mexistaniX
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2012
- Sythe Gold
- 0
- Messages
- 249
A few days ago, I was asked a very cornering question.
Question: Why be a Republican, when Republican policies are the reason this country is in such a horrible state? Capitalism obviously doesn't work, since it only breeds greed, selfishness, and materialism. Also, our bloated military budget (which is also a Republican ideal) is just increasing the debt more and more each day. Not to mention that the Republican Party has been taken over by evangelical Christians who seem to want to turn this country into a Christian theocracy. So why support any of that?
Answer: Well, I am a modern day Republican in the sense that if someone pulled a gun to my head with a lie detector attached to me and asked me what party I would be associated with or support, I would say Republican.
I am opposed to the modern United States’ politics. I refuse to associate myself with a party, hence the reason I find fault and in both parties.
I would like to refer to my political position as moderate, and if a more politically correct term may be used, I am slightly leaning more towards an extremely moderate conservative.
I see you are quite liberal, and I mean no offense to any of your views, but my views are solid as diamond to my mind, as are yours to your own mind.
In order to truly see the problem you must look outside of the boundary that the order of left and right are contained in.
Look at the ghosts of the past, a few notable presidents of the United States. In chronological order of four major ones: Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, & Ronald Reagan. All Republican. But one would be unwise to say that in a time of need, the implementation of their policies was wrong. They helped the country develop and “progress†in their own ways.
I argue not against any party, I only argue against the ignorant mindset that leftists and rightists have that they cannot and will not agree with other sides.
The problem is today, and today surely was not a problem yesterday. You also have to understand that they do not want to turn this country into a Christian theocracy. This is what you would call the “liberal propaganda†(I dislike Conservative propaganda like Fox News, mind you). Rather, society has set itself into so much of a liberal, or left, mindset while the Republican party has remained at the same position for its time. They are evangelical Christians RELATIVE to the position of society.
To further understand what I’m trying to support in my own “moderate†stance, a true extreme conservative standpoint is a Unitarian government, which is representative of perfect order, while a true extreme liberal standpoint is anarchy, which is representative of near compete lack of order. Almost as if the sciences have blessed society with reasoning, Sir Isaac Newton’s third law of motion is that for every action, there is an equal or opposite reaction. Now, the genius he was, he simplified the ways of the how the universe works. Look at Libya, which was ran by a dictatorship, with forced order. Eventually, there became a point where the rule & order was at an unnatural control, so a series of events let off the only way the citizens could express their “liberal†ideas, and that was through a civil war, and nearly left the country in anarchy. Now we look inversely at the situation of a “liberal†government, and to less of an extremity. The aftermath ideas of Libya are eventually going to push right back towards a set of rules and orders, but not to an extreme.
What I am trying to say, is that if one looks right in the middle of conservative and liberal, they find what I like to call the universal harmony of morals and logic. I see no reason to push society one way or another. BUT this perfect middle ground only works in a perfect society.
So this leads me to my final statement about all of this. We need conservatives, and we need liberals. We need Democrats and we need Republicans. A Democrat’s spite for a Republican, and vice versa, allows a system of checks and balances in which ideas do not reach an utmost extreme to the point at which it is almost irreversible without a drastic change, such as heightened order or a revolution. Entropy exists within the bonds of society, and it is this entropy which one should make sure they do not find perfect or completely polar opposite entropy. In an economy, you cannot rely simply on one product to suffice for the survival of a nation, you must equally balance the amount of production of each good, and in turn you can experience a country running on a fully efficient economy. In the same way, we cannot push ourselves so far against one set of ideas so far back that we refute the ideas without looking through multiple perspectives.
In reference to what you have said, capitalism does not work in full, but the government should only set regulation to a certain extent, otherwise you end up in a socialist nation, and this is what Democratic president Bill Clinton did by stopping regulations and deregulating government control of businesses. Only pure capitalism breeds greed, but with only slight regulation, it is fine. The military should not be as bloated as it is, but you have to note that this country only remains at the highest point BECAUSE of the military, which has a shameful budget of the next ten countries’ military budgets combined. But the U.S. has the big guns, and they remain powerful. Look at Europe which liberal Americans view or viewed as progressively liberal. They ended up screwing themselves over with the excess of liberal input and what can be seen as socialist ideals.
Moderation is the key to politics, it is the key to life and a type of universal harmony, I mean it’s how everything works in the world of physics.
We need a bipartisan government. But when the two parties becomes so ignorant as to ignore the moral aspect and the logical aspect of other ideas only because they are from opposing parties, it becomes a problem of society, and it becomes a problem of the government as a whole.
I am not a strategist, so I don’t know what to say about what exactly we’d do, but I have an idea of how things need to work.
Also, I decided a few weeks ago that I am not voting because of this.
Question: Why be a Republican, when Republican policies are the reason this country is in such a horrible state? Capitalism obviously doesn't work, since it only breeds greed, selfishness, and materialism. Also, our bloated military budget (which is also a Republican ideal) is just increasing the debt more and more each day. Not to mention that the Republican Party has been taken over by evangelical Christians who seem to want to turn this country into a Christian theocracy. So why support any of that?
Answer: Well, I am a modern day Republican in the sense that if someone pulled a gun to my head with a lie detector attached to me and asked me what party I would be associated with or support, I would say Republican.
I am opposed to the modern United States’ politics. I refuse to associate myself with a party, hence the reason I find fault and in both parties.
I would like to refer to my political position as moderate, and if a more politically correct term may be used, I am slightly leaning more towards an extremely moderate conservative.
I see you are quite liberal, and I mean no offense to any of your views, but my views are solid as diamond to my mind, as are yours to your own mind.
In order to truly see the problem you must look outside of the boundary that the order of left and right are contained in.
Look at the ghosts of the past, a few notable presidents of the United States. In chronological order of four major ones: Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, & Ronald Reagan. All Republican. But one would be unwise to say that in a time of need, the implementation of their policies was wrong. They helped the country develop and “progress†in their own ways.
I argue not against any party, I only argue against the ignorant mindset that leftists and rightists have that they cannot and will not agree with other sides.
The problem is today, and today surely was not a problem yesterday. You also have to understand that they do not want to turn this country into a Christian theocracy. This is what you would call the “liberal propaganda†(I dislike Conservative propaganda like Fox News, mind you). Rather, society has set itself into so much of a liberal, or left, mindset while the Republican party has remained at the same position for its time. They are evangelical Christians RELATIVE to the position of society.
To further understand what I’m trying to support in my own “moderate†stance, a true extreme conservative standpoint is a Unitarian government, which is representative of perfect order, while a true extreme liberal standpoint is anarchy, which is representative of near compete lack of order. Almost as if the sciences have blessed society with reasoning, Sir Isaac Newton’s third law of motion is that for every action, there is an equal or opposite reaction. Now, the genius he was, he simplified the ways of the how the universe works. Look at Libya, which was ran by a dictatorship, with forced order. Eventually, there became a point where the rule & order was at an unnatural control, so a series of events let off the only way the citizens could express their “liberal†ideas, and that was through a civil war, and nearly left the country in anarchy. Now we look inversely at the situation of a “liberal†government, and to less of an extremity. The aftermath ideas of Libya are eventually going to push right back towards a set of rules and orders, but not to an extreme.
What I am trying to say, is that if one looks right in the middle of conservative and liberal, they find what I like to call the universal harmony of morals and logic. I see no reason to push society one way or another. BUT this perfect middle ground only works in a perfect society.
So this leads me to my final statement about all of this. We need conservatives, and we need liberals. We need Democrats and we need Republicans. A Democrat’s spite for a Republican, and vice versa, allows a system of checks and balances in which ideas do not reach an utmost extreme to the point at which it is almost irreversible without a drastic change, such as heightened order or a revolution. Entropy exists within the bonds of society, and it is this entropy which one should make sure they do not find perfect or completely polar opposite entropy. In an economy, you cannot rely simply on one product to suffice for the survival of a nation, you must equally balance the amount of production of each good, and in turn you can experience a country running on a fully efficient economy. In the same way, we cannot push ourselves so far against one set of ideas so far back that we refute the ideas without looking through multiple perspectives.
In reference to what you have said, capitalism does not work in full, but the government should only set regulation to a certain extent, otherwise you end up in a socialist nation, and this is what Democratic president Bill Clinton did by stopping regulations and deregulating government control of businesses. Only pure capitalism breeds greed, but with only slight regulation, it is fine. The military should not be as bloated as it is, but you have to note that this country only remains at the highest point BECAUSE of the military, which has a shameful budget of the next ten countries’ military budgets combined. But the U.S. has the big guns, and they remain powerful. Look at Europe which liberal Americans view or viewed as progressively liberal. They ended up screwing themselves over with the excess of liberal input and what can be seen as socialist ideals.
Moderation is the key to politics, it is the key to life and a type of universal harmony, I mean it’s how everything works in the world of physics.
We need a bipartisan government. But when the two parties becomes so ignorant as to ignore the moral aspect and the logical aspect of other ideas only because they are from opposing parties, it becomes a problem of society, and it becomes a problem of the government as a whole.
I am not a strategist, so I don’t know what to say about what exactly we’d do, but I have an idea of how things need to work.
Also, I decided a few weeks ago that I am not voting because of this.
