This ought to piss off the lefties.

[Whaleboy]

Well, the driver can do what he wants, the idealist merely provides him with information to choose the word. The backseat driver may take an idea to the people. People are free to live in their idiocy, and I learned that it is irrelevant to try to take on the worlds concerns on your shoulders. There will be an answer, let it be, and all that.

One will always finds the means to survive and get by, it so happens that my particular ideas may actually have an audience (if not here) so there is the possibility of living on them. If not, I am not merely capable of irritating patriotic Americans, I have many talents!

[GePap]

Originally posted by yavoon


pretty typical inflated leftist opinion of themself. for all ur equality u sure like to classify society quickly.

At least he believes he has a goal and mission in life: that ususally helps greatly.

Of course society can be classified, and is classified. Everyone does it. It is like lying.

[Whaleboy]

pretty typical inflated leftist opinion of themself. for all ur equality u sure like to classify society quickly.

Well.. theres nothing wrong with self confidence, especially if lack of that gets in the way of your mental fortitude as well as intellectual processes. Who said I am egalitarian? Most people ARE blithering idiots (the engine), now while they should have the same opportunity to do whatever any one else does, I am not so blind to fail to recognise that they dont and wont!

[yavoon]

Originally posted by GePap


At least he believes he has a goal and mission in life: that ususally helps greatly.

Of course society can be classified, and is classified. Everyone does it. It is like lying.

apathy or elitism. choices choices.

[Whaleboy]

Elitism. Lets not beat about the bush here. I'm not going to claim some politically correct high ground here, I think what I think. I cannot fail to notice that all the liberals I know and know of are very very intelligent people, if few in number compared to the following, while the conservative masses and their loudest voices tend to be somewhat more simple minded, the mindset of the mass, the worker etc. See sig.

Thats not saying that its the case in every case, but lets be honest! Read the article on liberalism on my site if you wish.

EDIT: And there is nothing wrong with elitism, if you are prepared to adopt the intellectual equivalent of a "give 'em hell" or "sod them" attitude. Elitism merely means that something is out of the normal domain of the masses or the majority, and I am fine with that, and indeed support that position, as I have said, liberalism requires more cognetive effort which most people are either unable or unwilling to give.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by elijah
Elitism. Lets not beat about the bush here. I'm not going to claim some politically correct high ground here, I think what I think. I cannot fail to notice that all the liberals I know and know of are very very intelligent people, if few in number compared to the following, while the conservative masses and their loudest voices tend to be somewhat more simple minded, the mindset of the mass, the worker etc. See sig.

Thats not saying that its the case in every case, but lets be honest! Read the article on liberalism on my site if you wish.

did u just call the conservative party the party of the worker? marx will have ur left nut.

[Whaleboy]

I suppose in a way I did!

There is a suttle difference. Marx was more concerned with the interests of the workers and their needs, whereas the conservatives pander to what they want, which is a vicious circle of patriotism, absolutism, and popularism, not to mention the rather blatent lack of consideration, or rather, the lack thereof regarding the flawed, yet unquestioned assumptions on which the conservative position relies.

Note I am talking about conservatism more of the concept, not the party, although in some respects the two, in Britain, are converging.

[Verto]

Tell yourself whatever it takes, so you can make it through another day.

[Whaleboy]

Meaning?

[yavoon]

Originally posted by elijah
I suppose in a way I did!

There is a suttle difference. Marx was more concerned with the interests of the workers and their needs, whereas the conservatives pander to what they want, which is a vicious circle of patriotism, absolutism, and popularism, not to mention the rather blatent lack of consideration, or rather, the lack thereof regarding the flawed, yet unquestioned assumptions on which the conservative position relies.

Note I am talking about conservatism more of the concept, not the party, although in some respects the two, in Britain, are converging.

why choose to loathe just patriotism? why not loathe gay pride?

[Dinner]

I believe he meant that if being delusional helps you keep going then he will support it.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I cannot fail to notice that all the liberals I know and know of are very very intelligent people, if few in number compared to the following, while the conservative masses and their loudest voices tend to be somewhat more simple minded, the mindset of the mass, the worker etc.

My, we are trying to climb onto a higher horse, aren't we?

If I say that all the conservatives I know are very, very intelligent people, while the liberal masses are more simple minded, will you then change your tune and move the other way? I doubt it. However, I have found this to be fairly true (generalizing, of course). The smartest friend I had was a liberal, but after that all conservatives, and the liberal masses I've been in contact with (on college campuses) are mostly blithering idiots.

Of course that doesn't mean I call all liberals simple minded, even though William F. Buckley could argue circles around Al Sharpton .

[Whaleboy]

why choose to loathe just patriotism? why not loathe gay pride?

There is no loathing, merely a distaste - one should not succumb to hatred. People always band together in groups etc, its human nature, now to a point, thats ok, like with team sports, or as you suggest, a group with a common concern - safety in numbers on an intellectual level. This of course does not change the fact that it is still flawed, however at this point the benefits outweigh the costs. However, there is a limit to the logic of that position, for example, alligiance, love, discrimination, even the possibility of dying for it, is fundamentally based on a fallacious assumption. Indeed, beyond sports, national patriotism is a perfect example of that fallacy.

I believe he meant that if being delusional helps you keep going then he will support it

Its not dillusional, thats the entire point! One could say that conservatism is the dillusional position for aforementioned reasons. Of course I could say that all are illusions, but this is neither the time nor the place to get Platonic.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

My, we are trying to climb onto a higher horse, aren't we?

If I say that all the conservatives I know are very, very intelligent people, while the liberal masses are more simple minded, will you then change your tune and move the other way? I doubt it. However, I have found this to be fairly true (generalizing, of course). The smartest friend I had was a liberal, but after that all conservatives, and the liberal masses I've been in contact with (on college campuses) are mostly blithering idiots.

Of course that doesn't mean I call all liberals simple minded, even though William F. Buckley could argue circles around Al Sharpton .

Yeah, I agree Imran -- gross generalizations from either side are based on -- nothing.

[Whaleboy]

My, we are trying to climb onto a higher horse, aren't we?

No, like I said earlier, I'm taller!

If I say that all the conservatives I know are very, very intelligent people, while the liberal masses are more simple minded, will you then change your tune and move the other way? I doubt it.

Simply because a position is held by more intelligent people does not NECESSARILY make it "correct" for a given context, nor should that be a reason to choose it. I choose it because it agrees with me, whether it is popular with certain groups of people or not. However, I am merely pointing out that a reason for people choosing liberalism could be a greater intellect.

Lets not get confused about idiots. I am a blithering idiot in the sense that I have little skill with practical tasks, short attention span and relatively incapable of multitasking. I am saying that people capable of satisfying the greater cognetive requirements of liberalism (http://www.geocities.com/ben_j_elijah/liberal.htm) are thus more likely of choosing that position than those who are incapable of supporting it in their minds, providing they have not been indoctrinated which is a practise I disapprove of no matter what the position, for I would rather people to come to a certain conclusion themselves.

EDIT: Fixed erroneous link