Tartar, It's a matter of 'perception' and 'degree.' Nobody is a perfect example of a democrat or republican. We all have varying degrees of what is considered a 'liberal' or 'conservative.' c.i.
tartar, Why don't you give us an example of what you mean by "serious debate?" c.i.
Laudable sentiment, Tartarin. However, I doubt political debate would be among the societal phenomona of Utopia
timber
To be honest, it doesn't exist that much any more, except perhaps in colleges and universities. It's the kind of discussion which, in the political arena, at least, centers on issues rather than personalities. I remember all nighters at college and after (at another university) in which no viewpoint on current affairs was dismissed, in which no one was given a political label. What pops into my mind as I write this is that moving moment at the end of the film on John Forbes Nash when he is asked whether he is sane enough to accept the Nobel. His response (in part) is that (the drugs will do it) he has had to give up his creativity to remain sane. I often feel that the American people have made that sad choice too, though without the excuse of schizophrenia.
Tartarin, I must object strenuously to your baseless accusation we Americans have given up schizophrenia!
timber
timber, I enjoy your sense of humor. Keep it up, please!
c.i.
ci - He can't, the anti-schizophrenia drugs have some unfortunate side effects, if you catch my meaning. (Not to put too fine a point on it, of course... I wouldn't want Timber to get jealous.) :wink:
Side effects? Must we yell "Timber" when wood falls?
Okay, late contribution: am deeply liberal, but in a very touchy-feely kind of way, and I pick and choose from democratic socialism rather than embracing it whole hog.
Thinking about the topic leads me to frustration as I try to sort out the disparity between avowed political philosophy and the actions of the empowered avowers (eh?), but I'll assume for the time being that a politico's word is its (his or her seems a little too human) bond.
The conservative tenet I am most inclined toward is that the government should be no more cumbersome or intrusive than it needs to be to carry out its tasks.
Where I differ is in terms of what those tasks should be, and when they are completed.
Great thread idea. Perhaps as revealing in what wasn't or how little was said in what was and how often...
Perhaps...
pd, That's the reason why timber never goes to visit forests.
c.i. He doesn't know when to fall over.....
We are labellers and category freaks in this country. Artists' opinions on political issues are rarely taken seriously. Plumbers aren't supposed to know about the Bermuda Race or the Kronos. Politicians either have one track minds or are corrupt or both. Intellectuals are dangerous and/or flaky. I miss interdisciplinary thinking (though, at best, it does occur in these discussions). Party labels disappear when one wants them to, but most cling with desperation to their categories -- who is the more serious anarchist, you or me? who the more knowledgeable adherent of Milton Friedman's theories, you or me? Hey, Timber, maybe schizophrenia is the safer choice? Is bipartisanship a symptom?
i'm a liberal, and so am I
Damn, everybody's beating up on me tonight. "Guest of Honor" would be an oxymoron here, huh?
Tartarin, You may have a point ... Bi-Partisan, Bi-Cameral, Bi-Polar ... there may be a connection :wink:
timber
And, timber, there's always bisexual.
c.i.
Wow! I'm learning all kinds of things about timber tonight!
Yeah, I'm really a party sort of guy. :cool:
timber, who supposes he deserves this abuse
I heard tell you're also young and uninformed, timber.
DamnDamnDamn! I've got no secrets at all anymore. Jeez ... word sure gets around!
timber
And, timber, it ain't me that's yapping your secrets. l
c.i.
