Jump to content

For all the political activists - our community discussion


Guest $iLk
 Share

Recommended Posts

Okay guys, I've been doing some thinking on what would make our political arguments much more appealing and fun.

First off, all defined members of our recent arguments, (Me, Aramike, Menchise, Jaguar, etc.) could list ourselves in this thread, along with a special sig we can manually add in our political threads.

EXAMPLE:

Dan "$iLk" Cooper

The "Compassionate" Conservative

kind of like Savage!

Anyway we can put our bottom line affiliations, etc. so that we can be easily identified by liberals as "nazi bigots" or something.

And in the spirit of keeping our debates more orderly, we will work out a once a (month?) thread - topic decided on by passing around the thread leadership in a manner such as -

Menchise starts thread (November Political Thread - (topic) ) , Next month, $iLk starts thread, (December Political Thread - Is Santa Claus a commie spy? , and move on in that manner.

Anyway we will be able to focus our massive intelligence in one thread at a time, with certain rules which would be placed at the top of each thread by the thread starter-

1. Anyone is free to participate, but please keep tradition by making 30 paragraph replies to each post (actually I'm kidding, just no single posts that say "I agree totally" without throwing in some more info as to why you agree, etc.

2. Posting should be made in a matter consistent with a discussion; i.e. I ask a question, the next person should throw out their answer, if they support my opinion they should tell why and perhaps throw in some more info as to what their stand is on it etc. If they disagree, they should answer the question, failure to answer as the discussion moves on will be kept on record and a final score will be tallied.

3. Score will be based on arguments that are not defeated. 1 point if no one dissents with your opinion, or if someone does they are soundly trumped and admit defeat. 1 point if someone moves on to another topic without answering your question.

4. Grammar grammar grammar, actually us usuals are pretty good at it, but lets be careful not to misform our posts. We should explain what we are meaning throughout the post. If an opinion, please start your post with IMHO, if you are simply reporting undenied FACT, then you may indicate on your post.

5. I know it is easy to find certain things that corroborate your argument, but keep in mind to address points that overwhelmingly defeat your one point without ignoring them.

6. We are civilized, though some of us sometimes get frustrated. Hopefully the rules allow us to keep a proper format and tone to avoid driving someone out of an argument. Political rhetoric is good, but please give facts to back statements.

---------------------

So what do you guys think about this? Any opinion like mine on solidifying our debate community and organizing it? Kind of like that CNN show crossfire...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hehe. Interesting, although I have a few things to say.

First, a little nitpick: debating is not political activism.

Second, I'm not so sure about monthly debates since a lot of issues arise spontaneously from current news. It would also imply a time limit for each thread.

Third, in order for the scoring system to work properly, there needs to be some guidelines about what constitutes an argument.

Overall, I don't mind.

I've already come up with my political sig:

Nick Menchise

Socialist and Economic Democrat (don't call me a liberal!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well my whole idea is that the monthly debates would be a GENERAL Theme - gun control, communism, telitubbies, whatever.

Current issues such as something that happens still get their own thread.

Any more ideas and I'll start formulating a program?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

800th Post!

Once again let me compound on the whole idea of the thing.

These monthly debates would be general themes and not based on a specific event although examples of current events can be listed in proving a point. Of course these would be slower threads because we need to have some rules for bibliography quotes or what book you got your info or what webpage, etc., that way we can all learn more about specific subjects.

I wouldn't want to pick a subject we are all overwhelmingly against such as slavery reparations because I don't think any of us are for that, but something like (DEFINE LIBERALISM) would be a good argument for Menchise. We could delve deep into the problem and have a good argument I think.

Also Economic arguments like the Microsoft thread going on now is good.

More ideas?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldnt giving yourself titles such as "liberal" and "socialist" bias you against other posters, I know how some of you hate certain schools of politcal beliefs.

For example, if I said I was liberal(Im not even sure what that means), wouldnt some of you find it hard to listen to what I have to say without discounting it off hand.

Besides, Im not even sure what my title would be. Are there any tests out there I could take

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Discounting beliefs based on the poster's political orientation is not debating. If it was, I wouldn't bother responding to any of the posts written by $iLk, Aramike, or Jaguar.

As for finding out where your views are on the political spectrum, I suggest reading about each of the political ideologies and see which ones you agree or disagree with.

[ 11-16-2001: Message edited by: Menchise ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You want a test?

Anyone who want's to find out what they are click there.

Alright guys we can use this thread to solidify our new sigs or whatever and to work these rules out. Any changes? Clarifications? Let me know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

I am always surprised by that quiz, it says that I am a Hardcore libertarian, WOW, and I thought I was a constitutionalist!!

If you ask libertarians they say they are the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:


Originally posted by Menchise:

Discounting beliefs based on the poster's political orientation is not debating. If it was, I wouldn't bother responding to any of the posts written by $iLk, Aramike, or Jaguar.

As for finding out where your views are on the political spectrum, I suggest reading about each of the political ideologies and see which ones you agree or disagree with.

[ 11-16-2001: Message edited by: Menchise ]


Yep. I may call him a dirty little socialist pig, but that's just bantor.

We debate issues on their merits, not the credentials of those who bring them to the table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not so much a more thourough test as it is a communist indoctrination ritual.

Let's see how I do, I'm taking it now...

It says I'm an authoritarian/libertarian located in the authoritarian right...

cross.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah those test arent great, but anyway after alot of reading, I have a definition to put to my political beliefs. I knew I wasnt conservative before I read anything, and even moreso after. Socialism isnt quite me, so Im one of those Liberals you love to hate

I have a feeling that most people on this board who debate in these political threads are on the conservative side, or am I wrong?

[ 11-16-2001: Message edited by: TRD ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

I think Heinlein said it best though, "Rational Anarchist"


Some of his characters indeed were rational anarchists, any laws they didn't like, they ignored. Pretty easy..

Actually Heinlein, from what I understand was more like the characters in Number of the beast, the old Doctor, and of course Lazarus Long, at least that is what he claimed.

I am close in that regard, love Lazarus, although he can be a bit cloe minded at times. but then again, so am I!! LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

I am close in that regard, love Lazarus, although he can be a bit cloe minded at times. but then again, so am I!! LOL

An old friend of mine used to have a saying:

quote:

I'm very open Minded in my narrow point of view.

Yes many of his Characters were Rational Anarchists, the one in particular I was thinking of is Professor Bernardo de la Paz from The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. If you havn't read that one do so, it is an excellent book. (well... that would Imply that his others were not, and I feel ALL of his were so, hell just read em all!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

You want a test?

Anyone who want's to find out what they are click there.

How ironic. I put a link to that quiz in my last post, but then I decided to remove it.

It has overly brief descriptions of each political philosophy and the percentage scores are biased toward libertarians (it's a libertarian website). According to the quiz, I'm a left-liberal (very American definition of liberal). It also says that socialists are authoritarian, which is not necessarily true (it depends on which branch of socialist thought you agree with).

quote:

Here's probably a more indepth test, though I think it may be British based.

Hmm...haven't tried that one yet.

quote:

Yep. I may call him a dirty little socialist pig, but that's just bantor.

Hey! You never called me that (at least not in the forums).

quote:

I have a feeling that most people on this board who debate in these political threads are on the conservative side, or am I wrong?

That depends on your definition of conservative.

That reminds me, if you want to read more about political orientations, there are some descriptions of Liberalism and Conservatism somewhere on the third page of a thread called "Continuing the Debate".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just took the Political Compass test.

It says I'm left-libertarian

Economic Left/Right: -7.00

Authoritarian/Libertarian: -6.41

Although it's more sophisticated than the previous quiz, it's still not very accurate, because the creators of that test are imposing their own definitions of political ideologies on the left-right-libertarian-authoritarian grid. For example, it labels Communism as left-authoritarian because that's how they perceive Stalin. The fact is that Stalin is not an accurate representation of communists, and communism is not necessarily authoritarian.

[ 11-16-2001: Message edited by: Menchise ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

it's still not very accurate, because the creators of that test are imposing their own definitions of political ideologies

Does anyone have the right to impose their own beliefs on their own creations?

I wouldn't say that it isn't accurate simply because I disagree with the creator. What will it take? Must all creators impose your beliefs before anything is considered accurate?

FYI: I took the first test and I came up Centrist, but the dot was leaning closer to the Conservative square than anywhere else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...