My fellow Ex-Patriot Right-Wingers! Join me in the Republica

P51mus · **Posted:** Wed Mar 05, 2003 12:39 am

<font color="990099">Blackangel's the one that resurrected it, ask him...</font>

Okagenoyume · **Joined:** Fri Feb 28, 2003 5:52 am **Posts:** 128

Stale? *breaks teeth in process of biting into this thread* Ouch.

Pyromancer wrote:

Those running counter to the prevailing ideology of an area do tend to be more intelligent than average. Or to be stoned on something. Occasionally both.

Nice. *applauds*

I've seen both ends of spectrum, too. Maybe 3. Lived in moderate, conservative, and liberal areas (in that order). I agree that Abunai has some bias. But I do find a slight tendency for stupid people to be conservative. The inverse is not all that true, of course. Smart people seem to be evenly distributed. Just that the cynical people tend to be more conservative than the idealistic pups. Those with hope in the system are deluding themselves. Take a close look at the Patriot Act, or the No Child Left Behind Act. What sane congressmember could vote for these? Answer: A selfish or easily fooled one.

Politics suck.

I'm not an anarchist, or a communist. I'm a card carrying member of the Know Nothing party.

Clay_Allison · **Posted:** Wed Mar 05, 2003 8:45 am

I am findinfg way too much crap about the NCLB Act, and I know more than I want to about the goddamn Patriot act.

Could you link me to a useful page on No Child Left Behind?

P51mus · **Posted:** Wed Mar 05, 2003 1:55 pm

The Man In Black wrote:

Quote:

the jury's still out on Afghanistan as far as I'm concerned

Um...lets see:

dislodge al quida: done
overthrow taliban: done
set up coalition govt, protected by US/UN forces until the country stabalizes: right on scheduel.

Dunno what there is to complain about. As far as power changes from dictatorships to legitimate democracies go, this has been a stunning success (look at south America for how it can all go horribly wrong right off the bat.)

Um...heh. Lets look at an article I just found today, shall we? Just click here to look at it:

Quote:

After the collapse of the Taliban, much was made of `women's rights`. It would be a noble cause if the reality wasn't so laughable. Within months former Unocal consultant now U.S.-appointed (or rather appointed by personal friend Zalmay Khalilzad) Afghan leader Hamid Kharzi had restarted the feared Ministry of Virtue & Vice. Under Minister Wazir Razi Kabuli women were once again to be the targets of repression. "A woman can wear make up at home for her husband, but not in public," said Kabuli. As reported on BBCs Newsnight, Afghan women soon began filling jails once again. Rape, acid attacks, burns and sexual abuse are flourishing under the new government (Newsday, Miami Herald, Boston Globe July 30/02). Women's schools have been blown up, Marziya Basil one of the few Afghani women to get local judicial jobs in Kabul was fired for meeting Americans on a computer course without her Burkha. Meanwhile the so-called the Northern Alliance have been cleansing northern Afghanistan of Pashtuns using rape as weapon of displacement.

<font color="990099">Yeah....doesn't look too good.</font>

Ghost · **Posted:** Thu Mar 06, 2003 9:04 am

Pyromancer wrote:

those running counter to the prevailing ideology of an area do tend to be more intelligent than average

MIB would disagree with me here, but I am more informed and knowledgeable about politics and government than most of my classmates, and they are overwhelmingly liberal vs. me being conservative.

It says something that MIB gets pissed off at me so often.

I'm not sure what, but it does.

And, P51:

OUCH.

Unum Plurum · **Posted:** Sun Mar 09, 2003 8:44 pm

Probably people running against popular local beliefs are that way because:
A. As I believe most of us would agree, most people (besides, of course, us or anyone we like) are stupid. Therefore, the people who are against most people, or in other words have opposite views of those of stupid people, are smart, unless they happen to live in an area of smart people, which would, by aforementioned definition, are rare, and therefore areas with them are rare.
B. More concretely, probably people who are against the majority have to have a pretty strong reason for it, being confronted all the time in social situations with those of opposite views. Therefore they must know more than other people in order to back up their views.

I know both are flawed, but on some level I think they're true, if not precisely as I have explained them.

ZOMBIE FORUMS

My fellow Ex-Patriot Right-Wingers! Join me in the Republica

Who is online