Politics of SWRP

[Grumpy Panda]

I'll admit that things are changing and I really dislike change. It's not that I dislike the groups, but my personality type very much likes stable environments and consistency. So, I suppose I'll try to sit back and see how things go. I am very skeptical regardless. Usually I am very resistant to change until proven good to me and I find a way to reconcile myself to it. Here is hoping things get better. For everyone.

[Apillis]

Not to pick on you or anything, but that's a sentiment that a large amount of conservatives, and especially within the Republican party has. And it's the biggest problem they have as a political movement. Because the focus is too much on individualism and not humanism.

I mean, look at each of those demographics I mentioned in my prior post. I left one out, which was also historic land-marking, which is 73% of Asian voters voted for Obama. But think about each of those demographics, each of those cultures have very, very strong sense of community--a bit more so than "white America" does. So they're far more likely to act on community driven policy. And while they support individual freedoms, when they see local, state, and federal government community policies, programs, and apparati being threatened under the guise of so-called "individual freedom", they think to themselves "%@#$ you". Because they will see it as an aspect of their community being threatened by way of losing opportunities to uplift themselves.

For example, Planned Parenthood, when Republicans start screaming to have that defunded and abolished--women from the "minority" demographics get reactionary to that. Because it's not friggin' abortions that they go there to get like Republican rant and rave about. It's the full spectrum of healthcare they otherwise simply can't afford because they can't afford health insurance, or if Planned Parenthood couldn't provide it they would find someone who could. An example of that being, my mother and older sister, both were children's therapists at free mental health clinics, i.e. mental health clinics specifically for the poor because they have no insurance--which is not exactly what you turn to to make money in the mental health profession, it's what you do when care about the people themselves. In any case, it was Planned Parenthood that would help these women find those free mental health clinics and attain their services. And that's generational, those kids, when they become of voting age remember the people of those organizations that helped them and their families get what the needed. And so how are they going to react when you have with wealthy white guy by the name of Romney touting he's going to dismantle that very community apparati? And the thing is those women who they and their children go to Planned Parenthood, a very significant portion of them are of varying minority groups and are often of either the lower-income working class or the poor.

But then there's the Latino community, now what amused me about this whole ordeal is that what screwed Romney was the same very thing that screwed Gov Pete Wilson back when I was in high school in So Cal, only making the national stage. Which is the whole "self-deportation" issue. Here's the deal. The whole self-deportation thing originated as a satire, a joke started by satire comedian essentially being the Hispanic version of Stephen Colbert of Southern California radio, in reaction to Prop 187 (I remember that whole debacle vividly when I was in my freshman year of high school at the time). But the thing is, Gov Pete Wilson and his infinitely idiotic administration wasn't aware it was a joke, so he started touting it as for something for immigrants to do. Now why that is relevant is Romney in all is wisdom, made Pete Wilson one of his immigration advisers of his campaign, and what was he touting? Self-deportation. It's not only cynical, but also stupid, to think the Latino community would forget something like this. And that's on top of being too ignorant to not know the whole policy is based on a satire comedian's joke. But also, something Republicans need to recognize is, some of the Latino community's families have members that are illegal immigrants, and they desperately want them to become citizens, it's why the DREAM Act is so enormously popular. But when families are threatened of being separated, they see that as an attack on their community and rightly so. Because it's tough to say that families do not compose communities.

But, I also brought up the Asian vote for a reason, which is that--here in MN for example, it is the 2nd largest Hmong population in the US. And they're trying to establish for themselves a community base here in St. Paul. In fact, St. Paul has the largest Hmong population in the US going by city. And the ones providing that opportunity for them most has been the Democrats via various government programs, and the Republicans for some reason have been trying to vilify the Democrats for it under some sort of socialist nonsense and even trying to equate it to communism; which is stupid in the first place, because the reason why the Hmong refugees have been coming here is because of fleeing communist take over in Laos thirty years ago. They have better understanding for the threat of communism than a bunch of fat old rich white guys who've never left this country's borders. Thus unsurprisingly--they wound up largely supporting Obama and Democratic candidates for State Congress and US Senate. And really, politically the situation isn't all that much different with the Somalis here in MN, which the largest Somali population in the US is right here in MN, too.

So this has all largely been about community support. Last night I got into a heated debate with some of my fellow Libertarians in the Minnesota Libertarian Party about the election, that it was largely about community support. They would go on with their individualist rants--about part of freedom is personal responsibility and act in ones individual interests and blah blah with Ayn Rand logic fallacies, but I did manage to get a few to at least see the point in that--the problem with uplifting solely uplifting the individual is that does not drive a civilization. That crap is great for self-help tripe to become more self-absorbed, but when it comes to building a society it's worthless. The reason being is that your community being uplifted is in your individual interests, because an individual can prosper within a strong community far better than they can in a weak one--it's that simple. This whole current Republican and conservative line of thinking has been, "If I do well, the community does well.", which is an arrogant, self-involved mindset. But the community needs to prosper in order for the individual to do well within it, and the various "minority" cultures are more thoughtful of that than the current "white America" it seems.

And so to recap, that's the entire conservative movements problem is that it's thinking too much about individualism, and not enough about humanism.

[Grumpy Panda]

Well, I don't consider myself a humanist. I'm not a secular being. But I can say that I'm not republican at least. I don't really support any party. Libertarians are about the only ones I come close to.

And when I say skeptical, I do mean skeptical. I question my government, my job, even my personal beliefs. The only things I don't really question are food and sleep. Either way it didn't feel personal.

[Dr. Jake]

I'm a supporter, for the most part, of the Democratic Party. I am very partial to moderates and Blue Dogs, and just about anyone else that is on the center-left to center side of the Party. I really like "RINOs" like Jon Huntsman and Olympia Snowe.

This is mostly because I am a moderate myself, though I suppose you could classify me as center-left when it comes to social issues. My main disagreements with the Party are the issues of abortion, Affirmative Action, and for some reason I find it really hard to like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. Meh, better than ole Boo-hoo

[Dr. Jake]

youtu.be/Q7pYxnNUYkU

Gotta love Teddy!

---

An idea struck me earlier. What if we had a SWRP Political (or any other philosophical issue) Debate thread/team.

I have a few brainstorm ideas, but I want to hear yours. I was thinking that we could have rounds where a three member panel of judge-moderators present questions and gauge their responses.

I would imagine that there would be two teams, but three or four could work I suppose.

Thoughts?

[Lemur, The Kool-Aid Guy]

That seems like it woud deserve a thread to itself.

[Kiserius]

Social and Political Issues:

Abortion : Strongly against when used as a method of birth control outside of rape. Life of the mother ones are fine as well. With a combination of affordable birth control like Implanon/the pill + condoms, there shouldn't be much need for it, as the chances for failure with both of those methods properly combined are negligible bordering on impossible.

Gay Marriages/Civil Unions: Just let the gays have it already.

Misc. Gay Rights (Adoption, Mil. Service, etc.): Adoption a little iffy on, but that’s mostly a gut reaction and not based on actual research. Military service is fine, we shouldn’t be restricting anyone who is willing to fly off to various Sandinistans in order to fight for us.

Legal Gender Change: Fine, but their original birth sex should be public record and given to another party before marriage.

1st Amendment Rights: Like them, but feel they are a little restricted at the moment.

2nd Amendment Rights: Support in reasonable practice with proper licensing and screening.
Think sales between private individuals/at gun shows need to be regulated a bit more to prevent crazies from getting ahold of weapons.

10th Amendment (States') Rights: Federal law should override state where applicable, people are U.S. citizens first before they are citizens of a state.

Patriotism: Like it, people should be proud of their country’s achievements.

Federalism: Support it entirely.

Unitarianism (Unitary State): Against total federal control, people should be able to control their own localities within reason.

Current Political System: Needs to be purged of people gridlocking the process just because they don’t like what the other side says.

Current Presidential Election Method: Ok, needs to be reformed a little bit to stop giving swing states so much influence.

Affirmative Action: Against.

Gender Equality:: For, as long as it is EQUAL, and not skewed.

Recreational Marijuana Legalization: Only if given the same rigorous standards as smoking and drinking. E.g., smoke it the hell away from me and don’t drive while under its influence.

Other Recreational Drug Legalization: No.

Immigration*: Fine as long as it is legal, moderated, and we are importing people who will not adversely affect our culture and civilization and be a net boon for us.

Economic Issues:

ObamaCare: Like it, but could do a lot more.

Social Welfare: Could be buffed a bit more, needs to be means-tested.

Social Security: Needs to be means-tested, and disability needs to be investigated far more.

Medicare and Medicaid: Needs to be means-tested.

Other Government Entitlements: Needs to be means-tested more.

Progressive Taxation: Yes, and make this apply to capital gains as well. Make it hit the millionaires harder than the poor working stiffs in the $250,000-$400,000 range who pay almost as much with far less disposable income.

Flat Taxation: A blatantly obvious scheme by the ultrarich to fool the poor into believing that this would solve financial problems and that it would be more “fair”. Against.

Capital Gains: Make it progressive with some benefits and deductions for financial businesses, funds, ect.

Cap and Trade: Needs to be relaxed until countries like China and India stop polluting to the amount we’re saving./

Other Gov't Action for Environment: Approve, I don’t want our country to look like Industrial Revolutionary England where almost all white moths died out because smog and dark soot covered everything.

Socialism: Second-best economic system.

Capitalism: Best economic system when regulated to a reasonable extent. Worst system when “the free market will fix it” mentality is applied.

Government Intervention (Safety/ Regulations): Approve of. Why would someone be AGAINST safety regulations unless he or she does not care about personally getting injured or having their employees get injured? I don't want a return to early 20th-century business practices.

Government Intervention (General): The (US) government is not evil, just inefficient, but generally looks out for the rights of its citizens. Contrast with a corporation or business whose sole responsibility is to increase efficiency to improve profits for its shareholders. Needs to be a decent mixture of the two so that efficienc and people aren’t screwed over too much.

Debt Ceiling: Worrying, but I’m sure we’ll end up fine. We’re not worse off than many European nations or Japan, something like 2/3rds of our debt is held by our own countrymen.

Chinese Debt*: Japan holds almost as much, I’m not worried. People exaggerate this too much.

Foreign and Military Issues

US assistance to Israel: Needs to be lessened a little bit, but should still be there. Compared to the alternatives in the region, they are a comparatively friendly if deceitful and troublesome nation.

US Sanctions on Iran: Good, continue them.

Russia*: They are not evil, but they are certainly not our friends. Should be dealt with carefully, but not in a hostile manner.

China*: Same as the above, except they are much more aggressive and need to realize that Asia is not their rightful personal property, e.g. see their Exclusive Economic Zone claims where they claim the territorial waters of almost every Asian nation for themselves.

Cuba*: Not really a threat. Indifferent.

NATO: Good, but Euros need to start paying more into it.

EU: In general a good thing, but it needs to be reformed quite a bit more to handle things such as immigration and its currency more effectively.

US Operations in Afghanistan: We’ll never convince the Pashtuns/Persians to like us, ever. It’s a futile exercise. Maybe we should just let Pakistan annex Afghanistan like they’ve wanted to for who knows how long, and then threaten to let India nuke both nations if they try to fund any more terrorist acts like they’ve been doing for the past twenty-something years along with the Saudis.

Spcl. Immigration & Transportation with Can. and Mex.: Fine, Mexicans are a decent sort apart from the AZTLAN crowd. As long as they speak English they should be welcomed here.

US Support of Global Democracy: A good thing in general, but it needs to be scaled down a bit
due to our budget difficulties. We are not meant to be the sole defender of democracy on the planet.

US Mil. Intervention in General (except above field): Should be scaled back immensely. The average American does not benefit from this at all, only corporations and the defense industry does. When there is a legitimate threat to American businesses or lives, sure, but we should tread very carefully and not attempt to nation-build./b]

[Dr. Jake]

Dec 19, 2012 22:04:10 GMT -5 Lemur, The Kool-Aid Guy said:

That seems like it woud deserve a thread to itself.

I was trying to gauge the interest of the politically active before posting it for the entire forum.