View Single Post
Old 04-26-2019, 08:00 PM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Charter Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 35,255
Originally Posted by Bryan Ekers View Post
I suggest that it can be relevant if you want to extend the discussion beyond just applying labels to things, i.e. it's fine to consider the United States a closed system with a well-defined boundary and attempt to classify all political views held by its citizens (and only its citizens) in an effort to arrange them on a scale from most right to most left, for what that's worth, like you were sorting jelly beans by colour or something. Maybe this is a mildly entertaining intellectual exercise, as far as it goes.

I suggest a broader knowledge is useful when it quickly goes beyond merely arranging political views on a scale to declaring, for example, that people who hold views at coordinate X on the American spectrum are eagerly looking forward and indeed working toward the construction of a vast network of concentration camps for the re-education and as necessary liquidation of undesirables. If one can point out that several other functioning democracies have policies in place roughly equivalent to coordinate X but don't have concentration camps, one has a basis for calling the claim specious.

Is AOC really "loony" ? What are some of the things she has actually said that seem particularly lunatic? Is she describing implementing something in the U.S. that, say, Canada already has? Would that make Canada a lunatic place? Are you comfortable sharing a long undefended border with such a place? Or maybe it's just easier to say Canada's policies are irrelevant by definition if that avoids the mental dissonance of having to rethink one's opinion of AOC.

By way of disclosure, I don't have any particular knowledge of AOC's stated goals, but the political rhetoric in the U.S. has degenerated to such a degree that calling her or anything "loony","socialist" or "ultra" in any sense has lost all meaning.

If you don't want to care, feel free not to care. No skin off me.
Well, she is goofy. I make allowances for her being young, but her NGD was...loopy. And misguided. And, frankly, on the fringe of US voters except in very narrow voting regions, such as the one that elected her. Broadly, she doesn't really connect with the average Joe voter in the US, certainly not on most of the issues. Where she falls wrt European voters is, basically, irrelevant...they won't get to vote for her.

Loony though...that's going to be in the eyes of the beholder. Sorry, but wrt US politics, she is not mainstream. She isn't even mainstream liberal, and, frankly, that's all that matters. How Canada and Canadians view her, or view socialism is perhaps intellectually interesting, but has zero impact on how US voters view her in the US system. My caring or lack of caring is irrelevant....what matters is where she falls on our spectrum and with our voters.

Let me give you an example. I often hear Europeans say that this politician or that one who they consider right wing would be liberal Democrats in the US. Ok. So, in practical terms wrt their political system, what does that mean to the average voter in their country? Dick all. It means nothing because, by and large, their voting citizens don't give a flying fuck where right wing politician falls on the US spectrum...they care how they fit in in their own system. And because Americans don't live in their country, and don't vote in their system, and so have zero impact or say in it.

I'm sure you don't sit there thinking to yourself when you are going to vote in Canada 'hm, wonder how these two candidates fit into the US political system and fall on their political spectrum'. If you DO think that way, well, you've been on this board too long.

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!

Last edited by XT; 04-26-2019 at 08:01 PM.