i admit, it must be tough to be a right-winger in america. i mean, think of the INHERENT IRONY of your position: you fear your government and watch helplessly as your so-called civil liberties are slowly undermined; you create fantasies in which you actually have some control over your life (ie/ overmoderating open forums; driving like a prick, etc.); you enjoy the power your nation wields and yet wonder what the consequences would be if you were forced to challenge that power... AND SO, in fear, you find yourself rabidly and blindly supporting the very thing you mistrust and suspect. the simple suggestion that MAYBE not all is well sends you into a fit of righteous nationalistic spew. you are an 'intellectual' only by default: you are not truly questioning anything, the end goal is not a new understanding of anything, the goal is merely to feel 'right' and re-inforce the structure you have embraced. you are clear and lucid in your arguments, as well you should be, since they are easy to understand and accepted as mainstream. rather than attempt true intellectualism and question what is happening around you, you scorn and condemn those who do. anything outside your tidy 'ideas' is labelled 'socialist/fascist/communist/terrorist/conspiritorial/moronic/bleedingheart/unamerican. convenient, no? you understand (but rarely admit) that the marvelous standard of life we enjoy does not come about magically; people have and do suffer needlessly for our comparative luxery. but of course they are 'weak', 'lazy' or somehow less deserving. this is 'the real world'. life is 'unfair'. the truth is, you enjoy knowing many are weaker and less fortunate than you; it is a product of the power train you are lucky enough to be riding (a train which may decide to boot you off at any moment). you feel that the more you vehemently support this system, the more security you gain. this is of course false. ideas or suggestions as to how suffering and inequalities can be lessened are easily dismissed or given trite lip-service: you are not interested in change unless it measurably increases your own social/economic situation. fully committed, you cannot tolerate difference. thus, intolerance and indifference are your ideals. all manner of crime and injustice are acceptable to maintain the illusion that you somehow DESERVE to be richer and better fed than other humans. the problem is, this only increases your own private fear. now you fear: 1) your government, and 2) your neighbours. who can you trust? who's got your back now? where are you safe? buy a gun. build a bunker. stockpile. and so it goes. right-wing intellectualism is not about finding solutions and ideas; it is about masking fear.
Well... if nothing else, that load of tripe covered probably about 5% of right wingers. Of course, 43% of all statistics are made up on the spot, too.
Exhale2012 Actually I wonder what those very same people would think if they were from Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea, rather than from the USA. This, unfortunately, is the path the USA government is taking its people down. They are the aggressors, roaming around the world with lawyers, guns, and money, making a mess and broadcasting speeches about why it's for the best. All the people can do is realise it's pissing off everyone, and buy more guns. At least until the next election, when most of them will again be too lazy to vote.
the marquis Many who disagree with statistics they don't like say this, but it's simply not true. Do you ever have anything factual or relevent to add?
Here is a snippet I particularly liked, from an article that captures what's wrong with many left and right wing intellectuals in the post-9/11 world: :m: Peace.
Re: the marquis If you can explain to me how the opening posted topic was "factual" or "relevant" Adam, I'll be happy to. My "43%" coment was a humorous jab at my own 5% figure, which I can see you completely missed... as usual. Show me how his generalisation is an accurate description of all right wing supporters, and use facts and statistics to back up your argument. Go on... try.
why do you need statistics to believe anything? anyway just wanted to point out that i do NOT support left-wing intellectuals anymore than i support right-wing ones. this post was just an analysis of the latter. the left has a different dogma, but it's a dogma nonetheless. let's face it: both sides haven't challenged anything for DECADES, they have just been busy faking debates to feed their ego. yes, it feels good to have an enemy, but it doesn't change a thing.
the marquis You posted to whinge about the thread, a whinge based on an assumed statistic. Then you yourself admit your statistic-based whinge is rot and piffle. Then you whinge that people notice how pathetic your crap is. Moderator Edit – insult Hmph. I enjoy tossing out insults now and then. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Oxymoron I consider "right wing intellectual" an oxymoronic term. If I lean to the left, it's an observational result. Whether it's parents, churches, schools, or whatever, community institutions and family raised me according to certain ideals. My father, trying to demonize Communism, for instance, did not stop and think that his explanation of a community that shares everything would seem somehow positive to me. Yet, of course, the litany of my childhood--"Don't grab. Don't take what's not yours. Share with others. Give to those who have greater need and less fortune." Ad nauseam. That same family and community taught divisions of Democrat and Republican; my father was a staunch Republican, my mother voted along his line, and my brother aspires to be as cold as my father. But all of those things they made the mistake of teaching me: freedom, equality, hope, community ... all of the virtuous teachings pressed upon me in youth find their manifestation somewhere left of center. So some right-wing intellectualisms I've learned. Feel free to point out which ones make no sense; I don't vouch for any of them: - Freedom is only ensured when it is denied of others. (OCA--gays; GOP--speech, press, religion) - Communism failed because it did not account for human nature (vernacular) - Trickle-down is safe in its assumption that the rich will allow their wealth to trickle down according to the model. (Reaganomics) - "Tax and spend" is a bad thing (Reagan, Poppy Bush, and others demonizing Democrats) - The spending habits of the 1980s were the Democrats' fault despite the massive defense budget Reagan wanted. (Rhetoric v. History)° - God is on our side. (George W. Bush) - AIDS is a "gay measles" (Ronald Reagan) - Cuts to PBS (total budget approx. $170m) and White House maintenance (rose garden, approx. $3m) would pay for 15 stealth bombers ($1.3b each) that the Pentagon had not requested and did not want (Newt Gingrich) - Bill Clinton is mean because I didn't get to ride in the front of the plane (Newt Gingrich) - As president, I would make music like (rap) illegal (Bob Dole)° And that's just a small portion. Notes: ° Rhetoric v. History: I'll search around, but somewhere I have a college text from the late 1990s called "The American Pageant", which I recall has certain tables in its appendices, including budget deficits. 1982, when I recall Reagan reneging on a trade of social programs for SDI, the deficit was almost exactly the total of Reagan's SDI needs. It was off by only a couple of million. Reagan got his SDI budget, screwed the Dems by burying the social program legislation, and then set about leading the demonization of Democrats as "tax and spend". ° Bob Dole: In 1995, Bill Clinton embarrassed the hell out of himself by slamming the lyrics of rapper Sistah Souljah. Bob Dole to the rescue. Having started wheeling his 1996 campaign into gear, Dole pointed out that as president, he would make such lyrics illegal. This is far beyond the Constitutional authority of the President, and it is questionable whether such a standard could survive the courts. :m:, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Re: Exhale2012 "I wonder if I can get political asylum in the US?"Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Of course it's an oxymoron. George Dumbellya Bush, Jeorg Heider, Jean-Marie LePen, Trent Lott, James Dobson, Jerry Falwell, even (only somewhat facetiously) Frederico Franco, Benito Mussolini, and on & on, all the luminary airbags like Rush Limbaugh, the dozens who emulate him on AM, we could list the many Stupid White Men who have graced the world stage for a very long time. I can't present a correlation between the far right and IQ, but isn't if obvious there is a pattern? Of course, there are probably more dimwits at either left or right extreme. How much damage before we move back toward the saner center?
Re: Re: Exhale2012 No, probably more like "Why haven't we destroyed those Americans already? They have it coming to them!"
I consider myself a moderate but to some I suppose I might qualify as conservative. From the sounds of this post the attack isn't so much on right-wingers as it the current stance our nation has taken towards those who seek to see it destroyed. Despite the USA having the bite to go with our bark, liberals and conservatives are still both alive and healthy, both are heard, both have forums. At first I thought eXhale2012 was just a plain ordinary liberal, living a life of disillusionment somewhere in America. My mistake! He/she lives in Europe! What country? We don't know, he/she fails to mention it by name. He/she either lives in an Economic Union or a continent....now that's pride! Quote: >>" i mean, think of the INHERENT IRONY of your position: you fear your government and watch helplessly as your so-called civil liberties are slowly undermined; " << The only thing I fear is doing NOTHING!. Our civil liberties are fine, thank you very much, unless you happen to be a terrorist sympathizer. Ask most people how people how they feel about protecting our way of life and they say we need to clamp down even more (not less) on suspected terrorists and protecting our borders, infrastructure, etc. >>"you create fantasies in which you actually have some control over your life (ie/ overmoderating open forums; driving like a prick, etc.); you enjoy the power your nation wields and yet wonder what the consequences would be if you were forced to challenge that power..."<< Oh, you mean if we want to, we can demonstrate, protest, assemble, write our congress people, vote freely, go be a human shield for Saddam and call George W. an asshole? You are correct. If an Iraqi called Saddam an asshole he'd have a new hole, a bullet hole in his head. Driving like a prick? What's the matter, have penis envy? Sorry that you have to drive a moped to the welfare office. You need to go to Paris during rush hour, they make driving in Detroit look an advertisement for driver's training school. >>"AND SO, in fear, you find yourself rabidly and blindly supporting the very thing you mistrust and suspect. the simple suggestion that MAYBE not all is well sends you into a fit of righteous nationalistic spew. you are an 'intellectual' only by default: you are not truly questioning anything, the end goal is not a new understanding of anything, the goal is merely to feel 'right' and re-inforce the structure you have embraced. you are clear and lucid in your arguments, as well you should be, since they are easy to understand and accepted as mainstream."<< We have the ability to question anything, challenge anything and anyone, and succeed in doing so. Independent thinking, vision, clarity and cohesiveness to principles, that's what makes our system work. So while we may not be perfect, we're cognizant of that and at the same time we do learn from our mistakes. You are the ones who said millions would die last time we kicked Sadman's ass and probably thought the same thing of Afghanistan. Yeah, people do die in war. Your continent found that out the hard way when we bailed you out twice in one century. >>"rather than attempt true intellectualism and question what is happening around you, you scorn and condemn those who do. anything outside your tidy 'ideas' is labelled 'socialist/fascist/communist/ terrorist/conspiritorial/moronic/bleedingheart/unamerican.convenient, no?"<< Soooo, your labelling of "right-wing" Americans is what? Not scorning? Not outside your own "tidy" ideas? Uh-huh. Imperialist/capitalist/right-wing/pro-life/anti-pornographers/who-eat cold-cereal-without-milk/SUV-driving/republicans!!! >>"you understand (but rarely admit) that the marvelous standard of life we enjoy does not come about magically; people have and do suffer needlessly for our comparative luxery. but of course they are 'weak', 'lazy' or somehow less deserving. this is 'the real world'. life is 'unfair'."<< You are correct here too. It doesn't come about MAGICALLY. Most of us are working longer hours, for less pay and both spouses work outside the home to maintain our standard of living. Most of the resentment comes from having to involuntarily support people who don't have that same work ethic. >>"the truth is"<< ahhh, I love it when we get to the "truth"! Yes, oh wise sage, tell us the TRUTH! >>"you enjoy knowing many are weaker and less fortunate than you; it is a product of the power train you are lucky enough to be riding (a train which may decide to boot you off at any moment). you feel that the more you vehemently support this system, the more security you gain. this is of course false."<< See, I told you, penis envy. Lucky enough? Dude, I know how many paid holidays you all get over in Euro-welfare-land. Socialized medicine, government aid, heck I see EXACTLY why you are not bothering to work, you don't have any incentive to do so! But you make time to bitch about about those of us here in US that do work to achieve our dreams and goals? What the #@*& ? >>"ideas or suggestions as to how suffering and inequalities can be lessened are easily dismissed or given trite lip-service: you are not interested in change unless it measurably increases your own social/economic situation."<< What BS. Collectively, Americans are usually the first on the scene and give more to disaster relief than all of the world's other countries combined. You fools would've let Kosovo turn into more of a genocidal bloodbath than already was. Like you know the least thing about resolving the world's social/economic problems and would act on it even if you did? >>"fully committed, you cannot tolerate difference. thus, intolerance and indifference are your ideals. all manner of crime and injustice are acceptable to maintain the illusion that you somehow DESERVE to be richer and better fed than other humans."<< Intolerance? Like coming to the rescue when our fellow NATO allies had their respective thumbs up their asses while the Serbs were left to run loose like wolves? Like trying to kill all the Jews during WWII? Like the rise of anti-semitism in Europe (again)? Oh please. Shut up. >>"the problem is, this only increases your own private fear. now you fear: 1) your government, and 2) your neighbours. who can you trust?"<< Certainly not the French or Germans. >>"who's got your back now? where are you safe? buy a gun. build a bunker. stockpile. and so it goes. right-wing intellectualism is not about finding solutions and ideas; it is about masking fear."<< You need more to worry than us. Thinking that by voting against us, that you will somehow save your own miserable sorry asses is eventually going to catch up to you. Saddam and Osama don't care about your UN voting resolution. You are westerners and infidels by their definition of things and you will pay. A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money. -- G. Gordon Liddy The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery. --Winston Churchill
I don't need statistics to point out that the majority of Americans would believe this silly conservative bashing thread to be self induging left wing nonsense.. I can back up that statement with three words, House, Senate, Presidency. All of which are now controlled by the Republicans. I would imagine if I were close minded enough to be a liberal I would be spending more time wondering why my ideology has lost the support of the American people instead of making up psychological "woes" to poke at conservatives. Really, ask yourself why the left lost the Senate in an election that historically should have been a major windfall for it's party. I look forward to the coming day when the Libertarians are the second major political party in the U.S. and the socialist democratic party is assigned to the cellar. It's the stereotypical closed eyed barking that I see on this thread that insures that the day of the democratic parties demise is coming you know. Who's your spokesman now, Al Sharpton? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Go Team! LMAO
What? GB said: "One might note that both Al Qaeda and the Taliban are/were both organisations of the far right." Far right of what? Are you suggesting that a Theocracy in any way can be compared with our American notion of a political "right" & "left"? The only thing one might note from that comment is your woefully inept idea of governmental institutions...
Re: the marquis No Adam, I posted to say that the original post was opinionated crap. That is not a whinge on my part, it's an opinion. So wait... are you defending the original opinion's right to be posted but denying my right to have an opinion about it? It would be your usual hypocritcal style to do so. As to your reply in general... I noted your complete lack of ability to prove the original post right in any way. I also noted your attempt to cover your failure to do so by having a go at me instead. So you, in other words, cannot prove that the original post on this thread was anything other than someone's opinion, but because they agree with your assessment of things we dont see the usual Adam "Prove it! I demand proof!" being regurgitated. I thought as much. You're a hypocrite, Adam. Once again, you prove your inability to observe from anything other than your own perspective.
