|
|
#31
10-20-2005, 03:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Conservative Perception of Liberals
[ QUOTE ]
Citizens donating to the hurricane relief are altruistic. The government is covering its butt and always will be. It is easy to give money away when it is not yours in the first place. A good question would be how many of the politicians give the same or more of their own money to the causes they vote for. Tied expendatures to their salaries by the percentage and then see how altruistic they are. [/ QUOTE ] You asked 'when has the government ever done anything altruistic.' If you don't accept paying for the cleanup of natural disasters then what will you accept? If you're going to answer anything I name with "well it's not their money anyways" then what's the point? Then by your definition of 'government's money' it's impossible for the government to do anything altruistic. Even if they save a bunch of African starving AIDS babies from a tyrannical regime and cure their AIDS. You kind of changed the topic when you switched the question to how many politicians contribute to causes out of their own pocket. 
|
|
#32
10-20-2005, 03:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Radio Interview I Heard Today
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] See option (a), above. ****************************** Can anyone translate? [/ QUOTE ] dude, he called you stupid... I'd kick his ass. -Gryph [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] I [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] this thread.
|
|
#33
10-20-2005, 03:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Conservative Perception of Liberals
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Anyway, you are correct. There is no "real world." I made the whole thing up. [/ QUOTE ] I don't think you made it up; I'm just firmly convinced that the Harvard faculty, Podunk State alums, dairy farmers, Wall St. execs, homeless bums, diplomats, politicians, musicians, steel workers, etc. all exist in the 'real world'. [/ QUOTE ] People have blinders on and whatever it is that they see (or are concerned with) on a day to day basis becomes the real world. To them all other matters are extraneous and cause them to wonder when everyone will come around to their way of thinking.
|
|
#34
10-20-2005, 04:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Conservative Perception of Liberals
[ QUOTE ]
People have blinders on and whatever it is that they see (or are concerned with) on a day to day basis becomes the real world. To them all other matters are extraneous and cause them to wonder when everyone will come around to their way of thinking. [/ QUOTE ] I think it's more good ole' anti-intellectualism manifesting itself on the right: all liberals are stupid, except the smart ones, who are out of touch and not in the real world. I think it's easier (and more accurate) to argue that prestigious universities (and their faculties) aren't in fact populated by solely by leftists; but then again, that ruins some of the most cherished parts of the right-wing narrative - so criticizing some of the world's best academics for being out of touch and 'not in the real world' gives them the best of both worlds, no matter how meaningless and silly the charge. I'll throw a bone to the right and admit the left does the same: all right-wingers are idiot hicks who love the Bible but can't read it; except the smart ones, who are diabolically plotting to enslave us all with the Invisible Hand - all for a few more upward ticks in the GDP, and another yacht, while having a toast to celebrate the plight of the great unwashed. I don't think that this is a manifestation of anti-intellectualism, as it is more a case of ascribing some rather strange motives and rationalities to those with whom we disagree. The part of human nature that seems present here is the seemingly inherent need to dismiss that which we don't like, no matter the great lengths and ridiculous means we try to do it. This might provide an answer to the OP's question. My 2 cents, anyway.
|
|
#35
10-20-2005, 04:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Conservative Perception of Liberals
</font><blockquote><font class="small">En respuesta a:</font><hr />
So the 'real world' = entrepreneurial acumen? [/ QUOTE ] Close...allow me: "Academia is for sissies" [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
|
#36
10-20-2005, 05:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Conservative Perception of Liberals
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] So the 'real world' = entrepreneurial acumen? [/ QUOTE ] Close...allow me: "Academia is for sissies" [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Strange coincidence: On Yahoo!'s homepage, this was one of the lead stories on the 'In the News' column at the right hand side: College gender gap widens "And the needs of boys and girls are different, says Kimberly Tsaousis, a college-prep adviser who works mostly with low-income minorities at Cleveland High School in Seattle. "Girls are way more likely to just pay attention" during advising sessions, she says. "It's almost less cool" for boys to show interest in college." Replace 'cool' with 'masculine' and I think this guidance counselor (and you, vulturesrow) are onto something.
|
|
#37
10-20-2005, 06:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Conservative Perception of Liberals
One of the first things to understand about this "Evil Liberal" phenomenon is that it's just one of several incarnations of the same basic right-wing propaganda strategy. Instead of defending and advocating their own policies on the merits, they create an "image to oppose" and then they herd their followers by attacking it and trying to bait their more fairminded opponents into defending it. The left, in general, stands up for minority views and for oppressed groups, which makes this a very easy propaganda tactic for the right wing to employ. They attack a political minority, wait for their opponents to defend them on political freedom grounds, then accuse all thier opponents of being "secret sympathizers". They attack a religious minority, wait for their opponents to defend them on religious freedom grounds, then accuse all their opponents of being "anti-Christian". They attack a racial minority ... They attack a cultural minority ... They attack "the French" ... They attack "people who don't like Country Music" ... They attack "Hollywood" ... Anything which, when defended on Liberty grounds, can be turned into a symbol of a decadent and detached opposition. It's an outright propaganda tactic, and they use it ALL THE TIME. They use it because, so far, it has worked for them. Don't agree with cutting public services to the bone? Well, you must "love government spending". Never mind the specific budget items, of course, because that would get into actual legislative priorities, which is precisely the discussion right-wing propaganda is designed to avoid. Don't agree with invading (Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, wherever)? Why, you must "love the Terrorists!" You must "hate America!" And the thing is: the gullible idiots who get their "reality" from Hannity and Rush and Pat Robertson, they drink this stuff down by the gallon. q/q
|
|
#38
10-20-2005, 06:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Conservative Perception of Liberals
[ QUOTE ]
I never particularly understood what constituted the 'real world' and why some people might live in it, while others do not. [/ QUOTE ] OK, never mind about whether some people "live in the real world" or not--what do you think about the idea that some people are inclined to propose solutions that tend not to work in the real world, by virtue of the fact that they don't have to be accountable, and have never had to be accountable in that regard? Examples: business major who has never run a business, or even been in business, proposing an overhaul of XYZ Industries; George McGovern making business-related laws before he had ever run a business (and later failing at running a B&B); plus myriad other examples of which I cannot think at the moment (multitabling). It's also a lot easier to be an "expert" in theory than to put that theory into actual practice in a successful manner. Comments?
|
|
#39
10-20-2005, 06:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Conservative Perception of Liberals
</font><blockquote><font class="small">En respuesta a:</font><hr />
One of the first things to understand about this "Evil Liberal" phenomenon is that it's just one of several incarnations of the same basic right-wing propaganda strategy. Instead of defending and advocating their own policies on the merits, they create an "image to oppose" and then they herd their followers by attacking it and trying to bait their more fairminded opponents into defending it. The left, in general, stands up for minority views and for oppressed groups, which makes this a very easy propaganda tactic for the right wing to employ. They attack a political minority, wait for their opponents to defend them on political freedom grounds, then accuse all thier opponents of being "secret sympathizers". They attack a religious minority, wait for their opponents to defend them on religious freedom grounds, then accuse all their opponents of being "anti-Christian". They attack a racial minority ... They attack a cultural minority ... They attack "the French" ... They attack "people who don't like Country Music" ... They attack "Hollywood" ... Anything which, when defended on Liberty grounds, can be turned into a symbol of a decadent and detached opposition. It's an outright propaganda tactic, and they use it ALL THE TIME. They use it because, so far, it has worked for them. Don't agree with cutting public services to the bone? Well, you must "love government spending". Never mind the specific budget items, of course, because that would get into actual legislative priorities, which is precisely the discussion right-wing propaganda is designed to avoid. Don't agree with invading (Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, wherever)? Why, you must "love the Terrorists!" You must "hate America!" And the thing is: the gullible idiots who get their "reality" from Hannity and Rush and Pat Robertson, they drink this stuff down by the gallon. q/q [/ QUOTE ] Thanks for providing a picture perfect example of the liberal equivalent to what waxie was talking about.
|
|
#40
10-20-2005, 06:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Conservative Perception of Liberals
[ QUOTE ]
OK, never mind about whether some people "live in the real world" or not--what do you think about the idea that some people are inclined to propose solutions that tend not to work in the real world, by virtue of the fact that they don't have to be accountable, and have never had to be accountable in that regard? Examples: business major who has never run a business, or even been in business, proposing an overhaul of XYZ Industries; George McGovern making business-related laws before he had ever run a business (and later failing at running a B&B); plus myriad other examples of which I cannot think at the moment (multitabling). It's also a lot easier to be an "expert" in theory than to put that theory into actual practice in a successful manner. Comments? [/ QUOTE ] I don't think anyone is inclined to propose solutions that won't work - I'm not sure what accountability has to do with it; which isn’t to dismiss accountability as being important. But I don't think I understand your question (your question = what do I think about the idea that some people are inclined to propose solutions that tend not to work in the real world, by virtue of the fact that they don't have to be accountable, and have never had to be accountable in that regard?). I certainly agree your post, in that: it's difficult to put theories into practice. Take poker, for instance. Just reading 2+2 books (theory) will put you in a good position toward being a winning player - but experience plays a key role as well - so does variance; and losing (failure) is always part of the game, even for world-class players. I wouldn't expect people who have only been exposed to only 2+2 books to immediately become winning players, without any experience playing hands. Experience (with many things in life, it would seem) is important. So if I owned a business, I wouldn't suggest letting a newly-minted B-school grad overhaul my industries; nor would I recommend starting a business, like McGovern did, if you have no experience. But I think failures are to be expected in life, including in business. I don't think these failures demonstrate that McGovern lived in an alternate, not 'real' world. I don’t think I’m satisfactorily answering your questions, though. I'm not sure how this relates to the dialouge about the 'real world'. I know you told me to pay it no mind, and I'm trying - but I'm not sure what you're getting at, either.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
