EPTUS Politics Feedback Thread - Page 284
| Forum Index > Website Feedback |
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
Xxio
Canada5565 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28558 Posts
| ||
|
Sent.
Poland9104 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8927 Posts
I just want crystal clear words from mods on this. | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28558 Posts
The best, in my opinion, is if everybody posts to the best of their capacity and avoid having long drawn out conversations with posters that for whatever reason makes this impossible for them to do. It's totally fair if you reply to those posters every now and then because you want to correct something they said. But then it's also totally fair (sometimes, ideal, even) if that other poster replies to you, and you just internally go like 'okay, not worth it' and drop the conversation. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28558 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Jealous
10097 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8927 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8927 Posts
On April 15 2020 13:55 Danglars wrote: The Bernie/Biden discussion is immediately relevant. Political philosophy in the context of real current events is politics. I can understand if you think the arguments drag out and get repetitive, and that's kind of in the eye of the beholder. Thank you for your continued contribution to everything, Danglars. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On April 15 2020 16:50 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: Thank you for your continued contribution to everything, Danglars. You’re most welcome! | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland11926 Posts
On April 15 2020 13:32 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: We really need a political philosophy thread or something. While the current discussion is partly relevant, it's not really accomplishing anything and the last 5+ pages have shown that. It accomplishes something in that it clearly shows that I'm right :p Most internet debates are done for the audience rather than to get the opponent to concede. It sucks but it's not limited to philosophy, it's almost always the case. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
I’ve been pondering the sequence of arguments ending with Biff’s “Politics is about compromises” and Nebu’s retort “politics is about winning” I thought it was damn interesting seeing that end evolve from a Sanders/Biden fight and neoliberal/pragmatic leftist battle. Yes, I’m likely voting for Trump in November for his handling of the presidency and compared to his likely opponent, and I still thought it was mentally stimulating and thought provoking. To what extent is that a real divide? How much of it is in the mushy definitions of neoliberalism and necessary compromise itself? Are both perspectives more right than wrong? | ||
|
iamthedave
England2814 Posts
On April 16 2020 05:00 Danglars wrote: I confess that I tune out the background “you probably don’t know ... you probably don’t care” “string of neoliberal memes” “hilariously naive” etc etc. I read it, but I’m very used to that patina of insults. These days, it can even be sporting and good-natured as well as mean-spirited. I’ve been pondering the sequence of arguments ending with Biff’s “Politics is about compromises” and Nebu’s retort “politics is about winning” I thought it was damn interesting seeing that end evolve from a Sanders/Biden fight and neoliberal/pragmatic leftist battle. Yes, I’m likely voting for Trump in November for his handling of the presidency and compared to his likely opponent, and I still thought it was mentally stimulating and thought provoking. To what extent is that a real divide? How much of it is in the mushy definitions of neoliberalism and necessary compromise itself? Are both perspectives more right than wrong? Both positions seem odd to me; politics shouldn't be about either of those things, it should be about correct governance of the country said politics are happening in. If the end goal is winning, then what happens to governance? | ||
| ||
