It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dont Take the Moderates Seriously

page: 7
4
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: narrator



Argument: a reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong.


Right or wrong....opinions.




posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: CriticalStinker




Liberal libertarian or classical liberal with no party affiliation because my ideology is parties pervert platform.

I'd rather vote for people who are independent and clearly lay out their platform. Further more I want them beholden to no entity to change their stances so that they play ball for their team.


You're no moderate.


Why because I'm not dead center but just damn near close?

That's like your opinion man. Plenty of others would argue with you on whether or not I'm a moderate though. It's root meaning is I can change my stance on an issue by issue basis. I can also argue both sides.

Carry on with your roast though.



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: NiNjABackflip

Oh, I see, it's OK to denigrate the faceless masses.

Your mistaken ideological maunderings are what I "attacked", not you. But if you choose to view it as such, complain to staff. In this thread, I'm not staff, so have no say in it.



No, I'm not complaining, just pointing out your fallacies. I'm not the one trying to stifle the debate, just the unreasonable approaches to it.



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker




Why because I'm not dead center but just damn near close?

That's like your opinion man. Plenty of others would argue with you on whether or not I'm a moderate though. It's root meaning is I can change my stance on an issue by issue basis. I can also argue both sides.

Carry on with your roast though.


No, because you have a political ideology, and as such, we know where you fall.



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: narrator



Argument: a reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong.


Right or wrong....opinions.


Arguments are not the same as opinions.



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: NiNjABackflip

Right, arguments are had because of opinions.



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: CriticalStinker




Why because I'm not dead center but just damn near close?

That's like your opinion man. Plenty of others would argue with you on whether or not I'm a moderate though. It's root meaning is I can change my stance on an issue by issue basis. I can also argue both sides.

Carry on with your roast though.


No, because you have a political ideology, and as such, we know where you fall.


People can be moderate Democrat or Republican.

I think you're struggling with the concept of moderate, hence why you can't get a cohesive structure in your argument.



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: narrator
a reply to: NiNjABackflip

Right, arguments are had because of opinions.


I'm not trying to engage in this sort of sophistry. You can dismiss my arguments whole-cloth if you choose.



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:22 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker




People can be moderate Democrat or Republican.

I think you're struggling with the concept of moderate, hence why you can't get a cohesive structure in your argument.


Are you a moderate Democrat or Republican?



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: narrator
a reply to: NiNjABackflip

Right, arguments are had because of opinions.


I'm not trying to engage in this sort of sophistry. You can dismiss my arguments whole-cloth if you choose.


I wasn't trying to get philosophical with you. What you said wasn't accurate and I was just pointing out that inaccuracy.

I think the issue we're all having here is that we don't have the same definition of "moderate" that you do.

"Moderates wrestle with, and often reject, what they see as the false either/or ideological choices that define modern politics. They recognize that both sides have a piece of the truth and see flaws in the standard liberal and conservative perspectives." - Michelle Diggles and Lanae Erickson Hatalsky



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: CriticalStinker




People can be moderate Democrat or Republican.

I think you're struggling with the concept of moderate, hence why you can't get a cohesive structure in your argument.


Are you a moderate Democrat or Republican?


Have you read anything I've said?



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: narrator
a reply to: NiNjABackflip

Right, arguments are had because of opinions.


I'm not trying to engage in this sort of sophistry. You can dismiss my arguments whole-cloth if you choose.


I wasn't trying to get philosophical with you. What you said wasn't accurate and I was just pointing out that inaccuracy.

I think the issue we're all having here is that we don't have the same definition of "moderate" that you do.

"Moderates wrestle with, and often reject, what they see as the false either/or ideological choices that define modern politics. They recognize that both sides have a piece of the truth and see flaws in the standard liberal and conservative perspectives." - Michelle Diggles and Lanae Erickson Hatalsky



Your definition is essentially the one I've been using. Thanks for defining our terms.



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:35 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker




Have you read anything I've said?


Yes, and you confuse the adjective "moderate" and the noun "moderate" as if they are the same.



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: CriticalStinker




Have you read anything I've said?


Yes, and you confuse the adjective "moderate" and the noun "moderate" as if they are the same.


The adjective deals with amounts, so I'd be hard pressed how you could come to that conclusion.

The other means I'm near center in politics, not dead center, but near. (though some moderates are dead center, I'm just being honest about myself).

Or is this another one of your circles you're running or attempt to move goal posts?



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: CriticalStinker




Have you read anything I've said?


Yes, and you confuse the adjective "moderate" and the noun "moderate" as if they are the same.


The adjective deals with amounts, so I'd be hard pressed how you could come to that conclusion.

The other means I'm near center in politics, not dead center, but near. (though some moderates are dead center, I'm just being honest about myself).

Or is this another one of your circles you're running or attempt to move goal posts?


I appreciate your honesty.

A hypothetical: let's just say that liberalism, libertarianism and the like get tossed so far down the political spectrum, that they are considered extremist by the current standards. Would you remain a moderate?



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: CriticalStinker




Have you read anything I've said?


Yes, and you confuse the adjective "moderate" and the noun "moderate" as if they are the same.


The adjective deals with amounts, so I'd be hard pressed how you could come to that conclusion.

The other means I'm near center in politics, not dead center, but near. (though some moderates are dead center, I'm just being honest about myself).

Or is this another one of your circles you're running or attempt to move goal posts?


I appreciate your honesty.

A hypothetical: let's just say that liberalism, libertarianism and the like get tossed so far down the political spectrum, that they are considered extremist by the current standards. Would you remain a moderate?


Why yes of course, I'm anti extremism. You asked if I fall somewhere on the spectrum, and I've taken a long test before and out of honesty provided results when asked.

Don't confuse classic liberalism with liberalism. It's more like libertarianism though.

But as I've already stated, I don't like parties, and I don't defend them when they go extreme just because I may agree with their stance on one issue.



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: kelbtalfenek




Seems like you're completely supportive of revolution and tribalism/party croneyism here.

Who determines which extreme view is correct?


No I'm in support of the civic duty to engage in politics instead of running from it and trying to stifle those who do care about politics.


You're confusing moderates with the un-engaged. There's a HUGE difference.



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: narrator
a reply to: NiNjABackflip

Right, arguments are had because of opinions.


I'm not trying to engage in this sort of sophistry. You can dismiss my arguments whole-cloth if you choose.


I wasn't trying to get philosophical with you. What you said wasn't accurate and I was just pointing out that inaccuracy.

I think the issue we're all having here is that we don't have the same definition of "moderate" that you do.

"Moderates wrestle with, and often reject, what they see as the false either/or ideological choices that define modern politics. They recognize that both sides have a piece of the truth and see flaws in the standard liberal and conservative perspectives." - Michelle Diggles and Lanae Erickson Hatalsky



Your definition is essentially the one I've been using. Thanks for defining our terms.


Nowhere in that quotation does it say that they don't take action or try to take away from politics.



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:55 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker




Why yes of course, I'm anti extremism. You asked if I fall somewhere on the spectrum, and I've taken a long test before and out of honesty provided results when asked.

Don't confuse classic liberalism with liberalism. It's more like libertarianism though.

But as I've already stated, I don't like parties, and I don't defend them when they go extreme just because I may agree with their stance on one issue.


Again, thanks for your honesty. But that's what I mean. People are willing to abandon their principles and ideologies because they risk being labelled extremist. Things such as liberalism, abolitionism, MLK's cries for justice, even the founding fathers were labelled extremist. As history shows, those extremists were dead right.



posted on Oct, 11 2018 @ 01:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: kelbtalfenek




Seems like you're completely supportive of revolution and tribalism/party croneyism here.

Who determines which extreme view is correct?


No I'm in support of the civic duty to engage in politics instead of running from it and trying to stifle those who do care about politics.


You're confusing moderates with the un-engaged. There's a HUGE difference.


An analogy would be trying to ask someone who is agnostic what their religious stance would be. How could you place someone on a spectrum they don't ideolically take part of.

edit on 11-10-2018 by CriticalStinker because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
4
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join