The Residential Real Estate Crash Index Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: joseffy who wrote (306801)

2/8/2014 4:03:01 PM

From: koan

of 306849

Here is how liberals answer questions. With complete thoughts. Isn't it interesting that most of the pubs here post just ONE sentence at a time, while the liberals post in paragraphs!

Random liberal post:

Hmm? As I said, likely the most important thing we vote on - dwarfing all others that immediately come to mind - is the health of the environment - Global Warming. Doesn't seem to get many votes for those who run on this issue. Short term gain vrs what is good in the long term?

Not going to argue with that way of making the point. However, you first argued that no one voted for anything but narrow self interest. It's simply not the case. Lots of folk vote for global warming. And lots more would if the campaign finance laws could be fixed so that the large counter financial interests wouldn't be able to lobby more effectively than the rest of us. That's not going to change in the near term. But, to go back to your point, the lack of recent legislation on the global warming front is not evidence no one votes for it or cares for it as an issue.

Don't they have every right that Dr Martin Luther King had - or the civil disobedience's that koan thinks of? My point John is your meaningful issues are important to you and the meaningful issues of the right are every bit as meaningful to them. You think they are wrong - they think you are wrong. And so here we sit..........

King did not argue he had a legal right to civil disobedience; rather he had a moral right. And should he exercise it, he had to be prepared to face the legal consequences. He saw civil disobedience as a means to awaken dormant moral concerns; not as a means of violent force against other violent forces.

Thus, to stay within the framework of King's use of civil disobedience, folk who consider the deficit as a moral issue don't have the legal right to protest but can use such nonviolent instruments to make a moral case for a moral awakening.

Frankly, I consider civil disobedience against the rank racism of the American south in the 50s and 60s to be so much more important than civil disobedience against deficits (when those so protesting simply misunderstand the meaning of deficits and how best to correct them) as to be a different conversation and its morality not even in the same league as southern racism.

It is simply not the case that all moral arguments are equivalent.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next