I never really post in this forum

[Jdanz]

i'm a politics student at a US university, i don't feel like having people draw conclusions about how i see the world by getting any more specific.

I was trying to avoid writing a paper, so i started browsing through some threads.

I think there are some really smart people on this forum but almost no discussion. People are very good at looking up statistics that compliment their point of view but have no real interest in any sort of discourse.

It seems abundently clear to me that neither "right" or "left" is correct, and that some combination of the ideals which they espouse is far more effective then the over simplification that lies in either ideology in vacuum.

Just to point to an example we often see debates about what is more important security or privacy, but clearly both are important and the job of politics (and people like us talking about politics) is to constantly be redrawing the line in the give and take relationship between these two ideals.

I don't really expect any sort of consensus nor does any reasonable political figure, but is it really all that hard to understand that neither side is completely ignorant of reality, and that the principles and ideals that both express have some value, and that our political process is one that seeks to find an equilbrium between competing yet still worthwile goals.

I know the idea that we're all working towards the same cause is really not the flavor of the month, but reading the threads on anachro capitalism and the vietnam war, there is absolutely no discussion. It's simply people arguing with absolute assurity things that are patently ambigous.

The vietnam war in some aspects was both a deterent and an incentive for further communist movements. I have absolutely no idea why the idea that the issue is not clear cut is so anethma to the clearly very well-informed and intelligent people in that thread. You can argue/discuss exactly how and why it was more one or the other, but in my opnion it's fairly disengenous to come down with absolute authority speaking on what is clearly not an issue that can be so neatly resolved.

I don't really have too much to say other then i wish some of the people fighting so bitterly in this forum would realize that the reason there are such divergent opinions on the many issues discussed here is that there is no economic/political doctrine revealed from on high. The best system of government yesterday is not what it is today nor what it will be tomorrow, i myself nor anyone else here, has the "answer" and again IMHO we'd be far better served discussing the merits and disadvantages of different systems then zealously arguing which is Right, because clearly none of them are.

In our non-static world we have to allow for the evolution of ideas of governance, and certainly comming at our myraid problems from a too rigid perspective can only hinder our ability to do that.

I like this post. Nothing else to say.

[bholdr]

One reason that you may not generlly like the discussions on this forum is that so many of the topics that regurarly get brought up here have already been re-hashed ad naseaum, and thus end up being repetive restatements of people's already solidified positions. Sometimes, however, because of the diverse ideological demographic that makes up this site (poker players) it's, in my opinion, an intresting place to see the political interactions of diverse groups that otherwise never interact and discuss political issiues.

There are actually, if one reads the forum often and gets to know which posters are into quality debate (like natedogg, vulturesrow, mmmmmm, lehiguy and so on), great, productive discussions. there are also colorful ideolouges that keep us all entertained (cyrus, dr wogga), and so on.


maybe you could participate, and improve the quality of discourse instread of just complaining about it.

[Jdanz]

sorry, i don't mean to be an ass, or over-generalize. Like i said i've found that many of the posters who's style's don't quite mesh with the way i like to talk about things seem very intelligent/well-informed. However, i was making a comment as to the types of arguments i saw on the first page of the forum.

I'm not insulting anyone, in fact i'm trying to say that everyone clearly has something of value to say. Nor do i in anyway mean to insinuate that there isn't a useful or interesting dialogue that occurs (I particularly agree that a poker site has a fascinating combination of ideologies so as to make it a particularly intersting place to discuss politics).

I was simply reacting to what i saw, which i'm certain was not the entirety of what goes on here. I was simply positing my opinion, which is that people tend to draw a line in the sand and say you're on one side or the other, when in fact in almost all questions of governance there's significantly more room in the middle to manuever.

In essence when people frame a debate as an issue of security/privacy, individual/group, regulation/free market, the prevailing debate focuses around which one is "better" and not how these ideas interact.

In my opinion in any of these issues we are trying to find the correct balance, and in truth very few people believe entirely in one side or the other. Yet in arguing to shift the line a little more towards where we think it should be drawn, we fall into the trap of seeing these issues as black and white all or nothing issues, when in fact they're very very grey.

A main issue that comes into play is individual freedom/responsibilty, and while there are undoubtably some anarchists and totalitarians, they are the vast minority, and people who label themselves (or have been labeled) these things usually aren't. The raging liberal/conservative debate on this board obscures imporant issues especially when in the current political climate neither of those words line up very harmoniously with a cogent political philosophy.

I really don't mean to insult or complain, i'm just expressing what i believe is a productive way to deal with issues.

I think we all do ourselves a great disservice if we speak with too much assurance in our own views. I myself hold some very strong opinions on all the issues that are being discussed currently, but i find that the people esposing what i'd concider "my" side of the argument as well as those in the other camp leave little room for discussion while bringing up fascinating and important points.

The vietnam war thread is again the example i'll fall to as it epitomizes a political topic where people feel very passionetely and often have a personal philosopical interest in one side's "correctness".

The original post of the thread is an incredibly intersting question, yet the rest of the thread is not really evidence for one side or another, but statements of fact given as conclusive proof for one side or the othe. People clearly have a black and white view of the issue yet any serious reflection leads to the conclusion that the effects of the Vietnam War can't simply be classified as what the US intended or Not, as it is some of both.

I thank you for the invitation to particpate, and i find myself, almost unable not to, so you very well might be seeing more of me in the future. I just thought that a fresh look at some small subsect of the debate going on here might put some issues in a slightly different perspective, as you admit, the same people arguing the same issues, becomes a recitation of old facts rather then a discussion, hopefully some of my ramblings can be food for thought from a slightly different angle.

[whiskeytown]

[ QUOTE ]
The vietnam war in some aspects was both a deterent and an incentive for further communist movements. I have absolutely no idea why the idea that the issue is not clear cut is so anethma to the clearly very well-informed and intelligent people in that thread. You can argue/discuss exactly how and why it was more one or the other, but in my opnion it's fairly disengenous to come down with absolute authority speaking on what is clearly not an issue that can be so neatly resolved.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do think it's interesting that Henry Kissinger has gone on record a couple years ago that had the US not gone into Vietnam, he doesn't believe now that a communist curtain would have fallen across Asia.

He says one more country may have gone over, but essentially, it was not gonna matter one way or the other whether or not we intervened.

That takes away one of our primary "victories" right there. Sorta makes it moot.

RB

[Jdanz]

i'm not really trying to make this a vietnam thread, i'm simply saying that just saying victory/defeat oversimplfies an issue, specifically when the question that started the thread was (in my mind) attempting to question exactly what was the impact.

The impact had both positive and negative implications for the united states, i really don't think that's an unreasonable assesment, and whether henry kissinger thinks other asain countries would have fallen, America's involvment in Vietnam certainly had some impact on the entire world's thinking on the capitalist/communist struggle.

I'm pretty sure that it's effect on American popular opinion isn't understood, because as much as it created sympathy for the communist veitnamize, i'm sure that it polarized more indifferent people to become far more rigid and aggressive anti-communists.

I'm really not trying to argue what the impact of vietnam was, simply that it is debatable, and people are serously misrepresenting the facts and stifling debate if they see the impact only in one direction.

This forum is a cesspool for the dolts on both the right and left. Simple as that.

nh

You make an excellent point. Truth be known... I have changed some of my opinions based on the facts (and oh boy was it hard to dig through the BS) that I have found on this page.

The one thing I continue to see as the main problem is this.

Certain political groups/ideals/movements/ are based solely on theory and have no practical application. For example, a true communist society would work great... unfortunately; we all know it's impossible.

What ends up happening on the forum too often, is people want to have endless arguments over what really is... vs. what could have been based on something they learned in "theory class".

[ QUOTE ]
This forum is a cesspool for the dolts on both the right and left. Simple as that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yet you troll here.