Accountable
Well-Known Member
Your actual point was about using wedge issues, wasn't it? The anchor baby thing was just an example?I didn't think anyone had even really broached it. I'll just sit back and let you lot get on with it.
Your actual point was about using wedge issues, wasn't it? The anchor baby thing was just an example?I didn't think anyone had even really broached it. I'll just sit back and let you lot get on with it.
Guys? Plural? I'm the only one that pointed out the fact. I don't apologize for fact.
What's your opinion regarding the subject of this thread?
See my question, second line on post #80Your standard for calling someone a troll is lower than mine. See reply #9.
See my question, second line on post #80
I think it's really unquestionable that politicians use fear too much to fog the atmosphere and distract from more important issues.Dude, #9, #9, #9. Reminds me of a song from long ago. Any regrets for casually using the T word?
Your actual point was about using wedge issues, wasn't it? The anchor baby thing was just an example?
Goering @ Nuremburg said:"Naturally the common people don't want war: Neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, IT IS THE LEADERS of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is TELL THEM THEY ARE BEING ATTACKED, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. IT WORKS THE SAME IN ANY COUNTRY."
Maybe you are right, I may have been reading between the lines as in, "Pete's a troll". "And I thought that was Kelvin's gig (but I'm not going to disagree with you)". And I've admitted that I could be in error. So you don't think Pete is a troll. Got it.
Edgray, back on track? Oh, The Republican's always need an enemy.
the cold war was all about needing enemies I am sure that kids in the USSR were taught of the evils of US imperialism and no doubt the reverse was also true
You are not being controversial at all
You are just wrong
I'm assuming you're familiar with uber-lefty Marx. There's no way to say that he viewed capitalism as anything but an enemy.I'm going to be controversial here and say that as far as I can see, the more right wing the politics, the bigger the need for the enemy.
But then maybe that's no necessarily true, Hitler's National Socialism could well be placed in the left-wing of the political scale, and he used a supposed enemy to gain support. The USSR, of course they needed the US.
I'm assuming you're familiar with uber-lefty Marx. There's no way to say that he viewed capitalism as anything but an enemy.
I wouldn't say it was viewed as quite the same thing, he wasn't running for office for a start, he wasn't using capitalism as an enemy to bolster support to further an agenda. He was putting forward an idea.
His idea was his agenda
Gotta say, I don't like the idea of equal outcome regardless of effort. There's a disincentive for producing anything more than average. Communism is the natural enemy of innovation.equality was his agenda. Capitalism is a natural enemy of equality.
Gotta say, I don't like the idea of equal outcome regardless of effort. There's a disincentive for producing anything more than average. Communism is the natural enemy of innovation.
Innovation occurs from imagination. It grows from public buy-in. Do you think the Super Soaker water gun occurred from necessity? Necessity didn't bring forth the internal combustion engine, the internal combustion engine was around as a rich boy's toy until a capitalist found a way to make more money from it. The wheel was invented in South America. It never made it past the toy stage because necessity didn't have a use for it up in the Andes. They really could have used it in North America, but necessity never thought it proper to bring it about there.I would strongly disagree with that statement. Innovation occurs from necessity, and not the necessity of money. You have to remember that innovation generally comes not from the private sector, but the public one. NASA for example.
And China and Russia, whilst not being communist per se, they've certainly had their innovative moments.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.