Probably his party has forbidden him to answer your question. Moreover, today there is party conference again.
I’m kind of insulted. Why don’t you think I’m part of a political party?
Do you really know that I think you’re not a “part of a political party”?
I think that the defitions of the political ideologies are two much twisted in this thread.
Marx was not liberal by any streach of imagination. He was just the opposite. He believed in equality but equality is not liberalism. Capitilism is far more liberal than Marx, in the essence. One can make choice in the capitilism and democracy but not with Marx.
Socialism is liberal to the majority (average or poor). Capitilism is liberal to minority (rich and rare), though less than socialism. Thus, both are strict and liberal at the same time but to the different sections of the society. The crux of the issue lies in striking the right balance. Both extreames are dangerous thus should be avoided. An ideal government must be liberal when it is required but also strict too when it is required.
Leftist slightly misunderstand socialism. Socialism puts some burden on the citizen too, but those very people, who get benifit of the socialism, refuse to own their share of burden. They want that the government alone should own all the responsibilities and let them live freely as they like. Rightiest do not expect much from the government and do not want much interfere from it too.
People become socialist very easily if it is about receiving anything but become hardcore capitilst when it comes to giving something. An economically social becomes cultural capitilist when it comes to him. At that time, he does not want any interfere from the government.
Give me all what i want but do not ask me what i am doing with that.
That is the precise definition of a typical leftist or socialist nowdays. They have been forgotten that socialism deamds return gifts too from all the invitiees to the party.
with love,
sanjay
That’s right.
|_____ Thesis |__ Antithesis __| Synthesis ______|
|___ Liberalism |__ Egalitarianism __| Fraternitism ____|
|| Socialism ___| Globalism _____|
|| Communism |___________|
This “isms” are totalitarianisms.
Well, that’s even more insulting. You think I’m a party member yet you only call out Ucci? 
Have I ever said whether or not you are a member of a party?
Why do you always ask absurd questions, Gib?
By the way:
A “free market” means an absolute free market. That’s logical, even tautological. The “liberal humans” want a “free market”. - Okay, here is one:
When will the next “liberal” party conference start, Gib?
Either way I’m insulted.
That’s a big croc.
Your question is a good one for Eric (it’s his quote).
And do you understand what’s meant by “liberal”?
…
(BTW, where do you get all your disturbing pics/videos?)
Which “videos” do you mean, Gib?
And do you understand what’s meant by “liberal”?
Except for the ‘subtle’ part, yeah. Seems to me that all institutions of civil society from The Roman Catholic Church to the Boy Scouts do that, taken broadly. That I believe such institutions are important and good is why I’m a conservative and not a libertarian I suppose. That I prefer organizations that don’t have the legal power to tax, imprison or execute dissenters is why I’m not a liberal. Do you mean it in some more sinister way that doesn’t apply as broadly as what I describe? The good instututions that do this sort of thing are straightforward about their goals, and are working for the good of the people they are influencing.
For example here and here. And they are not disturbing because they are very important, Gib.
B.t.w: Why are you insulted, boy? Is that the reason why you are compelled to insult? Are you a member of a party?
By “subtle”, I mean influence that is unknown to the person, thereby causing their will to become what the influencer wanted without the person knowing why or who. Unconscious, unaware influence is more commonly known as “hypnosis”.
A young child has no choice but to be influenced by things without his awareness. Atheists complain that churches do that intentionally (as though governments don’t). Propaganda is specifically aimed at that purpose.
For a democracy, or any democratic assembly such as a simple jury, to function free of coercion, the members must be free of subtle influence. A governance trying to obtain and maintain complete control is too tempted to avoid engaging in subtle influence. Just about all politics these days is entirely a competition of subtle influence. The media does nothing else. An unaware populous is preferred by totalitarian governance, “liberal/communistic/socialistic”. And thus the democratic process is dysfunctional.
If there is any use in trying to “reform democracy”, it would have to entail a freedom from subtle, hypnotic influences, enhancing public awareness rather than media subterfuge and mainstream propaganda. That is why the media in the USA was to be free and uncontrolled in the USA. Unfortunately, in the USA, media is not at all free, nor film making or school teaching. Thus in the USA, there isn’t anything close to true democracy, but rather merely the attempt to be the greater devil of influence (just as Europe was before constitutionalism).
People in the USA want for only what they have been subtly influenced into wanting, these days. And the intention is to make it far more so such that literally no one wants for anything that hasn’t been designed before hand for them to want. And that includes a specific amount of dissidents to give the impression of uninfluenced will. That is what socialism is really all about, “the power to cause popular passion in chosen directions”.
And thus reproduction choices, ARE being controlled. But a part of controlling them is giving the impression that they are not controlled and in need of more governing. The arguing between the Yin and Yang of Liberal vs Conservative, Democrat vs Republican, is a passion-engine used to feed and create a subtle “god”. It is very largely mere distraction to allow for subtle influences to go undetected and thus effective.
Yes, those are the same videos I linked to in my last post. Glad we’re on the same page.
Oh, they’re disturbing all right–I had one of those it-can’t-be-real moments when I watched the Swedish Feminist blow a couple of caps into the guy’s skull.
I went to a party the other day… it was pretty wild and crazy, got really hosed… does that make me a “member” of it?
To start: I am sorry for the lengthy delay in response… School, both for my daughter and I restarted, it’s been taking up my time…
Ok, so if this is not passed as a law, that we simply get rid of the tax credits with for people with multiple children, then leave people along. I can live with this and I would see it as the free market, possibly, working to reduce the amount of children people have. If this is what you mean, I guess I’m on board.
If a law is passed, I’m against it…
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7cry-4pyy8[/youtube]
The only real problem I’ve seen is that you have not really explained clearly what you mean… Bogging us down in attempting to understand what you mean…
Yes, and that is a lot of innuendo… What kind of parties do you go to?
Oh, yeah. That tendency is my primary criticism of the left- they lie like dogs and deny what they really want because they need popular approval and their agenda wouldn’t sell if it was straightforwardly presented.
Mostly kids parties, actually. The only sense I got “hosed” was getting sprayed by the sprinklers.
I think I might be willing to join The Kid Party… As long as their policies were along the Conservative lines. How does your Kid Party feel about the second amendment?