| This forum is used with the NationStates web-game designed and run by Max Barry. While not officially affiliated, this serves as the regional forum for the regions: Middle East, African Continent, American Continent, Asian Continent, and European Continent. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and can "read only". In order to get the most out of these forums, please become a member and read this guide - http://z3.invisionfree.com/nationstates/index.php?showtopic=3060 If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| I'll take this as a personal achievement | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Apr 26 2009, 08:35 PM (612 Views) | |
| Ulgania | Apr 26 2009, 08:35 PM Post #1 |
|
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse
|
So there's this girl I went to high school with who, upon first learning about Obama fell in complete, absolute, irrevocable love. Everything about her was spewing 'YES WE CAN!' and she went from respectable high school senior to raging liberal activist in the course of two years. Now, this two years has been interesting. She goes to college at the University of Vermont (heh, liberal hippy party school when she got there) and has been in the general environment of social activism. Can't blame her, she's a poli sci major. She has a better chance of finding that crowd than say, an engineer. Anyway, in the past month she started blogging and, low and behold I found her on blogspot (mutual friend linked me). I read her entry, I follow what she's saying, and I ultimately decide to ask her two questions: 1. What are your personal political beliefs? 2. Do you have them because of your own personal experiences and thought processes or because you've been socialized by your peers? I wasn't so straightforward though... I tried to be more ornate. Now, I didn't mean anything personal by it whatsoever, and told her as much. I have respect for her and I know that she knows what she's talking about, based on some discussions. However, I had grown concerned since she had started getting into the activist stance on everything. I send her the message, and for the past few days everything she posts online (which is... a lot) has been 'fuck my life' and 'the world is out to get me' and finally I get a response saying she wasn't able to answer me and she actually stopped posting the politically fueled blogs and realized she's just been a tool of those around her. So, while I'm sure that her activism has been for the greater good and that it's closer to the general will than many others around her, I feel as though I was at least slightly victorious in making someone ACTUALLY THINK CRITICALLY ABOUT WHAT THE HELL THEY'RE DOING. There are way too many sheep in the world who just bandwagon. Having one less who is actually thinking about her politics is in my view a LOT better than the ongoing alternative. |
![]() |
|
| Rhadamanthus | Apr 26 2009, 08:52 PM Post #2 |
|
Legitimist
![]()
|
Awesome. |
![]() |
|
| New Harumf | Apr 26 2009, 08:59 PM Post #3 |
![]()
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
|
And . . . .. your point is? |
![]() |
|
| Ulgania | Apr 26 2009, 09:02 PM Post #4 |
|
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse
|
That most of the activists that I've met don't know why they feel the way they do |
![]() |
|
| New Harumf | Apr 26 2009, 09:04 PM Post #5 |
![]()
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
|
Then they are not really activists, just observers, and are probably enjoying the feeling of observing. Ask her out, feed her a burger and a beer, and fuck politics! |
![]() |
|
| Ulgania | Apr 26 2009, 09:06 PM Post #6 |
|
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse
|
I try to avoid political relationships. Already tried once. Ended in hilarity edit: but that was years ago Edited by Ulgania, Apr 26 2009, 09:07 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Tristan da Cunha | Apr 26 2009, 09:24 PM Post #7 |
|
Science and Industry
|
Ulgania, that is a good achievement. I'm not against being influenced by peers but the key is to run in to the right peers, not the crappy Obamaites. Now, Palin that was a candidate! :) |
![]() |
|
| Sedulius | Apr 26 2009, 11:42 PM Post #8 |
|
Field Marshal
|
I loathe liberals. Not because of their beliefs, but rather because of their smug attitudes. From what I've heard, they love to talk behind my back. At least conservatives insult me to my face. :lol: I guess that actually I loathe smug people, but a lot of liberals do indeed fall into that category. |
![]() |
|
| Porcu | Apr 27 2009, 06:29 AM Post #9 |
|
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes."
![]()
|
Nice job Ulgania! Though I can't speak about liberal activists I did work with a few people I know last summer for some local candidates, mostly running for State Senate or House here in Ohio. It was fun cause I got to drive around the state and some of the people are really nice (not to mention the free Chipotle I got ^^ ) but, point is, that while these people consider themselves conservative I find that many are just as stupid as some of the hysterical leftists I see around campus (I go to Ohio State). Both just cannot stand up straight in a somewhat intelligent discussion. Not only do they not ever tell you what they think/believe and how but it always seems to me that they've been given a list of common points and arguments to make and stick to those points no matter what. Dissect any of these points or stray away from their talking points and they're lost in an ocean without a gust of wind in any direction. Happy to see I'm not freeing minds on my own :P |
![]() |
|
| NRE | Apr 27 2009, 10:37 AM Post #10 |
![]()
Map Tsar and Southern Gentleman
![]()
|
This is certainly an achievement Ulgania as sometimes activist are so indoctrinated that you can't get through. Personally activists don't bother me, usually I go into peanuts mode when an activists begins to bother, i.e. everything they say starts coming out and sounding like a bugle horn. |
![]() |
|
| Sedulius | Apr 27 2009, 11:45 AM Post #11 |
|
Field Marshal
|
You know what? I'm putting those questions on my facebook, though I won't take credit for them. |
![]() |
|
| Tristan da Cunha | Apr 27 2009, 12:05 PM Post #12 |
|
Science and Industry
|
Critical thinking, and merely having personal political beliefs, arenn't enough since not all ideas are equal. The most toxic combination is a group of sheep led by an original thinker who independently discovers terrible and erroneous conclusions. I can think of several disastrous concepts independently discovered thousands or even millions of times in the past few centuries ( which by the way would explain the enduring appeal of Marxian economics :lol: ) The solution is more polemics! Ulgania has done good though, it sounds like he really impacted that person's life for the better :lol: |
![]() |
|
| Ulgania | Apr 27 2009, 03:15 PM Post #13 |
|
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse
|
Communism and fascism have managed to kill far more people than any religion has ever managed, but I'm not that worried about that. Obviously I'm going to start using mah critikle thincyng skillz to foster a group of followers that I can harness for my own uses. As far as evil people who gain followers, how often do they think of themselves as evil? Aren't they being, you know, just? ^^ |
![]() |
|
| Sedulius | Apr 27 2009, 03:18 PM Post #14 |
|
Field Marshal
|
Communism, fascism, and religion didn't kill people. The forces and foolishness of corrupt governments did. |
![]() |
|
| flumes | Apr 27 2009, 03:35 PM Post #15 |
![]()
CLEVELAND ROCKS!
|
I would argue that the concept of religion alone has been responsible for killing more people then any other group of ideals combined...... Think about it. Most wars go deeper then a crazy government, or a crazy leader. They usually are fought for some basic ideal that people share (religion). That is why I personally find religion a very interesting thing.... For as much of a "good" thing as it is supposed to be, it sure creates a lot of problems. |
![]() |
|
| Tristan da Cunha | Apr 27 2009, 03:45 PM Post #16 |
|
Science and Industry
|
Of course communism/fascism kill people. They're inherently ineffective economic systems that lead to high death rates- manifested as shortages and starvation, or war (as an outlet for unmanageable government debt levels), or both. |
![]() |
|
| Rhadamanthus | Apr 27 2009, 04:02 PM Post #17 |
|
Legitimist
![]()
|
Nice... except that the most wars haven't been fought over religion. The most wars have been fought over land, borders, resources, and similar things. |
![]() |
|
| Sedulius | Apr 27 2009, 04:49 PM Post #18 |
|
Field Marshal
|
I must utterly disagree. Religion and ideology has only ever been used as an excuse in war to make political gains. Religion is responsible for no death. Corrupt religious leaders and zealots are to blame. Communism and fascism responsible for no death. Rather, the foolish policies put in place by and the actions taken by deranged leaders are responsible. It is man and nature that is responsible for death. Nothing else is to blame. |
![]() |
|
| Porcu | Apr 27 2009, 06:00 PM Post #19 |
|
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes."
![]()
|
While man is the face of any aggression is there always an underlying reason for his actions. Man's nature naturally includes a wonder of the unknown and a way to explain it. This is the reason and root of religion, IMHO. You cannot separate man and his nature, which includes religion and ideology, for they are one in the same. Yes, there is also the consideration of political gains for aggressive action but there have been instances of purely driven ideology reeking destruction upon others. The actions of Islamic fundamentalists and the Holocaust relay no political gains, they are horrible actions driven by ideology alone. |
![]() |
|
| Tristan da Cunha | Apr 27 2009, 06:10 PM Post #20 |
|
Science and Industry
|
How don't the Islamic fundamentalists seek political gains? The Islamists' actions invariably seek to overthrow American-allied governments in the Mid East, to expel American military presence from the Middle East, and to overthrow the state of Israel. Islamic fundamentalism is nothing if not political.
Edited by Tristan da Cunha, Apr 27 2009, 06:18 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Tristan da Cunha | Apr 27 2009, 06:27 PM Post #21 |
|
Science and Industry
|
You mean foolish policies like collectivized agriculture or corporatism... the policies that are the definitions of communism and fascism! |
![]() |
|
| Porcu | Apr 27 2009, 06:35 PM Post #22 |
|
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes."
![]()
|
That is not their end goal. Their end goal is the total subjugation of the world to Islam and Islamic law. The overthrow of American allied governments, the expulsion of American military forces, and the destruction of the state of Israel are merely stepping stones to their larger goal. This is not to say that I support the government of Saudi Arabia, for example. In fact, I find that American support of such a despicable regime only lends aid to the arguments of the Islamists. Again, Islamic fundamentalists wish to see their version of heaven on Earth carried out and this is driven by a violent religious ideology. The means of achieving this end goal is partly political, I point to Europe as an example of what I mean. There have been demographic studies which state that by 2050 (I think) there will be a Muslim majority in some Western European nations. With this majority, and the ability to exercise freedoms otherwise not available in Muslim countries, there exists the likelihood that new laws will be created reflecting the religious ideology of fundamentalist Islam and thus presents a gain through political means but inherently such action is taken because of the underlying ideology. Fundamentalist Islam is a reaction to the decadence of the West and it poses itself as the cure, not in any political way but rather in a religious manner. I doubt that if the US were to relinquish its support of various Arab governments and Israel and remove its military forces that Muslims would be content and mind their own business, so to speak. Edited by Porcu, Apr 27 2009, 06:38 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| lebowski2123 | Apr 27 2009, 06:45 PM Post #23 |
![]()
Resident?
|
That doesn't sound political to you? :rolleyes: |
![]() |
|
| Porcu | Apr 27 2009, 06:48 PM Post #24 |
|
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes."
![]()
|
I'm just saying that it seems to me to be a religiously motivated political end |
![]() |
|
| Tristan da Cunha | Apr 27 2009, 06:57 PM Post #25 |
|
Science and Industry
|
There's no doubt Islam, unlike say Jainism, has always been a political religion since its inception. But your beliefs about the nature of Islamist terrorism are fallacious. Your theory fails to explain why Islamic terrorists launch attacks on the US but not against France or Sweden or Japan, all far more decadent, secular, and irreligious countries than the US. The only unifying theme for the international Islamic terrorists' targets in the developed world is that they have all in some way or another assisted in the war against Iraq, or lent support to Israel. As for the statutory spread of Sharia through democratic means in Western Europe - democracy reaps what democracy sows. Welfare socialism reaps what welfare socialism sows. It's only natural that the European population, aging, secularized, and enfeebled due to their social democratic values, should be swamped with energetic and militating Muslims. The burden rests on Europeans, not the Muslims, to dismantle the existing system and reestablish their cohesive Christian identity that can counteract these demographic trends. |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Off-Topic · Next Topic » |













11:39 AM Jul 13