledge, principle, or responsibility.
Then there are those that have been there and done stuff, and in doing so questioned every aspect of their core beliefs and learned from it.
Which brings me back to the OP's original question. If nothing else, doing WIITWD does tend to help you learn from experience, re-evaluate and redefine not just your personal relationships, but all the assumptions 'society' and your parents fed you. So though I'd expect every political viewpoint to be present, I'd expect those views to be more often some way away from the centrist view, than amongst the general population.
|
RE: Political orientation of D/s practitioners ? - 
Profile
RE: Political orientation of D/s practitioners ? - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread