Archangel M
Senior Master
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,555
- Reaction score
- 154
[yt]KWcPDQqm6rc[/yt]
I like this guy.
- Thread starter Archangel M
- Start date
I'll vote for him. Wait, he's not running.
The man can talk, I'll give him that.
I actually do agree that everyone needs a sense of their own responsibility and an overly powerful leadership tends to foster a reliance on that leadership to do the 'work' for everyone else - guess that must mean I'm an American Conservative then? :lol:.
Or maybe I'm just a person who has a sense of their own responsibilities?
Whilst it is often argued that everything is politics (and it is the case that politics does impact on more or less everything), allowing politics to become a religion is a very bad idea. That is the impression I get from a good deal of the content of the Study to be honest.
People are best served by eshewing Politics, in the sense of subsuming themselves to a 'party'. Having views on political issues should be a matter of intelligence and personal morals, not acceptance of what a political party says we can choose between.
I think that's the point the chap in the OP made that I disagree with i.e. that a bi-polar, bi-partisan, political system is better than a merry-go-round with more horses on it. Consensus/coalition government is about the best way there is to limit the interference of said government in everyones day-to-day lives.
I actually do agree that everyone needs a sense of their own responsibility and an overly powerful leadership tends to foster a reliance on that leadership to do the 'work' for everyone else - guess that must mean I'm an American Conservative then? :lol:.
Or maybe I'm just a person who has a sense of their own responsibilities?
Whilst it is often argued that everything is politics (and it is the case that politics does impact on more or less everything), allowing politics to become a religion is a very bad idea. That is the impression I get from a good deal of the content of the Study to be honest.
People are best served by eshewing Politics, in the sense of subsuming themselves to a 'party'. Having views on political issues should be a matter of intelligence and personal morals, not acceptance of what a political party says we can choose between.
I think that's the point the chap in the OP made that I disagree with i.e. that a bi-polar, bi-partisan, political system is better than a merry-go-round with more horses on it. Consensus/coalition government is about the best way there is to limit the interference of said government in everyones day-to-day lives.
OP
Archangel M
Senior Master
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,555
- Reaction score
- 154
- Thread Starter
- #4
Huh? Who said that? What I heard was that adding another political party isn't the answer, rather that adhering to conservative principles regardless of your party is the answer. My parents are lifelong Democrats with conservative principles...don't ask me how that is, but it's true.
We heard the same words, mate - I guess we just interpreted them in different ways at first listen.
What I took him to mean was that adding a third party was a schismatic step i.e. he preferred to keep the things the same.
I reckon tho', on reflection, that your take on it was more accurate than mine :nods:.
What I took him to mean was that adding a third party was a schismatic step i.e. he preferred to keep the things the same.
I reckon tho', on reflection, that your take on it was more accurate than mine :nods:.
Nah it makes you a good old fashioned British Liberal! We believe in less government, less involvement in people's lives by the authorities, more personal responsibility. No, it's nothing in common with what the Americans call a liberal.
Even Cameron now is talking about the Liberal Conservative party! :uhohh:
Careful, Suke, you'll be accused of racism for suggesting people "pull themselves up by their bootstraps..."
Yes, in name only, " Democrat or Republican". Yes, with it a 2 party government, but, with that party adhering to public sentiment. A party of the people and for the people.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,929
- Reaction score
- 1,451
:lol: @ Don and Elder :tup:
I was going to say that, aye, pulling myself up by my bootstraps is exactly what I have done with my life but I have to confess that, without that element of socialist policies that has been part of Britain for quite a number of decades, I would not have been able to do it.
It is because when I was a teen I was able to get a grant from the government to attend university that I have been able to climb out of the bottom-of-the-pile economic depths. Same thing when I had my accident and all that I had achieved went down the drain. Without the State supporting me for a while until I got back on my feet I would probably have spiralled back down into the depths.
It does have to be said tho' that those socialist elements, that built a fairer playing field for those of us born poor, have gotten completely out of hand these days - mainly down to the unscrupulous 'gaming' the system. That includes employers as well as those who shy away from work because they can 'earn' more on the dole.
As you can tell (and as Tez has said above) I am Liberal, in the British sense of the political term - which means in the end that a great deal of what the OP commentator said sits very comfortably with me, particular on the matter of personal responsibility. Where I generally tend to part company with the American Conservative platform is where the idea of wider social responsibility is somewhat cast aside in favour of a more sink-or-swim didactic.
I was going to say that, aye, pulling myself up by my bootstraps is exactly what I have done with my life but I have to confess that, without that element of socialist policies that has been part of Britain for quite a number of decades, I would not have been able to do it.
It is because when I was a teen I was able to get a grant from the government to attend university that I have been able to climb out of the bottom-of-the-pile economic depths. Same thing when I had my accident and all that I had achieved went down the drain. Without the State supporting me for a while until I got back on my feet I would probably have spiralled back down into the depths.
It does have to be said tho' that those socialist elements, that built a fairer playing field for those of us born poor, have gotten completely out of hand these days - mainly down to the unscrupulous 'gaming' the system. That includes employers as well as those who shy away from work because they can 'earn' more on the dole.
As you can tell (and as Tez has said above) I am Liberal, in the British sense of the political term - which means in the end that a great deal of what the OP commentator said sits very comfortably with me, particular on the matter of personal responsibility. Where I generally tend to part company with the American Conservative platform is where the idea of wider social responsibility is somewhat cast aside in favour of a more sink-or-swim didactic.
Congratulations, you're a Reagan Republican, i.e., a hand up rather than a hand out...
Last edited:
