Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 73
Thanks Tree110Thanks

Thread: Have You Ever Stopped and Thought It All the Way Through?

  1. #41
    Member Claudius the God's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,487
    Thanks
    1859

    From
    California
    Quote Originally Posted by Wonderer View Post
    I did that a few months back: What Is It That Makes You Conservative?

    Post #277 sets out my stances but the caveat here is that I'm not necessarily a full-on conservative, but rather a fiscal conservative/social moderate with libertarian leanings. And I think labels are lazy and easily abused.
    I went through several pages of it, did not see your post explaining anything relating to my question. I did see your attempt to separate ideology from practice which leads me to believe your support for the idea of conservatism lies in a philosophical realm outside of reality. I can appreciate this position intellectually, as an exercise in thought but we live in the real world. My question remains, what does fiscal responsibility mean to a conservative given the track record of conservatives when they assume power? I am talking about the federal government not a state or local government. If you respond with pipe dreams like balanced budgets or deficit reductions without specifics then I can assume that there is no rational blueprint to achieve the stated goals of the conservative movement at all. I will wait for the details.
    Thanks from NightSwimmer

  2. #42
    Chaos in fourteen lines Minotaur's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    20,510
    Thanks
    16558

    From
    USA
    It is not easy to merge thoughts because some base their view on party rather than logic and that is not conducive to resolution. Still others are just too far apart on issues to find agreement points. It is nearly impossible to find agreement between a philosophical belief in humanitarian actions benefitting the population and trickle down concepts of actions benefitting the wealthy. The happy medium should find solutions that recognize both philosophy's to communicate I guess.

    I'd say the best for me is times when my own mind is changed or a lightbulb goes off.
    Last edited by Minotaur; 1st May 2018 at 06:33 AM.

  3. #43
    Flibbertigibbet Wonderer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2014
    Posts
    24,476
    Thanks
    16362

    From
    Missouri
    Quote Originally Posted by Claudius the God View Post
    I went through several pages of it, did not see your post explaining anything relating to my question. I did see your attempt to separate ideology from practice which leads me to believe your support for the idea of conservatism lies in a philosophical realm outside of reality. I can appreciate this position intellectually, as an exercise in thought but we live in the real world. My question remains, what does fiscal responsibility mean to a conservative given the track record of conservatives when they assume power? I am talking about the federal government not a state or local government. If you respond with pipe dreams like balanced budgets or deficit reductions without specifics then I can assume that there is no rational blueprint to achieve the stated goals of the conservative movement at all. I will wait for the details.
    Thank you for taking a look at it. It's a fairly lengthy thread. That's why I directed you to Post #277. That is where I spell out my personal stances.

  4. #44
    Veteran Member bonehead's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    15,050
    Thanks
    5548

    From
    south
    Quote Originally Posted by Wonderer View Post
    Thank you for taking a look at it. It's a fairly lengthy thread. That's why I directed you to Post #277. That is where I spell out my personal stances.
    understand. the real thought here is to define what a democratic style government should be. what is such a thing? what is it's purpose? where does it's authority come from? what should be it's primary goal? these are the things that define any democratic style society. define those things in your own mind, and it will lead you to the answers you seek.
    Thanks from Wonderer

  5. #45
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    60,989
    Thanks
    30247

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by Minotaur View Post
    It is not easy to merge thoughts because some base their view on party rather than logic and that is not conducive to resolution.
    More accurately, IMO, people based their views in ideology, which itself is born in a limited degree of logic, and party is chosen based on that. I say "limited" degree of logic because, technically, people think logically. Problems occur when facts and logic do not support the ideology, and so either the facts or the rules of logic are deliberately twisted. Also, beliefs are sometimes - not always - confused with facts. But even where there is no such confusion, beliefs rather than facts - or, more often, a combination of them - typically serve as the premises of arguments leading to the formation of ideology. Thus, party is often chosen as much based on belief system as facts, and facts that contradict the belief are more likely jettisoned than the belief (especially considering the fallacious tendency to conflate beliefs and facts together).

    Quote Originally Posted by Minotaur View Post
    Still others are just too far apart on issues to find agreement points.
    Being far apart is not where the problems lie. The problem is in the tendency of people, in groups, toward extremes, with which comes the true believer syndrome that is easier to engage in than rational thought. In those circumstances, the problem is not that positions are too far apart to find compromise, but rather that compromise is seen as weak and even a betrayal. An example of this is the designation of moderates and/or compromisers in the Republican Party as RINOs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Minotaur View Post
    It is nearly impossible to find agreement between a philosophical belief in humanitarian actions benefitting the population and trickle down concepts of actions benefitting the wealthy. The happy medium should find solutions that recognize both philosophy's to communicate I guess.
    That is exactly the solution. People need to recognize that others are actual people, rather than solipsistically think of them as merely part of one's psychological environment, and thus communicate sufficiently until some kind of compromise can be reached. A compromise by definition means that neither party is completely satisfied, but each gets something one did not have before without surrendering something one already had. It is unfortunate that today's political climate (in the U.S.) has the sides being less satisfied with half a loaf than nothing at all, instead to subsist on self-righteousness.
    Thanks from Wonderer and bonehead

  6. #46
    Veteran Member bonehead's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    15,050
    Thanks
    5548

    From
    south
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    More accurately, IMO, people based their views in ideology, which itself is born in a limited degree of logic, and party is chosen based on that. I say "limited" degree of logic because, technically, people think logically. Problems occur when facts and logic do not support the ideology, and so either the facts or the rules of logic are deliberately twisted. Also, beliefs are sometimes - not always - confused with facts. But even where there is no such confusion, beliefs rather than facts - or, more often, a combination of them - typically serve as the premises of arguments leading to the formation of ideology. Thus, party is often chosen as much based on belief system as facts, and facts that contradict the belief are more likely jettisoned than the belief (especially considering the fallacious tendency to conflate beliefs and facts together).


    Being far apart is not where the problems lie. The problem is in the tendency of people, in groups, toward extremes, with which comes the true believer syndrome that is easier to engage in than rational thought. In those circumstances, the problem is not that positions are too far apart to find compromise, but rather that compromise is seen as weak and even a betrayal. An example of this is the designation of moderates and/or compromisers in the Republican Party as RINOs.


    That is exactly the solution. People need to recognize that others are actual people, rather than solipsistically think of them as merely part of one's psychological environment, and thus communicate sufficiently until some kind of compromise can be reached. A compromise by definition means that neither party is completely satisfied, but each gets something one did not have before without surrendering something one already had. It is unfortunate that today's political climate (in the U.S.) has the sides being less satisfied with half a loaf than nothing at all, instead to subsist on self-righteousness.
    yes. I think we all (most of us, anyway) understand what the solution is. my question is more basic - what led us to the situation we find ourselves in today? is this endemic of the system we have, or is it a more human failing?

  7. #47
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    64,501
    Thanks
    36054

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by bonehead View Post
    yes. I think we all (most of us, anyway) understand what the solution is. my question is more basic - what led us to the situation we find ourselves in today? is this endemic of the system we have, or is it a more human failing?
    If you look at 18th century thinking (which is the system of thinking that developed our current government) it's a failure of the elites. We've elected a grifter. The first rule of grifting is "No mark ever got taken who didn't want to be." People fall for con men because they offer something the marks want so badly they overlook all the signs that they should not trust the con man. The elites are supposed to know better. Conservatives are supposed to have respect for long-standing institutions and customs. Other leaders are supposed to call out the grifter and not let him take over their party. If he does manage to gain power, they are supposed to ham-string and investigate him until he's exposed.

    Blame falls on the foolish, selfish, fatuous nature of our political elites and the foolish gullibility of ordinary people.
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey

  8. #48
    Veteran Member bonehead's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    15,050
    Thanks
    5548

    From
    south
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    If you look at 18th century thinking (which is the system of thinking that developed our current government) it's a failure of the elites. We've elected a grifter. The first rule of grifting is "No mark ever got taken who didn't want to be." People fall for con men because they offer something the marks want so badly they overlook all the signs that they should not trust the con man. The elites are supposed to know better. Conservatives are supposed to have respect for long-standing institutions and customs. Other leaders are supposed to call out the grifter and not let him take over their party. If he does manage to gain power, they are supposed to ham-string and investigate him until he's exposed.

    Blame falls on the foolish, selfish, fatuous nature of our political elites and the foolish gullibility of ordinary people.
    are you indicating that "we got what we deserved"?

  9. #49
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    64,501
    Thanks
    36054

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by bonehead View Post
    are you indicating that "we got what we deserved"?
    Individually, no. Collectively, of course. We always do.
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey, Wonderer and bajisima

  10. #50
    Veteran Member bonehead's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    15,050
    Thanks
    5548

    From
    south
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    Individually, no. Collectively, of course. We always do.
    so, collectively, we ended up selecting "a pig in a poke" - as the saying goes.

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. They Are Saying The Leak Is Stopped
    By Blueneck in forum Current Events
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 16th July 2010, 06:44 PM
  2. This should be stopped!
    By Pragmatist in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 13th August 2009, 10:53 AM
  3. OPPS sorry Should have stopped here first!
    By BeMyOwnBoss in forum New Users
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 25th September 2006, 05:21 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed