1. #1801
    Quote Originally Posted by Sooba View Post
    But Bernie's campaign needs to "change it's tone and they're the ones operating on "feels". K.

    Thanks for showing your true colours.
    One has to actually be concealing their true colors in order to be "showing them" and it be a shocking thing. I think I've been very clear about what I think of Sanders, and BernieBros, from the start. They are different sides of the same coin as the Branch Trumpistas.

    I've said it once and I'll say it again: Bernie Sanders and his call for a 'political revolution' is sickening and as dangerous and unacceptable as Donald Trumps racism/fascism. And his supporters should be ashamed of themselves for going along with it.

  2. #1802
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/15/politi...e-now-opposes/

    I'm not going to link them all, but there are 45 specific circumstances of her backing TPP.

    Why is she saying she's against it? Because it's a political free lunch. She gets to feed some bullshit to a Democratic Base who knows better. TPP will pass in the lame duck session in December, and it'll be a crime with nobody's finger prints on it. She gets to make some promises about reviewing it when she comes into office - which she'll never follow through on. And even in the unlikely case it didn't pass in the Lame duck, she can request some superficial changes, call it a major change, and say it's a good deal, just like that. It would of course, be bullshit.

    She should absolutely be against TPP at this point... because the point is to win the nomination among people hostile to it.

    It's exactly the same reason a pro-choice liberal Republican name Mitt Romeny decides to become pro-life when he stopped being Governor and started to run for President.

    Both are politicians speaking to their auidences.

    And people eat it up because they never look at their past votes or decisions.

  3. #1803
    Quote Originally Posted by Sooba View Post
    But Bernie's campaign needs to "change it's tone" and they're the ones operating on "feels". K.

    Thanks for showing your true colours.
    Nobody here is asking them to change their tone. They can shout and scream all they want (Something they do best), but in the end, it doesn't matter. They are going to lose. This isn't me being a Hillary shill. This isn't giving in to the "establishment" (Whatever that is, Sanders and Trump supporters can't even define what it is). This isn't falling prey to the un-democratic voting system (Which, by the way, is rated as one of the best in terms of fairness in the world).

    These are cold, hard, facts. Like them or not, they are there. Sanders can go all the way to the convention. But temper your expectations about what is really going to happen and how much support Sanders really has.

  4. #1804
    Pandaren Monk
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,853
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    One has to actually be concealing their true colors in order to be "showing them" and it be a shocking thing. I think I've been very clear about what I think of Sanders, and BernieBros, from the start. They are different sides of the same coin as the Branch Trumpistas.

    I've said it once and I'll say it again: Bernie Sanders and his call for a 'political revolution' is sickening and as dangerous and unacceptable as Donald Trumps racism/fascism. And his supporters should be ashamed of themselves for going along with it.
    /rolleyes. Yup, let's just equate mouth-foaming raging racism and misogyny and universal healthcare. Clearly the same thing.

    And I was speaking more to the fear of the word "revolution" than your disrespect. (Perhaps ironically you've been better than most in this thread at concealing it despite your being more honest about it.) Sanders has been very clear about what he means by "revolution", and it's not what you've just tried to make it out to be.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by infinitemeridian View Post
    Nobody here is asking them to change their tone. They can shout and scream all they want (Something they do best), but in the end, it doesn't matter. They are going to lose. This isn't me being a Hillary shill. This isn't giving in to the "establishment" (Whatever that is, Sanders and Trump supporters can't even define what it is). This isn't falling prey to the un-democratic voting system (Which, by the way, is rated as one of the best in terms of fairness in the world).

    These are cold, hard, facts. Like them or not, they are there. Sanders can go all the way to the convention. But temper your expectations about what is really going to happen and how much support Sanders really has.
    You seem to have missed a whole news cycle.
    Last edited by Sooba; 2016-04-07 at 03:14 PM.

  5. #1805
    Quote Originally Posted by Sooba View Post
    /rolleyes. Yup, let's just equate mouth-foaming raging racism and misogyny and universal healthcare. Clearly the same thing.

    - - - Updated - - -



    You seem to have missed a whole news cycle.
    Universal Healthcare is not a revolution. It is a policy. One that I want, but do we want it in the way that Sanders supports it? Up for debate. Sanders ideas are not new. His implementation of them is shaky at best, impossible at worst. If healthcare and education are so expensive that we need to make them "free", how about we first focus on reducing their costs first?

    We already have the ACA. Fix the ACA, then we can move towards single payer. This is another problem, Sanders supporters ignore all the progress that Obama has had in terms of pushing liberal legislation. Just because it isn't perfect doesn't mean we need to smash it all down.

    Universal Healthcare and Free College tuition won't fix this country in the way that Sanders supporters seem to think. They are goals. Once we fix what we currently have, then we can turn to them.

    An what news cycle is that? Oh, Sanders won Wisconsin? We're ignoring the fact that he didn't win as much as he was hoping to? That even if he had, he still has a mountain to climb to catch up to Clinton, and that the upcoming states that matter (NY, Cali, Penn) all favor Clinton over Sanders?
    Last edited by infinitemeridian; 2016-04-07 at 03:30 PM.

  6. #1806
    Quote Originally Posted by Sooba View Post
    /rolleyes. Yup, let's just equate mouth-foaming raging racism and misogyny and universal healthcare. Clearly the same thing.

    - - - Updated - - -



    You seem to have missed a whole news cycle.
    No. Don't even try that.

    About upending our economic and political system? I'm sorry. It needs modest reform, not wholesale replacement. And fundamentally there isn't REMOTELY the kind of political consensus in this country on the extent and duties of government (Specifically how proper is it for it to be involve din healthcare, education, life choices, retirement, and so forth) for Sanders to demand and pledge a revolution to force a very, very leftist model on the country. There are huge numbers of very honest, very principled Americans who find the idea of expanding medicare to allow for universal healthcare is ideologically distasteful. Sanders model only has legitimacy in a country where the political consensus has formed that things like free taxpayer funded college are what the consensus of the country has formed around.

    Right now that is very , very plainly not the case.

    And that's what makes his calls for political revolution so distasteful. It makes the arrogant presumption that were he to be President, a radical vision of "what the role of government is" would be forced on a country a great deal more moderate and less sure than he and his beliefs are.

    That's why it is as bad as trump. It's a radical approach for a country that isn't nearly so radical in a national situation that simply doesn't warrant it.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Sooba View Post
    /rolleyes. Yup, let's just equate mouth-foaming raging racism and misogyny and universal healthcare. Clearly the same thing.

    And I was speaking more to the fear of the word "revolution" than your disrespect. (Perhaps ironically you've been better than most in this thread at concealing it despite your being more honest about it.) Sanders has been very clear about what he means by "revolution", and it's not what you've just tried to make it out to be. .
    I'm sorry. When I hear Sanders rant about wall street, I hear him going after my family and mines 401-ks. When I hear him going after big business, I hear him going after me. When I hear him rant about "big pharma", I hear him going after my father, who made crap for money working for decades in hosptials and universities, before moving to pharma in his late 50s to actually earn a retirement. When I hear him going after police and law enforcement, I hear him going after my brother (a New York City Assistant DA, and a big fan of stop and frisk who detests DeBlasio's liberalism). When I hear him going after the investor class, I think of my family which got wealthy off 1990s tech investments. When I hear him talking about socialism, I can't help but think about the conflict my family fled to the US from, 60 years ago.


    Detesting Bernie Sanders is very easy for me. Very, very easy. He says the word 'revolution', I see my extended family, who worked for every bit of it's success in the cross hairs. People like us tend to lose everything in revolutions. The super rich flee to other countries, treasuries in hand. The middle class, upper middle class and working-affluent get consumed by the angry horde.

    Bernie Sanders is a disgusting human being who is the ideal candidate for those who blame others for their failures.
    Last edited by Skroe; 2016-04-07 at 03:30 PM.

  7. #1807
    The Unstoppable Force Theodarzna's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    24,166
    Quote Originally Posted by Yvaelle View Post
    That's a good idea Skroe thanks! After we put Bernie on the throne, we should get him a Sainthood to match
    Clinton is surely trying to make a martyr out of him.

    I guess she takes a page out of Diocletian playbook from time to time.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    Rand's record is pretty great, so if you're a data driven purpose rather than an ideological one, yeah, you will "worship".

    But more to my point, I'm seeking to illustrate that as such a highly specialized field, it's not like a President Bernie would be able to have mooks off the street staff his foreign policy. He would be forced to deal with the exact_same_people.

    In fact, that can be said of almost ANY developed country for countless highly specialized subfields. Small "experts" communities as a part of anything involving good governance over ideological governance.

    Okay, this is basically not a serious... rant... you have here. I think both that you don't have much of a clue what "realism" actually is, and that you don't actually know what Kissinger's record is beyond Vietnam. But then again, neither does Sanders. "Kissingers beliefs were essentially that the purpose of American power, then, is to create an awareness of American purpose. " is a (barely sensible) claim completely undermined by the practical outcomes of Kissingerite foreign policy, like deepening and exploiting the sino-soviet rift.

    Saying Henry Kissinger isn't a realist is a very strange hill to die on. But then again, this has been a very strange electoral season. We've seen know-nothing Russian sympathizers and radical leftists like Katrina van Heuvel and the Nation try to redefine Realism to give Bernie Sanders something resembling a coherent foreign policy system to paper over the fact that he simply doesn't have one.

    I'll just leave this here:

    http://time.com/3275385/henry-kissinger/

    A bit too nuanced for you, or Bernie Sanders. But there it is.
    Okay, this is basically not a serious rant you have here. I think both that you don't have much of a clue what "realism," actually is, and that you don't actually know what Kissinger's record is beyond Vietnam. You believe firmly he is a genius, except he is a failure, flying by the seat of his pants with only the naked ambition to survive and the total willingness to burn anyone to keep himself afloat, In a sense he is much like you. Realism if it is not realistic than is a painful joke played on you and every other wannabe cold warrior.

    More over, I was not speaking of the "Rand Corporation," but of the psuodo-Philosopher, Ayn Rand.
    Quote Originally Posted by Crissi View Post
    i think I have my posse filled out now. Mars is Theo, Jupiter is Vanyali, Linadra is Venus, and Heather is Mercury. Dragon can be Pluto.
    On MMO-C we learn that Anti-Fascism is locking arms with corporations, the State Department and agreeing with the CIA, But opposing the CIA and corporate America, and thinking Jews have a right to buy land and can expect tenants to pay rent THAT is ultra-Fash Nazism. Bellingcat is an MI6/CIA cut out. Clyburn Truther.

  8. #1808
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    I'm sorry. When I hear Sanders rant about wall street, I hear him going after my family and mines 401-ks. When I hear him going after big business, I hear him going after me. When I hear him rant about "big pharma", I hear him going after my father, who made crap for money working for decades in hosptials and universities, before moving to pharma in his late 50s to actually earn a retirement. When I hear him going after police and law enforcement, I hear him going after my brother (a New York City Assistant DA, and a big fan of stop and frisk who detests DeBlasio's liberalism). When I hear him going after the investor class, I think of my family which got wealthy off 1990s tech investments. When I hear him talking about socialism, I can't help but think about the conflict my family fled to the US from, 60 years ago.


    Detesting Bernie Sanders is very easy for me. Very, very easy. He says the word 'revolution', I see my extended family, who worked for every bit of it's success in the cross hairs. People like us tend to lose everything in revolutions. The super rich flee to other countries, treasuries in hand. The middle class, upper middle class and working-affluent get consumed by the angry horde.

    Bernie Sanders is a disgusting human being who is the ideal candidate for those who blame others for their failures..
    your word salads lack any sort of perspective of reality, but I suppose if you're going to still fear the boogeyman a 74 year old, near pacifist Jew is probably the second scariest thing to Pennywise the Dancing Clown.

  9. #1809
    Quote Originally Posted by Theodarzna View Post
    Clinton is surely trying to make a martyr out of him.

    I guess she takes a page out of Diocletian playbook from time to time.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Okay, this is basically not a serious rant you have here. I think both that you don't have much of a clue what "realism," actually is, and that you don't actually know what Kissinger's record is beyond Vietnam. You believe firmly he is a genius, except he is a failure, flying by the seat of his pants with only the naked ambition to survive and the total willingness to burn anyone to keep himself afloat, In a sense he is much like you. Realism if it is not realistic than is a painful joke played on you and every other wannabe cold warrior.

    More over, I was not speaking of the "Rand Corporation," but of the psuodo-Philosopher, Ayn Rand.
    I don't really know enough about FP to have an opinion on Kissinger, but you're not really making any arguments for your case. You keep using grandiose rhetoric and calling him a demon, but you're not actually countering any of Skroe's points or backing up your own.

  10. #1810
    The Unstoppable Force Theodarzna's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    24,166
    Quote Originally Posted by infinitemeridian View Post
    I don't really know enough about FP to have an opinion on Kissinger, but you're not really making any arguments for your case. You keep using grandiose rhetoric and calling him a demon, but you're not actually countering any of Skroe's points or backing up your own.
    I made the argument earlier, Skroe's point is mostly getting China to be our quasi-ally, that spies on us, steals trade secrets and other shenanigans. Meanwhile it sidesteps the whole over all point, what were we doing being belligerent fucks to the Russians whose sacrifices made the victory in WW2 possible?
    Quote Originally Posted by Crissi View Post
    i think I have my posse filled out now. Mars is Theo, Jupiter is Vanyali, Linadra is Venus, and Heather is Mercury. Dragon can be Pluto.
    On MMO-C we learn that Anti-Fascism is locking arms with corporations, the State Department and agreeing with the CIA, But opposing the CIA and corporate America, and thinking Jews have a right to buy land and can expect tenants to pay rent THAT is ultra-Fash Nazism. Bellingcat is an MI6/CIA cut out. Clyburn Truther.

  11. #1811
    Pandaren Monk
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,853
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    I'm sorry. When I hear Sanders rant about wall street, I hear him going after my family and mines 401-ks. When I hear him going after big business, I hear him going after me. When I hear him rant about "big pharma", I hear him going after my father, who made crap for money working for decades in hosptials and universities, before moving to pharma in his late 50s to actually earn a retirement. When I hear him going after police and law enforcement, I hear him going after my brother (a New York City Assistant DA, and a big fan of stop and frisk who detests DeBlasio's liberalism). When I hear him going after the investor class, I think of my family which got wealthy off 1990s tech investments. When I hear him talking about socialism, I can't help but think about the conflict my family fled to the US from, 60 years ago.


    Detesting Bernie Sanders is very easy for me. Very, very easy. He says the word 'revolution', I see my extended family, who worked for every bit of it's success in the cross hairs. People like us tend to lose everything in revolutions. The super rich flee to other countries, treasuries in hand. The middle class, upper middle class and working-affluent get consumed by the angry horde.

    Bernie Sanders is a disgusting human being who is the ideal candidate for those who blame others for their failures.
    Then you have a hearing problem.

    All jokes aside, your approach to this is not very logical for someone who prides themself on such. (Hence my comments on the hypocrisy of Hillary supporters calling Sander's about the "feels".) He's not going after Wall Street in some communist manner like you imply, bound to wipe out your investment. He's speaking about regulation that would disallow the shenanigans that they pulled the last time. Glass Steagall, etc. Also the capacity to actually prosecute the cheats rather than being toothless, which is what has become of your financial regulation. In short, he wants to protect your 401k which as it stands in unbelievably vulnerable to manipulation by insiders.

    And he's not "going after law enforcement", but again about dealing with misbehaviour. Misbehaviour I might add that endangers your brother by fostering hatred and mistrust of law enforcement.

    And again, he's not talking about a "revolution" as you want to imply. No matter how hard you try and make him out to be boogey-man in order to satisfy your obvious emotionally charged reaction, you simply won't succeed. The man is a capitalist. A socialist, but a capitalist. His revolution is one of forcing financial institutions to take responsibility for their misbehaviour, and for getting the corrupting money out of politics.

    Oh so scary

  12. #1812
    Quote Originally Posted by Theodarzna View Post
    Clinton is surely trying to make a martyr out of him.

    I guess she takes a page out of Diocletian playbook from time to time.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Okay, this is basically not a serious rant you have here. I think both that you don't have much of a clue what "realism," actually is, and that you don't actually know what Kissinger's record is beyond Vietnam. You believe firmly he is a genius, except he is a failure, flying by the seat of his pants with only the naked ambition to survive and the total willingness to burn anyone to keep himself afloat, In a sense he is much like you. Realism if it is not realistic than is a painful joke played on you and every other wannabe cold warrior.

    More over, I was not speaking of the "Rand Corporation," but of the psuodo-Philosopher, Ayn Rand.
    You say I don't know what 'realism' is, yet you relate 'realism' to 'realistic'..... good heavens.

    Stop playing make believe Theodarzna. You're fooling nobody. For the record the term 'realism' was coined as a juxtaposition/critique the an obsolete international relations school called 'Idealism', that decades later gave way to "Liberal Internationalism". LI and Realism are the two major Western schools of international relations. The names have nothing to do with their straight forward "definitions" (the false relation you make).

    You didn't know any of this though, but now you do.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Theodarzna View Post
    I made the argument earlier, Skroe's point is mostly getting China to be our quasi-ally, that spies on us, steals trade secrets and other shenanigans. Meanwhile it sidesteps the whole over all point, what were we doing being belligerent fucks to the Russians whose sacrifices made the victory in WW2 possible?
    Oh please, like you even know what the Sino-Soviet split is and how and why the US worked to exploit it. The fact you defined it in this very post as " mostly getting China to be our quasi-ally" just underscores how out of your depth you are. The fact that even under that (dead wrong) interpretation of events, you think that the downside doesn't come close to reaching the level of importance of the upside (keeping our enemies, one in West Eurasia, the other in East Asia, divided), is mind-boggling.

    You didn't know who Henry Kissinger was, nor what he did, nor did you care, until Bernie fucking Sanders stated rambling about it. You were lying when you said you first heard about him when you were 17. Everything you have written has me completely convinced of that.

    And more to the point, you keep dodging the fact that Kissinger and his proteges have created so many careers that are so deeply entrenched in the US Foreign Policy establishment, that if Sanders were to have a foreign policy to begin with, he would have to surround himself with Kissingerites just to staff positions.

    But again, in 2016's weird campaign when Bernie Sanders becomes a make-believe realist just so parasites like Katrina van Heuvel can say he has a foreign policy school of thought, this is kind of the norm. Bernie Sanders simply does not strike me as the kind of man who believe power is the fundamental currency and self-interest and survival the primary motivators of international relations. It seems too sophisticated for him and not remotely keeping with his rhetoric.

    Rather Sanders is another would-be retrenchment President, no more, no less. He's all for "bringing the troops home" or some other slogan because of domestic liberal political beliefs, and not about those actual slogans being part of a wider International relations construct.

    Sanderistas and BernieBros trying to paint him as a realist was a new dishonest low. They had more integrity and honestly when he didn't have a international relations school of thought, rather than trying to shoe horn him into one to take on Clinton. It just makes Sanders come off as a fraud, because he doesn't strike me as the kind of person that would authorize the arming of Russian secessionists (as an example) just to undermine Russia's international ambitions. Because such an act would expand American power and reduce Russia's. Sanders is no realist.

  13. #1813
    The Unstoppable Force Theodarzna's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    24,166
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    ....
    While English is not my mother tongue, I know what the implications of "realism," as a chosen term is. The cleverness of using that term for what is otherwise a very unrealistic dreaming of cold warriors, conquerors and despoilers. It is only "realism," if you assume a very mechanical understanding of the world, and have very little knowledge of humans, I.E. its at best an autistic child's conception of reality, at worse its the preferred -ism of defense industry guys looking to make the bombs Kissinger desires.

    Considering folks like Kissinger and Kagan have not secure victory were they wished, neither Iraq nor Vietnam are wins, honestly Afghanistan is likely not one either, we have to either believe the delusional people trying to build an Imperium simply don't grasp that not everyone wishes to live under American yoke, OR we could believe your rantings that really these guys are just utter genius' and all this chaos is as planned.

    Your hatred of Sanders sounds like the rantings of a very wealthy kid, flushed with daddy's money, and pissed there is someone with the insolence to claim you are not a god-like "job creator," or to imply that Wall-Street is to be reigned in. You claim you hate him for using the term "Revolution," As if regulating Wall Street and providing basic Gov. Services most First World Countries with half our collective wealth can achieve. Only the most pathetically unself-aware child of privilege could possibly take that and pretend its basically the Bolshevik Revolution.

    The Cold War itself is nothing more than two dragons fighting over a treasure hoard. Were is St. George when we need him? The Sino-Soviet split was nothing more than a part of that. To the extent it was a brilliant move, yes sure, in a deadly bloody chess game we didn't need to be playing in the first place.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by stomination View Post
    Skroe is a staunch conservative.

    As for the argument...I believe Iron fist was saying that Bernie's policies are more closely tied to Libertarians than social democrats. At least thats how I read it.
    Skroe is not, nor could ever be called a Conservative. Perhaps a worshiper of money above country, but no, not a conservative.
    Last edited by Theodarzna; 2016-04-07 at 05:22 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Crissi View Post
    i think I have my posse filled out now. Mars is Theo, Jupiter is Vanyali, Linadra is Venus, and Heather is Mercury. Dragon can be Pluto.
    On MMO-C we learn that Anti-Fascism is locking arms with corporations, the State Department and agreeing with the CIA, But opposing the CIA and corporate America, and thinking Jews have a right to buy land and can expect tenants to pay rent THAT is ultra-Fash Nazism. Bellingcat is an MI6/CIA cut out. Clyburn Truther.

  14. #1814
    Quote Originally Posted by Theodarzna View Post
    While English is not my mother tongue, I know what the implications of "realism," as a chosen term is. The cleverness of using that term for what is otherwise a very unrealistic dreaming of cold warriors, conquerors and despoilers. It is only "realism," if you assume a very mechanical understanding of the world, and have very little knowledge of humans, I.E. its at best an autistic child's conception of reality, at worse its the preferred -ism of defense industry guys looking to make the bombs Kissinger desires.

    Considering folks like Kissinger and Kagan have not secure victory were they wished, neither Iraq nor Vietnam are wins, honestly Afghanistan is likely not one either, we have to either believe the delusional people trying to build an Imperium simply don't grasp that not everyone wishes to live under American yoke, OR we could believe your rantings that really these guys are just utter genius' and all this chaos is as planned.
    What? No. Not at all. Stop. Holy balls. Are "Democrats" "for a democratic form of government" and Republicans "for a republican form of government"?

    Just so you know: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/re...ntl-relations/

    In the discipline of international relations there are contending general theories or theoretical perspectives. Realism, also known as political realism, is a view of international politics that stresses its competitive and conflictual side. It is usually contrasted with idealism or liberalism, which tends to emphasize cooperation. Realists consider the principal actors in the international arena to be states, which are concerned with their own security, act in pursuit of their own national interests, and struggle for power. The negative side of the realists' emphasis on power and self-interest is often their skepticism regarding the relevance of ethical norms to relations among states. National politics is the realm of authority and law, whereas international politics, they sometimes claim, is a sphere without justice, characterized by active or potential conflict among states.

    Not all realists, however, deny the presence of ethics in international relations. The distinction should be drawn between classical realism—represented by such twentieth-century theorists as Reinhold Niebuhr and Hans Morgenthau—and radical or extreme realism. While classical realism emphasizes the concept of national interest, it is not the Machiavellian doctrine “that anything is justified by reason of state” (Bull 1995, 189). Nor does it involve the glorification of war or conflict. The classical realists do not reject the possibility of moral judgment in international politics. Rather, they are critical of moralism—abstract moral discourse that does not take into account political realities. They assign supreme value to successful political action based on prudence: the ability to judge the rightness of a given action from among possible alternatives on the basis of its likely political consequences.

    Realism encompasses a variety of approaches and claims a long theoretical tradition. Among its founding fathers, Thucydides, Machiavelli and Hobbes are the names most usually mentioned. Twentieth-century classical realism has today been largely replaced by neorealism, which is an attempt to construct a more scientific approach to the study of international relations. Both classical realism and neorealism have been subjected to criticism from IR theorists representing liberal, critical, and post-modern perspectives.
    You're right. English isn't your first language. Stick with what you know. You made a terrible assumption about what Realismism based on the word. I hate to think what you'd identify constructivism as (without looking it up).

    And I doubt you know who the Kagan family is (yes there is a family).


    Quote Originally Posted by Theodarzna View Post
    Your hatred of Sanders sounds like the rantings of a very wealthy kid, flushed with daddy's money, and pissed there is someone with the insolence to claim you are not a god-like "job creator," or to imply that Wall-Street is to be reigned in. You claim you hate him for using the term "Revolution," As if regulating Wall Street and providing basic Gov. Services most First World Countries with half our collective wealth can achieve. Only the most pathetically unself-aware child of privilege could possibly take that and pretend its basically the Bolshevik Revolution.
    First, not very wealthy.

    Second, my parents have paid for jack shit since I was 19 years old.


    Third you're making my point. The use of the word 'revolution' when what he really means is "modest reform" is grossly irresponsible. Would be revolutionaries often lose control of their 'revolutions' when more fanatical elements decide that the modest reforms don't go far enough.

    Quote Originally Posted by Theodarzna View Post

    The Cold War itself is nothing more than two dragons fighting over a treasure hoard. Were is St. George when we need him? The Sino-Soviet split was nothing more than a part of that. To the extent it was a brilliant move, yes sure, in a deadly bloody chess game we didn't need to be playing in the first place.
    Yes... the Soviet Union and Communist bloc, an expansionist, ideological, revolutionary state, nuclear armed to the tune of 35,000 warheads, out numbering the Free World 8 to 5. Truly a a meaningless threat and not an existential one, amirite?

    I'll say it again... "oh sweet summer child".

    For the record, Communism, thet hing the West fought and slew that you think didn't need to happen (what a crazy world view) only destroyed hundreds of millions of lives and robbed countless more of their democratic rights. There is no coincience between the blossoming of Democracy and development around the world since 1988, and the fall of the Soviet Union.

    I take back what I said earlier. Low information voters do exist.

  15. #1815

  16. #1816
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  17. #1817
    Quote Originally Posted by Didactic View Post
    Nice opinion pieces.
    The idea is an opinion.

    After all, where has it ever worked in the last fifty years?

    Never.

  18. #1818
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    The idea is an opinion.

    After all, where has it ever worked in the last fifty years?

    Never.
    It's made products significantly cheaper for consumers by allowing countries to specialise.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  19. #1819
    Quote Originally Posted by Didactic View Post
    It's made products significantly cheaper for consumers by allowing countries to specialise.
    Not an answer to the question.

    Or are you imagining that the US is this mythical country?

  20. #1820
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    The idea is an opinion.

    After all, where has it ever worked in the last fifty years?

    Never.
    Earth.

    Welcome.
    http://ourworldindata.org/data/econo...lopment-index/

    Last edited by Skroe; 2016-04-07 at 08:25 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •