1
   

What's so wrong with being an elitist?

 
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Apr, 2008 05:01 pm
let us make this forum a wonderful one to spend time and learn.
let us not engage in personal villification or vituberations or vile verbal attack.

The fact is this.
We all are innocents who endure the barbarism
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Apr, 2008 06:39 pm
As a person who had settled in Köln ( Germany)
i beg to remind the easy chair intellectuals who had made a rotten histroy of Germany( By interlligence I mean all the Germans)
while the original intelligent (Gandhi)
had chased away the colonial masters without any violence or WMD.
learn som English.

.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Apr, 2008 06:50 pm
Rama-lama-ding-dong is not only as irrelevant as Spurious, but he is, and one would never have thought it possible, even less coherent. I would dearly love to know what vituberation is . . . when we find out, perhaps Rama-lama-ding-dong can instruct Drewclown about it.
0 Replies
 
hanno
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Apr, 2008 09:35 pm
It's all about where you draw the line. I'm all about elitism, but high-handed liberals creep me out. I mean, you've got a Hawaiian telling coal miners and steelworkers what they're about - no good. I'll say right here and now, having been on both sides of the line that there are strata of reality known only to people who've labored in such capacities. On the other hand, were a knight-of-the-air like McCain to make a call for Industrial America it might go down a little smoother. I'm not being militaristic here, just that higher realities, especially with regard to our nation, are likely to be known to such a creature as he, having experienced the extrema of patriotic enfranchisement and all the consequences thereof.

It's like, elite how? Being elite as an individual, to me, means potential leader, whereas being elite as a social construct, the embodiment of circumstance and mob mentality - no damn good.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Apr, 2008 11:27 pm
I wish to die as an Athiest but not an intellectual elite.
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Apr, 2008 05:27 am
Setanta wrote:
Quote:
Neither the creation of the Senate with the power to select Senators at the discretion of the several states, nor the elector college with the power to determine how electors would be chose reserved to the several states, was adopted as an elitist measure, nor for elitist reasons. In fact, it was practical politics at it's most obvious and "transparent." It was a shot-gun wedding of the "big" states and the "small" states, whose separate interests otherwise threatened to deadlock or sink the convention.


Thanks for the 'sorry' with the 'shallow', but if your final paragraph is true, and it may well be, then the results must have been unintended consequences, but I don't believe that for a minute. The system of elections was set up so that people just like them (Any carpenters, oxmen, wheelwrights or tinkers at the Convention? hmmm?) would control just who would get to work the controls of the new nation. Did they do that unconsciously? Someone should ask Abigail Adams.

It was elitism in it's best sense, but still elitist and probably necessary to get the nation off the ground.

Americans like the idea of democracy, but those in power are always finding ways to slow things down in order to keep control. Example: the selection of delegates by election or caucus is almost entirely offset by the system of superdelegates who somehow choose themselves.

Joe(It's messy trying to be a democracy. You have to allow those shallow fellows to have the vote. yuch.)Nation
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Apr, 2008 08:35 am
The Jon Stewart Show last night (that would be Thursday's, USA) had an ecxellent sketch about elitism. Or, privilege, not quite the same thing. But it was funny.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Apr, 2008 01:19 pm
http://i28.tinypic.com/1zl53j8.jpg
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Apr, 2008 03:36 pm
Individual elite like the foreign minster of Hitler are worse than Hitler.

None f the Elites had opposed the barbarism of Hitler.
Ask any German who had endured this nonsense.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Apr, 2008 04:01 pm
Ragman wrote:
wow....name a single politician in Wash DC that is NOT an elitist.

Wait..is it because he's black AND an elitist? Is that his sin here?


Hmmm.... might be on to something there.....
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Apr, 2008 06:37 pm
Joe Nation wrote:
Americans like the idea of democracy, but those in power are always finding ways to slow things down in order to keep control.

I prefer when things in Washington are slowed to a complete stop.

I've never been so happy as when the Republicans took on Bill Clinton over the budget.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Apr, 2008 06:56 pm
There is nothing wrong to be a born intellectual or illiterate.
But those elite intellectual without ethical, moral,civil courage produce Hitler and his co-harts.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Apr, 2008 07:53 pm
ossobuco wrote:
What has that to do with the thread, JTT?


Setanta wrote:
Even those with honest motives often fall afoul of the casual (and i suspect "head-turning") experience of hobnobbing with the rich and famous--witness John McBush . . . er, i mean McCain, someone whom i genuinely think is basically honest, but who nonetheless got involved with Keating, and was censured by the Senate for it.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Apr, 2008 04:11 pm
snood wrote:
Ragman wrote:
wow....name a single politician in Wash DC that is NOT an elitist.

Wait..is it because he's black AND an elitist? Is that his sin here?


Hmmm.... might be on to something there.....


Quote:


Debate Analysis: ABC Asked Most Scandal Questions, Obama Was Clear Target


1) ABC's debate was in a class of its own, with more scandal and non-policy questions than any other.

Here's a breakdown:
Policy Non-Policy Scandal
CNN (1/31) 31 3 1
CNN (2/21) 23 5 2
NBC 24 17 5
ABC 32 14 13

2) Barack Obama has received the overwhelming majority of scandal questions over the course of the four debates, by a margin of 17 to 4.


3) Networks 'balanced' scandal questions to Obama by repeatedly asking Clinton about Obama's electability/readiness.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/20/debate-analysis-abc-asked_n_97599.html

0 Replies
 
OGIONIK
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Apr, 2008 04:17 pm
elitism owns, as i say the only person who can beat me is God himself.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Apr, 2008 09:33 am
Joe Nation wrote:
Thanks for the 'sorry' with the 'shallow', but if your final paragraph is true, and it may well be, then the results must have been unintended consequences, but I don't believe that for a minute. The system of elections was set up so that people just like them (Any carpenters, oxmen, wheelwrights or tinkers at the Convention? hmmm?) would control just who would get to work the controls of the new nation. Did they do that unconsciously? Someone should ask Abigail Adams.


Perhaps you'd have an argument if you could demonstrate how the composition of the Senate, or the electoral process, has assured that only an elite were members of the government. Your more vague reference to those who attended the convention does not either address the issue of how any part of the constitution mitigates against mediocrity or for elitism in the United States government.

Quote:
It was elitism in it's best sense, but still elitist and probably necessary to get the nation off the ground.


You fail to demonstrate how either the creation of the Senate, or of the electoral college, assured an elite in government. You have failed to respond to Thomas' call for a political elite by your references to the United States Constitution because of your failure to demonstrate how any part of that document promotes elitism, or prevents mediocrity in government office.

Andrew Jackson began his adult life as a mule-skinner. Abraham Lincoln worked as a clerk in a general store, and split rails in his spare time for the extra cash.

I have argued against the claim that the constitution enshrines elitism, and have done so from the perspective of how and why the measures to which you allude (the Senate and the electoral college) were created; and i have argued against the proposition that there has been a political elite in our nation's history.

Thomas called for a political elite to govern us, on much the same principle that we apply when we want the best doctor, or the best plumber, when we need the services of either of those professions. My consistent position has been that, first, no reasonable definition has been advanced of what would constitute an identifiable member of an elite class of people best fitted to serve in government; and, second, that the profession of politics attracts people who desire power and control. In regard to this latter point, i see no reason to assume the the profession of practical politics is going to attract any kind of elite, other than those with exceptional skills in manipulating public perceptions. Of course, if that is what Thomas has in mind for his political elite, i'd say he has nothing to worry about--that system is already in place.

Quote:
Americans like the idea of democracy, but those in power are always finding ways to slow things down in order to keep control. Example: the selection of delegates by election or caucus is almost entirely offset by the system of superdelegates who somehow choose themselves.


I don't personally consider myself (or you) as qualified to say definitively either what Americans genuinely like or what "those in power" (a sufficiently vague description of an amorphous group) do or can do to "keep control." Primary elections and caucuses are productions of the machinery of the political parties, and are not provided for in the Constitution, nor are they carved in stone. If it is deplorable that such things continue as they do, i'd have to say that were a symptom of the apathy of the American public who you claim so much like the idea of democracy. Is that like it as in "i like that idea, but don't expect me to get up off the sofa to do anything about it?"
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Apr, 2008 01:24 pm
USA
had failed to achive the Dream.
Sell not your daughters to be the title picture of Playboy and pent house.
Waste not your sons blood for barbaric reasons.
Strive hard to fulfill the so called AMERICAN DREAM:
UPHOLD THE CITIZENS OF NO
TO SETTLE IN THEIR COMMUNISTY:
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Apr, 2008 01:36 pm
Ramafuchs wrote:
UPHOLD THE CITIZENS OF NO
TO SETTLE IN THEIR COMMUNISTY:


Jesus Christ . . . who are "the citizens of No?" Where in hell, exactly, is "No?" What the f*ck is communisty supposed to be?

You are not an annoyance because you're some kind of political prophet crying the wilderness, which is what i suspect you see as your heroic role. You are an annoyance because the sh*t you drizzle all over almost every thread at this site makes no goddamned sense.

Not only are your ideas full of sh*t, you can't even coherently express them. Idiot.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Apr, 2008 01:44 pm
A devasted state wuth the abbreviation of N O.
Still those citizens were sleeping somewhereelse and not in their homes..
Correct me if I were wrong.
A soup sipping silly rotten SUPER POWER wage WAR for barbaric reasons while the citizens of this POWER are not able to see their birth place.
NO is an abriviation of one state. in USA.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Apr, 2008 01:49 pm
There is no state in the United States for which the abbreviation is NO.

There is nothing even approaching coherence in any of your posts.

I can't believe i'm actually talking to the worst bullshit artist at this site since Spendius showed up.

I can soon put an end to that.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/04/2024 at 02:48:25