Total Posts:42|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Some Critical Thoughts for President's Day

charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 2:43:57 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
The potentially controversial or subversive truth be told, what is an American president, the point man of American democracy, or puppet of the plutocracy? A tribune of the people or top toady to the bosses of big business? How's that for a topical topic question on President's Day?! Personally, being one for seditious honesty rather than patriotic hero worship, I prefer the latter critical characterization, and will proceed to elaborate. Yes, yes, I know it's not the sort of thing that Americans in Iowa and Kansas are equipped for by the indoctrinatory lessons they receive in their high school civics classes, but I cordially invite you to join me in my justifiably jaundiced journey to strip the office and function of president of all its pomp and constitutional legitimacy and examine it in a coldly skeptical light.

Well, when so viewed the president of the United States is arguably merely a glorified middle manager of the ole military-industrial complex, of a state apparatus whose fundamental, if largely dissembled, function is to protect the special interests and enforce the sub rosa sovereignty of the nation's (and global order's) economic elite. He's the commander-in-chief collaborator with the corporate powers that be. The quisling of the capitalist ruling class. One who under the color of constitutional authority often operates at about the ethical level of a cartel kingpin, utilizing marines or Navy SEALs rather than Zeta hit men, and killer drones rather than car bombs. That is, the good ole prez is not the most prestigious public servant, but rather the excessively honored and morally challenged functionary and flunky of the rich. A high-placed cog in the superstructure of capitalist society.

In other words, a president, or a politician seeking to become president, or any high-level politician, for that matter, should be seen as a complicit part of the system, and of the problems and injustices inherent in its structures, not as a potential savior who's hopefully going to provide solutions, who might rescue our society from the evils of racism and sexism, or from an economic recession, or from the capitalist business cycle that guarantees that recessions will continue to recurrently befall our economy, or from any of the many shortcomings and sins of our current socioeconomic national and world order.

Well, the corporate hegemons to whom all presidents, senators, secretaries of state, etc., sell their integrity of course certainly are not interested in the kind of revolutionary change that would be the prescription for the pathologies of American "civilization". The status quo and preserving it is really all they have a sincere interest in, and so, surprise, surprise, the politicians and institutions that they've co-opted also primarily operate out of an imperative to protect and perpetuate the status quo, even though it's one that victimizes a great many human beings.

But aren't I merely expressing a harsh opinion, indulging in an anti-presidential rant? Yes, I'm admittedly expressing a quite polemical view of our society's political leaders, but it's one that is arguably empirically justified. Merely look at the commitments, actions, and policies of presidents throughout the course of American history, there's a distinct recurring theme of their choice of commitments and policies serving to uphold the status quo and benefit its economic Establishment. For instance, where the true loyalties of American heads of state lie is nowhere more easy to behold than in the case of Ronald Reagan, who was a flaming booster and champion of unfettered capitalism - and, as the monetary tokens of appreciation and thinly-veiled payoff that he received from American and Japanese corporations after leaving Washington make crystal clear, their crony all along.

And moving to the other end of the mainstream political spectrum, even in the case of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal we find that its real upshot was the rescue of the capitalist system. That is, New Deal programs and Keynesian economics functioned to diminish the pain inflicted on the masses by the Great Depression, pain that might have spurred a popular insurgency. Pro-capitalist conservatives revile Roosevelt but at the end of the day, by reducing the suffering of the economy's victims and restoring hope, an anti-capitalist uprising was successfully averted and capitalism was able to get away with burning the working class without itself succumbing to the flames of class warfare. Mm-hmm, funny how government policies in the end usually work to shore up the system and the position of its elite.

Well, and in between these two polar opposite icons, roll-back-the-New-Deal Reagan and rescue-capitalism-from-the-threat-of-revolution-in-the-guise-of-being-compassionate Roosevelt, the history books are utterly brimming with empirical and damning evidence of the compromised nature of American political institutions and their top officeholders (item, virtually all of the military actions ordained by our political leaders, that turn working-class young people into cannon fodder for the imperialistic objectives of the moneyed elite, not for the defense of John and Jane Q. Public's liberty). But then of course we also know deductively that the government's CEO actually works for the CEOs of "corporate America". This is an undebatable deductive truth that, if one is capable of grasping and grokking it, follows from the fact that our form of mock representative democracy is quite simply the political superstructure (outgrowth) of our capitalist system of power relations and the executive branch merely one of its components. One that epitomizes the real and thoroughly corrupting nature of the undemocratic and disenfranchising power relations underlying a modern "constitutional republic" with a "participatory" political process.

In a blunt nutshell, capitalism is a system in which government is geared to promote not the common good but rather the specific good of those who own and control the means of production, the monetary resources to buy social status and political access and clout. To state what but for our indoctrination with our society's ideology should be the obvious, capitalism is the regime of capital, corporations, and the captains of high finance, it's abjectly the dictatorship of the plutotariat ; presidents, prime ministers, and political parties are merely its changing faces, so of course it's a given that they function to advance the agenda of Fortune 500 companies and investment banks! What else would you realistically expect?

Yep, under capitalism public institutions are inescapably, congenitally subverted into vehicles for the interests and influence of bourgeoisie and billionaires. The conduct of presidents merely reflects this terrible reality, the terrible reality of plutocracy. Actually, to use the correct technical poli-sci nomenclature, the American system of government is a plutocratic polyarchy, in which real political power is reserved to and dispersed among the competing elements of the economic elite; the democratic, electoral process exists but is reduced to being merely the highly managed, largely perfunctory process of choosing between the vying factions of the ruling class. Well, terminology aside, the inherent politics of such a system are such that it's virtually impossible for presidents to even approximate being the paragons of democratic principles that they're portrayed and idolized as. Ergo, it would very much behoove us all to stop revering the occupants of the White House, to begin immunizing ourselves and the next generation to the institutionalized charisma of the office of president. Or, we can remain and raise another generation of indoctrinated dupes, a posterity of programmed and patriotic pawns and patsies perpetually played by the presidential puppets of the plutocracy.

Continued below
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 2:45:39 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Conclusion

In other, still slightly alliterative words, and in conclusion, if you feature living in a future in which it's more plutocratic politics as usual, well, then by all means continue to teach your children to dream of being president. But if you would sincerely like to help bring about real and radical change, then teach your children to spit in the president's eye (figuratively speaking of course, if one were to physically spit in the president's eye the presence of oral bacteria in one's saliva would no doubt result in one being arrested by the Department of Fatherland Security on capital charges of bio terrorism). It all comes down to a crucial question of social conscience, will we continue to enculturate young minds to maintain the status quo, or train them to be critical thinkers? Our choice will have world-historical repercussions; it will determine the character of national politics and the fate of our global civilization.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 4:42:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
It is said that a man who has something important to say, can say it in a few sentences.

Your efforts are wasted in long walls of eye bleed. It would be better to just make the point in a sentence or two. What is the point by the way?
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 4:55:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 2:43:57 AM, charleslb wrote:
It's President's Day! I don't like American Presidents or American Govt

There, I edited it for you so all who wont read the eye bleed can know whet your point is.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 4:56:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 2:45:39 AM, charleslb wrote:
Conclusion

This who conclusion deleted.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 4:57:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 4:56:32 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 2/17/2014 2:45:39 AM, charleslb wrote:
Conclusion

This whole conclusion deleted.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 4:57:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 4:55:49 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 2/17/2014 2:43:57 AM, charleslb wrote:
It's President's Day! I don't like American Presidents or American Govt

There, I edited it for you so all who won't read the eye bleed can know what your point is.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 6:13:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 4:42:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
It is said that a man who has something important to say, can say it in a few sentences.

Your efforts are wasted in long walls of eye bleed. It would be better to just make the point in a sentence or two. What is the point by the way?

Ah, sad ole sadolite, as usual an irritable retort of no substance. Assuming you're capable, would you perhaps care to actually contribute anything even slightly constructive? Come on, challenge yourself, you don't have to be brilliant just slightly constructive.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
themohawkninja
Posts: 816
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 6:28:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I was interested in your critique until I got to the second paragraph whereby it just turned into a poorly-written Shakespearean play.

As has already been said, if you are going to bake a point, be concise, and don't fill it in with filler and unsupported anti-government B.S.
"Morals are simply a limit to man's potential."~Myself

Political correctness is like saying you can't have a steak, because a baby can't eat one ~Unknown
themohawkninja
Posts: 816
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 6:29:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
make* a point

When the hell are we getting an edit button already?
"Morals are simply a limit to man's potential."~Myself

Political correctness is like saying you can't have a steak, because a baby can't eat one ~Unknown
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 7:16:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 6:28:49 PM, themohawkninja wrote:
I was interested in your critique until I got to the second paragraph whereby it just turned into a poorly-written Shakespearean play.

As has already been said, if you are going to bake a point, be concise, and don't fill it in with filler and unsupported anti-government B.S.

Of course I did my due dilligence and checked your profile to confirm my suspicion, and of course you're a "libertarian". Your sort of petty and petulant ad hominem response is what I pretty consistently seem to incite from folks of your ideological orientation. Incidentally, if you're genuinely a "libertarian" you should enjoy deep denunciations of the govrnment, but I suppose etiologically linking the sins of the state to the sins of capitalism rubs your free-marketarian sensibilities the wrong way.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 7:22:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Btw, no, I absolutely don't view Barack Obama as an exception to my above critical analysis. He's certainly no beautiful Marxist man of the people, or proletariat. That's just the rubbish of the radical right, a load of conservative caca. He's of course just another establishment career politico. By the time any aspiring commander-in-chief rises to the level in mainstream national politics where it becomes possible to become president s/he's already been quite thoroughly enculturated and groomed to be merely another guardian of the established socioeconomc order. Realistically speaking, no Democratic or Republican president is ever going to be an authentic progressive fighting the good fight for the downtrodden from within a bad system designed and inclined to body forth the hegemony of capitalists. Well, being merely a projection of our society's fundamental capitalist power structure, of course the political paradigm embodied by the mainline parties is one that profoundly socializes, shapes, and suborns our elected "representatives" and "public servants" (at all levels) to wield their legislative and executive authority a good deal more on behalf of fat cats than the working-class underdogs who comprise the vast majority of their constituencies. And Obama clearly didn't escape the effects of coming up in such a perverse-for-a-supposed-democracy paradigm.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 7:27:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 6:13:40 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 2/17/2014 4:42:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
It is said that a man who has something important to say, can say it in a few sentences.

Your efforts are wasted in long walls of eye bleed. It would be better to just make the point in a sentence or two. What is the point by the way?

Ah, sad ole sadolite, as usual an irritable retort of no substance. Assuming you're capable, would you perhaps care to actually contribute anything even slightly constructive? Come on, challenge yourself, you don't have to be brilliant just slightly constructive.

No really, Isn't that the point of the whole essay? You don't like American Presidents and you don't like American govt? I got it I read it. You like to use big words to say simple things. You have an excellent vocabulary and write well. But you fail to understand that you are not reaching people. A good writer would write in a way that would want people to engage. You don't do that. You waste enormous amounts of time writing essays that no one reads because it takes you for ever to make any discernible point about anything if ever. You offer nothing to the reader to engage you in dialog with. But only give monotone lectures in the voice of Ben Stein It's like you want the reader to grade your essay like a college English professor.

Spelling and grammar A+

Content : Condescending from beginning to end, A pure lecture nothing more. Writing style loses a readers interest in a matter of seconds. Invites hostile reactionary responses that will never lead to meaningful dialog about anything. Ultra dull to read. Writing style loses a readers interest in a matter of seconds.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 7:37:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 7:27:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 2/17/2014 6:13:40 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 2/17/2014 4:42:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
It is said that a man who has something important to say, can say it in a few sentences.

Your efforts are wasted in long walls of eye bleed. It would be better to just make the point in a sentence or two. What is the point by the way?

Ah, sad ole sadolite, as usual an irritable retort of no substance. Assuming you're capable, would you perhaps care to actually contribute anything even slightly constructive? Come on, challenge yourself, you don't have to be brilliant just slightly constructive.

No really, Isn't that the point of the whole essay? You don't like American Presidents and you don't like American govt? I got it I read it. You like to use big words to say simple things. You have an excellent vocabulary and write well. But you fail to understand that you are not reaching people. A good writer would write in a way that would want people to engage. You don't do that. You waste enormous amounts of time writing essays that no one reads because it takes you for ever to make any discernible point about anything if ever. You offer nothing to the reader to engage you in dialog with. But only give monotone lectures in the voice of Ben Stein It's like you want the reader to grade your essay like a college English professor.

Spelling and grammar A+

Content : Condescending from beginning to end, A pure lecture nothing more. Writing style loses a readers interest in a matter of seconds. Invites hostile reactionary responses that will never lead to meaningful dialog about anything. Ultra dull to read. Writing style loses a readers interest in a matter of seconds.

Oh well, thank you for the constructive criticism of my style of self-expression.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 7:41:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 7:37:22 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 2/17/2014 7:27:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 2/17/2014 6:13:40 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 2/17/2014 4:42:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
It is said that a man who has something important to say, can say it in a few sentences.

Your efforts are wasted in long walls of eye bleed. It would be better to just make the point in a sentence or two. What is the point by the way?

Ah, sad ole sadolite, as usual an irritable retort of no substance. Assuming you're capable, would you perhaps care to actually contribute anything even slightly constructive? Come on, challenge yourself, you don't have to be brilliant just slightly constructive.

No really, Isn't that the point of the whole essay? You don't like American Presidents and you don't like American govt? I got it I read it. You like to use big words to say simple things. You have an excellent vocabulary and write well. But you fail to understand that you are not reaching people. A good writer would write in a way that would want people to engage. You don't do that. You waste enormous amounts of time writing essays that no one reads because it takes you for ever to make any discernible point about anything if ever. You offer nothing to the reader to engage you in dialog with. But only give monotone lectures in the voice of Ben Stein It's like you want the reader to grade your essay like a college English professor.

Spelling and grammar A+

Content : Condescending from beginning to end, A pure lecture nothing more. Writing style loses a readers interest in a matter of seconds. Invites hostile reactionary responses that will never lead to meaningful dialog about anything. Ultra dull to read. Writing style loses a readers interest in a matter of seconds.

Oh well, thank you for the constructive criticism of my style of self-expression.

You are not expressing your self, you are lecturing. Demeaning and attacking the character of historic people in history is not self expression.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 7:44:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Charles, are you on revleft or another forum?
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 8:09:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 7:44:51 PM, Noumena wrote:
Charles, are you on revleft or another forum?

Nyet.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
themohawkninja
Posts: 816
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 8:28:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 7:16:52 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 2/17/2014 6:28:49 PM, themohawkninja wrote:
I was interested in your critique until I got to the second paragraph whereby it just turned into a poorly-written Shakespearean play.

As has already been said, if you are going to bake a point, be concise, and don't fill it in with filler and unsupported anti-government B.S.

Of course I did my due dilligence and checked your profile to confirm my suspicion, and of course you're a "libertarian". Your sort of petty and petulant ad hominem response is what I pretty consistently seem to incite from folks of your ideological orientation. Incidentally, if you're genuinely a "libertarian" you should enjoy deep denunciations of the govrnment, but I suppose etiologically linking the sins of the state to the sins of capitalism rubs your free-marketarian sensibilities the wrong way.

So you respond to my not-ad-hominem reply with nonsensical ad hominem yourself?

I'd really love to have a nice discussion about the importance, or lack thereof of a holiday, but you really do not seem open-minded enough if you are going to judge me based off of what my Internet profile says.

I'll have you know that I am not actually Libertarian, but simply chose that as I felt it was the closest option available to my real political beliefs.
"Morals are simply a limit to man's potential."~Myself

Political correctness is like saying you can't have a steak, because a baby can't eat one ~Unknown
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 10:00:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 7:27:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 2/17/2014 6:13:40 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 2/17/2014 4:42:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
It is said that a man who has something important to say, can say it in a few sentences.

Your efforts are wasted in long walls of eye bleed. It would be better to just make the point in a sentence or two. What is the point by the way?

Ah, sad ole sadolite, as usual an irritable retort of no substance. Assuming you're capable, would you perhaps care to actually contribute anything even slightly constructive? Come on, challenge yourself, you don't have to be brilliant just slightly constructive.

No really, Isn't that the point of the whole essay? You don't like American Presidents and you don't like American govt? I got it I read it. You like to use big words to say simple things. You have an excellent vocabulary and write well. But you fail to understand that you are not reaching people. A good writer would write in a way that would want people to engage. You don't do that. You waste enormous amounts of time writing essays that no one reads because it takes you for ever to make any discernible point about anything if ever. You offer nothing to the reader to engage you in dialog with. But only give monotone lectures in the voice of Ben Stein It's like you want the reader to grade your essay like a college English professor.

Spelling and grammar A+

LMAO

Content : Condescending from beginning to end, A pure lecture nothing more. Writing style loses a readers interest in a matter of seconds. Invites hostile reactionary responses that will never lead to meaningful dialog about anything. Ultra dull to read. Writing style loses a readers interest in a matter of seconds.

XD

Critique of Charles' style A+

Charles when will you learn the art of being succinct? the ART
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 10:16:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
"I'd really love to have a nice discussion" I don't think that would be possible. Charles lectures he doesn't discuss.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2014 2:49:19 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 8:28:53 PM, themohawkninja wrote:
At 2/17/2014 7:16:52 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 2/17/2014 6:28:49 PM, themohawkninja wrote:
I was interested in your critique until I got to the second paragraph whereby it just turned into a poorly-written Shakespearean play.

As has already been said, if you are going to bake a point, be concise, and don't fill it in with filler and unsupported anti-government B.S.

Of course I did my due dilligence and checked your profile to confirm my suspicion, and of course you're a "libertarian". Your sort of petty and petulant ad hominem response is what I pretty consistently seem to incite from folks of your ideological orientation. Incidentally, if you're genuinely a "libertarian" you should enjoy deep denunciations of the govrnment, but I suppose etiologically linking the sins of the state to the sins of capitalism rubs your free-marketarian sensibilities the wrong way.

So you respond to my not-ad-hominem reply with nonsensical ad hominem yourself?

Your response was in fact ad hominem in nature, and I merely addressed an ad hominem response in an ad hominem fashion.

I'd really love to have a nice discussion about the importance, or lack thereof of a holiday, but you really do not seem open-minded enough if you are going to judge me based off of what my Internet profile says.

Hmm, you don't think that your response indicates anything at all about your temperment or mentality? Perhaps you need to cultivate a bit more self-awareness.

I'll have you know that I am not actually Libertarian, but simply chose that as I felt it was the closest option available to my real political beliefs.

Well, if one's mentality waddles and quacks like a snarky libertarian.

Care to get back to the topic of the OP now?
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2014 2:52:07 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 10:16:24 PM, sadolite wrote:
"I'd really love to have a nice discussion" I don't think that would be possible. Charles lectures he doesn't discuss.

And you make quite the effort to have a constructive exchange. NOT!
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2014 3:14:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 2:45:39 AM, charleslb wrote:
Conclusion

In other, still slightly alliterative words, and in conclusion, if you feature living in a future in which it's more plutocratic politics as usual, well, then by all means continue to teach your children to dream of being president. But if you would sincerely like to help bring about real and radical change, then teach your children to spit in the president's eye (figuratively speaking of course, if one were to physically spit in the president's eye the presence of oral bacteria in one's saliva would no doubt result in one being arrested by the Department of Fatherland Security on capital charges of bio terrorism). It all comes down to a crucial question of social conscience, will we continue to enculturate young minds to maintain the status quo, or train them to be critical thinkers? Our choice will have world-historical repercussions; it will determine the character of national politics and the fate of our global civilization.

You have managed to say nothing at all surprising Charles. Politicians are beholden to money and special interests.... Does that really surprise anyone? But that's a function of our broken system for regulating political contributions. The US ranks pretty low on the democracy scale compared to countries like Norway.

If you think Reagan was bad, look at what Clinton did. I'm surprised you don't cite that as your example, Charles. Check out the Financial Securities Modernization Act and the Commodity and Futures Modernization Act. Both were passed at the urging of Wall Street lobbyists. The former led to the 2008 crash by making the big banks too big to fail (by allowing commercial banks, investment banks, and insurance companies to combine) and the latter led to the Enron problems (rolling blackouts) and to the collateralized debt obligations (CDO's) that crashed the market in 2008.

But your assertion that what FDR did was bad is kind of silly. We weren't about to have a communist revolution in the US (in fact, most countries that had them didn't really have populist movements - e.g. Russia). And the Great Depression wasn't a failing of capitalism; it was proof that trade tariffs and trade wars are bad for the global economy. Capitalism is a tool - you can use it wrong. Just like communism is a tool that I'm sure you would assert has always been used wrong every time it's been tried.

So yeah, spit in the president's eye if you want (metaphorically). His approval ratings are already really low.

President's Day is really Washington's birthday, not a holiday devoted to the current president anyway, so you're regularly scheduled rant isn't really even more than slightly topical.

If you ever want to do another debate on whether communism is a viable system, let me know, although Jkenyon beat you pretty bad last time.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
themohawkninja
Posts: 816
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2014 7:57:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/18/2014 2:49:19 AM, charleslb wrote:
Well, if one's mentality waddles and quacks like a snarky libertarian.

Care to get back to the topic of the OP now?

If you are just going to insult me with nonsense, then no, I have no interest in any further discussion.
"Morals are simply a limit to man's potential."~Myself

Political correctness is like saying you can't have a steak, because a baby can't eat one ~Unknown
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2014 4:09:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/18/2014 2:52:07 AM, charleslb wrote:
At 2/17/2014 10:16:24 PM, sadolite wrote:
"I'd really love to have a nice discussion" I don't think that would be possible. Charles lectures he doesn't discuss.

And you make quite the effort to have a constructive exchange. NOT!

And what would we discuss? Yours is to attack and make people defend their position. It is never an exchange of ideas to solve a problem. I know exactly how a "discussion goes with you. I have had several. It is a unending non stop compilation of condescension.

My critique was a hope to help you communicate with people. Ignore it, I don't care. There is not a single person on this site that would not agree with it. Use this information as you will. I know I would consider it if I wanted to have meaningful dialog with other people. I can assure you your approach is ineffective at best, and that is saying it in a polite way. But I really don't think you do. I think being condescending towards other people and their views gives you some kind of mental high and a feeling of superiority to mask your true character and identity. Try using the words "Why is, why do, what is, why are. " in your essays. These signal to the reader that you want dialog. Simply denigrating everything you don't like is called a lecture and lectures do not signal dialog to a reader.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Fox-McCloud
Posts: 158
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2014 4:21:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 2:45:39 AM, charleslb wrote:
Conclusion

In other, still slightly alliterative words, and in conclusion, if you feature living in a future in which it's more plutocratic politics as usual, well, then by all means continue to teach your children to dream of being president. But if you would sincerely like to help bring about real and radical change, then teach your children to spit in the president's eye (figuratively speaking of course, if one were to physically spit in the president's eye the presence of oral bacteria in one's saliva would no doubt result in one being arrested by the Department of Fatherland Security on capital charges of bio terrorism). It all comes down to a crucial question of social conscience, will we continue to enculturate young minds to maintain the status quo, or train them to be critical thinkers? Our choice will have world-historical repercussions; it will determine the character of national politics and the fate of our global civilization.

How long did it take you to write this post?
Abortion Is Generally Morally Reprehensible: http://www.debate.org...

The instant we feel anger we have already ceased striving for the truth, and have begun striving for ourselves - Archibald Alison

Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive, but to be young was very heaven! - William Wordsworth
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2014 9:09:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/18/2014 4:09:03 PM, sadolite wrote:

And what would we discuss? ...

Well, to begin with, which specific point or points in my post do you disagree with, and what are your arguments, if you would not mind articulating them. For instance, please articulate your defense for continuing to esteem the president of the United States as some sort of plausible symbol of American democracy and the principles of the "Free World" rather than what he and the armed forces & intelligence services he commands usually acquit themselves as, the guardian of a global capitalist order that opposes, for billions (with a B) of human beings at home and in the Third World, the total (political, social, economic, spiritual) kind of liberation that they yearn for? And also please explain why you seem to disapprove of my observation of the obvious, that the U.S.' form of government is the epiphenomenal embodiment of its capitalist and profoundly undemocratic power structure and the president merely the personification and preeminent protector of said power structure. Or, perhaps lacking anything of sbstance to say, would you prefer to just continue to take shots at my style of self-expression?
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2014 9:21:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/18/2014 3:14:43 AM, bluesteel wrote:

You have managed to say nothing at all surprising Charles. Politicians are beholden to money and special interests.... Does that really surprise anyone? But that's a function of our broken system for regulating political contributions.

Rather, it's traceable much deeper, to the capitalist substructure of our society, which is why mere campaign finance reform will never be an adequate remedy.

If you think Reagan was bad, look at what Clinton did. I'm surprised you don't cite that as your example, Charles.

Suffice it to say that I'm certainly no fan of either Bill or Hillary(!), and I tried to give equal time to the Dems by citing FDR as little more than another guardian of the status quo.

... And the Great Depression wasn't a failing of capitalism; ...

Don't care much about your credibility I take it.

Hmm, is this all you've got?
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2014 9:24:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 7:44:51 PM, Noumena wrote:
Charles, are you on revleft or another forum?

And no, btw, I'm not an orthodox Marxist. One can appreciate the value and apply the insights contained in the Marxist tradition and theory of history without being a simplicistic orthodox Marxist who sweepingly attributes every bit of human consciousness and history to economic factors, and crassly denies the existence and importance of other dimensions of life and reality, i.e. the spiritual and the sacred. Roman Catholic theologians such as Juan Luis Segundo and Gustavo Gutierrez are concrete and quite adequate instantiations of this fact. And one can certainly be something of a Marxist without being a pseudointellectual crackpot, as evidenced by the playwright Arthur Miller, the sociologist C. Wright Mills, and the philosopher Jurgen Habermas. Ergo, it would simply be facile and lame for anyone to dismiss me as a Marxist troll.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2014 9:26:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/18/2014 9:24:49 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 2/17/2014 7:44:51 PM, Noumena wrote:
Charles, are you on revleft or another forum?

And no, btw, I'm not an orthodox Marxist. One can appreciate the value and apply the insights contained in the Marxist tradition and theory of history without being a simplicistic orthodox Marxist who sweepingly attributes every bit of human consciousness and history to economic factors, and crassly denies the existence and importance of other dimensions of life and reality, i.e. the spiritual and the sacred. Roman Catholic theologians such as Juan Luis Segundo and Gustavo Gutierrez are concrete and quite adequate instantiations of this fact. And one can certainly be something of a Marxist without being a pseudointellectual crackpot, as evidenced by the playwright Arthur Miller, the sociologist C. Wright Mills, and the philosopher Jurgen Habermas. Ergo, it would simply be facile and lame for anyone to dismiss me as a Marxist troll.

1) I know dude. I had not intention of categorizing you as orthodox. Do they even exist anymore?
2) Habermas sucks and everyone knows it.
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.