|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 4, 2024 13:24:00 GMT
Nobody mentioned freezing anything, Maintaining order isn't telling everything to stop moving. The non extreme right are just concerned with preventing the kind of chaotic, bottomless shit-pit and pile of dead bodies situation that is the typical trademark of the revolutionary left (in their area). So, you're not opposed to change. You welcome change provided there is an orderly transition from one state to another. That's fine. Sounds like your with Engels rather than Marx, then. Marx and Engels both agreed that change was inevitable, that greater social equality invariably comes about in every society over time. Marx didn't want to wait. He wanted a revolution. Engels preferred evolution. Is Engelist a word? Probably not, but for ease of reference, let's call you an Engelist going forward. I couldn't say i was an Engelist because I don't share that vision of any inevitable final state. To me it seems similar to imagining a final state for an organism. This is more or less a common intellectual currency on the right - that reality is a continuous bun-fight and worthwhile order has to be maintained with discipline, bravery and competence - ie It is something placed and kept in the world by effort |
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Oct 4, 2024 13:42:32 GMT
So, you're not opposed to change. You welcome change provided there is an orderly transition from one state to another. That's fine. Sounds like your with Engels rather than Marx, then. Marx and Engels both agreed that change was inevitable, that greater social equality invariably comes about in every society over time. Marx didn't want to wait. He wanted a revolution. Engels preferred evolution. Is Engelist a word? Probably not, but for ease of reference, let's call you an Engelist going forward. I couldn't say i was an Engelist because I don't share that vision of any inevitable final state. To me it seems similar to imagining a final state for an organism. This is more or less a common intellectual currency on the right - that reality is a continuous bun-fight and worthwhile order has to be maintained with discipline, bravery and competence - ie It is something placed and kept in the world by effort Yep, I don't suppose it would be correct to describe you as an Engelist in that case. I don't think that most of the left would disagree with your final sentence. They would likely disagree with your notion of what the 'something' that should be maintained with effort is, though. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 4, 2024 15:51:00 GMT
I couldn't say i was an Engelist because I don't share that vision of any inevitable final state. To me it seems similar to imagining a final state for an organism. This is more or less a common intellectual currency on the right - that reality is a continuous bun-fight and worthwhile order has to be maintained with discipline, bravery and competence - ie It is something placed and kept in the world by effort I don't think that most of the left would disagree with your final sentence. They would likely disagree with your notion of what the 'something' that should be maintained with effort is, though. I had a little think about this and i doubt this can be true. If you accept a high functioning society is hard work to create, then wouldn't you also accept that (in such a society) it is quite possible a significant change could be a step down / backwards ? This is why i think conservatism in high functioning societies is completely differently motivated from conservatism in low functioning societies. If you have a broken engine, banging it with a hammer isn't such a bad idea. Doing the same with a working clock is just stupidity. |
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Oct 4, 2024 15:55:20 GMT
I don't think that most of the left would disagree with your final sentence. They would likely disagree with your notion of what the 'something' that should be maintained with effort is, though. I had a little think about this and i doubt this can be true. If you accept a high functioning society is hard work to create, then wouldn't you also accept that (in such a society) it is quite possible a significant change could be a step down / backwards ? This is why i think conservatism in high functioning societies is completely differently motivated from conservatism in low functioning societies. If you have a broken engine, banging it with a hammer isn't such a bad idea. Doing the same with a working clock is just stupidity. Yes, it's probably a bad idea to hit a working clock with a hammer. However, if the clock doesn't work for everyone, it might be a good idea to replace it with a better clock. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 4, 2024 15:58:21 GMT
I had a little think about this and i doubt this can be true. If you accept a high functioning society is hard work to create, then wouldn't you also accept that (in such a society) it is quite possible a significant change could be a step down / backwards ? This is why i think conservatism in high functioning societies is completely differently motivated from conservatism in low functioning societies. If you have a broken engine, banging it with a hammer isn't such a bad idea. Doing the same with a working clock is just stupidity. Yes, it's probably a bad idea to hit a working clock with a hammer. However, if the clock doesn't work for everyone, it might be a good idea to replace it with a better clock. Sure. However, you haven't got a better clock.. Go back a step - functioning societies take hard work to build. |
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Oct 4, 2024 16:00:30 GMT
Yes, it's probably a bad idea to hit a working clock with a hammer. However, if the clock doesn't work for everyone, it might be a good idea to replace it with a better clock. Sure. However, you haven't got a better clock.. Go back a step - functioning societies take hard work to build.'Better' is subjective. A clock that works for everyone is better than a clock that works only for some (or so we Lefties like to think). |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 4, 2024 16:03:14 GMT
Sure. However, you haven't got a better clock.. Go back a step - functioning societies take hard work to build.'Better' is subjective. A clock that works for everyone is better than a clock that works only for some (or so we Lefties like to think). So, you have a 'clock that works for everyone' ready to install? Nope |
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Oct 4, 2024 16:05:01 GMT
'Better' is subjective. A clock that works for everyone is better than a clock that works only for some (or so we Lefties like to think). So, you have a 'clock that works for everyone' ready to install? Nope It's a work in progress. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 4, 2024 16:14:12 GMT
So, you have a 'clock that works for everyone' ready to install? Nope It's a work in progress. That's a pity.. If you could show this 'works for everyone' clock, we could rationally ditch the one that merely feeds, clothes and houses millions of people. |
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Oct 4, 2024 16:20:39 GMT
That's a pity.. If you could show this 'works for everyone' clock, we could rationally ditch the one that merely feeds, clothes and houses millions of people. I think you'll find that the left has been been instrumental in feeding, clothing, and housing everyone since at least Marx's time. If you fine conservatives had been allowed your way, the vast majority would still be living in slum tenements and working 12 hours a day dressed in little better than rags. But, as I said, it's a work in progress. That clock keeps getting better and better. In a century or so, you won't even recognise it. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 4, 2024 16:27:46 GMT
That's a pity.. If you could show this 'works for everyone' clock, we could rationally ditch the one that merely feeds, clothes and houses millions of people. I think you'll find that the left has been been instrumental in feeding, clothing, and housing everyone since at least Marx's time. guffaw |
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Oct 4, 2024 16:32:59 GMT
I think you'll find that the left has been been instrumental in feeding, clothing, and housing everyone since at least Marx's time. guffaw Thank you! You've been a wonderful audience. |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Oct 4, 2024 18:56:25 GMT
The bit you miss is that people don't also say Christians are bad because of what a few Christians did, which appears to be your position. Neither do people imply that abuse reflects an attitude or characteristic of all Christians This is my post 13 above yours on previous page where I imply all Muslims are bad You joining Steve in making stuff up I didn’t say No, I was picking up on your implication the Muslims living here is a bad idea because of the behaviour of some. I would be extremely glad for you to tell me I'm wrong and you are happy to invite them to live among us. |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Oct 4, 2024 18:57:40 GMT
There's nothing wrong with being far right The far right are patriots and honourable nationalists who feel they are protecting their country from worse Ignoring semantic squabbles about precise definition, more or less. Most of the people labelled far right are just normal, working people who hold positions that would have been officially considered reasonable twenty five years ago. The establishment's slide into total insanity has left them behind and the establishment has responded by re-labeling ordinary political positions. I have no doubt the same thing happens in all regimes that slide into madness. Just behind the times then? |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Oct 4, 2024 19:00:58 GMT
'Better' is subjective. A clock that works for everyone is better than a clock that works only for some (or so we Lefties like to think). So, you have a 'clock that works for everyone' ready to install? Nope It runs for everyone, but in order for it to do so it runs slow. |
|
