Wisconsin Revolt
- Thread starter Carne Seca
- Start date
BudMcLovin
Active Member
You have no idea how I feel about personal conservation. You just assumed because I don’t like the government cock in my mouth, like you do, that I’m for wasteful use of resources. And I’m the dumbass. Enjoy that cock meat sandwich.
BudMcLovin
Active Member
I have no illusion about private industry. They dont hide their motives, they want to make money. To assume otherwise is just stupid. They cant force me to participate in any market I dont want to. Government on the other hand is the only entity that can force you to participate and routinely hides its motives under the illusion of a helping hand.
Ummm...its pretty obvious how you feel about conservation if you take issue with regulations requiring low flow toilets. Personal freedom is all fine and dandy except when allowing people to do whatever they want runs the risk of everyone else running out of drinkable water.
"To begin to show that "classic" liberals are just liberals operating in a different socio-political environment, we need a definition that could plausible cover both groups. Wolfe provides a really good one: "As many people as possible should have as much say as is feasible over the direction their lives will take."
In a radio interview Wolfe once gave, he highlighted the concept of autonomy as vital to liberalism. It is distinct (ironically considering the etymology of the word) from "liberty" (or "freedom"). I have never liked the word liberty. Perhaps it is because those who extol it most often seem to be referring to the liberty of a predator to consume prey. What of the liberty of the prey not to be eaten? Liberty and freedom are negative concepts. They imply merely the absence of formal restraint (usually by the state). However autonomy is a richer and more complete concept. It is akin to the distinction Martin Luther King Jr. once drew between peace that was merely the absence of violence, and peace which contained the presence of justice. Thus it is not merely enough to remove the chains that bind humanity, if they are left destitute in the street to wander aimlessly and hungry. Autonomy requires the capacity to pursue goals. It is still individualistic, but allows for the real support all of us need from without to make any of those goals a reality.
A shorter definition from Wolfe's might be "As many people as possible should have as much autonomy as feasible." Indeed, Wolfe has probably said as much, and likely uses the longer version as the word autonomy requires explanation. Much more can be said about this, and I think there are even other valid (probably longer) definitions of liberalism possible, but this one satisfies my need. For one thing it should be evident that conservatives cannot really claim to exist under this definition. The long history of conservativism, as Phil Agre wrote in a famous piece, is one of hierarchy and inequality. But what about libertarians? How are they distinct from this?" - Daniel De Groot (emphasis added)
Taken from a diary entry: "One liberalism through the ages" on openleft.com
edit: here's the link http://www.openleft.com/diary/17559/one-liberalism-through-the-ages
really really good read
In a radio interview Wolfe once gave, he highlighted the concept of autonomy as vital to liberalism. It is distinct (ironically considering the etymology of the word) from "liberty" (or "freedom"). I have never liked the word liberty. Perhaps it is because those who extol it most often seem to be referring to the liberty of a predator to consume prey. What of the liberty of the prey not to be eaten? Liberty and freedom are negative concepts. They imply merely the absence of formal restraint (usually by the state). However autonomy is a richer and more complete concept. It is akin to the distinction Martin Luther King Jr. once drew between peace that was merely the absence of violence, and peace which contained the presence of justice. Thus it is not merely enough to remove the chains that bind humanity, if they are left destitute in the street to wander aimlessly and hungry. Autonomy requires the capacity to pursue goals. It is still individualistic, but allows for the real support all of us need from without to make any of those goals a reality.
A shorter definition from Wolfe's might be "As many people as possible should have as much autonomy as feasible." Indeed, Wolfe has probably said as much, and likely uses the longer version as the word autonomy requires explanation. Much more can be said about this, and I think there are even other valid (probably longer) definitions of liberalism possible, but this one satisfies my need. For one thing it should be evident that conservatives cannot really claim to exist under this definition. The long history of conservativism, as Phil Agre wrote in a famous piece, is one of hierarchy and inequality. But what about libertarians? How are they distinct from this?" - Daniel De Groot (emphasis added)
Taken from a diary entry: "One liberalism through the ages" on openleft.com
edit: here's the link http://www.openleft.com/diary/17559/one-liberalism-through-the-ages
really really good read
Was this directed towards me? I assume you are talking about my comments on how the US has its used military/intelligence agencies and money to support US friendly dictators and open up markets, and has generally not been used in the defense of the homeland since WWII.
http://www.military-veterans-for-ju...tion=com_content&view=article&id=10&Itemid=13
MrDank007
Well-Known Member
I think they think money falls out of the sky
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
No I was referring to your lies about the government doing a bang up job 'protecting' our water and food. I was also referring to the other lies and spin you've put out.
The Clean Air Acts, and Clean Water Acts are some of the greatest achievements our democracy has produced through legislation. The USDA and FDA were/are the most necessary government programs that exist, whose positive impacts(especially when they were first created) and benefit for our society are only rivaled by OASDI and SSI.
It is because of corporate regulatory capture and obstructionism by conservative politicians that regulation hasn't been allowed to improve and adapt to the 21st century. You don't fix the government by giving up control of it to corporations who are beholden to no one and driven only by profits, and not what is good for society.
part of the law that creates the FDA also forces the FDA to ignore or consider innaccurate, unreliable and false reports that somehow argue that Schedule 1 drugs have pharmaceutical benefits.
it's not the FDA's fault. it's the law that empowers the FDA and DEA that's the problem.
it's not the FDA's fault. it's the law that empowers the FDA and DEA that's the problem.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
let's sidetrack the ever living shit out of this thread!
snow on the gorund. it snowed 3 days ago. it is rare that we get snow in portland, and rarer still that is stays on the ground for so long. very unusual cold streak we are having right now.
i pruned the rose bushes last week thinking that the coldest weather passed. i was wrong. new buds are doing fine, luckily.
the primrose is not doing so well. its soil is frozen solid.
hyacinth planted by previous owner(s) is popping through.
[magnolia tree is showing blooms. this is the best predictor of spring.
chickens are chickening. i want warmer weather for more eggs!
i built a new veg space. this should make 2011 very green
The FDA won't even look at cannabis to treat medical conditions. That alone tells me how great the FDA is
It's called regulatory capture.
So you are saying the benefit the armed forces has provided to the poor over the past 50 years is cheap gas??? Are you insane?
You are openly saying you support the use of our military to pillage resources of nations around the world so we can have cheaper gas??
Maybe we wouldn't be in the mess we are in now if instead of invading country after country and setting up puppet governments to open up markets for us we should have invested that money in alternative fuel sources.
And again, the average citizen benefits from cheap oil a LOT LOT less than the captains of industries.
No, in many drought stricken regions of the world, water doesn't "just" fall out of the sky.