The New Aristocracy

[sarthaz]

Where there are still intelligent people, who are not complacent about politics, there is still hope. However, I think the masses feel very distant from the political system, and do not feel it engages them or represents them in any way.

Part of the problem is that the two parties are near identical when it comes to this issue. People want to believe otherwise, because everyone has a soapbox and identifies with the party that pretends to support their issue, but ultimately our choices are:

1) Give my hard-earned money to massively corrupt and mismanaged government programs and have the PC police tell me how to live my life
2) Give my hard-earned money to massively corrupt and mismanaged big businesses and have the religious police tell me how to live my life

And the line between the massively corrupt and mismanaged government programs and big businesses is extremely blurry.

If you're like me and believe in a non-bloated government and social liberty, there's no one to vote for. And the candidates who have Libertarian next to their names aren't actually Libertarians, and the Tea Party sure as hell isn't what it claims to be either. It's all extremely disheartening, and the older I get, the more I realize it doesn't matter.

[Ubik]

Part of the problem is that the two parties are near identical when it comes to this issue. People want to believe otherwise, because everyone has a soapbox and identifies with the party that pretends to support their issue, but ultimately our choices are:

1) Give my hard-earned money to massively corrupt and mismanaged government programs and have the PC police tell me how to live my life
2) Give my hard-earned money to massively corrupt and mismanaged big businesses and have the religious police tell me how to live my life

And the line between the massively corrupt and mismanaged government programs and big businesses is extremely blurry.

If you're like me and believe in a non-bloated government and social liberty, there's no one to vote for. And the candidates who have Libertarian next to their names aren't actually Libertarians, and the Tea Party sure as hell isn't what it claims to be either. It's all extremely disheartening, and the older I get, the more I realize it doesn't matter.

I hear you, but the thing is... it DOES matter. We've just had European elections here in the UK and right wing parties like UKIP (UK Independence Party) made massive gains, earning seats in the EU parliament and overtaking long standing parties. They did so with openly rasicist views, anti-EU rhetoric and general fear mongering politics. They've captured a section of the public who are generally disenfranchised, poor and not well educated.

With so much voter apathy about, they've made a big dent in the political landscape. It's depressing and a bit scary. I voted, and encouraged everyone I know to do the same. In spite of this we are seeing a rise in right wing politics in Europe again. It saddens me.

[Jan]

...and have the PC police tell me how to live my life.

Not wanting to be confrontational, but could you define 'PC police' as you're using it? Because in many cases it's become a pejorative term or vastly overused so looking to understand.

Jan
not overly big on discussions using labels

[sarthaz]

Not wanting to be confrontational, but could you define 'PC police' as you're using it? Because in many cases it's become a pejorative term or vastly overused so looking to understand.

Jan
not overly big on discussions using labels

Sure, the PC Police make sure you're not doing anything naughty with your computer!

No, what I'm referring to is the growing segment of the population who are ready to pounce on anyone who doesn't say or do things in just the right, popular, politically correct manner of the moment. Some celebrity says something stupid or makes a joke in poor taste, and everyone is OUTRAGED, and that individual's life must now be destroyed! It's the growing list of words or phrases that are now deemed offensive. It's the campaign against the phrase "Man Up" because that's now apparently demeaning to women. Never mind that the phrase is not intended to differentiate between a man and a woman, rather between an adult and a child -- so what -- let's get outraged about it and lynch anyone who uses it. Wait, did I say "lynch"? I think that's offensive these days. Can't keep track.

Anyway, I believe in a level of social liberty. Gay? No problem. Think gays are icky? No problem. As long as you're not hurting someone else, I don't care what you say or do. I have personal beliefs, and they're pretty strong, but it's OK if others don't share them. The "PC Police" are not content to live and let live. Worse, there's this level of enlightened elitism, this look-at-me attitude where one must publicly condemn the non-PC words and actions of others and vocally pat themselves on the back for how better-than-everyone-else they are.

Not sure if that's the right term, but that's how I was using it

[Jan]

Sure, the PC Police make sure you're not doing anything naughty with your computer!

Well, I'm in trouble then! My computer and I definitely have a 'thing'.

No, what I'm referring to is the growing segment of the population who are ready to pounce on anyone who doesn't say or do things in just the right, popular, politically correct manner of the moment. Some celebrity says something stupid or makes a joke in poor taste, and everyone is OUTRAGED, and that individual's life must now be destroyed! It's the growing list of words or phrases that are now deemed offensive. It's the campaign against the phrase "Man Up" because that's now apparently demeaning to women. Never mind that the phrase is not intended to differentiate between a man and a woman, rather between an adult and a child -- so what -- let's get outraged about it and lynch anyone who uses it. Wait, did I say "lynch"? I think that's offensive these days. Can't keep track.

Well, I'll admit to my own personal campaign to get all sexual terms out of the insult business. And like it or not, 'man up' counts. As for outrage...I'm torn. I'm perfectly content for people who say stupid things to be whapped upside the head for their stupidity and I also believe that freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences. But, yeah, too much of the time the punishment is far outweighing the stupidity these days.

Anyway, I believe in a level of social liberty. Gay? No problem. Think gays are icky? No problem. As long as you're not hurting someone else, I don't care what you say or do. I have personal beliefs, and they're pretty strong, but it's OK if others don't share them. The "PC Police" are not content to live and let live. Worse, there's this level of enlightened elitism, this look-at-me attitude where one must publicly condemn the non-PC words and actions of others and vocally pat themselves on the back for how better-than-everyone-else they are.

Guess I'm an elitist, then. Because when somebody says something stupid, I do condemn it, and to their face. Some times it's just ending a conversation but I honestly don't have a problem disassociating myself from people whose openly expressed attitudes offend me. Because society doesn't change until certain behaviors become unacceptable in polite company.

Not sure if that's the right term, but that's how I was using it

Thanks for explaining. But...and this is a big but...what does any of that have to do with the government as you stated in your post above? If society has decided that something that used to be accepted is no longer acceptable, isn't it right to codify it into our legal system? I read one time that it's impossible for a government to be fair to everybody but that it should at least try to be the least UNfair as possible. This would seem to apply.

Thanks for indulging me in conversation.

Jan

[sarthaz]

Well, I'll admit to my own personal campaign to get all sexual terms out of the insult business. And like it or not, 'man up' counts. As for outrage...I'm torn. I'm perfectly content for people who say stupid things to be whapped upside the head for their stupidity and I also believe that freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences. But, yeah, too much of the time the punishment is far outweighing the stupidity these days.

I'm cool with some whapping, and I definitely don't agree with freedom from consequences. Say something stupid, in a public forum no less, and deal with what happens to you. It's just the level of outrage these days and the long, growing list of all the things that will piss everyone off now. Btw, I just picked "man up" out of a hat because I keep seeing it on Facebook every 5 minutes. Cuz that's going to solve gender inequality?

Studies are starting to show just how unprepared our emerging youth are to handle adulthood. A generation of man-children (sorry, man-and-woman-children) are graduating from college completely ill-equipped to face a challenging world. It's my opinion that the prevailing trend of trying to shield them from any word that might somehow possibly be offensive is part of the problem (along with participation trophies and 5th grade graduation celebrations). Everyone, including adults, are being so coddled these days, and it gives us all a real sense of entitlement and little drive to look inside ourselves instead of just blaming others for whatever happens to be wrong. We increase our list of things that offend us, so we have more people to blame when needed.

A side effect of being so aggressively PC is that people are getting better at masking their true feelings to avoid potential scorn. I'd prefer people just be themselves. Someone says something stupid? Roll your eyes, make a mental note that he's probably a douchebag, and move on with your life. Crap, can I say "douchebag"? That's gender-specific, but I haven't received a memo yet on whether that's offensive or not. It would really be easier if there were a central list I could use to know what's ok to say and what isn't.

Guess I'm an elitist, then. Because when somebody says something stupid, I do condemn it, and to their face. Some times it's just ending a conversation but I honestly don't have a problem disassociating myself from people whose openly expressed attitudes offend me. Because society doesn't change until certain behaviors become unacceptable in polite company.

Condemning someone doesn't make you an elitist. Bragging about it is the issue here, and there's a lot of that these days. Granted, social media and 24-hour news are fueling it, but it's on the rise. I can't go on Facebook without seeing a bunch of people patting themselves on the back for how enlightened they think they are.

Thanks for explaining. But...and this is a big but...what does any of that have to do with the government as you stated in your post above? If society has decided that something that used to be accepted is no longer acceptable, isn't it right to codify it into our legal system? I read one time that it's impossible for a government to be fair to everybody but that it should at least try to be the least UNfair as possible. This would seem to apply.

I dunno. I'm just mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore? Nah, the government needs to be in the business of national security and fixing potholes, not making laws for everything. What this has to do with my original post is just clarifying the terminology for you like you requested. Every individual is different, but in terms of general political movements, the two opposing sides seem mostly motivated by pushing religion where it doesn't belong on one side and don't-hurt-my-feelings on the other. These are not opposing views on any level, but they're both a level of telling other people how to live their lives, and I don't like it!

Thanks for indulging me in conversation.

Anytime, Jan. I take none of this personally. I hope you don't either. I feel very disenfranchised, both socially and economically, so it's frustrating to see my choices every election cycle.

[Jan]

I take none of this personally. I hope you don't either. I feel very disenfranchised, both socially and economically, so it's frustrating to see my choices every election cycle.

Never personally. I *like* vigorous conversation.

Jan