Aliens and the US Government (a few facts)

[sirio11]

[ QUOTE ]
Exactly. Which is exactly why we have to kill all of the sharks - to keep us safe from the aliens. I'd rather fight the sharks in the ocean than the aliens here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeeahhhh!!!!!! Lets kill all those sharks !!!

Where do I sign?

[Exsubmariner]

DVault,
I love to troll you on so many levels.

I want to clarify a couple of things. First Sklansky doesn't qualify as egg head in my book. I am not for a moment denying the impact of intelligent people on the world. Nor am I advocating ignoring getting educated. I'm trying to point out that different people play the great game of life by different rules for different goals. Sometimes people post really inane things on message boards just to get other posters all rowled up.

Secondly, The Penis does not produce testosterone. That hormone is produced by the Testicles, thus the name Testosterone.

You cannot possibly deny that the twentieth century wasn't shaped profoundly by Hilter. Regardless of how dispicable his acts, dealing with him took the combined might of England, Russia and the United States. I am not saying that I admire him at all, just using him as an illustration that you cannot ignore the impact of what he represented.

Anyway, I went straight to absurd gear a while back, so I'm not going pretend to be serious anymore. My point was more or less that you cannot have whatever it is in the world you are after and ignore the motivations of others completely. Some people are driven sometimes by what seem incomprehensable forces. What cocktail of motivations would drive someone to fly an airplane into a building? I can't even imagine. But I know enough to understand that I ignore those motivations at my peril.

I was laughing so much at my successful troll I stopped playing poker. I'm going to go back to that now. Enjoyed it.
X

[Exsubmariner]

Very good.

[Exsubmariner]

That's funny.

It's true. Sometimes my world revolves completely around my penis. On occasion, my penis takes over my actions completely.

X

[oneeye13]

"facts"

[jokerthief]

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Some people are driven sometimes by what seem incomprehensable forces. What cocktail of motivations would drive someone to fly an airplane into a building? I can't even imagine. But I know enough to understand that I ignore those motivations at my peril.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think the forces that drive the right are that incomprehensible.

You posted a neat little quote about language and politics that I thought was quite appropriate.

Listen to the language of the right, and I think you'll often hear the sounds of hyper-masculine chest thumping. And as I said, I don't think it's all that incomprehensible.

[xniNja]

Nice post.

[Exsubmariner]

[ QUOTE ]
Listen to the language of the right, and I think you'll often hear the sounds of hyper-masculine chest thumping. And as I said, I don't think it's all that incomprehensible

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying that hyper masculine chest thumping by the right motivated people to fly airplanes into buildings?

Okay. Just kidding.

Seriously, masculine chest thumping behaviour is a trait that is hard wired into humanity. Right wing politicians are naturally going to play to that mentality. Why? Well, for one, the left doesn't. Second, as I stated earlier, appealing to people who live by the hyper masculine chest thumping ethic is going to get you access to their resources, which are substantial. Politically shrewd if you ask me. Why are you so suprised by this revelation? Why do you hold political speech that would appeal to such a constituentcy in such contempt? I mean other than the fact that you consider your views to be immensely more enlightened and superior?

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Seriously, masculine chest thumping behaviour is a trait that is hard wired into humanity. Right wing politicians are naturally going to play to that mentality. Why? Well, for one, the left doesn't. Second, as I stated earlier, appealing to people who live by the hyper masculine chest thumping ethic is going to get you access to their resources, which are substantial. Politically shrewd if you ask me. Why are you so suprised by this revelation? Why do you hold political speech that would appeal to such a constituentcy in such contempt? I mean other than the fact that you consider your views to be immensely more enlightened and superior?

[/ QUOTE ]

First, politics is more than a game played by Machiavellian puppeteers whose only interest is to pull strings to get access to resources. There's a whole lot of sincerity to right-wing chest thumping – take this forum for example: posters on this board clearly don’t expect to gain anything from calling liberals whiny bitches other than for some level of personal satisfaction.

Anyone who has ever worked in politics knows there are a lot of people who put their nose to the grindstone fighting political battles when their personal gain (in regards to resources gained) are quite small. I’ve worked on campaigns where volunteers put in 20 or 30+ hours a week for a candidate, for months on end, where their personal gain was absolutely nothing. Maybe they were just part of some conspiracy on behalf of some power hungry politician, who duped them into sacrificing their time and energy. Or maybe there are things that matter to political actors other than just gathering resources. You might not agree with the Herbert quote you provided, but I think he's close to the mark when he says that language can matter to people more than wealth.

That is to say, no matter how much we might want to make politics like poker (just some game where everyone’s out to fleece someone else out of something) – it’s not. People have emotions invested in politics – emotions that can’t easily be explained away by the motivation to grab as many resources as possible. And I’m quite convinced the politics of anxious masculinity is one of them – that is to say, I think the right thrives on the insecurities of the modern male, whose gender role has been in flux for the better part of 40 years (if not longer – much longer; better historians than I can possibly cite evidence of gender roles being in constant flux). And I don't think we can explain those insecurities (nor the wish to resolve them) through account which center around competition for resources.

I think the consequences of such a statement could be alarming for the right. Might it be that right-wing positions on drilling for oil in ANWAR, defense spending, affirmative action, welfare, etc. – aren’t driven by anything more substantive than wanting to be the toughest SOB around?