I am Really Tired of Ideology

Whispering Death

Whispering Death

Active member
Really really really tired of it. I'm tired of people who spout out phrases like "western hypocracy" and "because it seperates us from the terrorists" etc. etc. etc.

I don't care what hyporacy is done so long as it improves my quality of life. I think we already have enough that seperate us from the terrorists in that I can live a free, prosperous life in my country.

I'm tired of people who support the "no torture" bill who'se only argument is ideological. But it's been on a wide variety of issues since 2001 not just that one.

Arn't we supposed to be a "logical" people? Why does it seem that everything in politics that wins has no logical basis anymore but an ideological one?

Well I am tired of it. I'm tired of ideology.
 
Ideology / Ideological

Whispering Death said:
I'm tired of people .......only argument is ideological........"logical" people......politics.......ideological..... Well I am tired of it.
I'm tired of ideology.
Click to expand...

IDEOLOGY/IDEOLOGICAL = THE STUDY OF IDEAS; ABSTRACT THOUGHT; IDEAS ON WHICH SYSTEMS ARE BASED.

I don't mean to criticize - but - your very own argument is ideological in nature. It presupposes a personal belief system based on your own ideas, systems and values.

That does not make it wrong, it just means that it is ideological by the very nature of being a personal belief system.

Every person who questions existance or the "order" of life have a personal ideology. That is one of the reasons that you and I can argue both sides of any topic or issue. Sometimes we will agree and sometimes we won't.

That is what makes us "human".
 
No you're taking the term "ideology" into its most abstract form. Let me clarify.

What I mean is when an argument appeals to an ideological motive instead of a logical one, especially in the extremist rhelm of politics. Such an example is in the "no torture" ban. Where one side will say "we need to use techniques X, Y, and Z that would be prohibited under the 'no torture' ban because if we do not, Americans, maybe you, will die." Now if that argument is supported with evidence it is a logical argument. However, recently I hear the counterargument of "If we are to torture these people it would be unamerican. We would bring ourselves down to their level if we where to use these techniques!" That isn't a logical argument, that is an appeal to ideology and I am DELETED tired of it.

This is not meant to be myopic on the torture ammendment at all, I'm just using it as an example of a MUCH MUCH MUCH larger issue.

Guy 1 says we need to do X, Y, and Z to keep our economy going, our society stable, and protect our lives. Guy 2 says he doesn't care what happens to our economy, society, or lives because what he cares about is ideology.

I want a return of practical, logical discourse like we saw in the president's address tonight instead of this ideological argumentataive style which sounds seductive but has next to zero logic behind it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with Whispering, alot of ideaology (especialy left wing ideaology) has to do with "feelgoodism" or feeling good about things or ideas, which sometimes has zero logic behind it other than it makes you feel good at the moment.

Just becuase it feels good doesn't mean it is good.

Shooting heroin up your arm feels good, doesn't mean it is good.

Alot of politcal correctness is about "feelgoodism", about not hurting anybody's feelings ect. If only people didn't mind hurting Hitlers feelings by a premtive strike when he was starting to rise in power things would have been different. But no, Hitler had feelings too you know.

The same thing goes on today, thats why I have been saying this on this a while now that Europe will be doomed within around 50 years because they have sucumed to this feel good fantasy.

If a person is known terrorist or captured taking up arms against us on the side of the terrorist, I don't comprehend why we can't us any means possible to extract information from them, which includes torture if need be, when the information gathered may save lives. It seems totaly ilogical not to do this, the only reason not to is because it doesn't "feel good".
 
Last edited:
Whispering Death said:
No you're taking the term "ideology" into its most abstract form. Let me clarify.

What I mean is when an argument appeals to an ideological motive instead of a logical one, especially in the extremist rhelm of politics. Such an example is in the "no torture" ban. Where one side will say "we need to use techniques X, Y, and Z that would be prohibited under the 'no torture' ban because if we do not, Americans, maybe you, will die." Now if that argument is supported with evidence it is a logical argument. However, recently I hear the counterargument of "If we are to torture these people it would be unamerican. We would bring ourselves down to their level if we where to use these techniques!" That isn't a logical argument, that is an appeal to ideology and I am f*cking tired of it.

This is not meant to be myopic on the torture ammendment at all, I'm just using it as an example of a MUCH MUCH MUCH larger issue.

Guy 1 says we need to do X, Y, and Z to keep our economy going, our society stable, and protect our lives. Guy 2 says he doesn't care what happens to our economy, society, or lives because what he cares about is ideology.

I want a return of practical, logical discourse like we saw in the president's address tonight instead of this ideological argumentataive style which sounds seductive but has next to zero logic behind it.
Click to expand...

So what you are saying is that you are sick and tired of everyone who disagrees with your ideology?
 
Oh come on Gladius, so now ideology is mainly a leftist deficiency? The American right has no specific set of idea's on which they base their course of action?

If a person is known terrorist or captured taking up arms against us on the side of the terrorist, I don't comprehend why we can't us any means possible to extract information from them, which includes torture if need be, when the information gathered may save lives. It seems totaly ilogical not to do this, the only reason not to is because it doesn't "feel good".
Click to expand...

The illogical thought behind not doing so:
1) So you pick up this guy, beat the crap out of him and he knows..... diddly. You reckon he lies or hold back so you do a littel watertorture combined with some electricity because he has got to no something. Again he says he knows nothing....hhmm, let's put him away somewhere and work on him longer. Finally the guys actually does know nothing, that is what I call illogical.
2) Suppose you have a clever guy. After being beaten senseless once or twice he'll sing like a canary. Yes sir, I have a nuclear device somewhere hidden in the Rockies.... whatever you want me to say sir.
3) Of course there are more than a few laws prohibiting such acts.
4) For the connaiseurs in our midst; I doubt that this was the deeper meaning of "We the people...." we are all created equal unless we think you might have something to do with terrorism. Proof for arrest, we don't need any, we'll beat you just as long as it takes so that you'll say you are quilty.

Again, I might be rambling again but I do get a bit frightened if you seriously propose to unleash the "torture first as questions later"- policy.
 
The US doesnt torture, it pressures. Why send a message to the Terries that if they get captured its going to be like a stay in the hilton for them.
 
MontyB said:
So what you are saying is that you are sick and tired of everyone who disagrees with your ideology?
Click to expand...

Jesus Christ would you please listen for once! No, I'm bringing up a recent example of an argument based on ideology so as to clear up what I'm talking about. Logical arguments for the "no torute" ban are great. Logical arguments for anything are great. I'm just tired of having ideological arguments being so extremely pervasive whereas logical ones are downplayed.
 
Whispering Death said:
Arn't we supposed to be a "logical" people? Why does it seem that everything in politics that wins has no logical basis anymore but an ideological one?
Click to expand...

Ideology
  1. The body of ideas reflecting the social needs and aspirations of an individual, group, class, or culture.
  2. A set of doctrines or beliefs that form the basis of a political, economic, or other system.
Logic is the ability to reason and is used to credit or discredit an idea or ideology. Its possible to be logical and ideological at the same time.

Politics is a dispute of ideas. A political party is a group of people who support the same beliefs- the same ideology. It's not possible to have politics without ideology.

So my question is what is your logical and what is your ideology?
 
i·de·ol·o·gy
  1. The body of ideas reflecting the social needs and aspirations of an individual, group, class, or culture.
  2. A set of doctrines or beliefs that form the basis of a political, economic, or other system.
Reading the definition of ideology, I can't for the life of me see why anyone's ideological mindset has to agree or parallel anyone elses. While it's true that every, person, group, class, or culture lives by the structure of their own ideology, that doesn't qualify it as being right for or accepted by another person, group, class, or culture. Thus, a clash of cultures caused by ideology. I think WWII was the biggest culture shock to the Western allies when Japan demonstrated their rules of prisoner treatment. It wasn't wrong to them but it certainly was to Western countries.

I think some countries see beating Women for what they see as a terrible infraction to their code of living as being a duty by their ideology. That doesn't make it wrong to them, but to those countries who see that as barbaric, it's a strong enough act to warrant interfering in that particular part of their culture. Those who hold Human rights and dignity dear for every person on Earth are horrified by some practices that are completely normal for others. By definition, neither can be right or wrong if the argument that all ideologies are sacred and should be respected by the World as unique to a certain culture even if that means turning a blind eye to genocide.

Well, I accept the idea that there are destructive ideologies such as homocidal bombs will waft one to a life of x number of virgins in paradise.
 
I think some countries see beating Women for what they see as a terrible infraction to their code of living as being a duty by their ideology. That doesn't make it wrong to them, but to those countries who see that as barbaric, it's a strong enough act to warrant interfering in that particular part of their culture. Those who hold Human rights and dignity dear for every person on Earth are horrified by some practices that are completely normal for others. By definition, neither can be right or wrong
Click to expand...
very true. Americans have no clue what it's like to be raised as a muslim in Iraq, and vice versa. (EXAMPLE)

large-smiley-040.gif
 
Missileer you have touched on the very core of the issue I think. Or at least one which I have been considering for awhile now.

Some liberal idealogues have long touted we should respect other cultures. The have also professed that human rights as defined by the Western democracies should be the international norm. Even further they have then declared that it is immoral to sit back and allow gross violations of these rights. At the point they become consciously aware of said violations in country X they begin to publicly lobby for action on the part of their government and/or the UN. When the action is taken and they don't like the result they return to point one and declare their government is not respecting the culture of other peoples.

I might be over-simplifying and all but it seems like a case of wanting to have their cake and eat it too.

I speak from a point of a man in the middle of changing his outlook on the world around him, not for the first or last time I am sure.
 
Missileer said:
i·de·ol·o·gy
  1. The body of ideas reflecting the social needs and aspirations of an individual, group, class, or culture.
  2. A set of doctrines or beliefs that form the basis of a political, economic, or other system.
Reading the definition of ideology, I can't for the life of me see why anyone's ideological mindset has to agree or parallel anyone elses. While it's true that every, person, group, class, or culture lives by the structure of their own ideology, that doesn't qualify it as being right for or accepted by another person, group, class, or culture. Thus, a clash of cultures caused by ideology. I think WWII was the biggest culture shock to the Western allies when Japan demonstrated their rules of prisoner treatment. It wasn't wrong to them but it certainly was to Western countries.

I think some countries see beating Women for what they see as a terrible infraction to their code of living as being a duty by their ideology. That doesn't make it wrong to them, but to those countries who see that as barbaric, it's a strong enough act to warrant interfering in that particular part of their culture. Those who hold Human rights and dignity dear for every person on Earth are horrified by some practices that are completely normal for others. By definition, neither can be right or wrong if the argument that all ideologies are sacred and should be respected by the World as unique to a certain culture even if that means turning a blind eye to genocide.

Well, I accept the idea that there are destructive ideologies such as homocidal bombs will waft one to a life of x number of virgins in paradise.
Click to expand...

I agree with most of this however the one hole in many peoples thinking on these issues is that they have blanketed an entire religion with the ideologies of a few nutjobs who simply hide behind that religion.

Lets be realistic here if you look at the extremes of every culture you will find it hiding behind religion in one way or another to blanked an entire people with the reputation of a few is misleading after all how would would the US like to associated with the actions of Fred Phelps just because he was american?
 
Whispering Death

If you are trying to talk about the ideology of Political Correctness as it applies to the "feelgoodismology" (my term) thread that seems to permeate almost any discussion of American politics then I am afraid that I agree with you.

I am also sick and tired of that kind of crap. It would be the height of luxury if those idiots in Washington could begin to work together instead of constantly pointing a finger at each other while spouting all sorts of political cliches.

Whatever happened to common sense? When did it become extinct?

Average Joe sees what the problems are and asks himself why nothing seems to be resolved.

AS WHISPERING DEATH WOULD SAY:

THE REASON IS A REASON BORN IN IDEOLOGY AND DESTINED TO DIE IN IDEOLOGY.

Republicans<>Democrats (<> = 'are NOT') Democrats<>Republicans
 
Ted said:
Oh come on Gladius, so now ideology is mainly a leftist deficiency? The American right has no specific set of idea's on which they base their course of action?



The illogical thought behind not doing so:
1) So you pick up this guy, beat the crap out of him and he knows..... diddly. You reckon he lies or hold back so you do a littel watertorture combined with some electricity because he has got to no something. Again he says he knows nothing....hhmm, let's put him away somewhere and work on him longer. Finally the guys actually does know nothing, that is what I call illogical.
2) Suppose you have a clever guy. After being beaten senseless once or twice he'll sing like a canary. Yes sir, I have a nuclear device somewhere hidden in the Rockies.... whatever you want me to say sir.
3) Of course there are more than a few laws prohibiting such acts.
4) For the connaiseurs in our midst; I doubt that this was the deeper meaning of "We the people...." we are all created equal unless we think you might have something to do with terrorism. Proof for arrest, we don't need any, we'll beat you just as long as it takes so that you'll say you are quilty.

Again, I might be rambling again but I do get a bit frightened if you seriously propose to unleash the "torture first as questions later"- policy.
Click to expand...
You are assuming right away because he is a terrorist, then he doesn't know anything, thats why your thinking is illogilcal.

What if he does know something? After all he is a terrorist or in coertion with terrorist.

Whether or not the terrorist does know something they will find out.

The purpose is to extract information to save lives. To simpy not do it because of your feelings is illogical.

And as for your misgiuded atempt to use the US constitution of "we the people" to the benefit and well being of the terrorist, maybe you better read it again...

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
 
Last edited:
See gladius that's logic! You are pointing to a contract made between we the people and the government and saying "Hey, you promised us this, give it to us!"

One could just as easily say "By using these torture techniques we are fostering more terrorism because now they are going to put in their recruiting speaches about how we do these inhumane things. Therefore it's creating more terrorists than it is stopping."

That's what I'm saying, I like things like that and I don't understand why mainstream political discource these days has such low low ammounts of that and such high amounts of ideology in it! Maybe because it's easier to just be ideological in your points? Because then you can go back and look at history and studies to determine whether or not a logical claim is true or false... but if it's just an abstract ideological line like "it would lower us down to the level of the terrorists" you can't prove or disprove it, ideology is just ideology.
 
Last edited:
Its all about "feelgood" they do what feels good, but hat doesn't mean it is good. Political correctness has to do with feeling good, but not neseceraly doing the right thing.

It feels good now, but it will lead to trouble and cost more lives later, just so some politically correct wienies can fell good about it for the moment. I wonder if they will still feel good when some information that could have been extracted wasn't, and allows a terrorsit to set off a bomb and kill some their family members.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top