quixotic
12-14-06, 04:31 AM
This is a response I gave recently on an IM to a realist that I kind of liked and felt like posting… just to see what people thought….
I'll give you one thing, your instant on your view. The real issues against universalism that you show are not some vague description of economics that show little understanding, or political theories. But rather its social application and its problems thereof. Mainly, with people who despite all reason insist on their point of view. Now, I don't want to go through every single possibility of realist rhetoric and prove how its wrong. So I state it simply and you ignore it, now it very obvious to me, the problem with arguing is that sometimes you have to listen. When you respond to my laborious replies you repeat the same statement in different words. Whatever its OK if you want to be realist have fun with that. But stop shooting down my ideas and those of others automatically because they don't fall into your school of thought that you been taught.
Although to others on this board your rebuttals might sound intelligent, but believe me once I finish explaining this theory one of these days, you'll take back every word. But in the mean time i don't expect you to agree, but please stop repeating yourself, can you at least try different perspectives next time, like and procedural approach or something.
Now its easy to understand why you so easily misunderstand my arguments or what I'm saying since its a new theory in a way and you don't have much knowledge of it. Which is why it surprises me why you don't want to know more about it, since your such an intellectual I thought you might want to understand what your talking about, or why you don't check out those links. But if you insist on making blanket statements about which you don't understand go ahead, but don't fool yourself into thinking that your actually proving anything. Just give me some time and ask constructive questions and I doubt you'll have so much to conflict with, but you do seem to define intelligence by making everyone else feel stupid. Which never works so just listen.
Universalism is not communist or lefty, its balanced. Its as much capitalist and right as it is left. Humorously it is more often confused with being to far on the right which is why I find your opinions particularly interesting.
In communism there is no government just communities so obviously that out the window. Socialists the government has control over the resources - that too is not true. Universalism's do not dictate the behavior of its organizations or cooperations they can function however they wish or deem necessary to best utilize and reach their goals. So long as they don't infringe on the peoples rights and maintain their best interest. So a multinational cooperation could be universal and they could work together and dominate markets so long as the company reasonable prices and kept innovating new technologies and improving itself, but if it tried to use cheap labor or make prices to a select audience or kept innovating and just did what made easy profit and its audience suffered it would be shut down. Same with a bunch of smaller companies they could all work independently so long as the competition was healthy and all their workers got decent wages and they're products where of quality. Universalism does what works, whatever best for the people as a government should not on whatever best for a select group. Thats what it does keeps the balance in the favor of people vs individual power so that everyone gets what they need.
CPC and the rest provide solution agreed upon by over 107 heads of state and their cabinets. As well by all the relative scientists of all ideologies. All you offer is individual uninvolved criticize. If you actually read any of the info, or knew of the issues you wouldn't say such things. There is no debate as to whether its the best way, but rather who will actually do it. Universalism is the answer.
Your assertions are not that of an accurate realist. You talk like one speaking on street terms about higher workings. Universalism has already addressed liberalism and realism and constructivism and postmodernism and has combined and overcome them all. There is nothing in its ideologies that realism can overcome. Of course that doesn't mean its right 100% at all, and there are still many errors but thats what universalism ever evolving. It takes its errors and confronts and solves them. Universalist unlike other ideologies can actually realize when they're wrong and change their course instead of blindly charging on. Its about what works not who can sound more realistic or smart or whatever else people attach to their theories.
The more you accurately criticize Universalism the stronger and more efficient it becomes. By all means accurately criticize it, what I have a problem is blanket sneering and being looked down upon by one who has no understanding of that which he sneers.
I have yet to see and large or relevant criticism that would actually disprove the use of universalistic thinking. Never will either, because thats just it - its universal - if its right we accept it. All which you hold precious with your realism we have and all your negative aspects we avoid or attempt to. Its the theory of human societal and environmental evolution.
Universalism is here to stay whether you want it to or not. It always been there, always will be. Trying to ignore its expansion is like ignoring or insulting trans-nationalism. I just wish you could realize how incredibly limited you keep your theories, be a fully fleshed realist it wont be more honorable or ethical, but at least I'll have to realize you can stand your ground.
Once again just so you know Universalism is not a set thing, aside from its founding principals its flows in whatever direction best suits it current. But it remains constant in many things since simply it works best.
Universalism is seen in everyday life. Like standing in line and streetlights to public parks and nature reserves to common decency. Its all around us all the time, you want proof for universalisms effectiveness, your still alive aren't you. Could a realist say the same if it where the other way around. Realism is the kid you see hogging the sandbox or pushing other kids of the jungle gym, universalism is the kids that get together and push him off.
I'll give you one thing, your instant on your view. The real issues against universalism that you show are not some vague description of economics that show little understanding, or political theories. But rather its social application and its problems thereof. Mainly, with people who despite all reason insist on their point of view. Now, I don't want to go through every single possibility of realist rhetoric and prove how its wrong. So I state it simply and you ignore it, now it very obvious to me, the problem with arguing is that sometimes you have to listen. When you respond to my laborious replies you repeat the same statement in different words. Whatever its OK if you want to be realist have fun with that. But stop shooting down my ideas and those of others automatically because they don't fall into your school of thought that you been taught.
Although to others on this board your rebuttals might sound intelligent, but believe me once I finish explaining this theory one of these days, you'll take back every word. But in the mean time i don't expect you to agree, but please stop repeating yourself, can you at least try different perspectives next time, like and procedural approach or something.
Now its easy to understand why you so easily misunderstand my arguments or what I'm saying since its a new theory in a way and you don't have much knowledge of it. Which is why it surprises me why you don't want to know more about it, since your such an intellectual I thought you might want to understand what your talking about, or why you don't check out those links. But if you insist on making blanket statements about which you don't understand go ahead, but don't fool yourself into thinking that your actually proving anything. Just give me some time and ask constructive questions and I doubt you'll have so much to conflict with, but you do seem to define intelligence by making everyone else feel stupid. Which never works so just listen.
Universalism is not communist or lefty, its balanced. Its as much capitalist and right as it is left. Humorously it is more often confused with being to far on the right which is why I find your opinions particularly interesting.
In communism there is no government just communities so obviously that out the window. Socialists the government has control over the resources - that too is not true. Universalism's do not dictate the behavior of its organizations or cooperations they can function however they wish or deem necessary to best utilize and reach their goals. So long as they don't infringe on the peoples rights and maintain their best interest. So a multinational cooperation could be universal and they could work together and dominate markets so long as the company reasonable prices and kept innovating new technologies and improving itself, but if it tried to use cheap labor or make prices to a select audience or kept innovating and just did what made easy profit and its audience suffered it would be shut down. Same with a bunch of smaller companies they could all work independently so long as the competition was healthy and all their workers got decent wages and they're products where of quality. Universalism does what works, whatever best for the people as a government should not on whatever best for a select group. Thats what it does keeps the balance in the favor of people vs individual power so that everyone gets what they need.
CPC and the rest provide solution agreed upon by over 107 heads of state and their cabinets. As well by all the relative scientists of all ideologies. All you offer is individual uninvolved criticize. If you actually read any of the info, or knew of the issues you wouldn't say such things. There is no debate as to whether its the best way, but rather who will actually do it. Universalism is the answer.
Your assertions are not that of an accurate realist. You talk like one speaking on street terms about higher workings. Universalism has already addressed liberalism and realism and constructivism and postmodernism and has combined and overcome them all. There is nothing in its ideologies that realism can overcome. Of course that doesn't mean its right 100% at all, and there are still many errors but thats what universalism ever evolving. It takes its errors and confronts and solves them. Universalist unlike other ideologies can actually realize when they're wrong and change their course instead of blindly charging on. Its about what works not who can sound more realistic or smart or whatever else people attach to their theories.
The more you accurately criticize Universalism the stronger and more efficient it becomes. By all means accurately criticize it, what I have a problem is blanket sneering and being looked down upon by one who has no understanding of that which he sneers.
I have yet to see and large or relevant criticism that would actually disprove the use of universalistic thinking. Never will either, because thats just it - its universal - if its right we accept it. All which you hold precious with your realism we have and all your negative aspects we avoid or attempt to. Its the theory of human societal and environmental evolution.
Universalism is here to stay whether you want it to or not. It always been there, always will be. Trying to ignore its expansion is like ignoring or insulting trans-nationalism. I just wish you could realize how incredibly limited you keep your theories, be a fully fleshed realist it wont be more honorable or ethical, but at least I'll have to realize you can stand your ground.
Once again just so you know Universalism is not a set thing, aside from its founding principals its flows in whatever direction best suits it current. But it remains constant in many things since simply it works best.
Universalism is seen in everyday life. Like standing in line and streetlights to public parks and nature reserves to common decency. Its all around us all the time, you want proof for universalisms effectiveness, your still alive aren't you. Could a realist say the same if it where the other way around. Realism is the kid you see hogging the sandbox or pushing other kids of the jungle gym, universalism is the kids that get together and push him off.