McCain vs. Obama Watch

Oswy
Badges: 13
#381
Report 10 years ago
#381
(Original post by favh)
Ok, stop right there. I haven't been trying to push an ideology or make value judgements on this thread, but you seem to be trying to twist such an intent out of me.

I have been perfectly consistent throughout this whole 'discussion,' I have responded to everything you have said, and tried to ignore the nagging suspicions that your selective quoting of what I have said is intended to somehow nudge me towards "admitting" that the US is a "socialist country" (and thus, I suppose, that the US's success can all be assigned to socialism? I guess that is what you are trying to covertly imply).

To be absolutely clear, because I absolutely do not want either to appear as though I am pulling the wool over someone's eyes, or contradicting myself, or to have my words twisted by someone with a partisan bias, this is my position clearly and in its entirety:

- The US government has had significant socialistic elements since at least the 20s, and more minor ones before that.
- The US is not a "socialist state" in any absolute sense, it merely exists at a point on a capitalist - socialist continuum and not on absolute capitalism [OT: You still havent explained why you used to believe the US was an absolute capitalist society.]
- Most other countries and all other major powers lie further to the 'socialist' side than the US does.

If you want to infer value judgements, or draw partisan conclusions, then do so yourself. I may wish to discuss them with you, but they're nothing to do with this, which is a simple matter of fact.
Ha ha. What a little pickle libertarians can get themselves into! On the one hand you don't want the US to be considered capitalist because substantive government and the regulation and intervention of markets fails to meet with your ideological position, on the other hand you aren't sure whether you've made a mistake to characterise the US as socialist, because this seems like ammunition to those on the left to show how the most economically powerful country on the planet has a socialist dimension and socialist thinking at the centre of government operations. You juts can't win, lol
quote
reply
favh
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#382
Report 10 years ago
#382
(Original post by Oswy)
Ha ha. What a little pickle libertarians can get themselves into! On the one hand you don't want the US to be considered capitalist because substantive government and the regulation and intervention of markets fails to meet with your ideological position, on the other hand you aren't sure whether you've made a mistake to characterise the US as socialist, because this seems like ammunition to those on the left to show how the most economically powerful country on the planet has a socialist dimension and socialist thinking at the centre of government operations. You juts can't win, lol
I have stated my position quite plainly in three short sentences. If you believe that there is a contradiction or bad reasoning, then please elaborate.

Until then, you will excuse me if I consider the 'pickle' to be with your poor english comprehension and reasoning -

1. I have not treated capitalism as a 'binary state', as DrunkHamster puts it, at any point. The US is not absolutely capitalist, but still more capitalist than most other real countries, and all other major powers. This has been the conclusion of serious academic research.

2. As such, it is not at all contradictory to say that the United States has socialistic elements without 'admitting' that these elements in particular have been beneficial to it, or that the US is an absolute "socialist country".

3. Most defences of libertarianism are not based on consequentialist morals anyway, so even if the United States was some kind of socialist utopia it would not logically be 'ammunition' against it, but 'my ideology' is nothing to do with the point of fact.

4. Remember when you are trumpetting the glorious triumph of socialism in the heart of the capitalist beast that what you are heralding isn't supposed to have helped people, but to have caused a devastating banking crisis. Perhaps it would be better for you not to draw too much attention to it?
0
quote
reply
EndangeredSpecies
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#383
Report 10 years ago
#383
I think the notion that America is very simialar to us in the United Kingdom is false and that those knowledgable about America realise there are huge differences.

I rememeber when Bush was elected for a second time to be US president, i was shocked. However it taught me to never udnerestimate American stupidity...

When you look at the beliefs and ideology of Mccain/Palin it sounds more like a theocratic government of the middle east than a nation which is a scientific powerhouse.
I think its reasonable to believe that in America there are many different people and quite often we are only seeing the decent people in the media. There clearly is a lot of very stupid backward Americans...

Anyways, would it change your opinion of America if Mccain/Palin are elected?
0
quote
reply
RamocitoMorales
Badges: 21
#384
Report 10 years ago
#384
It won't change.

I'll carry on thinking they're racist.
quote
reply
ssk2
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#385
Report 10 years ago
#385
Yep; it'll re-instill my faith that rhetoric and empty promises simply aren't good enough for the people.
0
quote
reply
Oswy
Badges: 13
#386
Report 10 years ago
#386
(Original post by favh)
I have stated my position quite plainly in three short sentences. If you believe that there is a contradiction or bad reasoning, then please elaborate.

Until then, you will excuse me if I consider the 'pickle' to be with your poor english comprehension and reasoning -

1. I have not treated capitalism as a 'binary state', as DrunkHamster puts it, at any point. The US is not absolutely capitalist, but still more capitalist than most other real countries, and all other major powers. This has been the conclusion of serious academic research.

2. As such, it is not at all contradictory to say that the United States has socialistic elements without 'admitting' that these elements in particular have been beneficial to it, or that the US is an absolute "socialist country".

3. Most defences of libertarianism are not based on consequentialist morals anyway, so even if the United States was some kind of socialist utopia it would not logically be 'ammunition' against it, but 'my ideology' is nothing to do with the point of fact.

4. Remember when you are trumpetting the glorious triumph of socialism in the heart of the capitalist beast that what you are heralding isn't supposed to have helped people, but to have caused a devastating banking crisis. Perhaps it would be better for you not to draw too much attention to it?
None of this gets you out of your pickle though. You have stated that US governments are socialist (maybe weakly socialist but socialist nevertheless). This has all sorts of implications for the historical power of socialist ideas in contemporary civilization, especially given that the US is an entity very much associated with the industrial and commercial power of capital. You just can't have your cake and eat it.
quote
reply
Stozo
Badges: 0
#387
Report 10 years ago
#387
It won't change.

I also think to view America as one political entity is quite silly. It's such a vast country with views differing so much in different regions. California for example is hugely liberal state, Schwarzenegger (a Republican) has introduced some policies that the right wing of the party (Bush, Palin followers) would be disgusted by.
0
quote
reply
favh
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#388
Report 10 years ago
#388
(Original post by Oswy)
None of this gets you out of your pickle though. You have stated that US governments are socialist (maybe weakly socialist but socialist nevertheless). This has all sorts of implications for the historical power of socialist ideas in contemporary civilization, especially given that the US is an entity very much associated with the industrial and commercial power of capital. You just can't have your cake and eat it.
I don't think I've ever denied that "socialist ideas" have "historical power" in "contemporary civilisation" (what does that even mean?).

However it is certainly possible for me to "have my cake and eat it". For instance, the socialist elements in the United States' government may have been wholly harmful to its prosperity and power, merely that the harm socialist policies in other countries caused was greater, and that the United States would be even better if it had been wholly capitalism.

I am not necessarily saying that was actually the case, but it is certainly possible, contrary to your protestations.

You can't dodge debating the specifics that easily (far more effective to simply ignore most of what I post).
0
quote
reply
Oswy
Badges: 13
#389
Report 10 years ago
#389
(Original post by favh)
I don't think I've ever denied that "socialist ideas" have "historical power" in "contemporary civilisation" (what does that even mean?).

However it is certainly possible for me to "have my cake and eat it". For instance, the socialist elements in the United States' government may have been wholly harmful to its prosperity and power, merely that the harm socialist policies in other countries caused was greater, and that the United States would be even better if it had been wholly capitalism.

I am not necessarily saying that was actually the case, but it is certainly possible, contrary to your protestations.

You can't dodge debating the specifics that easily (far more effective to simply ignore most of what I post).
If we are in agreement then why can't you accept that we are - we both agree that socialist ideas (by some degree or other) are present at the heart of US administrations. I'd go further and state that this is a profound observation given that the US is the most economically powerful nation on the planet and is iconically associated with industrial and commercial capital. Aren't we agreed on that much?

Whether the socialist content in US government is harmful is a much more complicated and arguable issue and doesn't in any event form a component of my assertions in this thread.
quote
reply
ooze
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#390
Report 10 years ago
#390
Did anyone see this piece in the guardian the other day?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...08.barackobama
0
quote
reply
Rascalov
Badges: 0
#391
Report 10 years ago
#391
(Original post by maze.e)
I don't think politics and religion should be mixed because it leads to confusion, but respect peoples religious beliefs though if people speak in tongues they speak in tongues. I know you don't mean any offence to anyone but being born a pentecostal Christian it sounds kind of rude. :cool:

This is why palin should be president

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=2zP8uFPWxaA

She can deal with russia!!

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=KDmNk2...eature=related

(Im joking btw)
Heh - I didn't mean to be rude, sorry bout that. However politics and religion, particularly Christianity are heavily intertwined in a lot of American politics especially in the right wing. I watch any right wing politician from the USA speaking and it's "god this" "god that" and "thank God". Some muslim countries that do this are branded as extremists, whereas in America it seems a lot of people are cool with their politicians invoking god at every opportunity.:confused: btw, I liked those videos
0
quote
reply
favh
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#392
Report 10 years ago
#392
(Original post by Oswy)
If we are in agreement then why can't you accept that we are - we both agree that socialist ideas (by some degree or other) are present at the heart of US administrations.
If you care to look, my very first post on the thread was pointing out to you that the US has socialistic elements, but intellectual honesty doesn't seem to be something you value.

I'd go further and state that this is a profound observation given that the US is the most economically powerful nation on the planet and is iconically associated with industrial and commercial capital. Aren't we agreed on that much?

Whether the socialist content in US government is harmful is a much more complicated and arguable issue and doesn't in any event form a component of my assertions in this thread.
This is what bothers me - you are trying to imply a link between America's (compared to other nations, quite small) socialist leanings and its (compared to other nations, very great) prosperity and power. I wouldn't mind so much if you actually explained in what way you believed them to be linked, and tried to draw some solid, defensible conclusions - but you won't even do that, you will only submit a vague association using weasel words like "profound observation". Why is it profound?

Do you believe the socialism to have been causally linked to the capital and industrial success? If so, please explain precisely how. If not, then I don't think it's very 'profound' at all.
0
quote
reply
ssk2
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#393
Report 10 years ago
#393
(Original post by ooze)
Did anyone see this piece in the guardian the other day?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...08.barackobama
Pretty crappy article isn't it? I don't get why this guy is bringing in the global reaction and how Obama would win if it was a global election... Americans are voting for THEIR president, why should it matter if Europeans don't like McCain?
0
quote
reply
Rascalov
Badges: 0
#394
Report 10 years ago
#394
I'll carry on thinking of America as a country with a fair few intelligent and forward thinking people, but with a hell of a lot more backwards idiots who vote for leaders because "they like them" rather than looking at what they offer. **** for brains Palin is an example of this, if the media would get off her nuts saying how great she is perhaps people would have an opportunity to look at what she has in store for their so called great country.
0
quote
reply
Areontas
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#395
Report 10 years ago
#395
It won't change at all.
0
quote
reply
ssk2
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#396
Report 10 years ago
#396
(Original post by Rascalov)
I'll carry on thinking of America as a country with a fair few intelligent and forward thinking people, but with a hell of a lot more backwards idiots who vote for leaders because "they like them" rather than looking at what they offer. **** for brains Palin is an example of this, if the media would get off her nuts saying how great she is perhaps people would have an opportunity to look at what she has in store for their so called great country.
Excuse me? Media saying how great she is? Its been entirely the opposite, from virtually all sides of the media! Plus, its pretty hard to vote for Obama because Americans don't have a clue what he actually stands for - he just spouts rhetoric.

Nice to see the anti-American bigotry continues though...
0
quote
reply
ooze
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#397
Report 10 years ago
#397
(Original post by ssk2)
Pretty crappy article isn't it? I don't get why this guy is bringing in the global reaction and how Obama would win if it was a global election... Americans are voting for THEIR president, why should it matter if Europeans don't like McCain?
Because international relations are important?

I can't help but see agreement with this: "Until now, anti-Americanism has been exaggerated and much misunderstood: outside a leftist hardcore, it has mostly been anti-Bushism, opposition to this specific administration. But if McCain wins in November, that might well change."
0
quote
reply
manc
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#398
Report 10 years ago
#398
Let's all underestimate middle-america!

'Palin's good but will she get them off their tractors?'
0
quote
reply
ssk2
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#399
Report 10 years ago
#399
I can't help but see agreement with this: "Until now, anti-Americanism has been exaggerated and much misunderstood: outside a leftist hardcore, it has mostly been anti-Bushism, opposition to this specific administration. But if McCain wins in November, that might well change."
Why would it change? Unless you are completely ignorant of American politics, you'll realise that McCain is not a continuation of Bush.
0
quote
reply
favh
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#400
Report 10 years ago
#400
I don't think OP knows what he's talking about. McCain is not on the religious right. The Republicans view him as being quite lefty, which is presumably why he appointed Palin to be his running mate.
0
quote
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Were you ever put in isolation at school?

Yes (257)
27%
No (695)
73%

Watched Threads

View All