5 1

LINK Can republicanism transcend our political disagreements?

By WilyRickWiles5
Actions Follow Post Like

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value evidence and civil discourse - the social network for the fans of the IDW.

Create your free account

5 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Believe me you do NOT want an end to political disagreement. Politics exists solely for the purpose of managing (for lack of a better word) disagreements. It is unreasonable, impossible even to think that you can create a system that is universally moral and fair. This I believe is the primary fallacy of "progressive thought". It intentionally fails to recognize the nature of human beings to be competitive, venial, petty, self interested. These particular attributes can NEVER be eliminated nor should we try to eliminate them. The best thing to do is to have a system established with a set of rules (law) hopefully founded upon a moral and common-sense ideal. Politics is in a manner of speaking a mechanism where there is a constant and never ending ebb and flow of competing wants and desires. So we alternatively approve and disaprove and live with results of elections and the passing of laws and regulations. It would be very good however if we could say about some laws and regulations "well, that didn't work" lets nullify that law or that gov't bureau or agency and try something else. But as far as I know there has never been a case where a written law or regulation was legally nullified.

iThink Level 6 Apr 15, 2019

The system you describe only works when all parties have a shared epistemology. The Constitution provides a pretty good foundation for that, but the right in recent decades has absorbed the moral relativism of the '60s and flirted with nativism and market fundamentalism. Moreover, not all people place greed and domination of others first--and don't get me wrong competition can be fun--but many are driven first by creativity and community. You need some level of cooperation and shared understanding to hash out your disagreements. I prefer not to reduce human nature to animal instincts. History has proven that we are better than that.

Edited
0

I found the article very interesting. Republicanism could transcend our political disagreements only if both sides stop using the politics of emotion and switch to the politics of reason and logic. Middle America would react favorably to framing debates and discussion in republican terms but the progressives are not willing to do so for it would mean giving up what they believe is power, and power is their god of choice.

0

The effects the Global Migration Pakt... that immigration is a human right... that the entire world must come to terms that the EU/UN know what's best for the World. The Globalist do NOT care about your cultures; customs; traditions; family; values; women and children; your streets; and must ensure that all of us are dependent on these un-elected officials who thirst for ultimate power over all of us and our World. This is REAL..! This is NOT A JOKE..! We must disrupt; fight; sabotage; argue; and Ultimately VOTE for our lives; our culture; our customs; our values; our families; our streets; homes; and Jobs. Soros is the source and the financier.

0

I am under the suspicion that the reality of this New World Order and their Immigration Pakt that many, many countries signed - thank God we had Trump - will provide an actual existential threat to our Cultures; Traditions; Customs; Celebrations; Values...even down to our very lives. This Order wants to impose a one-size-fits-all social economic plan...for the entire World, diluting countries with non-compatible immigration from many third world countries while at the same moving manufacturing and other industries to these countries. Leaving million without the hope of getting a job; buying a car; living day to day. Then imposing millions of Islamist immigrants whose bills will be paid be the peoples of these countries...even making it against the law to say anything against the Pakt. So, no...it will be a movement of the People against this Enemy and political disagreements will be settle once the Dragon is Slayed.

The UN/EU are implementing a massive immigration plan that move over 260 million African immigrants into Europe and parts of South America. What is happening now at our Borders, and those liberal democrats who are helping...is planned. A planned invasion to destroy our laws; our Constitution; our Cultures; and our way of life. To bring the U.S. to its knees. But World's people are waking up...we, who are the Apple of the Globalist Eye...but, this time, the Apple is Poison.

@TheFly only scratches the surface. Women and children will be extraordinary victims. An aggressive ideology that believes that woman and children are prizes to be used to fulfill all of a man's desires... without a word. To destroy other's religions and to take over cities. The Globalist failed in two world wars ...now they have planted and paid for Puppets and Marionettes to do their bidding ... and destroy our Laws, Constitution, and Borders. To create a Cesspool... a third-world nation... to bring our Country to her knees. Killary, would have signed the Pakt. I am pleased that you are in the know and are wide awake. Many, many will perish.

@TheFly Your country's leader, is a male feminist; a Liberal; and the Destroyer of Canada.

1

Libertarianism has a better chance.

Since most ARE, but don't KNOW They are.

Even though there aren't many people in the bottom-right quadrant of a chart of social attitudes vs. economic attitudes? To be clear I'm just talking about right-wing libertarians here.

To show you what I'm getting at, here are some takes from partisan sources of different stripes:
[voterstudygroup.org]
[dataforprogress.org]
[nymag.com]
[niskanencenter.org]

@WilyRickWiles

I'm right there.

EDIT:

But, I think for myself.

(NyMag?.. dataforprogress?)

Edited

@WilyRickWiles
When confronted with issues, (healthcare, taxes, regulation, etc) most people fall JUST right (for Now) of center.

@Guido_Provolone Counterpoint: Red states Idaho, Nebraska, and Utah voted by referendum to expand Medicaid in the modern elections.

@WilyRickWiles there you go.

@WilyRickWiles meaning, on hardcore social issues, (abortion, etc) they fall dead right

Edited

@Guido_Provolone Right, but they're right wing populists rather than right wing libertarians because they're to the left in their economic attitudes.

@WilyRickWiles

How is it "Populist" to care about one's fellow citizens? I mean inside a National Arena?

Edited

@WilyRickWiles You understand that Classic Libertarianism is JUST outside Anarchists right?

@Guido_Provolone Because the economically libertarian option would be to leave healthcare entirely to the free market.

@WilyRickWiles

THAT is the GOP wish!

Libertarianism understands that we must take care of those among us who CANNOT provide for themselves.

Those that WILL NOT, well, life is hard.

Edited

@Guido_Provolone Yes re: classic libertarianism. We Americans sure like to make things confusing in our use of political terminology.

@WilyRickWiles Amen.

Too much Ego.

@Guido_Provolone I'm with you on the GOP and definition of libertarianism but I don't think the anarchocapitalists, Koch Brothers, and the Cato Institute would be!

Edited

@WilyRickWiles

LOL!!
Of course not! They are Elitist Capitalists... blind drunk with greed!

@Guido_Provolone Do you know them? The Koch brothers?

@Farmergramma

Yep. Have an ex brother-in-law that retired from a lumber Co., in Arkansas that is owned by them.

@Farmergramma

I AM a conservative capitalist.

I'm just not one blind drunk with greed.

Write Comment
IDW.community does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content read full disclaimer
  • IDW.community is the largest community for fans of the Intellectual Dark Web! We're non-commercial, fan-operated, and independent of any public figure.