The new Democratic party. What will it look like?

Liberal progressive democrats will remain a minority political party, their total numbers are shrinking.

1 Reply

@Frugal1,

You wanna cite some figures? Remember Hillary got nearly three million more votesc than Trump. T web

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Face it, you are a minority party even when you factor in illegal aliens.

1 Reply

@Frugal1,

This is another totally fallacious conspiralcy theorist meme. Unddocumented aliens are paranoid about bringing any attention on themselves. The last thing they would do is try to vote illegally. Trump is passing gas. Having trgouble hano8dling the clear fact that a majority did not want Trump but he was foistedü on us anyway, frug?

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

It's true, the democrat party is in complete disarray.
They are blaming everything & everyone for their failures.
Their only hope is to look inward for the root of all of their failure.

0 Replies

If the democrat party refuses to tell 0bama that it's all his fault, they
will never recover from the rejection & repudiation they have suffered.

It looks like the democrat party will forever be the party of disarray.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

Quote:

I don't believe human nature has changed significantly in the last four thousand years. Just brak out a copy of Aesop's Fables to observe a record of the foibles of human nature 2,500 years ago and try to find anything that has changed.

Quote:

The observable fact is the complexities of human nature far exceed the intellectual reach of the thinkers and dreamers, from Plato to Marx and even modern progressives who have made the attempts

This is your problem. You're looking at ideals, what is in the abstract, rather than looking at the specifics of a problem and its potential solutions..

I would rather not to have to attach any 'isms' in the working of a solution. Unfortunately, it comes with the territory of language and we have no choice..

So, while I do think you can have a general ideal as your guide, such as a notion of equality, goodness, fairness etc..things that can be queried against to gauge if your 'ideals' have any merit, bringing to me ideas of Marx, Lenin, Plato, Frugal etc.. falls on my deaf ears.

To whit: I don't look for ism's to solve my problems. There are specific problems, they can be addressed specifically. Just about every gov't has a piece of paper that includes some kind of vision that guarantees its people 'the best'. Fair enough, now hold that paper to its promises and where it doesn't square up, you make the effort to make it so..

btw, I have no idea what the hell you mean when you talk about human nature relative to this conversation. It is completely out of place and assumes far too much about what that nature is.

When you ask 'what has changed', you know a lot has changed for various societies. Ask the slaves. It may be within human being's capacity as a smoldering ember waiting for the right atmosphere to turn into a fire, but that doesn't mean that that capacity, will, defacto, manifest. This is ridiculousness beyond the extreme and conflates the issue. What exactly are you saying: No utopia? Damn! And I thought that was possible!

2 Replies

@catbeasy,

Quote:

When you ask 'what has changed', you know a lot has changed for various societies. Ask the slaves.

Muslim countries enslave millions of human beings, they have owned slaves for over 1000 years... go ask their slaves what has changed.

0 Replies

@catbeasy,

You appear not to have understood anything I wrote, including the very clear passages you quted here.

If you don't know what is meant by the term 'human nature' that is your problem not mine.

As for the rest it appears you have it all precisely backwards. My argument was against the generalizations and abstractions regarding human behaviour so avidly applied by progressives and other advocates of group identities, not for them.

In particular I cannot make any logical, or even grammatical, sense out of the following passage of yours;

Quote:

So, while I do think you can have a general ideal as your guide, such as a notion of equality, goodness, fairness etc..things that can be queried against to gauge if your 'ideals' have any merit, bringing to me ideas of Marx, Lenin, Plato, Frugal etc.. falls on my deaf ears.

To whit: I don't look for ism's to solve my problems. There are specific problems, they can be addressed specifically. Just about every gov't has a piece of paper that includes some kind of vision that guarantees its people 'the best'. Fair enough, now hold that paper to its promises and where it doesn't square up, you make the effort to make it so..

1 Reply

Trump and Hillary fans? Do you want a good laugh?

Hillary and Bill are going to attend Trumps inauguration? It is nice to see good friends make up.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Quote:

As for the rest it appears you have it all precisely backwards. My argument was against the generalizations and abstractions regarding human behaviour so avidly applied by progressives and other advocates of group identities, not for them.

Your argument appeared to me to state that 'human nature' was the same throughout the ages and therefore no matter what was applied, nothing could be done to change anything..

My retort was that I had no idea what you meant by stating that. Are you saying that because whatever you think human nature is that nothing will change?

So, if I misunderstood your point, it's because to me you were conflating the idea of human nature precluding change and what kind of change, if any, ideology can bring to the table. Here, it seems you were in fact, bringing up an abstraction to apply to something - politics in this case..

And regarding 'human nature', it can be brought to the table in general terms, that I agree with (we all need, love, freedom, care, we're social beings etc). What I don't understand is your invoking of it as a reason why particular political 'things' won't work. This is why I said I reserve specifics for the challenge of 'human nature' and political things.

So, does the soviet union promote human nature? Which policies of that said erstwhile nation are we talking about? What aspects of human nature? What are issues of ideology versus implementation? Did various sectors of the USSR have the same ideology but the actual implementation differed?

I would applaud your use of human nature only as an ideological litmus test for what actually occurs. And even then it must be treated carefully because what is actually done and the ideology behind it may be different things..

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

The Clinton's are irrelevant, and they are desperate.

This is an effort to save face globally, not with Trump.

2 Replies

@Frugal1,

Quote:

The Clinton's are irrelevant, and they are desperate.

This is an effort to save face globally, not with Trump.

You don't think it has anything to do with their family's long standing friendship?

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

No, it has everything to do with the Clinton's big money lifestyle... the Clinton's are running out of money.

1 Reply

@Frugal1,

why shouldnt she attend. She garnered the majority of all the citizen votes than the Dumpster?

In Delaware we have "Return Day" in which the winner and the loser of an election ride together in a parade in Downstate Georgetown.
Gore attended Bush's, McCain attended Obama's.

3 Replies

@farmerman,

Everybody should attend, it's a celebration!

1 Reply

@Frugal1,

More than hlf the US voters disagree with you. Be careful what youve wished for, hes all yours now.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

We survived 8 years of the worst president in this nations history, and put a
stop to 0bama & friends spreading the misery around. It's time to celebrate.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

why shouldnt she attend. She garnered the majority of all the citizen votes than the Dumpster?

In Delaware we have "Return Day" in which the winner and the loser of an election ride together in a parade in Downstate Georgetown.
Gore attended Bush's, McCain attended Obama's.

Do you expect Obama to attend Trump's ?

0 Replies

@catbeasy,

catbeasy wrote:

Your argument appeared to me to state that 'human nature' was the same throughout the ages and therefore no matter what was applied, nothing could be done to change anything..

I said that the basic complexities and contradictions inherent in human nature have not detectably changed throughought the course of history. I did not say that "nothing could be done to change anything": those were your words , not mine. I was clear in my referenced to Aesop and ancient literature, but you appear to have ignored the obvious meaning.

catbeasy wrote:

My retort was that I had no idea what you meant by stating that. Are you saying that because whatever you think human nature is that nothing will change?

Do you have any knowledge or understanding of human history? Do you know why Shakespeare's plays are still read today? Nothing in Denmark today is much like the environment attending Hamlet five centuries ago, but the psychological and morasl dilemmas facing him are relevant today.

catbeasy wrote:

So, if I misunderstood your point, it's because to me you were conflating the idea of human nature precluding change and what kind of change, if any, ideology can bring to the table. Here, it seems you were in fact, bringing up an abstraction to apply to something - politics in this case..

You did misunderstand, and I didn't conflate anything. I merely assumed you understood a very fundamental fact of history - namely that the human situation and all it's contradicvctions hasn't changed significantly despite all the many changes in our material world.

catbeasy wrote:

So, does the soviet union promote human nature? Which policies of that said erstwhile nation are we talking about? What aspects of human nature? What are issues of ideology versus implementation? Did various sectors of the USSR have the same ideology but the actual implementation differed?

I have no idea what you mean by the phrase "promote human nature". The fact is that both Karl Marx and V.I. Lenin believed they could indeed change human nature and create a "new Socialist man " (their phrase). After the slaughter of about 15 million Russians, Ukranians, Tatars, Poles and Lithuanians and the wasted lives of two unfortunate generations, it turned out they were wrong. The Soviet ideology and the authoritatrian socialism that was its mechanism proved to be incompatible with the enduring facts human nature, and the system they created collapsed as a direct result of that contradiction.

This is all very basic stuff.

1 Reply

The new Democratic party. What will it look like?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know