Louis
Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006
|
'Ras, by any definition of the word bigotry, I am not bigoted. I don't claim to be perfect or free from bias, but as was said before, these false equivalences of yours don't work. None of the castigation of the ideas of bigots I am happy to sign my name to has the hallmarks of bigotry. I don't advocate segregation or discrimination against bigots for example, nor do I cry for restriction of their freedoms (speech or otherwise). In fact I demand the opposite, I would argue strongly against censoring bigots, their ideas must be allowed to be made public so they can be criticised. None of that has the hallmark of bigotry. I recommend you buy a dictionary and attempt to understand the words you use.
The same goes for this latest wind up of yours regarding politics. It is, as you said: voting for the lesser of two evils still voting for evil, but that doesn't negate the fallacy at the heart of your claims. Only a deluded idealist expects or demands utopia, the collaborative effort that is any society demands compromise by definition. The one thing you can guarantee is that if you don't cooperate with others then you will be defeated by people who do. Simple scientific fact, easily observable in any social species.
The tragedy of the US system (and the UK system for that matter) is that the electorate is stuck with limited choice. So limited in fact that it constitutes disenfranchisement in my view. The only way to change that is to engage in some fashion (from "smash the system" to "vote with apathy"), if you don't engage you cannot change a thing, you simply open yourself to exploitation in all its glory.
You're right about another thing though: engagement doesn't have to be done blind or with some faith-like pandering to vested interests, but engagement is your only safe choice.
The rest of this happy horseshit is just the latest in a long line of false equivalences you like to make to annoy people. A bit transparent but otherwise harmless.
Louis
--------------
Bye.
|
