Your actual point was about using wedge issues, wasn't it? The anchor baby thing was just an example?
In Need of an Enemy?
- Thread starter edgray
- Start date
Your standard for calling someone a troll is lower than mine. See reply #9.
See my question, second line on post #80
Dude, #9, #9, #9. Reminds me of a song from long ago. Any regrets for casually using the T word?
Last edited by a moderator:
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?
yes it was just an example, one I regret using now! But less about a wedge issue and more about making an enemy to bolster political support.
Goering @ Nuremburg said:
I think the politicians were perfectly happy fighting The War On A Guerilla Tactic. It was the people who insisted on a proper noun, so after trying out some foreign words that just didn't catch on, they came up with Muslim Extremists. Since Americans have that Irish penchant for shortening names (Mike, Dave, Joe, Ed) it was inevitable that sooner or later some would shorten the enemy down to simply Muslim. Now the politicians have a PC problem to deal with.
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.
yes,..im right and yes,..your wrong
you really need to stop attempting to put words in mouth. i did not say he was a troll and did not say he wasn't.
i believe everyone has a little "troll" in them, just depends on the topic and if they wish to express themselves on it.
back on topic. there will always be "Enemies" for every political party, not just republicans. they will just use different terminologies to make something seem more daunting, ominous or evil
war on terror, war on drugs, war on poverty etc., all the "czars" we have now..do we have an immigration czar yet?
we seem to have a fascination in this country with putting a 5$ tag on a $2 item
do we need to do something about illegal immigration,..yes. will the government figure out a way to spend 40 billion dollars on a problem that still wont be fixed after wards...yes...will they avoid a simpler more cost effective solution just becuase somone isnt making a buck on it.....absofuckinglutely.
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
I realize I'm being one sided, but I don't consider the USSR a good example. I viewed it as a real enemy, not one made up. Now I'm sure they told all their people how the West would eat their babies if given half a chance.
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.
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.
You are not being controversial at all
You are just wrong
You are just wrong
You are not being controversial at all
You are just wrong
it was the very centre piece of the neo-con philosophy...
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.
His idea was his agenda
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.
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.
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 think people like Edison, Bell, Branson, Dyson, Gates, and Martin Cooper (inventor of the cell phone) might dispute your assertion that gov't is necessary for innovation.
You're actually going to pit China & Russia's post WW2 innovation against that of the West??
Last edited by a moderator: