Willravel

First off, welcome back Ustwo. We missed you (especially host).
That's an interesting idea, but I might have to disagree with you. Liberalism is a part of a two sided scale, the front side being liberal and the back side being conservative. On the liberal side of the scale, we have people who constantly pull society forward, always trying to reach above and beyond. On the conservative end, we have people who are content with stagnation or the status quo and who pull back against the liberals. As an 'equilibriust' (I just made that word up), and a student of anthropology, I am led to conclude that in a society that is too liberal, things move forward too fast...so fast that mistakes are made. It is in that way that conservatism becomes useful. Move too fast and you won't have time to consider the repercussions of every decision. A society that is too conservative, however, stagnates. As it is the natural state for all life to evolve over a slow period of time through processes of mutation and natural selection, so also society must develop, and therein lies the problem with your assertion. Human nature constantly evolves. We are not the same humans we were 10,000 years ago and we are not the same humans we were 1,000,000 years ago. As with all evolution, what is new today will eventually become old. Likewise, notions that are liberal today will become less liberal and eventually conservative. Take, for example, the idea of transfusion. When the idea of sharing blood for medical purposes was originally introduced, conservatives overwhelmingly condemned it as wrong. That is no longer the case except in very specific cases today. I doubt we would see Rush Limbaugh telling people not to give blood today. As such, liberal notions today such as homosexual marriage being accepted by the state or universal health care will either be destroyed by conservatism or undoubtedly become less liberal over time. Even you, Ustwo, are a product of societal development occurring for hundreds of thousands of years. That's liberalism eventually coming out on top consistently throughout human existence.
Ironically, I must disagree. Meaning is relativistic. A 'personalist' and socialist could easily decide based on precedent and reason what the real world applications would be of each philosophy.
Communism is one type of socialism. Not only is the term 'communist' inaccurate in referring to your adversaries here, but it carries with it a negative connotation because of McCarthyism. Just so you're aware, that's what a lot of people get mad about. I'm sure you'd be just as pissed if I inaccurately called you a fascist.

Just fyi, a new feature was added so that ultra-long articles can be better organized for the ease of the reader.
Personal goals are awesome. I agree that it's important to spend time with family an all that jazz. I wish you all the best in that.

You were a 20 something once upon a time, and I'm sure you had just as many big opinions on things as you do now. I'm also sure that you would have been pissed off if some older person tried to dismiss you and/or your ideas based solely on your age. Have the courtesy of showing others the respect they earn. If someone is an idiot, call them an idiot for the things they say and do, not their age.

j8ear

Thank you for, if nothing else, at least illuminating EXACTLY what the entire liberal mind set is all about. I've struggled personally with thoughts of something similar but the nuts and bolts eluded me. You nailed it!!!!

I can't say I completely agree with this characterization of conservatism, at least in it's present incarnation in US politics.

Essentially I think that the stripes of both "ideologies" are for the most identical, and essentially boil down to staying in power, at what ever cost.

Classical liberalism or true libertarianism I think is concerned with understanding human nature and adapting appropriate solutions and present day liberalism is essentially (and has yet to chalk up a single success. This lack of success or even a single improvement is key) attempting to create a utopia based on how the population of a utopia "should" behave. Obviously and without a doubt dillusional in assuming that human nature can be utopic or even in the slightest way manufactured or steered in such a direction.

Anywho....Ustwo, I miss your insights, and wish you well in your quest for family happiness and whatever other goals you seek to accomplish.

-bear

__________________
It's alot easier to ask for forgiveness then it is to ask for permission.

dc_dux

Ustwo....show me a successful Libertarian government anywhere in the world in the last 200 years.

Its a fine model on paper and may work well in a small, agrarian, homogenous, isolationist nation. I dont believe for a second that such a government can represent its citizens best interests in a post-industrial, geo-politically and economically complex 21st century.

No, I would not be happy living under such a government, because, IMO, most likely it would be a failed state.

***
edit:
FYI...here is an example of "hit and run" I am talking about....from you last post in Feb on global warming: (link)
You find one scientist that attributes global warming to solar activity (I found the article to be informative and may certainly have some validity)....AND with that you discount any other scientific possibility (like the findings of the 100+ scientists and climatologists of the International Panel on Climate Change) as well as making smug comments directed towards those here who disagree with you.
You conclude that your scientiist is right, the others are wrong, yet you dont hang around to debate....(you" don't plan on posting anytime soon again.") - hit and run...and a very disengenuous way to participate in a forum.

My apologies to others for the threadjack and and making it personal.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Ch'i

Would you explain how it is a mischaracterization? If it is baseless, then add the foundation that you think should be there.
If you knew this, why did you persist?




Thanks for stopping by Ustwo. Hopefully your new found ability to let go of anger and disdain is contagious.

I wish you and your family well.

dc_dux

Ch'i....if you want to start a new thread on liberalism/conservatism (based on Ustwo's premise or not), I will be happy to debate it.
For now, I will suggest that it was predominantly "liberal" programs and liberalism (as it is/was characterized and practiced in US politics.. ie an active govt role vs limited govt conservatism.. rather than a classical political/economic sense) that created the post-WW II middle class (GI bill - opening the opportunity for college to millions of returing vets, programs to expand home ownership - Fannie Mae, programs enhancing small business opportunities - SBA loan programs, etc), provided retirement and affordable health security to seniors (social security and Medicare- both need fixing now), intiated the civil rights movement and programs to protect the environment, promoted scientific and technological research through government grants.....

Now if you think these examples are "against human nature and tries to force us to become what they think humans should be", as I said, I would be happy to discuss it further in a new thread....I would suggest it is religious social conservatism in the US that has these characteristics.

And, I persisted with my observation regarding Ustwo's follow-up comment to my initial observation of his "hit and run" tactics ("There are about 15 liberals to one conservative that posts, I'm not going to respond to everyone who thinks they have a point.") with an example -- I simply pointed out he if post an article and comment that criticizes others here as "armchair experts", he should stay around and debate it.

The same would apply to his latest sweeping characterization (or mischaracterization IMO) of liberalism/conservatiism. If he is going to offer that kind of controversial commentary, he should have the courage of his convictions to debate it and defend it.

I thought a public response was reasonable (considering all the threadjacking that goes on in the political forum) and I stand by what I wrote.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

host

....speaking of empathy.....let's hop in the "way back" machine, for a sec...

Seaver in this post on Aug. 12, 2006:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...1&postcount=53
Post #15, on this thread:
From post #78, on this thread:
....a re-run...in a "drive-by", from a "conversation" that took place, last august?:

In this post http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...&postcount=204

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...40#post2106840

....and now....it's more than 130 weeks since the "offense" took place....he received an apology.....while I'm still waiting for one....silently....but for the subject being dredged up, again....

Intense1

My post has to do with the statements made about hunger in the US - I am amazed that anyone would say that there is true "hunger" in the US, true hunger meaning there is no access to services or ministries that would alleviate an actual physical hunger.

I have lived in Thailand for years, I have walked amongst poverty stricken people there in the slums of Klong Tuey and have walked down the streets of Vientienne, Laos, and in the eastern border towns between Thailand and Cambodia. I have walked in Myanmar, and have seen hungry kids asking for money for food (or for their weekly amounts they must give their handlers who are watching on the side)

I have walked in Egypt and had kids asking for "bahksheesh", kids who don't have homes and who only eat when a foreigner gives them money.

In these years I have been privileged to walk amongst such children, never have I seen a "fat" kid, a child who obviously and truly had enough to eat. Not like most all American kids I have seen, even in the most impoverished of American kids.

So don't say that there is true "hunger" here in America - there are services available, and failing that, there are ministries who will care for these kids. In other countries, there is nothing - no government, no services, no ministries.

These kids are truly "hungry".

Americans need to pull their heads out of their asses and see what is going on in the world, and not just think the sun rises and sets on them.

And I am an American.

__________________
(none yet, still thinkin')

host

Please read the following article and tell me that you don't sound remarkably similar to candidate Bush during his first presidential campaign:
....and why would you compare the hunger problem in the US to the situations in third world countries such as Thailand, with 1/5 of per capita income of the US, and Egypt, with less than 1/10 of US per capita income?

But, since you did compare the US to those countries, please take note of the fact that Thailand has a lower poverty rate than the US does, compared to the respective mean incomes in each country. Notice, too....that in both Egypt and Thailand, the bottome ten percent enjoy almost twice the 1.8 percent of total national income that reaches the bottom ten percent of the US population.

Are you defending the idea that, in the US, a country where the average income is five to ten times the average income in Thailand and Egypt, hunger that is say....."half" as severe, for the bottom ten percent here in the US, as it is in those much poorer places, is acceptable, or out of the realm of your belief system, as it seemed to be out of candidate Bush's?

Your opinions contradict the reports from the USDA, and the CIA factbook offers statistics that indicate that the bottom ten percent here control only 1.8 percent of the total wealth, 1/17 of the top ten percents' 1997 figure of 30.5 percent. ....and if the CIA factbook can tell us the income distribution in the last few years in foreing countries, why do your think that 30.5 percent wealth figure for the top ten percent in the US is from 1997...nine years old now.....?

You say that it is not so bad here....but don't the income numbers tell us that it should be five times better for the poorest here, than in Thailand?
Your comparisons of conditions of the poorest of the population living in the wealthiest major country in the world, with the plight of the poorest in 4 or 5 impoverished third world countries, as a method to dismiss the hunger problem in the wealthiest major country, is unconvincing and disturbing to me. It reminds me of Newt's shameful rhetoric:
You and the political agenda that you support does not recognize that there is a crisis in the US. and that hunger is only a real symptom of it. Keep backing bills like the "bankruptcy reform act", and reduction of short term capital gains taxes from 28 percent to 15 percent, and tax cuts that shift, even slightly, the total tax burden from the top ten percent to the bottom twenty percent of income earners, and a "fair tax" that eliminates progressive income taxation, or propaganda that changes the description of estate taxes to "death" taxes.

Keep pushing an agenda that makes it impossible for the rural poor to obtain birth control and sex education, and birth control products and access to safe clinical abortion.....

Keep doing all of the things that I've described republicans' supporting, and you'll succeed in shifting that last 1.8 percent of the national income that does trickle down to the poorest ten percent in the US, and keep denying that there is a hunger problem, here, because you have witnessed REAL hunger....and maybe you'll get to see REAL hunger here, too!

Seaver

Ustwo, I really do understand where you came from. You see that little warning bar under my name? That is because I got sick of the feces which was pouring out from another TF'er and I simply didn't care. I never apologized and I never will. By the end of your tenure, however, you were doing nothing more than flame baiting.

We saw eye to eye on most issues, and would try to mutually support each others arguments against the heavy tilt which is TF Politics. However by the end of it you didn't care and it showed, hell I hardly post here anymore. Even salmon give up after swimming up stream long enough, but simply not posting is much more civil than the one liners you were using.

__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

shakran

You've pointed out another example of government doublespeak. It's not hunger. It's just low food security. And the janitor is really a custodial systems engineer. And a 13 cent nut becomes a $100 hexiform rotatable surface compression unit.

You can make up any word you want for hunger but it's still hunger. Note I said hunger, not starvation. Sure, there are few, if any, people in America that are truly starving. Sure, there are many countries where the people are a whole lot hungrier than we are. But comparing the USA to egypt and saying "See? Look! We're not as bad as them so things are great" is disingenuous. It's rather like coming home to mom and dad with a D on your report card and saying "Yeah, but this other kid got an F, so compared to him I'm awesome and therefore don't need to do anything to improve!" It simply doesn't fly.

There are certainly organizations that you can turn to for help if you can't afford to buy food - - - but why should we think it's acceptable that so many Americans *have* to turn to those organizations. If the citizens in the richest country on earth can't afford to buy even cheap, crappy food for themselves, while the government drops BILLIONS into a front of the "war on terr" that in fact has nothing to do with the fictitious war on terror, what does that say about our priorities?

Yakk

You can have low food security without being hungry. You can have low food security and be fat.

A non-reliable or unsafe source of food is a food security problem. A non-nutritious source of food is a food security problem.

I thought that most industrialized nations engage in practices to increase the price of food?

__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.

Ustwo

80% warn and proud of it Ironicly I took more heat for mentioning some wicca or pagan fest as a place to pick up easy hippy chicks than anything on politics, I guess the LARPers and their made up regilion get upset very easily, its only ok to make fun of Christianity here The current warning system as a gaping obvious flaw of course, but I won't bother with that.

You did nail it though, I didn't care anymore, but I wouldn't say I was flame baiting. If you recall ANY post of mine became a flame bait to the slavering horde, it doesn't matter on how it was presented. My posts did stand out more, but when you think of the outright flames, no bait, just complete flames, I would get without any moderator action until it was pointed out since the moderators never bothered to read those posts, I should take some solace in that my posts were at least read.

In the end I've just decided to look at the path my life has taken, and then the paths of others and wonder who's philosophy should be the rule of law. Maybe now I am 'The Man' in many eyes, but I am what I am by taking control of my own life and hard work, not by leeching off the work of others or complaining it wasn't fair.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Ch'i

I never read any of those posts, Ustwo. Seems I was wrong in thinking that you had grasped at any sense of humility as well. Not really sure why I did in the first place. Oh wait, that's right! I thought you had actually meant something when you said "With age comes wisdom, and I received a bit of a dose this last year or two."

My mistake.

roachboy

my my, ustwo.....such Grand Pronouncements.

it is i guess nice to see that your time spent in an ashram had such effects, focussing you on the Big Picture and reducing those of us who scuttle about here to a suitably small scale.

just be careful up there in those Olympian Heights: the air is thin and it makes you dizzy the way drinking in boulder can.

one consequence of this thinness in the air is that your sentences--you know, those transmissions aimed at us Little People--dont really make sense at times. like your equating of your "life path" and that of "whose philosophy should be the rule of Law". i dont recall your having much of a philosophy.

but, as one of those Little People that you use in order to get a sense of the scale of your Magnificence, i am sure that the problem of recognizing your philosophy lay entirely with me: as does the sense of garble in your last post.

so no worries: next time you feel inclined to stride mightily downward from the Heights in order to deliver a Transmission, i'll be just as grateful as i am right now. it is always lovely to see you and your sentences. god knows there's nothing quite like reading a post from someone who imagines himself to be copping a squat on you from a great height: it really makes me feel inclined to say welcome back.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

The_Jazz

__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

jorgelito

Ustwo, what's wrong with being the "Man"? People reap what they sow. Not everyone gets this. *shrug*

I have a great quote (paraphrase cause I can't remember it verbatim) for you that you may like from one of my favorite statesmen:

Winston Churchill:

"If you are not a rebel by the time you are 20, then you have no heart. But if you are not part of the establishment by the time you are 30 then you have no brain."

I hope you stick around Ustwo, it brings a little balance to this place.

smooth

The only balance it brought was by the end of the third page there is a big red mod warning. other than that, the conversation was going fine...so it seems "where's the old heated debate" is answered in that a few specific people are no longer posting derogatory comments.

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

dc_dux

People come and go all the time...thats the nature of political forums.

I do find added entertainment value from those who feel a need for an extended public farewell tour.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Ustwo

Yes remember, because its important that you only listen to people who agree with you.

You just don't get it, but thats ok.

Seems you are in Chicago now? Wanna get a beer?

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Charlatan

now there's a meeting i would like to see.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

shakran

Pot, meet kettle. You have yet to consider an opposing opinion, or even admit that it might possibly have some validity.

roachboy

ustwo: chicago yes.
a beverage would be interesting, sure.
pm me.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Intense1

Perhaps, Host, I was unclear about what I stated before - I have seen hunger, and it is awful. Perhaps we should define the term "true hunger". I see true hunger as being a situation in which there is no hope, either from familial, ministerial or governmental means, for alleviation of hunger. I'm writing of personal experience of actually seeing kids/adult suffering with both marasmus and kwarshkor (sp?).

I don't know about statistics regarding how horrible you feel the Bush administration has performed regarding the poor in the US. You have so many stats and quotes that I just really have no desire to work through, but from what I can see, you just are focussed on the politics of seeing conservative issues fail.

That is not what I am talking about - I'm talking about real hunger. Kids with distended bellies, kids who have begged me for water and food, kids and adults who have no one else but me (a foreigner) who can supply them with a few pennies in order to give them another meal.

I've personally walked through this, Host, in other countries. I've never seen emaciated kids in the US. Where are they? If there are emaciated kids in the US, why aren't YOU out there helping them? Or at least calling attention of the numerous government services available to them?

Where are you, Host, in the issue of hunger in America?

__________________
(none yet, still thinkin')

shakran

Once again we have someone saying that Ethiopia is worse, and therefore we don't have to do anything to fix our own problems. I never held myself to the standards of the remedial students in school, I expect my country to have the same outlook.

Intense1

You misunderstand me, Shakran. I never said that we shouldn't fix our own problems, I just stated that our problems seem to pale in comparison with other problems. We in the US are concerned with making sure there are enough people above the poverty line - in other countries they are just concerned with having enough people over the HUNGER line.

If this is an "Ethiopia is worse" problem, then so be it. Sometimes you just have to concede that indeed, Ethiopia is just worse off than we are.

__________________
(none yet, still thinkin')

shakran

No one disagrees that Ethiopia is worse. However I feel it is not a meaningful activity to compare the US to other countries. Either we're doing what we need to do or we are not. And the simple fact is, we are not. Those homeless shelters and soup kitchens should not be anywhere close to full every night, yet they are, all while the richest tiny fraction of our society spends their days deciding between the Bentley and the Rolls Royce - - and then deciding aww what the hell, let's get both. I have no problem with people being wealthy, but I find it unconscionable that those who are wealthy do not have to contribute their fair share to the government, which could then turn around and help empty out those shelters and kitchens.

jorgelito

But "fair share" can be tricky to assess. It is subjective.

host

how are these CIA "fact book" statistics, "subjective"?
Contrast the "share" of the bottom 10 percent, with that of the top ten percent, and the GINI index number, of the three above countries, with the data of the three countries, displayed below......

Can a politcal philosophy, or a politcal party, sustain itself by embracing the idea that the distribution of wealth in the US is fairer, or sounder for the politcal status quo, if it matches the arrangements in Mexico and Brazil, closer than those of Germany, Sweden, and Japan? Is the top ten percent in the US Mexico, and Japan, better off, from a security and politcal influence standpoint, goinf forward....than the top ten percent in Japan, Sweden, and Germany?

Are the lower class inhabitants of the US. Mexico,and Brazil, lazier, or less productive, than their counterparts in Sweden, Germany, and Japan.

Are the top ten percent in the US, Brazil, and Mexico, smarter, or more productive...or are they simply, and probably temoporarily, in possession of more politcal influence than their counterparts in Japan, Germany and Sweden?

jorgelito

What are you talking about host? Your stats don't prove squat. I was referring to taxes cause that's what I assumed we talking about when it comes to "fair share". So yes, apparently it is very subjective because we all have different views as to what is subjective.

nofnway

I can't speak for anyone else but I don't post much because frankly the line by line dissection of each others posts and sources is TEDIOUS.

I get more enjoyment out of the first few posts in a thread when people are on point and projecting their opinions (right or wrong) from original thoughts rather than sniping the other guy and getting so far afield from the original topic that it is forgotten.

__________________
"Iron rusts with disuse, stagnant water loses its purity and in cold water freezes. Even so does inaction sap the vigor of the mind"
Leonardo Da Vinci

Necrosis

With the degree of civilized discourse that our members present here, the term "cocksucker" must have been immediately followed by a Seinfeldian "Not that there's anything wrong with that."

No? How shocking.

Plan9

Wow, it IS like Clash of the Titans up in here.

With more than one Krakken!

(drops his humble baked goods, runs for his life)

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

Elphaba

You brought doughnuts?

__________________
"You can't ignore politics, no matter how much you'd like to." Molly Ivins - 1944-2007

ottopilot

edit

Sun Tzu

It also appears the touchy subject of Israel / Palestine is avoided now. That seemed to lead to real nasty dialogue.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

DaveOrion

Now this thread was an interesting read, very informative. I'm glad to know I'm not alone in my view on certain modular TFP matters......dont ask.

80% warn on Ustwo??? Obviously I don't call members cocksuckers quite as much as I should. I feel inadequate with no warnings at all.....

Come back!! I want a fuckin doughnut to you cocksucker!!

__________________
Syriana...have you ever tried liquid MDMA?....Liquid MDMA? No....Arash, when you wanna do this?.....After prayer...

loquitur

I've been away from this forum for a while and it looks like things are proceeding apace...........

Carry on, tallyho, pip pip..........

tecoyah

I was thinking (yeah...I know, bad Idea), but for me at least the lack of serious debate comes down to two things:

1) the vast majority of people agree for the most part with my stance, thus making debate pointless.

2) those who do not agree have debated with me on the issues, and are extremely negative for the most part, making debate again...pointless.

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

loquitur

Tecoyah, I guess that means you're a uniter, not a divider! <ducking>

Necrosis

Perhaps there is yet another reason.

A search of posts containing the word "Abramoff":
Showing results 1 to 40 of 91

A search of posts by Host containing the word "Abramoff":
Showing results 1 to 40 of 58

In these posts, Host was able to delve out incredibly minute details of public figures he dislikes. Contrast that to a search for posts by Host containing the word "Hsu":
Showing results 1 to 3 of 3
Unfortunately, none of these refer to NORMAN Hsu.

A man who can tell you Abramoff's uncle's shoe size, and who posts at length of real and imagined transgressions by Republican politicians, does not stimulate me to debate if he has not heard of Norman Hsu. For that matter, a large majority of other posters on this forum has no interest in lawbreakers who are not named Abramoff, Cheney, Rove, or Bush.

Why in the world would anyone consider debating people with such closed mindsets? Perhaps one of Host's lengthy posts, this time dishing on Norman Hsu, would stimulate animated debate.