2012-09-28, 00:52 | Link #801 | ||
( ಠ_ಠ)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere, between the sacred silence and sleep
|
Quote:
Heck, dislike of those types are exactly the reason why many of us on this thread is rooting for the failure of GOP! Quote:
Which is odd considering that fair amount of his own supporters fall in that 47% he called "entitled".
__________________
|
||
2012-09-28, 00:56 | Link #802 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: قلوب المؤمنين
|
Quote:
Quote:
Religious leaders with political powers are definitely in position to cause problems and even disasters, I agree.
__________________
|
||
2012-09-28, 01:05 | Link #804 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: قلوب المؤمنين
|
Pointing which one is orange and which one is apple isn't pulling a strawman.
I don't think you're racist. I just think you lack the patience necessary to indulge in political discussions like this.
__________________
Last edited by Ridwan; 2012-09-28 at 01:17. |
2012-09-28, 01:06 | Link #805 | |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Dai Korai Teikoku
|
Quote:
I'm going to have to outright say you're not really helping yourself by ignoring reality on the ground and talking in concepts which are limited to a small portion of the world. That is not a stance one should have when talking in general terms. |
|
2012-09-28, 01:11 | Link #806 | ||
( ಠ_ಠ)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere, between the sacred silence and sleep
|
Quote:
In fact, I think Romney actually agrees! At least this isn't a "secret private videotaping" Quote:
I'm saying, monarch is backwards system, and majority of them suck. You're saying "there are good ones too!" Which I agree, I'm not saying they're all bad. But few good apples amongst crapton of bads does not make the whole concept good.
__________________
|
||
2012-09-28, 01:30 | Link #808 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: قلوب المؤمنين
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2012-09-28, 01:35 | Link #809 | |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2012-09-28, 01:36 | Link #810 | |
( ಠ_ಠ)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere, between the sacred silence and sleep
|
Quote:
I prefer electorial democracy, you like monarchy and I don't. Hell, you probably drink the blood of a virgin from a golden goblet while using a peasant as your footrest!
__________________
|
|
2012-09-28, 01:48 | Link #811 | ||
Le fou, c'est moi
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 34
|
Quote:
The Hashemites of Jordan and the Alaouites of Morocco both claim their legitimacy from their descent from the Prophet Muhammad. As close to divine right as it gets. Ironically it is that prestige which allows them the leeway to contain their extremists and create moderate monarchies. Combined with historical circumstances that made them early and constant allies of the West, and they don't need to be as nasty as the rest. Good for King Abdullah, he can now slowly back out into the comfort and security of a true constitutional monarch. Of course, on the other hand, hardcore theocracies like Iran or the Wahhabi Al-Sauds can go burn in the fires of their precious hell. Saying Islamic leaders are shite is hardly racist. They are largely shite, through no fault of the Qur'an or Semitic racial characteristics, mind (that's just bullshit and nobody's saying that here), but because they're a bunch of asshole oppressors. Secular post-Nasserist dictators, Iranian theocratic clerics, Saudi/Gulf sheikhs with their fabulous oil wealth...the new generation of democrats, Islam-based or not, won't have to do much not to be worse, though there will be much work before they can really call themselves better. Quote:
No racism here, just honest republicanism. And why the hell not? Why are kings kings, and why should I be loyal to oppressors and children of oppressors? Tradition is only worth the good it can bring, nothing more. And as a secularist, religion can indeed go make love to itself. I study religions, even read the annotated Qur'an (quite an interesting book of poetry, that one), because they're quite interesting. Because I'm a historian not a philosopher I'm not particularly concerned with bashing religion to establish my worldview. But, in my secular politics, God can shove off. Not saying you can't believe, or that I'll look down on anyone for just believing, but I quite object to having other people's beliefs being used as the foundation of a society I live in. |
||
2012-09-28, 02:10 | Link #813 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: قلوب المؤمنين
|
Quote:
@aohige : Heck, I don't even type my posts. My christian slaves do that for me @Irenicus : Ideological narratives should never dictate academic understanding. Kings and Queens can have no temporal power and still function in some way or another like in UK, Japan, Scandinavia, and many other living examples accross the world. And when they do pose political power, it needs not to be infinite either. Monarchy doesn't automatically translate into autocratic tyranny, just as much as Republic doesn't automatically mean a proper democratic universal suffrage which upholds human rights. I'm definitely all for liberal secularism. But I'm against Turkish and French laicitism because non-interference between state and religion should be mutual, instead one sided.
__________________
|
|
2012-09-28, 02:30 | Link #815 | |||
Le fou, c'est moi
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 34
|
Quote:
Quote:
Monarchs with power, however, better behave. Just the same as I would call for the deposition of Gaddafi or Assad or diss the PRC, having a crown doesn't matter one bit to me if you're an asshole and an oppressor. Quote:
When it's just lip service alone I don't mind too much, but this 2012 election, despite the paramount importance of the economy issue and the urgency of the international situation, sometimes feel like God vs. Laicité with the battles over many social issues, and I know where I stand. As an aside, I never ever did truly swear the Oath of Allegiance in its entirety, because of an annoying little phrase some McCarthyists put in there. Not that I don't like the USA, it's quite a charming place and closest I've got to a home, but it's quite convenient sometimes to be as conditionally patriotic as I want. |
|||
2012-09-28, 03:29 | Link #816 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: قلوب المؤمنين
|
@aohige : Yes they are. There's a fine line indeed between the supposed pair of anti-thesises.
@Irenicus : Absolute monarchies are dangerous no doubt. It's just absolute monarchy isn't the only variant of monarchy there is. I can see the problem with US. While being a secular country, religion gets politicized waaaay too much, and that's bad. But something like Kemalist laicitism will only politicize religion further, and I really hope such won't take place in US.
__________________
|
2012-09-28, 03:43 | Link #817 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
Probably because most of those, the elderly, and some of the Southerns and rural folks believe they earned their share (probably did) and thus while they likely consider themselves poor, they don't think of themselves as part of the 47%. They think those are the bums, homeless, the immigrants (legal or not to some, but mostly the illegals), and the inner city folk. Most of the Republican poor would think the 47% are in urban areas (which usually vote Democrat), not the ones living in rural areas or the suburban areas that have taken over what use to be rural areas as the cities expand.
__________________
|
2012-09-28, 04:01 | Link #818 |
Knight Errant
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 35
|
Romney's "47%" remark, and remarks like it, is the dark side of meritocratic ideology. If you believe that society rewards those who are the smartest and most driven (IE are "the best") then ultimately you believe the reverse as well, IE that the people at the bottom are there due to their own faults and general stupidity.
One thing you can say for the more aristocratic rich of the past is that they had a lot more empathy for the poor, because they understood that they were rich and the other poor due to random events (what vagina they popped out of). |
2012-09-28, 04:44 | Link #819 | ||||
( ಠ_ಠ)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere, between the sacred silence and sleep
|
Quote:
But I won't play the silly race card and call you out for something you're obviously not. Quote:
EDIT: Quote:
Even though there are plenty of minorities in that base, it's still majority blue-collar white the last I checked. It seem like they can continuously insult their own support base, and somehow have them elude the fact. Quote:
But isn't the higher income not already the said reward? The tax favortism seems to be simply compiling the problem. Of course, the above question isn't directed to you, or even the GOP. It's to the supporters who are blinded by their own treatment.
__________________
Last edited by aohige; 2012-09-28 at 05:25. |
||||
2012-09-28, 05:31 | Link #820 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
I seem to recall it was a standard in the post-Recostruction South. The dirt poor white family was basically on the bottom, but could feel superior to any black family...even if the black family was actually better off, because of the rules and pecking order. Some of those rules, while gone in name and law, still exist in spirit in some of those places. Mostly because it hasn't been all that long since the Federal Government stomped those laws out (a generation or two, as that was the 1960s).
Oh and some still consider a Constitutional Monarchy as a monarchy...because it does have a king or queen. The head of state for all Commonwealth nations is still Queen Elizabeth II if I remember correctly. At least her head is on the currency still.
__________________
|
|
|