RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (63) < ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... >   
  Topic: Presidential Politics & Antievolution, Tracking the issue< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 10 2008,07:57   

Howdy spottedwind

Quote
he trots out the old "neither is good so I don't vote but I'll criticize without providing a better option".


So, what are 'options'?  What if the best answer is 'not an option'? Options may be contextually determined, the in principle best solution is not.  Unless there are several different solutions with the same r squared.  The option I suggest is not one on the table rigged by the heirs of powdered wigs and spice empires.  my critique is not based on a better way to run a nation the size of the united states within the confines of the system currently employed.  if that means it is 'not an option' then the point is far over your head.  who ever you are you know proverbial that you guy.  

Quote
They both have corrupt, selfish members that care only for themselves and their family, and play up their supposed credentials to get elected.  They know what people want to hear and how to play the victim/crusader/outraged everyman as needed.  Both parties also have well-meaning, honest people that want to do well for the country and the people they represent.


How do you separate these two groups?  My my it sounds like the Not A True Christian argument.  When I hear such arguments I know there is a fallacy at root.  I think I've found one of them.

Quote
It either does not work as intended or is not capable of handling the situation in the US as it exists today.


Aye aye

Quote
If you abstain you can a) offer no suggestions and simply complain that all politicians are a waste or b) you can push for change.


Or you can do both.  Offering burnt offerings to the gods suggestions to the system is a lot like pouring piss down a rat hole.  The merit of an argument is irrelevant to the degree which it is implemented, unless by merit you mean how much $ do you make and who do you have to pay off.

Quote
Let's say that we despise the system, refuse to participate in it, and want it changed.  Short of armed revolution, how else will you change the system?


change it to what?  you dont think any threat to existing power structures will go unchallenged by armed means, just because it makes more sense?  nope.  people die in conflict.  i've been trying to stress that people die as a result of your vote:  if you are going to argue that people would die if you didn't vote then I think we can use some algebra to get at the question of how valuable this vote is.

anyway i think it is common for folks to lose their personal ontology in a group identity.  the question, my friends, is not "What are we going to do" it is "How can I keep all these brain dead bastards out of my vegetable garden when the S.H.F."  I am a lot more concerned about repelling the starving zombie hordes than I am about making sure that everybody is as free as Jesus made them.  i'd rather eat squirrels than rats but right now there is not enough to go around for everybody.

Quote
Is voting in the current system something of a tacit approval of the broken politics?  Unfortunately yes, but no less than not voting is tacit approval of the status quo.


This is more creationist logic.  All have sinned and come short of the glory of God.  What, you don't believe in God?  Why you are still a sinner.  Again be skeptical of such arguments.

Quote
You can work with a broken system by putting into power people that are willing to make changes to fix it.


really?  name one.  substituting a soap opera personality passion play for whatever it is that the political system is supposed to represent has always been the name of the game.  If the whole thing is premised on incorrect assumptions it doesn't matter how much you monkey with the business nested within it.

Quote
However such a fatalistic attitude assumes that you could not being to lay the groundwork that would make changing the system possible.


you can start by growing your own beans and taters.  food is the key to revolution.  

Your comments regarding the teaching of anti-evolution are spot on of  course.  I would suggest that you consider that a politician will do anything that gets him elected.  the democrat leaders wish they had the drooling fundie nutcase block, if they had a shot at it you would see this behavior supposedly celebrating the teaching of real science nipped in the bud immediately.  i support this by my own truism, "Anyone who deserved the job would never want it".  

clamboy
Quote
So your view is that the American political system is not optimal. Well, you've certainly gone out on a limb there - next you'll be suggesting that ursine mammals void their bowels in sylvan environments!


it's true, i've seen them do it.  of course that is not all i have suggested either.

Quote
So sitting in the corner and sniveling about the unfairness of it all is the answer. Gotcha.


Of course I never said that, but that and voting have exactly the same effect on anything real and tangible.  Other than you know have something to talk about at lunch.  You can vote in one hand and hold the other behind a bull, see which fills up first.  Voting = Praying.

Louis, you are bigoted against bigots.  That is as simple as that.  I was just saying you should be proud of that.  I am bigoted against stupid people.  Once they aren't stupid then I find I am more or less indifferent to them.

Quote
If we don't vote, the Lying Liers win all the time.


well they do that either damn way.  if anyone wins, then this has happened.

jeff i think understands it.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 10 2008,07:58   

this has all been said more betterer here.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 10 2008,09:06   

'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.

  
Amadan



Posts: 1337
Joined: Jan. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 10 2008,09:18   

But nothing will change until people arrive at politicians' doors singing

You can get anything you want
At Alice's Restaurant



(just wait until the song comes around again and we can all join in)











(Here it comes . . . )

--------------
"People are always looking for natural selection to generate random mutations" - Densye  4-4-2011
JoeG BTW dumbass- some variations help ensure reproductive fitness so they cannot be random wrt it.

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 10 2008,10:43   

I'd be interested to see any evidence of how things would actually be different depending on who wins. I recognize a lot of rhetoric, but in the 40 years I've been voting, I've failed to see a lot of difference in actual outcomes between presidents of different parties.

Just for example, the most enduring outcome of the Clinton presidency may be welfare reform. Not something the democrats intended.

It's also possible that the Russians will use our intervention in Kosovo as cover for nibbling its way back to control of Eastern Europe.

Politics is a game, and intentions don't equal accomplishment. Changing the rules, as in reforming or restructuring voting and representation, will be followed by adaptations, just a surely as bacteria evolve resistance to antibiotics.

The only useful test of a political system is whether -- in fact, not theory -- it produces alternations of control among the competing tribes.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 10 2008,11:49   

midwife, i too am waiting for such evidence.  

louis it's not a windup and not false equivalences.  you are intolerant of bigotry.  that's all.  you have an opinion and i agree that having an opinion is not the same as acting upon it (which you seem to have made the explanatory difference).  

i said nothing about whether or not it made you a bad person etc.  i think you are a fine person, even if you are sort of gay.  some of my wifes best friends are gay for example.  

back to anti-evolution and presidential politics, any of these douchebags who want to be president would be anti-evolution if they thought that could make them win.  the same with any other platform (hence the long digression into what is wrong with nation-states and representative government in general).  As others have noted, what you do about that is the critical piece of information.  Engaging and educating the public (those you have access to) about the best most recent science is by far the tact with the biggest payoff.

why?  not because an informed public will educate that philosopher kings that rule them, but because those douchebags want their power so they will pander to the loudest most influential base.  That is not the same as being led to rational conclusions, and so much of the 'get involved and make a difference' poofery best reserved for college freshman is predicated on the assumption that decisions are made in this manner.  The cynical machiavellian view best represents political reality.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 10 2008,12:30   

Saying nation states are "wrong" is a bit like saying the design of living things is wrong. Things are what they are because of descent. That includes the U.S. constitution.

There are few decent governments in the world that are not descended from the British model, with some fiddling with details. I'm not convinced the details matter as much as some people think. Any system that involves elections and representation will be gamed by factions.

But I am not personally cynical about this. I vote for the same reason I return lost wallets. It doesn't benefit me directly, and the world will not change if I quit voting or keep found money, but for whatever reason, I am a social animal and engage in social behavior that has no immediate benefit to myself.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Spottedwind



Posts: 83
Joined: Aug. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 10 2008,12:36   

Erasmus, I don't mean this to be offensive, but at times I find your post to be...mere rhetoric.  You accused Lou of word salad a while back but I have trouble seeing how some of your responses wouldn't qualify for the same.  Perhaps I'm just not used to your way of speaking and perhaps it is just over my head, but IMO the best way to get ideas across is to make sure you are understood.  So, if in my response I miss your point, it's not out of purposeful avoidance, but an inability to understand; my ignorance and/or your writing the cause.

 
Quote
So, what are 'options'?  What if the best answer is 'not an option'? Options may be contextually determined, the in principle best solution is not...my critique is not based on a better way to run a nation the size of the united states within the confines of the system currently employed.  if that means it is 'not an option' then the point is far over your head.


Notice that you ask me what the options are.  My point is not that he has to pick from a list of approved options, it was that he criticizes and offers NOTHING.  Sure, you can criticize all you like, but if you have nothing to offer, even if it is what is considered an outlandish idea, then why not just go babble on the street corner?  If he gave the suggestion to dissolve the US, that's fine.  It might not be a realistic option at this point in time but at least he would be giving a suggestion of which way to go.

 
Quote
How do you separate these two groups?  My my it sounds like the Not A True Christian argument.  When I hear such arguments I know there is a fallacy at root.  I think I've found one of them.


What two groups would that be Erasmus?  Do you mean the difference between the lying group and the honest?  Well, mainly you look at it by actions.  Do their actions reflect their words and facts or not.  I don't mean this to come across as condescending, but I feel like you are purposefully crossing signals.  People throw the No True Scotsman fallacy around way too easily.  Definition is the problem obviously, but some definitions really can't be refined.  An apple is an apple and an orange isn't.  A person who has told an intentional false statement has lied.  They are a lair.  (I feel like such a 3rd grader saying it like that).

Here's the other thing, I didn't even say that people who go against what I believe are selfish and those that agree with me are honest.  I said that there are well intentioned people that are trying to do what they think is best.  Whether what they think actually is the best is another conversation.

What I was trying to say in that paragraph was that neither group is pure good or pure evil.  As bitter and jaded to the politics as I am, I at least have enough sense of reality to realize that not every single person in politics is out only to help themselves.  I can understand where that frustration comes from but, well I guess I have a bit more faith in humanity.  Which I think would break the irony meters of my friends.

 
Quote
 
Quote
If you abstain you can a) offer no suggestions and simply complain that all politicians are a waste or b) you can push for change.


Or you can do both.  Offering burnt offerings to the gods suggestions to the system is a lot like pouring piss down a rat hole.  The merit of an argument is irrelevant to the degree which it is implemented, unless by merit you mean how much $ do you make and who do you have to pay off.


How can you do both?  Honestly, not rhetorical but a serious question.  You say that you can do both but give no example.  How is it possible to just complain and push for change?  If you are pushing for change, then you are not just complaining.  If you are not pushing for change (ANY CHANGE) then you are simply complaining.  I'm seriously confused by what you mean here.

And you are mixing things ups...I said you can abstain and push for change.  What does that have to do with offering suggestions to the system?  My point was that if you choose not to participate in the system because of your disgust with it (my words, not speaking for you), these were some of the options that I saw.  I didn't say that was the only thing, but a simple list.  And they weren't suggestions TO the system but ABOUT the system.  What is it that you want to see done about the problems that bother you?  I did list changes to the current system, but if you notice I also listed a new government or other ideas.  I didn't limit options to what is possible now.


 
Quote
 
Quote
Let's say that we despise the system, refuse to participate in it, and want it changed.  Short of armed revolution, how else will you change the system?


change it to what?


The question of what it changes to was not the question I asked.  I was trying to understand HOW to change a system that we wanted changed if we preclude physical violence and participating in the system.  I didn't say it was impossible either...I want to hear ideas, suggestions, anecdotes, examples, anything.  I mentioned changing the culture of the nation but that alone wouldn't change the system.

I hesitate to draw this connection, but part of the Civil Rights movement was a cultural change that pushed a change of the system.  And yes, the system was resistant and it wasn't easy but the cultural change helped to bring about a change of the system.  It didn't work in a vacuum though.  There was violence, there were people trying to change the culture, and there were people that worked in the system to try to fix it.  Now, I'm not saying we have totally conquered that hill...racial problems are still obvious.  My point is that if you removed the violence and the people participating in the system, how would the situation have changed?  Seriously, I don't meant to be dense, but I don't see how things would have changed in any appreciable time.  Sure, if you changed the culture, the mentality it would just happen…but how long would that take and what happens in the mean time?  And that assumes that everyone would have eventually agreed, and we can see even now, that isn’t the case.

 
Quote
you dont think any threat to existing power structures will go unchallenged by armed means, just because it makes more sense?  nope.  people die in conflict.


When did I EVER say that a challenge to the existing power structure would go unchallenged?  In fact, I specifically stated that it would be resisted every step of the way.

 
Quote
i've been trying to stress that people die as a result of your vote:  if you are going to argue that people would die if you didn't vote then I think we can use some algebra to get at the question of how valuable this vote is.


People die whether I vote or not, it's true but what does that mean?  If you are trying to say that our government has engaged in wars regardless of political leadership, I agree.  Never said otherwise.  However, I think it can be very persuasively argued that the number of people that die, how they die, and why they die can change depending upon how I vote.

 
Quote
anyway i think it is common for folks to lose their personal ontology in a group identity.  the question, my friends, is not "What are we going to do" it is "How can I keep all these brain dead bastards out of my vegetable garden when the S.H.F."  I am a lot more concerned about repelling the starving zombie hordes than I am about making sure that everybody is as free as Jesus made them.  i'd rather eat squirrels than rats but right now there is not enough to go around for everybody.


Who said anything about group identity?  This whole section confuses me because it feels like a non sequitur.  Unless this is something about being a citizen of the US and the good of the nation.  If so, I somewhat agree.  Whenever someone says 'good of the nation' in a serious tone, I become wary.  What do they mean?

Now, I have seen that you have no interest in society (Arden's sig) and that's fine by me.  Honestly, I have no objection to people that wish to live without society.  But the problem is that others do wish to live that way and what they do with that society affects the world.  Because I can be a part of this society and can try to have some effect, I can try to give it the best direction I can and work to make it better.  It's not perfect and bad things will happen.  But without trying to tame it in some directions, even more bad things will probably happen.

Also the "I'm looking out for me, screw society" is a rather selfish mentality, IMO.  Which the only difference I see between that and the selfish politician above, is that the politician exploits society to get what he wants and doesn't care what happens to others.  The "I'm looking out for me" doesn't care about other people at all.

 
Quote
 
Quote
Is voting in the current system something of a tacit approval of the broken politics?  Unfortunately yes, but no less than not voting is tacit approval of the status quo.


This is more creationist logic.  All have sinned and come short of the glory of God.  What, you don't believe in God?  Why you are still a sinner.  Again be skeptical of such arguments.


Huh?  I know you keep trying to connect me with creationist stuff but I feel you are barking up an empty tree.  If you have the power to object to something but don't, this is often seen as tacit approval.  Think of racism.  If you are on a bus and a racist person starts yelling out about how horrible Race A is and no one says anything otherwise, anyone of Race A on that bus shouldn't be faulted for thinking the other passengers agree.  Maybe they are just too scared to speak up or maybe they agree.  Either way, the other passengers did not challenge what was going on.

 
Quote
 
Quote
You can work with a broken system by putting into power people that are willing to make changes to fix it.


really?  name one.  substituting a soap opera personality passion play for whatever it is that the political system is supposed to represent has always been the name of the game.  If the whole thing is premised on incorrect assumptions it doesn't matter how much you monkey with the business nested within it.


How about most politicians?  They are elected because people believe that they will be able to make the changes that they want for the government.  Now, I myself am not a supporter, however Ron Paul will work as a good example.  If part of what you saw as a broken system is federal income tax and you wished it were abolished, then it would behoove you to try to get Ron Paul elected.  He has consistently pushed for the elimination of federal income tax and would work to make it go away.  Would electing him simply make it disappear? No, and no one is saying that.  But, he would be able to start the ball rolling by, say, limiting who can be taxed.  When his term ends and more needs to be done, you elect another, like minded individual that can take that further.

Now, I’m not saying this example is a good idea or a bad idea, but the point is that not every politician wants to keep things the same.  Some want to change things and are trying to get elected to do just that.  And yes, they are being denied because they are too far outside the ‘mainstream’, so you have to work to get them accepted and move from there.  Again, not easy, but that’s life.

Please correct me if I’m wrong, but something that you seem to be saying is that government & society in general is a bad idea and doesn’t work.  Okay, works for me.  Then how do you go about getting rid of them?  You refusing to take part in it won’t make it go away.  Even if a majority doesn’t want to take part in them, they won’t just go away.  As long as there are enough people that want a government and want a society, then they will exist.  Yes, perhaps you can change the culture and it can be that people don’t want to live like that, but it’s not going to just happen and while you are working towards that, what do you do in the mean time?

You reference The Story of B in a later post, and perhaps you think this is a good option.  You never actually say, so I’m inferring and so my apologies if I’m wrong.  If what you prefer is a return to a hunter/gather life rather than agriculture; we all know that most people don’t want this.  Nothing exciting here.  Obviously, if anyone tried to force this one people and dissolve the country, there would be revolt.  People don’t want to give up what they have.  They are happy, they are content, they see no need to ‘go back’.  So, in order to bring about the change you want, you will have to change their worldview.  You’ll need to educate them and convince them; and you seem to doing that in your post, suggesting that I grow my own food.  Awesome, but this will obviously take time.  In the meantime, life continues much as it has: pollution increases, as does deforestation and extinction.  Land use degrades natural habitat beyond recovery within human lifetime.  Assuming you could convince people to change, by the time that change happens, irreparable harm has probably happened.

We have still been outside the system this entire time.  Now, let’s add to your efforts, a person that agrees with you but is willing to work within the system.  While you are trying to change minds and habits, this person helps to make stronger environmental laws that slow damage.  She works to restrict oil and natural resource exploration to save habitable lands.  She pushes energy conservation and recycling.  So, when you have finally changed enough minds there is more benefit to be had.

Yes, the above is a bit of a fairy tale but I’m trying to stress that things don’t happen in a vacuum.  One thing I am not saying is, ‘don’t try, just follow the rules’.  I’ve never said that and do not think that.  I am trying to get you to recognize that governments, society, culture are going to continue to exist and that perhaps the best thing to do is to make them responsible until they can be dismantled, assuming that might be desirable to you.  And my apologies if I read too much into your comments, but I hope you still understand what I was trying to get at.

 
Quote
 
Quote
However such a fatalistic attitude assumes that you could not being to lay the groundwork that would make changing the system possible.


you can start by growing your own beans and taters.  food is the key to revolution.


Awesome, a suggestion!  Seriously, I'm happy about this and sorry if that comes across badly.  (I hate the internet to mask/obscure emotions)  But it's only part of the step...great, I grow my own food.  Now what?  I'm all for hearing about a full revolution, but I do want to hear about it.  How is the revolution going to grow and what happens to those people who don't want to be a part of it?  This is at least more than I'm getting from my friend but it still doesn't answer how that supplants or changes anything in the grand scheme of things.

 
Quote
Your comments regarding the teaching of anti-evolution are spot on of  course.  I would suggest that you consider that a politician will do anything that gets him elected.  the democrat leaders wish they had the drooling fundie nutcase block, if they had a shot at it you would see this behavior supposedly celebrating the teaching of real science nipped in the bud immediately.  i support this by my own truism, "Anyone who deserved the job would never want it".


Again, I think you are trying to connect the No True Scotsman with me.  But never, throughout my post, do I say that one group will always do one thing and the other would never do it.  Yes, there are pandering democrats just like there are pandering republicans...a fact which I mentioned right at the top of all this.  I spoke about people.  Individual people and what their positions were and if those positions were something worth supporting or not.  That is why people need to get informed about who they vote for and really dig into what the person has said and done.  It's not easy and it can be exhausting, but voting party line is not much better than voting for a person because "they're like me".

Here’s the thing about the truism…while I like it, it perhaps goes the wrong way.  Someone who deserves the job, should want it.  They should want to get in there and try to change what bothers them.  Society/culture/government might not be able to be controlled in a way you like, but they can be limited and guided to do the least damage.

  
Spottedwind



Posts: 83
Joined: Aug. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 10 2008,13:01   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 10 2008,11:43)
Politics is a game, and intentions don't equal accomplishment. Changing the rules, as in reforming or restructuring voting and representation, will be followed by adaptations, just a surely as bacteria evolve resistance to antibiotics.


Of course adapatations will happen and people in power will try to figure out how to stay in power.  But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't make the effort.

It is just like evolution; one species does not just give up because another is just going to change.  They both keep changing and one hopes to overcome the other.  (This make evolution sound aware and intentional, which I don't mean to do.)  And if species A does eventually dominate, it wasn't because species B gave up but because they got out competed (or other factors).

Whatever the case, saying 'don't try to improve things because they'll just change too' doesn't seem different than 'don't try to make new anitbiotics because they'll just adapt'.  Maybe the changes will help, and maybe they won't but the Red Queen shouldn't be a reason to avoid trying.


 
Quote
The only useful test of a political system is whether -- in fact, not theory -- it produces alternations of control among the competing tribes.


I don't think I fully agree with this but I do generally agree that the juggling over power is good.  Keeping power from being too concentrated makes it harder to abuse.  Not impossible, but harder.

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 10 2008,13:29   

I don't oppose trying to improve politics. I do, however, doubt that sweeping changes are likely to happen, particularly at the federal level.

There are lots of places where new memes can be tested. The world provides a laboratory full of variations on the theme of democracy and representative government.

There are also lots of variations among state and local governments. I would personally oppose drastic changes at the national or international level that have not earned their place by gaining popularity at lower levels.

The problem race has come up. That's a different issue altogether. Questions about basic rights and basic justice do belong at the national or international level.

EDITED for spelling.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Spottedwind



Posts: 83
Joined: Aug. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 10 2008,13:45   

I think we are actually in the same chapter, if not the same page, midwifetoad.

I'm not someone who think that the next 4 years will bring about epic change, no matter who is elected.  And I do also agree that federal changes are slow and smaller areas may be a better way to test new ideas.  

That doesn't mean we can't start talking about the possible solution for problems that do exist and national politics aren't quite the same as state and below.  But still, ideas do need to prove themselves before they are implemented.  If only that concept applied to other areas.

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 10 2008,14:18   

Quote (Amadan @ Sep. 10 2008,09:18)
But nothing will change until people arrive at politicians' doors singing

You can get anything you want
At Alice's Restaurant



(just wait until the song comes around again and we can all join in)











(Here it comes . . . )

I liked Officer Obie's run-in with blind justice...

Thanks for bringin' up one of my old-time favorite movies.

At least I think it was, but I don't remember it all that well.  

I think.  I think, therefore I am.

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 10 2008,14:21   

Quote (Louis @ Sep. 10 2008,09:06)
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

Louis - Get your butt over here, and start votin'!

If they will let Richardthughes (moment of silence) in to the US, they'll obviously let in any old UKer in.  That would be You.

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 10 2008,14:58   

Quote (J-Dog @ Sep. 10 2008,20:21)
Quote (Louis @ Sep. 10 2008,09:06)
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

Louis - Get your butt over here, and start votin'!

If they will let Richardthughes (moment of silence) in to the US, they'll obviously let in any old UKer in.  That would be You.

Erm, thanks I think!

Moving to the USA has one downside: more creationists.

There are some advantages, but I've been told by my wife to forget about those. ;-)

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
jeffox



Posts: 671
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 10 2008,22:57   

We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man
We got a kinder, gentler machine gun hand. . .

- N. Young

  
rhmc



Posts: 340
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2008,18:46   

Quote (jeffox @ Sep. 10 2008,01:54)
Voting isn't so bad.  I've come to the realization that, as a borderline anarchist, my other option is to vote with my 20 gauge.  Since I also recognize Machaevalianism (sp.) for what it is, I'll stick to voting the normal way, for now.  :)

if you get over your apparent squeamishness, you could join my political group.

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5455
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 13 2008,08:59   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Sep. 10 2008,12:49)
...and so much of the 'get involved and make a difference' poofery best reserved for college freshman is predicated on the assumption that decisions are made in this manner.

...and so much of the "I don't like the choices so I'll not vote" whining best reserved for youth is predicated on the assumption that sitting in the corner sucking one's thumb will produce positive results.

Instead of that, I think I'll work on becoming a teacher, where I can work toward making the system better by educating the next generations.

While I'm doing that, I'll also be voting for the candidates likely to do the least amount of damage to your constitutional right to bitch about the government, based on what they say and how they've acted in the past. I, for one, think that's an idea worth keeping. In fact, there's a whole list of ideas that I think are worth hanging on to.

Contrary to the cute little strawman you've built of me, I don't vote with idealist faith that the Democrats are the saviors of the country. In fact, going back to the original analogy I used of the swimmer, you'll note that I only felt that the current crop of the party's candidates were paralleling the shore, not making things worse, or at least not to the extant that the Republicans would. As someone mentioned earlier, one of those two sets of candidates will be elected, whether you or I like that or not. Given that choice, I will be voting for the set of candidates that intends to do the least amount of damage based on the evidence in hand. If you prefer to think of it this way (feel free because I sometimes do), I'm not supporting Democrats as much as I'm opposing Republicans.

At the same time, I'll be filling out my dance card by voicing my dissatisfaction and the reasons for it to anyone who'll listen, and pushing to get better candidates through the system. Assuming there is still a Republic by the next election, I will have worked to get slightly less damaging candidates on the party's ticket. Whether or not I and like-minded people are successful in that regard depends on how well we educate, and how much help we have. From what you've written thus far on the topic, I take it that we shouldn't be counting on you to assist in that effort?

So far, everything you've said boils down to "the system sucks". I don't think you'll find anyone here arguing against that, Erasmus. The fact that some of us choose to try and do something about that is what separates us.

Near as I can tell you've yet to offer a more productive course of action, but if you've got one, by all means, let's hear it. If there's a more efficient way of getting people in office to make the system better, I'm all for it.

If on the other hand, your contention is that the protections of the Constitution are not worth keeping, and that the Republic should just be scrapped and allowed to become a theocracy run by the most ignorant and autocratic people in the country, then you and I will simply have to part company on our premises.

Machiavellianism may be the political reality, but we can work long and hard to fix that, or we can allow it to continue unabated. In this time and place, in this context, where we stand today, those are the options. We can't even include armed rebellion as a last resort option, Erasmus. The reason it worked for the colonists a few centuries back is that they had both popular (not universal, but certainly popular) support and support from abroad, two very critical components to revolution which we are distinctly lacking.

So, if you've got a third viable option, I'm listening.

--------------
“Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas?

Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

   
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 13 2008,12:10   

Yo, Lou...when you become a teacher are ya gonna keep running your girl on girl websites?  

Just curious.

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 13 2008,12:20   

Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 13 2008,18:10)
Yo, Lou...when you become a teacher are ya gonna keep running your girl on girl websites?  

Just curious.

Would that be bi-curious?

{shudders}

Louis

P.S. What's wrong with it if he does FTK. Remember to reply on your own thread btw, I've forgotten so smack my bottom and call me Cyril.

--------------
Bye.

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5455
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 13 2008,20:35   

Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 13 2008,13:10)
Yo, Lou...when you become a teacher are ya gonna keep running your girl on girl websites?  

Just curious.

That depends, Ftk. Are you and your lying IDiot buddies still going to be willfully as ignorant as a box of rocks and such an easy target for mockery? Are you still going to be lying your asses off in an effort to illegally sneak your Jesus in the back door of my science classroom? Are you still going to be trying to insert your bigoted superstitions into the laws of this country in an effort to deny equality to all Americans? Are you still going to be trying to force everyone else to believe in your silly fairy tale book so that you feel better about dying on the premise that if everyone denies reality then reality will change?

If so, then yes.

Also, I'm going to teach my students the joys of barbecuing Christian babies for Arbor Day cookouts, force them to have gay sex out of wedlock while the class watches and takes notes (that will be on the test, class), and for field trips we're going to go to the nearest church and pee in the baptismal. Also, I'm going to teach them all to drive solar powered cars and recycle.

Why do you ask?

ETA: P.S. I may also heartily encourage them to become Science Professors.

Edited by Lou FCD on Sep. 13 2008,21:36

--------------
“Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas?

Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

   
olegt



Posts: 1405
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 13 2008,20:49   

Yesss!  Teach them professor values!

P.S.  I must admit I'm a relatively lame member of the guild: I'm only practicing atheism, unjustified claims of expertise and knowledge, liberal beliefs, and anti-patriotism (not a US citizen, hehe) and am sorely lacking in censorship, socialism, liberal grading, liberal bias and promotion of sexual immorality.  But hey, we do what we can!

--------------
If you are not:
Galapagos Finch
please Logout »

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 13 2008,22:05   

midwife my use of 'wrong' is of course predicated upon some version of Aldo Leopold's definition of what is ethical.  I would say, instead, There are Few Decent Governments In The World and just leave it at that.  For you, voting is like going to church is for so many people.  Very well.  Hell I went to church the other day.  Only because we were lined up to do the music, long boring story.

spottedwind I believe i hinted at options.  I would enjoy that conversation but I do think I have derailed this thread enough.  Mebbe I'll start that thread later.

Surely context can tell you which groups I mean.  After all, you described them.  Anyway, determining 'intent' behind falshood is a subjective matter.  but...

Quote
Whether what they think actually is the best is another conversation.


i think that is the important conversation.

regarding doing both, i meant that from my perspectives there are no suggestions, within this model, worth offering.  That is far different from saying that there are no suggested alternatives at all.

Quote
I was trying to understand HOW to change a system that we wanted changed if we preclude physical violence and participating in the system.


the 64000 dollar question.  I suggest that it can't happen without physical violence, but I am not advocating physical violence.  Just that, as you note, those with power will not relinquish that power easily.

you correctly understood the meaning of what i intended by 'group identity'.  i do suggest that you look up the original quote tarden lifted for his sig line.  i am not advocating living 'without society', just the global (or even continental) version that has been the result of the way things are now.

i'm not suggesting you are a creationist, just pointing out that the objection you make that 'not voting is tacit approval of the status quo'.  that is about the same thing as when the fundies say 'the atheist knows deep down there is a god' and other such muddlesome foolishness.  false  dichotomy and all that.

Quote
the point is that not every politician wants to keep things the same.


they want to keep things the same in that none are advocating the abolition of the system by virtue of their election.  that is the 'same' that is the problem.

regarding B, I think this is the ecological imperative that is the bottom line for the future of human societies on earth.  it's the only option if we wish to maintain the sorts of social and ecological connections that have defined humanity for the majority of their existence on this planet.  will folks who love zipping around on jet planes and eating advocadoes while living in alaska resist?  of course.  i return to leopold's definition of what is good and right to settle this issue.  of course whether that definition is robust is another matter.

i am involved in resistance activities that participate within the system as it exists now.  science is the only tool i have at my disposal for that sort of resistance, and it is a particularly ineffective tool within the american system.  i'm just bringing this up to demonstrate that i'm not advocating hermits turning off tuning out and dropping out, or dreadlocked hippies beating drums at a protest.  

growing your own food is a start.  disavowing personal responsibility for your fellow man, in principle and not in practice, is another.  In other words, warm fuzzy platitudes about all men created equal, love it or leave it, vote or shut up, etc etc are invalid.  I'm not sure if this is clear enough, but I'm not advocating selfishness or screw everyone but me.  I don't live like that.  I'm saying I distrust solutions that work at the scale above the individual.

here is a fine example of my frustration.  both of these douchebag teams running for president are advocating clean coal technologies in the face of mountains of evidence (or the destruction of over 700 mountains as evidence) that coal energy is poisonous to the environment, poisonous to water, destroys ancient forests, hunting grounds and poisonous to social relations within human communities.  yet both parties are parroting the talking points given them by the coal industry who is heavily invested in both parties.  where do you go with that?  there aren't options.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 13 2008,22:07   

Oleg, that link is hilarious.  I did learn something though.  A few weeks ago, I saw a clip on the news of some guy mooning an audience of people.  I didn't pay much attention to it because I was just walking through my living room as my husband was watching the news.

Now, it all makes sense...

Quote
A Kansas university professor, Fort Hays State University debate coach William Shanahan, "is under fire after a video showing him mooning a room full of students and faculty during a heated debate found its way onto YouTube." He "is shown on the video in a profane, in-your-face argument with his counterpart from the University of Pittsburgh ...."


ROTFLMAO!  That's who I saw in the clip...what a loon!!!!  Being a professor and all (a *science* professor at that!), I hope you're able to keep your pants pulled up while you're lecturing your students!

Don't you have duel citizenship?  Haven't you been in the states since the early 90's?

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
olegt



Posts: 1405
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 13 2008,22:22   

Yeah, ftk, Shanahan is quite a loon.  Here's some additional info about him.  

I don't have a US citizenship, just a green card.

--------------
If you are not:
Galapagos Finch
please Logout »

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 13 2008,22:24   

Quote
Instead of that, I think I'll work on becoming a teacher, where I can work toward making the system better by educating the next generations.


wow, lou, that's great.  i'm serious.  But note that it doesn't have anything to do with voting encouraging the bastards.  i think it is hilarious that you find some sort of value in holding your nose and trying to determine which is the least shitty diaper in the bin, as if that did anything but encourage the bastards.

Quote
Contrary to the cute little strawman you've built of me, I don't vote with idealist faith that the Democrats are the saviors of the country.


What is not a strawman is that you have an idealist faith that one of the candidate is more of a savior than the other.  the swimming analogy is inadequate for many reasons, but you could salvage it by comparing our situation to prisoners voting for which inmate gets trustee.  i don't care who it is, it is all done without my consent.  the idea that your vote influences the behavior of the candidate is just silly.  voting = praying to a god.  how do you know you are voting in the right election?  better register to vote in every district.  

Quote
So far, everything you've said boils down to "the system sucks". I don't think you'll find anyone here arguing against that, Erasmus. The fact that some of us choose to try and do something about that is what separates us.


Ok the system sucks.  what you fail to comprehend, Lou, is that voting is not 'doing something about it'.  Further, I am not failing to 'do something about it'.  I'm just not participating in a social exercise akin to "American Idol".  So it makes you feel like a good citizen, that's just peachy.  that's a pretty empty thing at the end of the day, huh?

Quote
If on the other hand, your contention is that the protections of the Constitution are not worth keeping, and that the Republic should just be scrapped and allowed to become a theocracy run by the most ignorant and autocratic people in the country, then you and I will simply have to part company on our premises.


speaking of men of straw...  i don't know if you noticed but all of these zeroes make strong testaments about their 'faith'.  sounds like you can't get a candidate that does share your premises.  that's gotta suck.

Quote
We can't even include armed rebellion as a last resort option, Erasmus. The reason it worked for the colonists a few centuries back is that they had both popular (not universal, but certainly popular) support and support from abroad, two very critical components to revolution which we are distinctly lacking.


I don't even consider those as the most important reasons why armed rebellion fails today.  yer squirrel guns were fine when you were fighting against other squirrel guns.  that's not the case any more.  dying for your ideals is a dumb thing to do, and that is surely the result of attempting that sort of resistance.  

the problem is not just american imperial hegemony but the imperial hegemony of every other nation.  fracture this republic and you will have another, seeded by a foreign power.

the third option is grow your own food, remember how to make white oak baskets, sing old songs, go see yer granmaw, plant on the signs, unplug whenever you can, shoot squirrels, raise chickens and teach these things to children.  throw sand in the cogs of the machine every chance you get, but do not sacrifice yourself for your principles.

there is a vast literature on the alternative path but none of it is represented in the mainstream discourse because it does not accept the foundational premise that you are failing to question, namely that we should live this way.  

if you do not question this premise then these will not seem to be alternatives but cop-outs.  I can lead you to the conclusion but I can't make you accept it.  Perhaps returning to the ethical prescription that is a foundation of my philosophy is a start.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 13 2008,22:44   

ARE YOU PEOPLE WATCHING SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE???  FREAKING HILARIOUS OPENING SKETCH WITH PALIN AND HILLARY!!!

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
bfish



Posts: 267
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 14 2008,02:18   

Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 13 2008,20:44)
ARE YOU PEOPLE WATCHING SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE???  FREAKING HILARIOUS OPENING SKETCH WITH PALIN AND HILLARY!!!

Thanks for the tip, FTK. SNL is on two hours later out here (or three? In the olden days it was on at 10:30 in the Midwest) so I was able to check it out after I read your post. Very funny, with not a little emotional truth, I suspect.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 14 2008,06:56   

Speaking of comedy, check out recent Sinfest strips. Very funny parodies of current US political goings on.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
bfish



Posts: 267
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 14 2008,10:08   

Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 13 2008,20:44)
ARE YOU PEOPLE WATCHING SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE???  FREAKING HILARIOUS OPENING SKETCH WITH PALIN AND HILLARY!!!

And here is the skit itself.

  
csadams



Posts: 124
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 14 2008,15:05   

Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 13 2008,22:07)
Oleg, that link is hilarious.  I did learn something though.  A few weeks ago, I saw a clip on the news of some guy mooning an audience of people.  I didn't pay much attention to it because I was just walking through my living room as my husband was watching the news.

Now, it all makes sense...

Quote
A Kansas university professor, Fort Hays State University debate coach William Shanahan, "is under fire after a video showing him mooning a room full of students and faculty during a heated debate found its way onto YouTube." He "is shown on the video in a profane, in-your-face argument with his counterpart from the University of Pittsburgh ...."


ROTFLMAO!  That's who I saw in the clip...what a loon!!!!  Being a professor and all (a *science* professor at that!), I hope you're able to keep your pants pulled up while you're lecturing your students!

Don't you have duel citizenship?  Haven't you been in the states since the early 90's?

Shanahan wasn't a scientist or a science professor by any stretch of the imagination.  Naw, he specialized in communications . . . couldn't ya tell??

Shanahan has a strong aversion to science; also, to law enforcement personnel, shoes, public schools, haircuts, professors who make more $$$ than he does, his son's T-ball umpire, district court judges, those who question his pronouncements, mown lawns, interstate speed limits below 85 mph, optometrists, and teachers.  His arrests for aggravated assault were pled down to disorderly conduct.

FHSU is well rid of him.  Why the professor from UPittsburgh wasn't also fired is a mystery.

*************************
olegt, I hope you don't have "duel" citizenship; we'd hate to see you go the way of Alexander Hamilton.

--------------
Stand Up For REAL Science!

  
  1878 replies since Aug. 25 2008,04:17 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (63) < ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]