SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: TimF who wrote (338548)5/28/2007 1:42:11 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1575119
 
That means that Bush has elements found in an Authoritarian but is not considered Authoritarian.

If Bush is on the statist/authoritarian side, then many French leaders should be even further to that side. The US has more freedom than France. Not night and day, not enough to put France in a totally different category, but the state does control more in France.


See that is the illogic that plays out in your head. Because a state performs more functions does not necessarily mean there is a loss of freedoms for the individual.

"The 2nd one I've commented on before. The problem is not as much that it places France at the center (although I would disagree with that as well) but that it sets France's area to be such that you can't be at the center unless you are very like France. Also the idea that France is overall freer then the US isn't a very reasonable one."

France is in the center because politically on a global scale it is center. Just because the world according to Tim doesn't compute that doesn't make it wrong. Its why I find the current America so unbearingly frustrating. Its conservative bent has been its undoing and people like you encourage it.

We are not talking about France's culture but we are talking about its political system.

And its still silly to insist that the political system has to be anything like Frances to be centrist.


Again, the world doesn't spin on Tim's POV which I might out is wrong.

Do you know how to read these charts? Laissez-faire, a French construct btw, sits on the far right of the line labeled Economic Right. That means Bush/Reagan is much more laissez-faire than Clinton, and in turn, Clinton is much more laissez-faire than Greenpeace.

Laissez-faire is the opposite of totalitarianism in more ways than it is at the middle between leftist totalitarianism and "Corporatism", so it should be more like what you describe, but that's not the way the chart is actually drawn up. Look at the third chart. The green area in the chart says "laissez-faire capitalism". Clinton bumps up against its boundary, barely outside of it. Greenpeace is close to it than Reagan. And Hitler is close to it than Bush. That's ridiculous.


Laissez-faire has to do with economics and the marketplace.......and little to do with the political aspects of the gov't.

Labeling France as the center isn't really objectively wrong, its just subjective. But whatever you pick as the center, the idea that Chirac was less authoritarian than Bush and that Arafat is barely more authoritarian, is silly. That chart (the 1st one) even has Bush as closer along the top to bottom, authoritarian to libertarian access to Mugabe or Saddam Hussien, then he is to the center.

Stop fooling yourself.......people aren't making this stuff up to irritate you. Its a reality you all refuse to recognize just as you don't recognize all the other mistakes you have been making. Its getting tiring.......this country can't afford you're particular brand of denial.

Tim, if you haven't noticed, I have stopped making an effort to be reasonable with you. In AA, the right's positioning on issues would be called stinkin' thinkin'. It comes from years of getting bad info and building on the bad info. Again, this country can no longer afford to sit quietly by while you all play out those beliefs that don't work. They have put us into a very bad situation. Wake up and smell the coffee!