ungenteel
Familiar Member
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 20:26:26 GMT -5
Posts: 560
|
Post by ungenteel on Jul 26, 2011 22:45:33 GMT -5
<<Dems plan to win in 2012: Blame Bush again!>>
Silly just to blame Bush .. he was just a tool of the Repuibs ... blame Repub political philosophy ... repubs are nothing but creepy social Darwinists
|
|
diamonds
Senior Member
Not as Tame as I Look!!
Joined: Feb 8, 2011 11:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 3,522
|
Post by diamonds on Jul 26, 2011 23:23:27 GMT -5
Time to deploy the ignore button......
|
|
steff
Senior Associate
I'll sleep when I'm dead
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 17:34:24 GMT -5
Posts: 10,772
|
Post by steff on Jul 26, 2011 23:52:23 GMT -5
<<Dems plan to win in 2012: Blame Bush again!>> Silly just to blame Bush .. he was just a tool of the Repuibs ... blame Repub political philosophy ... repubs are nothing but creepy social Darwinists
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Jul 27, 2011 0:04:02 GMT -5
Time to deploy the ignore button...... ...I just was struck by the term, "creepy social Darwinist" ...what's that?
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Jul 27, 2011 9:14:44 GMT -5
Time to deploy the ignore button...... ...I just was struck by the term, "creepy social Darwinist" ...what's that? Believe it or not, it refers to a widely held liberal opinion that believing in personal responsibility (rather than total dependence on government) is "creepy".
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jul 27, 2011 9:58:13 GMT -5
Social Darwinism isn't about personal responsibility. Social Darwinism is a Victorian concept that equates mankind to a pack of wolves. In essence, it is "survival of the fittest" applied to human society.
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Jul 27, 2011 10:23:49 GMT -5
Social Darwinism isn't about personal responsibility. Social Darwinism is a Victorian concept that equates mankind to a pack of wolves. In essence, it is "survival of the fittest" applied to human society. Yes, as in "you are responsible for your survival" i.e. the consequences of your decisions are your responsibility. As opposed to the liberal philosophy that everyone will be cared for by the government, everything will be distributed "equally" and no one is responsible for their own choices...
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jul 27, 2011 11:03:04 GMT -5
Social Darwinism isn't about personal responsibility. Social Darwinism is a Victorian concept that equates mankind to a pack of wolves. In essence, it is "survival of the fittest" applied to human society. Yes, as in "you are responsible for your survival" i.e. the consequences of your decisions are your responsibility. As opposed to the liberal philosophy that everyone will be cared for by the government, everything will be distributed "equally" and no one is responsible for their own choices... No, not as in you are responsible for your survival through your decisions, ed. Wild animals don't act on decisions. They act on instinct. Social Darwinism assumes that what applies in the "natural world", amongst the rest of the animal kingdom, should apply to human society, as well. It just doesn't work that way. That's been well known since the mid-forties... by those who think.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Jul 27, 2011 12:38:56 GMT -5
Social Darwinism isn't about personal responsibility. Social Darwinism is a Victorian concept that equates mankind to a pack of wolves. In essence, it is "survival of the fittest" applied to human society. Yes, as in "you are responsible for your survival" i.e. the consequences of your decisions are your responsibility. As opposed to the liberal philosophy that everyone will be cared for by the government, everything will be distributed "equally" and no one is responsible for their own choices... That is not the standard liberal philosophy. No liberals I know believe that people aren't responsible for their choices or that everything should be distributed equally or even that the govt should do everything to care for the poor. You are taking a very extreme viewpoint & assuming half the country feels that way - not true.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 27, 2011 14:02:48 GMT -5
i heard some woman named Hoover pimping her book on NPR this morning, making the same wrong claim that several posters have made- that Bush's last budget was only 1/3 as out of whack as Obama's first. nobody called her on it. i hate liars.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 27, 2011 14:05:07 GMT -5
Social Darwinism isn't about personal responsibility. Social Darwinism is a Victorian concept that equates mankind to a pack of wolves. In essence, it is "survival of the fittest" applied to human society. Yes, as in "you are responsible for your survival" i.e. the consequences of your decisions are your responsibility. As opposed to the liberal philosophy that everyone will be cared for by the government, everything will be distributed "equally" and no one is responsible for their own choices... that sounds more like communism to me. you do know the difference between liberalism and communism, right? that is something i appreciated about Buckley. he knew that liberals could be relied upon for issues of liberty (particularly social liberty) wheras authoritarians cannot.
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Jul 27, 2011 14:23:31 GMT -5
Yes, as in "you are responsible for your survival" i.e. the consequences of your decisions are your responsibility. As opposed to the liberal philosophy that everyone will be cared for by the government, everything will be distributed "equally" and no one is responsible for their own choices... that sounds more like communism to me. you do know the difference between liberalism and communism, right?. Yes, in Russia they were honest and called it communism...
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jul 27, 2011 14:24:59 GMT -5
I saw that last one coming, dj. Nothing you can do, or anyone can do. Some folks just don't want to know.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 27, 2011 14:31:14 GMT -5
that sounds more like communism to me. you do know the difference between liberalism and communism, right?. Yes, in Russia they were honest and called it communism... you didn't answer the question: do you know the difference between liberalism and communism? i happen to think it is really important to know the difference, so i will spell it out, if you don't.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 27, 2011 14:31:59 GMT -5
I saw that last one coming, dj. Nothing you can do, or anyone can do. Some folks just don't want to know. oh, i think ed knows. i think most people do. they just choose to not think about it.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jul 27, 2011 14:34:36 GMT -5
I'd certainly hope most educated people know the difference between liberalism, socialism, communism and fascism; however, I'm often brought to doubt by some of the things posted here!
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Jul 27, 2011 14:40:37 GMT -5
...okay, then if we are to discount ed's definition, then can someone help out about republicans being "creepy social Darwinists?" ...at least two posters think this, ungenteel and steff... and I still don't know to what it refers... ...granted, what do I know? I'm just an I...
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Jul 27, 2011 14:40:39 GMT -5
If liberals actually believed all the things that some conservatives on here claim they believe, then the country would be in serious trouble.
Actually, I suddenly understand why some conservatives are so scared of liberals - because they don't understand anything about liberals & just make up shit about them. The liberal monsters in their head are far scarier than actual liberals. Maybe if they would bother to get their heads out of their asses & actually listen to liberals, they would learn a thing or two & not make such ridiculous statements.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 27, 2011 14:40:55 GMT -5
I'd certainly hope most educated people know the difference between liberalism, socialism, communism and fascism; however, I'm often brought to doubt by some of the things posted here! only the Birchers and the Skousenites think that liberalism and communism are the same thing. and that is why there is no dealing with such people. they can't be reasoned with. and that is, in fact, one of the main difference between liberals and communists, is that liberals are fundamentally non-doctrinal. they have no fixed beliefs other than the belief that things should be reasoned through. and that is why they are the enemy of the purveyors of belief. liberals are, in every culture, in every economic system, heretics by the standard of fundamentalists.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 27, 2011 14:42:44 GMT -5
If liberals actually believed all the things that some conservatives on here claim they believe, then the country would be in serious trouble. this country wouldn't even exist. the conservatives wanted to remain part of England.
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Jul 27, 2011 14:43:06 GMT -5
If liberals actually believed all the things that some conservatives on here claim they believe, then the country would be in serious trouble. Actually, I suddenly understand why some conservatives are so scared of liberals - because they don't understand anything about liberals & just make up shit about them. The liberal monsters in their head are far scarier than actual liberals. Maybe if they would bother to get their heads out of their asses & actually listen to liberals, they would learn a thing or two & not make such ridiculous statements. ...well, then do you think "republicans are creepy social Darwinists" is a fair statement? and can you help explain it?
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Jul 27, 2011 14:43:58 GMT -5
...okay, then if we are to discount ed's definition, then can someone help out about republicans being "creepy social Darwinists?" ...at least two posters think this, ungenteel and steff... and I still don't know to what it refers... ...granted, what do I know? I'm just an I... I had assumed it was a reference to the idea that republicans want to get rid of all social safety nets & social programs & make us a "survival of the fittest" society.
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Jul 27, 2011 14:44:12 GMT -5
If liberals actually believed all the things that some conservatives on here claim they believe, then the country would be in serious trouble. this country wouldn't even exist. the conservatives wanted to remain part of England. ...and how about you, dj? you think it's a fair statement that conservatives want to be British... how so? ETA: ...or are you just using a historical reference, and not intending to equate it to modern day conservatives?
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Jul 27, 2011 14:46:27 GMT -5
If liberals actually believed all the things that some conservatives on here claim they believe, then the country would be in serious trouble. Actually, I suddenly understand why some conservatives are so scared of liberals - because they don't understand anything about liberals & just make up shit about them. The liberal monsters in their head are far scarier than actual liberals. Maybe if they would bother to get their heads out of their asses & actually listen to liberals, they would learn a thing or two & not make such ridiculous statements. ...well, then do you think "republicans are creepy social Darwinists" is a fair statement? and can you help explain it? I don't necessarily think it is a fair statement because I don't think most republicans want to get rid of all safety nets & social programs. I think it is just as much of a generalization as saying liberals are actually communists under a different name.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 27, 2011 14:49:30 GMT -5
this country wouldn't even exist. the conservatives wanted to remain part of England. ...and how about you, dj? you think it's a fair statement that conservatives want to be British... how so? i absolutely do. i have a loyalist in the family. i have read his writings. he was far more conservative than the founders. the liberals were folks like Jefferson that wanted to break free of England. most of them didn't believe in the COE, and some didn't even believe in Christianity at all. they were the radicals- the hippies of their days. they wanted to overthrow established authority and become self governing.
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Jul 27, 2011 14:51:41 GMT -5
Are you saying it isn't? Because that would be pretty naive...
Fine, if we were still living in the 18th century. Try again with the modern, American definition of liberalism (i.e. progressivism)...see that's where part of the problem is, we need to agree on the definitions first...
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 27, 2011 14:51:52 GMT -5
ETA: ...or are you just using a historical reference, and not intending to equate it to modern day conservatives? i don't know what ETA is.....but........ i think there is absolutely a direct lineage between modern liberals and 1776 liberals. and i think there is absolutely a lineage between modern conservatives and 1776 conservatives. HOWEVER, i think that modern conservatives are approximately where 1776 liberals were. i say approximately because they are clearly more liberal in some ways, and less in others.
|
|
|
Post by magichat on Jul 27, 2011 14:58:46 GMT -5
ETA: ...or are you just using a historical reference, and not intending to equate it to modern day conservatives? i don't know what ETA is.....but........ i think there is absolutely a direct lineage between modern liberals and 1776 liberals. and i think there is absolutely a lineage between modern conservatives and 1776 conservatives. HOWEVER, i think that modern conservatives are approximately where 1776 liberals were. i say approximately because they are clearly more liberal in some ways, and less in others. Liberals from 1776 equate much more closely to libertarians of today.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Jul 27, 2011 15:00:04 GMT -5
Are you saying it isn't? Because that would be pretty naive... I don't think we are in the type of trouble that some are running around & declaring. Everything that is going on now is a bunch of posturing & political games by both sides. Eventually they will raise the debt ceiling & lower some spending & life will go on.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Jul 27, 2011 15:00:27 GMT -5
ETA = Edited to add
|
|