Yeah, I get it. Everyone who still believes in the two-party paradigm is an idiot. Except neither side is particularly dumb, but is more describable as gullible, with members of either party leaning their bias to one side or the other based on one to several key issues they are taught to be well-educated on. Its why the Libertarian Partys ideations are phrased socially liberal; fiscally conservative; both sides have some good ideas, but their ideas are focused on a specific set of ideas, IE: conservatism, or liberalism, (neither of which have any meaning anymore), since theyre taught that the problems the two parties face are not harmonizable by any solution. The point of third parties is theoretically to try to bridge the gap between the two, and provide people frustrated with the binary system a way of escaping it while not sacrificing their values, which means that third parties wishing for success have to first admit that theres a good basis for at least some of the values a new potential member might have, and then convince them the third party is better equipped to handle them. Anarcho-capitalists need to take that a step further, and not only admit that they have valid beefs, but that they cant be solved by party politics, at all. I dont think a good first step to building that sort of relationship is to call someone an idiot. If you want people to accept your views, maybe frame them logically, without ad hominem. It might just assist you with that endeavor.
Posted on: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 03:24:06 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015