Is the US headed for another civil war?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by James R, Feb 11, 2022.

  1. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    A government that does little is what most people want. You describe compromise as compromising with failure. No compromise is an extreme position and we see that doesn't usually work either.

    You don't want government loans but you don't mind taxes being raised forever rather than having a loan for a short period of time. How is that better?

    Look at the drug addicts living under bridges and in the parks all around Seattle. You think it would be better to house them without any restrictions? For the true homeless there are shelters. Drug addicts don't want that because they have to continue doing drugs and they have to continue committing crimes to pay for the drugs. Do you think if we did that (provided better housing) they would stop using drugs or use more drugs?

    Where is the motivation to work and to be productive if it's easy to be a drug user and have everything provided? We need more productive people, not less.

    How many productive people do you know on the far left? Who is more productive, you or James?
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    You are erroneous and fallacious; observe:

    • … of such centrist inclination as to demand liberals compromise with conservatives by agreeing to fail.​

    It's not a question of "no compromise", or "compromise as compromising with failure". Rather, it is the political question of demanding such compromise as agreeing to fail.

    Not every compromise is a compromise with failure. As I said↑, it's called compromising with conservatives, or, compromising with Republicans.

    There is a curious, narrow dullardy, a presumption of unmarked boundaries, common among many conservative outlooks and positions, as if their argument is the only other possible alternative, or some such. It's an artificial dualism, a false dichotomy. It's like when people complain that everyone who disagrees with me gets called -ist, and the obvious answer is no, not the ones who aren't -ist; some people even actually teach me things that advance my understanding, which is a far cry from blaming the penguin↱ as one faults right↱. It's even in the conservative narrative about Hillary and the Deplorables. Those who would separate↗ conservatism from Trumpism¹ might recall she did the same; even more, she asserted to recognize the difference in Trump voters. But when the so-called Deplorables complained that she called all Trump voters deplorable, that other half was apparently willing to dutifully line up↗ and complain↗. It's actually part of our American tradition, and thus kind of baked into conservatism, but that gets complicated, or, at least, subtle.

    Since you're so fluent in fallacy, try this one: You don't like taxes, but you're happy to pay inflated prices so rich people can buy another summer house and a new jet to fly there; how is that better?

    Walmart quality on Amazon terms at Netflix prices with a Hulu interface on a Comcast box. It's how your bit about centrism↑ isn't utterly wrong; the center of the voter-spectrum bell curve, as such, that middle bloc, that influential "center" majority, as such, gets so angry about the results of what they voted for, and in feeling somehow hopeless about how society goes, pretends the indifference you suggest, a façade to obscure and occult what they would otherwise prefer remain unseen.

    Your entire post is a string of fallacies:

    The thing is, some part of me would presume you're aware it's more complicated than that. Asking, as you do, "Do you think if we did that (provided better housing) they would stop using drugs or use more drugs?" is fallacious.

    If I suggest it sounds like 1984 all over again, I don't mean the dystopian novel, but, rather, suggest a vintage for that dystopian conservative politic.

    You mean like a best-selling, influential novelist? I actually don't know. To the one, not everyone makes those politics known; to the other, it depends on what you call productive, or how you measure leftwardness.


    Remember² Wilde: "The proper aim is to try and reconstruct society on such a basis that poverty will be impossible."


    ¹ If we "wonder what happened to all those non-Trump Republicans that existed at the time of his election", there are two obvious answers to the question. One is that some will vote for a moderate or conservative Democrat; the other is that most will come back to the Party line enough to support Trump sufficiently to drive the Bushes and Cheneys out. Of the part about voting for Democrats, we should remember that struggling to accommodate conservative needs in order to pick up those crossover voters is part of how the Democrats wreck themselves against the rocks, akin to your prior noise about noise and centrism.

    ² As I have already mentioned↗ to you twice↗ in as many weeks.​

    Bors, Matt. "Fault Right". The Nib. 7 August 2018. 6 September 2022.

    Tomorrow, Tom. "Penguin thinks we're Nazis". This Modern World. 28 May 2018. 6 September 2022.

    Wilde, Oscar. "The Soul of Man Under Socialism". 1891. 6 September 2022.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.

Share This Page