Community >> View Post
Post By
Late Great Donald Blake 

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,563
In Reply To

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Subj: To be clear I don't cosign that at all.
Posted: Mon May 09, 2022 at 10:46:34 pm EDT (Viewed 149 times)
Reply Subj: Re: The Democrat party's inability to hold together a popular coalition...
Posted: Fri May 06, 2022 at 07:26:00 pm EDT (Viewed 240 times)

Previous Post

Both you and LGDB are right. The Republican Party is now an extremist party of anger and hate that embraces conspiracy theories and disbelieves science. They will do anything to win and keeping Garland from even coming up for a vote almost a year out from the election while simultaneously and hypocritically rushing Barrett through with a month before the election has resulted in the Supreme Court's awful reputation and terrible decisions. The Democrats are inept at communicating and governing and recognizing where their faults lie and so are having a hard time stopping the crazies.

You're totally entitled to your opinion, and I sympathize with your point of view you a lot, but I don't think applying morality to politics is ever so simple. If I simply take the stated platforms of the two parties I would certainly agree more readily with the Dems, but that's basically where it stops. To be clear, at the anthropological level, I don't believe by and large liberal Democrats are more rational or more moral than conservative Republicans. As a matter of fact, I think a better predicator by far of people's political affiliations are things like socioeconomic group, region, family and community; those are farm more determinate than something like individual intelligence, sanity, or moral character.

And even if we're not terribly rigorous in our moral philosophy; even if taking the parties as they are with no contextualization, from my perspective it just looks like two different kinds of death cults and the question is how slow or fast moving you want it. How purely refined do you want the oligarchy? Would you like to ignore climate change entirely or just systematically fail to address it? Would you like to ignore poverty entirely or just apologize of why you can't address it? Do you GET to bomb people in the global south or do you HAVE to? And you'll notice it's not a false equivalency. I'm not saying they're both equally bad. I would never say a little bit of Fentanyl was as bad as a lot of Fentanyl. But despite the disparity, I'm saying they're both VERY bad.

Further, I would argue if we're going to talk about politics in a more formal sense, there are enough examples of establishment Democrats being similarly awful and in certain comparative ways definitively worse than certain conservative sectors. I'll put it this way: even if the liberals have some kind of moral high horse to tout after all things are weighed and measured, it's so flimsy, so tenuous and technical, that if they focus more on touting their superiority than addressing their own crimes, excising the cancers in their political machine, and tending their own garden... then morally speaking it's at best a Pyrrhic victory.

---the late great Donald Blake

Posted with Google Chrome 100.0.4896.127 on Windows 10
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2022 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2022 Powermad Software