Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by Mac1958, May 13, 2017.
fox balanced, joke of the century, fox is direct opposite of msnbc nothing more.
Yep, I really did need to tell you that. Oh, and BTW, a google search would have given you all you needed to know about east Palo Alto, so I'm still not sure you attended Stanford, but I'm satisfied you at least know how to do some research before posting.
"Doctrinaires leftists"? "Multiculturalism destroyed social justice"? You need some explaining to do. I would apply the use of the word "doctrinaire" to the GOP of today - Ryan's drum beat for the conservative agenda for example. I doubt very much a moderate Democrat, left of center by definition, has a matrix in mind when discussing issues. The D's have not singled out individuals as DINO's when they question what they believe are wrong-headed ideas.
Most Democrats I know, and D Pols I have listened to, believe in equal opportunity and equality before the law; most of the latter vote that way. Is that what you mean by "Doctrinaire leftists"?
I believe in the classic liberal principle of a social contract - does that make a leftist"? Does supporting and having empathy for other human beings and animals, protecting our environment and rejecting authoritarianism make a doctrinaire leftist?
I learned that the simple explanation for using labels was best illustrated as the Face of a clock: Going clockwise from the 12, we see Republicans, moderate, conservative and radical to the 6 and Democrats as revolutionary, progressive/liberal and moderate back up to the 12.
Radicals and Revolutionaries reject compromise, they represent the doctrinaire set, and at their extreme, the idiot fringe. We see that mostly in the minor political movements, but over the past decade or so, the GOP has tossed their moderate members under the bus, have rejected compromise and debate and are now led by an incompetent authoritarian. Congress has now rejected checks and balances as a threat to their agenda, and that should scare all of us. See my signature line, and think about it.
Well, Hugh Davis Graham's history on how politics morphed the Civil Rights movement to fit bureaucratic and Party political needs is a good start for those interested, very detailed and well written. I was surprised by a lot it, and I thought I had read extensively and followed the money enough to have most of it down, but I found I was wrong and only partially informed; the insider politics was some truly insane and bizarre stuff for us unwashed Deplorables out here in fly over country, while it appears to be 'normal' for Washington and state houses.
I'm not sure about college campuses per se, but a certain sort of Manichaean mind set is pretty much hard wired into our two party political system where we are encouraged to see either/or rather than shades of grey. Good grief, all the authoritarian leftists who call you a right winger for not being extreme enough attests to that.
I also think that the more chaotic and technological the world become, the more people have a need for tribe. Since there are two competing tribes in this country, people chose one or the other and then simply go about the business of soldiering.
As far as College campuses, it's the social sciences leading the charge. Professors with bloated egos do not allow for critical though, as they punish those who disagree. The need for good grades forces students to accept the prevailing orthodoxy, and there are few out there with the balls to point out that the emperor is naked.
Good stuff. My guess is that also, the exponential proliferation of "media" sources are the primary driver here. The sheer volume of them have pushed the two sides further and further apart, exacerbating the "us vs. them" thing to an insane degree. There is simply little room (or worse, demand) for curiosity, humility or pragmatism. That's why I don't see how this gets fixed.
You think CNN and Rush are opposite equals and neither has a grasp on reality?
Separate names with a comma.