Do you think a person who's views are extremely radical (Bleeding-Heart Liberal) or extemely conservative (Neo-Conservative) are more dangerous to society as a whole? I'll give my reason for posting along with my opinion later.
Do you think a person who's views are extremely radical (Bleeding-Heart Liberal) or extemely conservative (Neo-Conservative) are more dangerous to society as a whole? I'll give my reason for posting along with my opinion later.
eveything labeled ''extreme'' is a so called danger in its own way imo.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 50 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- Artificial Intelligence
I think the extreme liberal one is more dangerous.Society has never adapted well to many changes at once and never will.Ofcourse like Eddy said,its obvious both aren't good for society.From extremist to crazy dictator isn't that much to go.
Def Poets Society
Never really thought about it.... I have gradually grew a hate for both at the same time..... Ill have to think about it and come back.................
It depends on your definition of liberal and conservative. Neocons are not really conservative.
It is hard to say which is really worse. The neocons dump money that we don't have into the military to expand the empire and fill their friends' pockets with money. The far left swingers believe socialism is the end all to suffering.
As far as affecting me, I am not sure which is really worse. The neocons create inflation with their spending. The left wingers typically do not spend as much even though they are looked at as the big spenders. They would however more than likely raise my taxes and put more burden on me as I want to start my own business. The neocons want to take my freedoms, the lefties don't want to take as many. Both are pro big central government.
Hard to say really. I voted for neither in the last election.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 50 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Well, there are 2 ways of view'n this.
1 is hypothetical, and in that case, the neo-conservatism would be a scarier reality. Only cuz th eprocess to reaching their final goal would enough to end a worlds population, and stop any morale building in the process. Neo-Cons, that are in office, all believe in PNAC, which basically is a plan to make America the one world government and disassembleing the UN.
Within that process comes great resistance from country's both friend and foe. The fact the world is occupied by one government, and is ruled with one set of law, defeats the purpose of freedom, religions, culture, etc.
If you were liberal, that allows a man to go seek it's own destinsy. of coarse there is bad to go along, there will still be hunger, and poor, and rich and no even medium. BUt the fact that the Neo-Cons plan is to de-populate the planet, to a more 'comfortable' and suitable' number for health reasons, war, and oil consumption.....gives the feeling, I may not be the one, or my kids for that matter, that gets to keep on going.
I dunno, Opey, I gotta get stoned then I'll think about it.
no. lets not take the discussion where it always goes. RADICAL or CONSERVATIVE views.... which ones are more dangerous. this is not a republican vs democrat discussion. u need to recognize the difference (everyone does).Originally Posted by dren
im not asking what you think the secret agenda of neo-cons in the government is. i'm asking about having radical or conservative views in general. i'm not concerned with policies of the current administration (which isn't neo-conservative anyway).
this is fun
no, to be so set in your ways, or swaying far to a side is always dangerous. That means it's more of a dictatorship, and more personal within it's politians beliefs, and not for whats best for the country.
Anyone who is extreme anything shouldn't be in govt. people in the middle.
and I'm in Canada, so I have a pretty shitty govt. situation right now, so I can endulge into that, or we can be talking about the US govt.
Cuz if you've heard the shit goin on in my country, you'd sit and think.....how does shit happen from day to day in Canada.
look it up.
extreme conservatives=no change
no change= stagnation
stagnant bodies of water= disease and illness
i guess neocons.
[YOUTUBE]XEx2T1NLsqw[/YOUTUBE]
You stated the neo-cons as being conservative. They are not conservative, they are extremely radical. Bleeding heart liberals are extremely radical. They are way on the far side of each.
In today's politics a liberal is looked at as a progressive thinker who wants to tax the rich more and even the gap between the classes. They want the government to give everybody free things such as health care, education etc. A bleeding heart liberal is typically thought of as a socialist.
Originally liberals were for very small limited government. These are referred to as classic liberals. They wanted personal freedom and property rights keeping government out of our lives.
As for conservatives today... they are looked at as thrifty spenders. Lower taxes to allow businesses to grow thus increasing jobs. They are in favor of taxes, just not as high of taxes as the liberals. Now on the other hand the neo-cons are pro empire. They want to spend spend spend to grow the empire and increase their wealth and power at the expense of the citizens and even other nations.
Neo-cons are not extremely conservative. If they were they would want to erradicate taxes and decrease the size of government hinting back to the classic liberal of yesterday.
What exactly are you comparing here then? Neo-cons and bleeding heart liberals both of which are the extremes in their respective parties?
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 50 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
ahh now I read this...im not asking what you think the secret agenda of neo-cons in the government is. i'm asking about having radical or conservative views in general. i'm not concerned with policies of the current administration (which isn't neo-conservative anyway).
this is fun
Ok well it depends on which direction the radical views are. If they are libertarian views, which are radical to both the democrats and republicans, then yes they are good views.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 50 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
word. i agree that both are dangerous. That's why my question is which one is the worse of the 2. i'm trying to not give my view on this right now for a reason, so that's why i'm bein so vague at this point.
why do u keep associating the words Radical and Conservative with specific policies concerning taxes etc? i'm talking about how a person views everything from a political standpoint. neoconservatism is as conservative as you can get. to say neocons arent conservative is a hilarious contradiction.
honestly....too much freedom can send shit down the toilet alot faster then too much strict shit
Posting Rules
Reply With Quote