3 ms·

The fundamental error of this piece is that it assumes that if you vote Democratic, you're by definition not an engineer. (not really, but to me it makes as muc

by paul 13y ago

The fundamental error of this piece is that it assumes that if you vote Democratic, you're by definition not an engineer. (not really, but to me it makes as much sense as your statement) How does being a part of the evil "one percent" make you any less qualified to have or hold a variety of political views? If anything, I've found that having more money makes me more aware of issues like unemployment, health care, etc because many of my friends and family are not as well off, and now I'm in a position where I feel obligated to do something about it. Overall, I find the whole left/right political divide to be frustratingly counter-productive. Both sides are wrong, and we waste much time and energy arguing about which side is more wrong.

rndmize 13y ago
> How does being a part of the evil "one percent" make you any less qualified to have or hold a variety of political views? I don't think this is what he's saying. It's that one percenters have an inherently greater voice on political issues (if they so choose) and that as a result, the national debate has been warped to focus on the issues and perspectives they consider important.
- smacktoward 13y ago
  That was my point, yes. I don't object to the 1% having a voice in politics; of course they should! I just object to having a system that defers reflexively to their needs and interests over those of everybody else.
cmdkeen 13y ago
Well feel better - there is no right/left divide in America. By the standards of anywhere else there is only very right / slightly less right. The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled off was convincing Americans that anyone to the left of Attila the Hun was a Communist... What I find odd is that the article equates libertarianism with Rand and the Koch brothers, as if no other type exists. There's also a hint of conflating liberalism and libertarianism.
- walshemj 13y ago
  And describing Obama/Dems as a liberal when hes/they are centre right.
- saraid216 13y ago
  Libertarianism is basically a fundamentalist version of liberalism. It's essentially "liberalism has gotten too complicated and the complexity is producing errors; here are the most important bits and they're what Really Matter", which is what fundamentalism is.
  - yarrel 13y ago
    It's a fundamentalist version of economic liberalism certainly, but not of political liberalism in the sense of vaguely leftist centrism.
    - saraid216 13y ago
      Political liberalism is and always has been nonsense. It's a propaganda label and is as meaningful as having a Libertarian Party with a platform half the libertarians in the country disagree (all of whom contend that those who do agree aren't True libertarians).
- jacoblyles 13y ago
  The Democratic Party is trying to gobble up more of the economy to spend through the federal government, the Republican Party is trying to make it eat less. How are they not left and right?
  - scarmig 13y ago
    You can't map being right and left wing to a scale measured by "desired percentage of GDP to be spent by the government." Consider: Bush or Clinton? Huckabee or Romney? FDR or Hitler? Ukrainian anarchists or Stalin? French monarchists or Jacobins? Southern segregationists or Northern industrialists?
  - 13y ago

by paul 13y ago

rndmize 13y ago

> How does being a part of the evil "one percent" make you any less qualified to have or hold a variety of political views? I don't think this is what he's saying. It's that one percenters have an inherently greater voice on political issues (if they so choose) and that as a result, the national debate has been warped to focus on the issues and perspectives they consider important.

smacktoward 13y ago
That was my point, yes. I don't object to the 1% having a voice in politics; of course they should! I just object to having a system that defers reflexively to their needs and interests over those of everybody else.

cmdkeen 13y ago

Well feel better - there is no right/left divide in America. By the standards of anywhere else there is only very right / slightly less right. The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled off was convincing Americans that anyone to the left of Attila the Hun was a Communist... What I find odd is that the article equates libertarianism with Rand and the Koch brothers, as if no other type exists. There's also a hint of conflating liberalism and libertarianism.

walshemj 13y ago
And describing Obama/Dems as a liberal when hes/they are centre right.
saraid216 13y ago
Libertarianism is basically a fundamentalist version of liberalism. It's essentially "liberalism has gotten too complicated and the complexity is producing errors; here are the most important bits and they're what Really Matter", which is what fundamentalism is.
- yarrel 13y ago
  It's a fundamentalist version of economic liberalism certainly, but not of political liberalism in the sense of vaguely leftist centrism.
  - saraid216 13y ago
    Political liberalism is and always has been nonsense. It's a propaganda label and is as meaningful as having a Libertarian Party with a platform half the libertarians in the country disagree (all of whom contend that those who do agree aren't True libertarians).
jacoblyles 13y ago
The Democratic Party is trying to gobble up more of the economy to spend through the federal government, the Republican Party is trying to make it eat less. How are they not left and right?
- scarmig 13y ago
  You can't map being right and left wing to a scale measured by "desired percentage of GDP to be spent by the government." Consider: Bush or Clinton? Huckabee or Romney? FDR or Hitler? Ukrainian anarchists or Stalin? French monarchists or Jacobins? Southern segregationists or Northern industrialists?
- 13y ago