|
|
Post by Sara Moore on May 1, 2003 13:41:00 GMT -5
Conservative are money loving, self-interested capitalists that only look at the bottom line and liberals are small-minded unrealistic, idealistic wimps that have no grasp on reality. Is this how some stereotype “the other side”? Where does this get us rather than wrapped up in some endless argument of how the others side is stupid and wrong? I think we need to remember our values; try to understand the values of others; and analyze all the attributes that are keeping us and others from living in accordance with those values. I‘ll assume that most people strive for happiness health, freedom, and the ability to spend time with those close to us.
Is it possible for people to focus on the problems (terrorism, poverty, fraud…) and have open discussions on different solutions rather than rejecting an idea because it comes from a different value system. For example there is an anti-American sentiment in various parts of the world this is undeniable. We need to break it apart in order to understand it and defuse it. We need to ask many questions a few of which are: Why do people hate America? What exactly do they hate about America? Has anyone said they hate America because it is a free country? Let’s look at their history, their culture, their values and how these values might conflict with American history, culture and values. How do people perceive power when they have no control who is in power, just as every another country could feel toward Americans since we are the only superpower and understandable other countries have no choice in who runs America. Can we make any parallels between the perceptions of America and how people feel when an entity (boss, company, government) that has power over them.
We need to make much more of an effort to understand these relationships and not put judgment on them. Yes, this is very difficult, after all we are all human. In trying to understand these actions, we would certainly find differences. Possibly these differences would go against our own cultural values an/or could lead us to look at our own culture critically. This can be challenging, but should not keep us from looking.
There are some peoples that are increasingly speaking of America in terms of an empire; Why do people think this? Are there really any parallels? Maybe not. If we don’t critically look at the arguments that we disagree or agree with we will not know if the truly have substance, opposing viewpoints may deepen and divisions will grow. If this is an appropriate parallel then what does this mean about feelings toward America? Why should we care if people don’t like us? If people abroad think our intentions are not noble or we are only acting for our own interests, and perceive those intentions as a dominating outside force oppressing them; What does this mean? Could such a perception lead to another September 11th, worse? Regardless of how we see our intentions (noble, in support of freedom, jus), does this matter if others see America as oppressors, not in support of their freedom and/or only in support of American interests.
Basically my point is that we need to look at these problems critically, and not get tied up in our own value systems that separate us from others that offer different perspective to what we know. I do not think we are looking at such problems critically. I think we are to quick to generalize, point the finger and act. Yes, action in some form is necessary but we should fully understand what we are getting ourselves into, recognize all the complexities of those involved and diffuse the hate that some people currently feel for this great country.
|
|
|
|
Post by MO on May 2, 2003 0:59:38 GMT -5
Your ideas sound wonderfull, but only if we live under the false assumption that all people are reasonable and all people want peace. Real evil exists in the world, no matter what your mommy and daddy told you when they were putting you to bed.
|
|
Theflossingofamerica
Guest
|
Post by Theflossingofamerica on May 4, 2003 3:52:58 GMT -5
MO, I think it is great how you completely demean someone with "mommy and daddy."
God forbid, someone try to be rational and step beyond the bounds of our two parties. Good for you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Desarrollo on May 4, 2003 20:36:53 GMT -5
its true as long as we see the world as "us versus them" then we get relatively nowhere...ive seen both sides and i think we all want the same thing...to live relatively productive lives where our children can grow up and live in a better world then ours...i dont believe there is evil just the misguided...we need to take our brothers and sisters who are misguided and teach them the source of their ignorance...our world would be better for it
|
|
|
|
Post by Joel on May 21, 2003 15:10:31 GMT -5
I agree with several of your points. It seems you have taken a reasonable approach to an open exchange of ideas. The problem is encompassed in how those the accomplishment of an idea is preosecuted.
There are those on either side, who will stop at nothing to accomplish their goal - this is the reason why we have to write so much pork into just about any legislation that gets voted upon. People are mostly self-centered and petty. Take it a step further - there are those who have absolutely no connection with advancing either conservatism nor liberalism. Their sole purpose is to pursue a malicious outcome or at least a completely self-serving outcome under the umbrella of ideology. This colors the waters a great deal and it is THIS which breeds the suspicion between "us" and "them". It is nearly impossible to be involved in politics and not be either a hypocrit or a cynic (or both) - the difference between "us and them" is which one we choose and which we feel the other has chosen.
Joel
NoPunditIntended.com
|
|
|
|
Post by Bandwagon Boy on Jul 14, 2003 14:36:44 GMT -5
Sarah you sound like a typical Liberel! You are full of it Liberels are WRONG and JEALOUS face it! And who cares if a bunch of foreiners dont like us! They can all go screw! If they dont like it maybe we will invade them too!
ps you sound like you might be Hot are you Hot! Put up a picture of youself!
|
|
|
|
Post by Sandy on Jul 14, 2003 18:31:17 GMT -5
We are having an open debate about the basis or core of American values. Let's see if we have money, we are money grabbing capitalists! If we are poor we need to take what we need from those greedy capitalists.
Is this what they teach you guys in school? I've got news for you, this is pure socialism. This is as deep as this forum goes? Lord, America is in deep itshay! Do us all a favor and don't run for any office. You have grown up with a clue in hell what is in the U.S. Constitution! Hell you call each other by labels you can't even spell!
This forum must be used as the best example of why America must close up Government Schools.
|
|
|
|
Post by markwashio on Jul 16, 2003 0:38:06 GMT -5
The primary concern is that this country and what it exist for survives. European concerns, Islamo-fascist and socialist liberalism be damned to hell.
|
|
|
|
Post by flossingofamerica on Jul 16, 2003 2:40:38 GMT -5
How is it that socialism and liberalism become one in the same during debate? Am I a socialist because I feel all people have a responsibility to one another? Am I a socialist because I long for a return in community? Trust me, I'm not. I'm a money-grubbing capitalist. I think that the government should stay out of the welfare business...but, you know what? They intervened, and we stopped caring. If people were more forthcoming in their respective communities in helping the poor, then it would be a heck of a lot easier to tell the government to go away on this issue...but what did we do?
Well, our lawyers helped a homeless man sue a restaurant that donated food they were going to throw away ( a chicken place in Frankenmuth, MI.) They'd been doing it for years, and many homeless in the area lived on their 'throw-away' food alone, costing nobody a dime. A guy gets sick, it goes to court, they win, and now there isn't a restaurant out there that will take the risk. Do you have any idea what the average restaurant throws away daily?
We had orphanages run by the community and the churches in that community, but someone screamed separation of church and state, and the government pulls the plug. (You may think it was because of abuse, but you should check your history...it is not the case...and just a note, the separation of church and state has to do with a freedom to practice religion and freedom from laws based on specific religious practice. It doesn't mean that you can't give money to a church that is providing a community with a service like child welfare, as long as the government doesn't discriminate with regard to WHICH churches it will or will not help.) Rather than making orphanages more up-to-date and setting more strict guidelines, we do away with it all, and create our aweful child welfare system that costs the federal government almost 100 billion dollars a year, an average of nearly 70 thousand dollar expense per child, per year. I wish I had that kind of money per year for my kids.
There are more examples, but the point is, we created this...us capitalists and those liberals, and those socialists, and those conservatives...We're suing over this and arguing over that, and we stopped caring. Rather than going to the store and buying a 100 dollar air conditioner for old Mrs. Smith down the road 'cause we've got the extra cash, we let someone else handle it. Rather than taking our leftovers from the restaurant to the poor family next door, we let it rot in our fridge.
My grandmother lived in a time when you gave the clothes your children grew out of to the new family in the community that was just getting started. My mother grew up in a time when she knew her neighbors for blocks in either direction, all by name. You loaned what you had, borrowed what you didn't, helped when you could, and got it when you needed it. That's not socialism...it's called humanity. If longing for that makes me a liberal, then smack me silly and call me Hillary:)
What have we done over the last thirty years of litigation and debate, except for reduce personal responsibility for our actions for and against others? We're constantly blaming the other side for the ills of society, when we are all to blame. This conservative/liberal debate will end when we both admit we're wrong, stop the mudslinging and baiting, and start making a difference, one community at a time. Voting for people who want to cut government fat, learning our neighbors names and needs, and ending the finger-pointing would be a good start. However, that statement makes me a liberal socialist I guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by markwashio on Jul 16, 2003 14:52:55 GMT -5
Is it responsibility or do you shove it down other people's throats? People should be responsible to themselves, for their conduct, for the way they live. You want to thrust their problems down everyone elses throats or as you rant shows steal other people's well earned money ( sounds like communist thinking) to give money to people who sit on their butts all day and expect everyone else to support them.
So you support law suits insted of social action? Nice lie.
You support the welfare system because i gives you something to use as a political rant.
So insted of the so called "community action" you speak of, you decided to waste the people's money in a stupid law suit. You are part of the problem, did it ever come to your mind that a law suit costs more in bad results for all than good for the few?
We had orphanages run by the community and the churches in that community, but someone screamed separation of church and state, and the government pulls the plug. (You may think it was because of abuse, but you should check your history...it is not the case...and just a note, the separation of church and state has to do with a freedom to practice religion and freedom from laws based on specific religious practice. It doesn't mean that you can't give money to a church that is providing a community with a service like child welfare, as long as the government doesn't discriminate with regard to WHICH churches it will or will not help.) Rather than making orphanages more up-to-date and setting more strict guidelines, we do away with it all, and create our aweful child welfare system that costs the federal government almost 100 billion dollars a year, an average of nearly 70 thousand dollar expense per child, per year. I wish I had that kind of money per year for my kids.
There are more examples, but the point is, we created this...us capitalists and those liberals, and those socialists, and those conservatives...We're suing over this and arguing over that, and we stopped caring. Rather than going to the store and buying a 100 dollar air conditioner for old Mrs. Smith down the road 'cause we've got the extra cash, we let someone else handle it. Rather than taking our leftovers from the restaurant to the poor family next door, we let it rot in our fridge.
My grandmother lived in a time when you gave the clothes your children grew out of to the new family in the community that was just getting started. My mother grew up in a time when she knew her neighbors for blocks in either direction, all by name. You loaned what you had, borrowed what you didn't, helped when you could, and got it when you needed it. That's not socialism...it's called humanity. If longing for that makes me a liberal, then smack me silly and call me Hillary
What have we done over the last thirty years of litigation and debate, except for reduce personal responsibility for our actions for and against others? We're constantly blaming the other side for the ills of society, when we are all to blame. This conservative/liberal debate will end when we both admit we're wrong, stop the mudslinging and baiting, and start making a difference, one community at a time. Voting for people who want to cut government fat, learning our neighbors names and needs, and ending the finger-pointing would be a good start. However, that statement makes me a liberal socialist I guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by markwashio on Jul 16, 2003 15:02:34 GMT -5
Look at the actions of the Democratic Party and the little groups of "me people" that follow it.
I've abandoned the Democrats, I used to be supportive till I finally came to my sense and seen how they and their gang of thugs have been using the courts and lawyers to strip our rights and control people's incomes.
I should have woke up years ago from the "John Kennedy drugs" my mother had me snorting. The modern Democratic Party and modern liberalism are a threat to America's survival, more so since Bill Clinton was president. and sadly I voted for him in 1996 because I was still stupid.
Never again will I vote for a Democrat or support Democrats. They and their liberal friends can go blow for all I care.
|
|
|
|
Post by flossingofamerica on Jul 16, 2003 15:07:13 GMT -5
I think that you completely misunderstood my post. I am not for lawsuits, and I think I made that perfectly clear. I am completely against our current welfare system. I have no idea what you are trying to say. I used the lawsuit as an example of what has been done to thwart community action...I was not hailing the lawsuit as a good thing, I was condemning it. Read my post...there's nothing there that says, 'hey file a lawsuit.' The idea I was trying to get across is that if we all helped one another out when we saw someone in need when we had the means, then many of our problems would be on their way to a solution. Instead, we have allowed our court systems to file frivilous lawsuits without causing so much as a ripple of disgust or action from our communities. Then, we all blame each other for the government involvement, higher taxes, and a lazy group in our society, rather than accepting our responsibility in allowing it to grow into the seemingly endless problem it has become.
|
|
|
|
Post by garrett7855 on Jul 27, 2003 14:37:36 GMT -5
Flossing--I got your point--I am starting to suspect that a number of the folks reading these posts are doing so using the "Evelyn Wood Speed Reading Method". I see an awful lot of quick, gut reactions that apparently are in response to surface skimming of rants. I tend to believe that liberals today are secretly socialists in sheeps clothing, myself, but it is also obvious to me that a goodly number of the liberals on this site would be more accurately described as 'old school' liberals. I lean more to a conservative viewpoint (lean? I'm practically an unheard tree, falling over in the forest), but I recognise that a true liberal is concerned for people as individuals, not groups. The liberal view strikes me as being impractical more due to human greed than bad intentions. The liberal leadership is the danger--the current leadership is not interested in the 'common good'. They are showing on a daily basis that their interest is in the acquisition and retention of power. Charity begins at home-just because it's trite doesn't make it untrue. Unfortunately, charity has moved from the private sector into the government sector. Welfare programs in all ther kaliedoscopic variety have been as excuses on so many occaisions to increase the portion of our incomes that is funnelled into government coffers, that we find ourselves less and less able to contribute. The separation between church and state is another incorrect notion that is making life tougher. As I've said on many occaisions the constitution says nothing about separating the church FROM the state. Well, crud! I've gone and lost my train of thought! See, I made this too long--now nobody will understand it  I'll try again later. |
|
|
|
Post by Sentinel on Jul 27, 2003 20:42:29 GMT -5
Flossingofamerica, that lawsuit on behalf of the homeless man was an example of liberalism in action. Liberals don't care about individuals. They don't care that resturants throw out a great amount of food which the homeless use. They don't care that a victory for the sickened homeless man would mean an end to the food the homeless use. The liberal lawyer cared only about stuffing his pockets with taxpayer money.
Liberalism is using the government to rob your neighbor for your own benefit. Liberalism doesn't come close to even socialism.
Liability has dramatically raised the cost of living for everyone, and we're long past the point where we're actually signficantly safer because of the liability concerns of business. Indeed, more people are dying because of the high price of liability.
Consider, people who don't go to the doctor as soon as they should because the doctor is so expensive. Half the cost of the doctor and drugs is liability insurance.
Millions of childrens toys are recalled every year because of safety concerns (usually, they're safe enough, it's just that a few idiots manage to do something really stupid with them). People who claim to care about children want to put teeth into the recall law to force companies to track every toy sale and when there's a recall to make sure that every toy is turned in. As it is, a very, very small percentage of toys are actually returned and companies don't try to track toys.
Those teeth for recalls would double the price of toys and baby/children's equipment (cribs, helmets etc.). If the price doubles then more people will use broken toys and broken cribs or use substitutes that were never intended for use with babies or children. The result is that injuries and fatailies would increase. But, if the liberal gets his way, he'll check his fattened wallet (from industry settlements) and feeeeel good about himself because he helped the children. If it saves one life, no matter how many more lives are taken as a result, it is worth it.
But, I don't want a homeless man to need food from a dumpster. I believe liberalism is the chief cause of homelessness, but you won't find any liberal feeling guilty about it. It use to be that the mentally unstable were institutionalized, before liberals cared enough to de-institutionalize these people and move them out to the street. It's not just that. It's as you say, people don't care because they think the government will do something about the person down the street who is just barely hanging onto his or her home. Or, the government will do something about the person who lost his home.
But, my conservate values leads me to something else. Liberals teach liberal values which are highly impractical. A person who follows them is much more likely to end up homeless. Liberals also have a knack of making life very complex which can cause a marginal person to decide just to drop out and avoid the hassle.
Every person, all the millions, in the world who have died of AIDS is a victim of Liberal values and compassion.
|
|
|
|
Post by USA50 on Aug 26, 2003 12:39:23 GMT -5
I think this is a good question. And I think george is one who bears a lot of responsibility, therefore, it should be addressed to him (or D-ck....or Laura.... or george sr....)
|
|
