Who will replace Harper?

[vid]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Who you talkin' to?

I was talking to Pinus.

"Talking" lol they're words on a screen

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by vid

On a serious note: if you've ever tried to be 100% consistent in an ideology, you'll realize that often you get to points where your only choice is to violate that ideology. You cannot be 100% consistent (ie, single standard) because there are so many variables that some have no choice but to be contradicted by other aspects of your ideology. Total consistency, a single standard, is nearly impossible.

That's why I've made an effort to move away from ideology - it's too much of a straitjacket. So if you're a leftist you absolutely need to believe in A, B, C and D and think that E is the end of the world. And if you're on the right you have a similar number of opposite tenets you HAVE to follow.

There is a reason why "ideologue" has pejorative connotations.

I still admit to being mostly left but I judge issues on their own merits, not on where they are assumed to align on the left-right spectrum.

[vid]

Originally Posted by Acajack

That's why I've made an effort to move away from ideology - it's too much of a straitjacket. So if you're a leftist you absolutely need to believe in A, B, C and D and think that E is the end of the world. And if you're on the right you have a similar number of opposite tenets you HAVE to follow.

There is a reason why "ideologue" has pejorative connotations.

I still admit to being mostly left but I judge issues on their own merits, not on where they are assumed to align on the left-right spectrum.

As do I. I generally dislike the whole "purity test" shit that both the right and left have for their politicians these days. No one is perfect, just pick the least horrific one and get on with it.

But I'm also not a fan of history for history's sake. We don't live in a museum, we live in a dynamic and every changing world. Standards change over time and if you don't accept that, you're going to be miserable all the time.

[Pinus]

Originally Posted by vid

You racist.

Uh huh

[Pinus]

Originally Posted by vid

On a serious note: if you've ever tried to be 100% consistent in an ideology, you'll realize that often you get to points where your only choice is to violate that ideology. You cannot be 100% consistent (ie, single standard) because there are so many variables that some have no choice but to be contradicted by other aspects of your ideology. Total consistency, a single standard, is nearly impossible.

Nice attempt at saving-face.

[333609543]

I'm generally content just reading new posts but can people stop bickering PLEASE. It's been quite prominent and to be quite honest its quite annoying to read post after post of zero substance material. Thanks.

Any kind of "pure" ideology blinds its followers from making rational conclusions to whatever the ideology's subject matter. It's also nearly impossible to have any kind of conversation with an ideologue because they already have an opinion (correct or not) and won't change it for the world.

[kool maudit]

Originally Posted by khabibulin

You've changed man. All your posts used to be thoughtful. Now your commenting on someone's facial appearance? And name calling?

It might not have been the most thoughtful post, but I think there really is something to the idea that centre-right politics attract a certain type of person. This is essentially Buckleyite conservatism, with Buckley's famous definition of such being 'to stand athwart history yelling STOP'.

This is neither a very optimistic nor a very forceful worldview, and as such I think it disproportionately attracts marginal wonks.

My comment was not about Scheer and this man's attractiveness, but about how their expressions and demeanours come off. There is an element of the bowtie here, of George Will-type prissiness and ineffectuality.

[theman23]

Could someone explain the Garnett Genius thing to me? He seems photogenic enough for a politician, and I haven't yet found any views of his that sound particularly odious. What was the point of that post?

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by theman23

Could someone explain the Garnett Genius thing to me? He seems photogenic enough for a politician, and I haven't yet found any views of his that sound particularly odious. What was the point of that post?

And who is he?

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

It might not have been the most thoughtful post, but I think there really is something to the idea that centre-right politics attract a certain type of person. This is essentially Buckleyite conservatism, with Buckley's famous definition of such being 'to stand athwart history yelling STOP'.

This is neither a very optimistic nor a very forceful worldview, and as such I think it disproportionately attracts marginal wonks.

My comment was not about Scheer and this man's attractiveness, but about how their expressions and demeanours come off. There is an element of the bowtie here, of George Will-type prissiness and ineffectuality.

At the same time though, it's necessary to have the accountant and lawyer types around to pick up the pieces after the reckless visionary types who prance around tilting at every windmill in sight (JT anyone???).

Now, if you excuse me, I have to find where I put my pocket protector and put some fresh masking tape on my broken eyeglasses..........

[kool maudit]

All in all, not my strongest few posts I guess. I'll accept the verdict Still think there's a germ of something there but as things stand it's built on little save the Andrew Scheer/Bobby Hill thing I've been enjoying.

[Gresto]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

It might not have been the most thoughtful post, but I think there really is something to the idea that centre-right politics attract a certain type of person. This is essentially Buckleyite conservatism, with Buckley's famous definition of such being 'to stand athwart history yelling STOP'.

For all his hyper-mannered intellectualism, Buckley was always quick with a, "Watch out, or I'll smash you in the face", usually when angered or argumentatively foiled by a leftist. Still, he was entertaining in his hauteur.

[vid]

Originally Posted by Pinus

Nice attempt at saving-face.

This is the internet. I have no face to save.

[Phil McAvity]

I have a prediction

I think Justin Trudeau will replace Stephen Harper