The Grand Collusion… a position on relevant and irrelevant topics!

[khomeinist]

The idea that opponents to tobacco and guns are "leftists" is simply wrong.

I don't predict a long life to this thread.

Agreed. C'mon Ray. You are a smart dude.

[PigFish]

Agreed. C'mon Ray. You are a smart dude.

Have not seen you in a long time mate. I guess it took me starting threads to see you post again.

Welcome friends, the one member I can all Kommie and he takes it with gusto!!! -LOL

So tell me mate. Just spit out an opinion…

Is the anti-tobacco movement driven from the right, the left or is it apolitical? We have been honest with each other in the past, level with me. Who pushes the anti-tobacco movement?

Spotlight is back on you my friend. I hope that time has been good to you and you are still well…

-Ray

[PigFish]

Of course I believe there are right and left of centre views of many issues. What I am saying is that I side with some issues from the left of centre view point and some from the right. The older I get the more I seem to find myself leaning right on more issues however.

This is why it bothers me when someone pigeon holes a person as either a leftist commie or a radical right winger based on their opinion on one single issue. If we were to discuss other hot button political topics (that I won't even mention), some might assume I'm a right wing extremist.

It also bothers me that most talking heads in the media and in government seem to box themselves into either a right or left stance on ALL matters. To me that's ridiculous and very close minded.

As far as your question about the anti smoking agenda...of course I think it's definitely driven from the left. And I don't agree with 90% of it. Does that make me a righty? No.

IMO all issues need to be looked at with an open mind and opinions formed based on facts and consequences rather than closed minded right and left dogma.

I believe there are solutions to all of our issues that usually lie somewhere between the right and left. Unfortunately the fact that our political system is set up as Right vs. Left, and we're expected to choose sides, it's usually very difficult to solve the simplest of problems that we face as a society.

So I guess I'm right and I'm left.

I think we need to pay taxes...but not too much. Government needs to be accountable.

I think we need welfare but should be tougher on the cheats and the lazy. If you're able bodied and sound mind get a job. If my kid can get one almost anyone can.

I'm a union member and believe in basic labour union principles, but think most unions (mine included) have gone way too far in protecting the deadwood in our labour force. Unions really need to reset their goals and expectations on many issues.

I think we need to be tougher on real criminals. I support the police 100%, less a few bad apples.

I believe in public education and healthcare but with more accountability.

I believe in tax breaks for business in order to keep jobs but they need to pay what's fair.

I don't believe in bailouts for big banks and huge corporations.

I hate the recent "nanny state" stance our governments are taking. I'm an adult, leave me the f*** alone.

I like trees. They are good for us. But I think responsible harvesting is ok.

As for firearms, I feel perfectly safe without one. I would feel even safer knowing my neighbour doesn't have one. I'm ok with hunting and hunters owning rifles with strict licensing standards.

I despise war and think that with a few exceptions many could and should have been avoided. Being by far the most intelligent species on the planet you'd think we'd be able to figure things out without blowing the **** out of each other.

This is my current stance on just a few political issues. I'm sorry if you don't agree with me, maybe you can change my mind. My ideas and beliefs are not set in stone. Am I left or am I right? Am I right or am I wrong? I'm not sure, maybe you can tell me.

Thanks for answering my question mate and answering it honestly… I did not start this thread to tell people what I think of them (as in put them down) or where to stuff their ideas. I asked for them, and none are better than others. Some I will agree with and some I will disagree with. Thanks for seeing it for what it is and playing along…

We will undoubtedly be offered the opportunity to 'discuss' some of the other issues on other threads at other times…

Cheers! -Ray

[CaptainQuintero]

I agree with the idea of there being no true left or right. Go to either extreme and you are in very similar territory, if you go the the centre then you are also in very similar territory.

People in power regardless of politics stance will invariably want more power and control. Left or right. Hitler it's probably fair to say was generally to the right but his economic reforms were generally 'left' ie nationalised or heavily subsidised companies guaranteeing work and food. He also was anti-tobacco anti-meat and anti-gun ownership. But can you get more right wing than Hitler? It's quite difficult.

Governments want to control populations, if possible into a generally healthy state so they can work to bring in taxes, and be educated enough to be able to drive the economy and bring in more money, but not be too educated enough to realise how they are being treated. Left or right it doesn't change how ordinary people are treated. Vote for different people and generally nothing will change and they will all make similar decisions. Personally I don't think its a coincidence but that's another debate!

Left or right I don't think exists, it's simply a tool to divide and dominate those who would otherwise rise up and go very torches and pitchforky. In terms of individual opinions on issues eg guns, abortion or the environment etc, they are just that; individual opinions that don't logically connect to each other.

No one in any position of real power really want what is best for you. If something looks like it is then they've just been very good and hiding the true motive. Were just at a point right now that the politicians are so poor at their job that their motives, regardless of political party are plain for all to see.

[headstand]

It's early am where I'm at, so bear with me as I try to formulate my thoughts on the fly. Ray asked: Is the anti-tobacco movement driven from the right, the left or is it apolitical? I say none of the above.

I'm going to take a narrow view of the word politic to signify a tool used for the governance of people. To the extent that the anti-smoking movement makes use of that tool it can't be said to be apolitical. I think it might be fair to say that in politics, the emphasis given to the protection and furtherance of the individual good identifies the right, and the protection and furtherance of the common good identifies the left. So long as society has a shared understanding of what is good, there is a reasonable expectation that the right and left can find a workable balance in governance. Without that ethos, politics devolves into a battle between disparate ideologies.

In the absence of a shared sense of goodness, ideologues must, on the strength of their convictions, fill the void by any and all means, in short by tyranny. It wasn't political debate that ushered in the reign of Stalin (let's call this a parody of the genuine left), nor was it political debate that gave us Facism (a parody of the genuine right). Ideology is a dictator. The anti-smoking movement is driven by ideology that can't be labelled either left or right. It is in the best interest of ideologues to make us think that their agenda stems from a debate within society, so that we accept as good medicine that which is otherwise unpalatable. Let's not allow the ideologue to pit us against each other. They have had enough success already at redefining social norms, and somehow making us feel enlightened despite the unthinkable human cruelty we ascent to.

Alan

[PigFish]

It's early am where I'm at, so bear with me as I try to formulate my thoughts on the fly. Ray asked: Is the anti-tobacco movement driven from the right, the left or is it apolitical? I say none of the above.

I'm going to take a narrow view of the word politic to signify a tool used for the governance of people. To the extent that the anti-smoking movement makes use of that tool it can't be said to be apolitical. I think it might be fair to say that in politics, the emphasis given to the protection and furtherance of the individual good identifies the right, and the protection and furtherance of the common good identifies the left. So long as society has a shared understanding of what is good, there is a reasonable expectation that the right and left can find a workable balance in governance. Without that ethos, politics devolves into a battle between disparate ideologies.

In the absence of a shared sense of goodness, ideologues must, on the strength of their convictions, fill the void by any and all means, in short by tyranny. It wasn't political debate that ushered in the reign of Stalin (let's call this a parody of the genuine left), nor was it political debate that gave us Facism (a parody of the genuine right). Ideology is a dictator. The anti-smoking movement is driven by ideology that can't be labelled either left or right. It is in the best interest of ideologues to make us think that their agenda stems from a debate within society, so that we accept as good medicine that which is otherwise unpalatable. Let's not allow the ideologue to pit us against each other. They have had enough success already at redefining social norms, and somehow making us feel enlightened despite the unthinkable human cruelty we ascent to.

Alan

You know Alan, while I disagree with a lot of this, lets just say I enjoyed reading it and hearing your thoughts. Not that I would reject sitting down with most members here, I think we could have a great time talking political theory here, I like how you mind works and I wanted to complement you on the post and tell you that I liked it.

Thanks for sharing… -Ray

[StingMeadery]

The real concern should be the agenda of the "Global elites".

The Illuminati driven Rothschild and Bilderburg group corporate entities surreptitious dissemination of individual freedoms in pursuit of global domination...by population reduction !

One world currencies, such as the proposed "Americana" to replace the greenback and one world government...

[StingMeadery]

The real concern should be the agenda of the "Global elites".

The Illuminati driven Rothschild and Bilderburg group corporate entities surreptitious dissemination of individual freedoms in pursuit of global domination...by population reduction !

One world currencies, such as the proposed "Americana" to replace the greenback and one world government...

[Smallclub]

what's next? The zionist conspiracy?

[ptrthgr8]

what's next? The zionist conspiracy?

I'm not saying it was aliens... but it was aliens.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk

[headstand]

those who would otherwise rise up and go very torches and pitchforky. /quote]

I like that 'torches and pitchforky'. Wonder what the little lady would do to me if I popped that one out when we are having a bit of a disagreement

I think we could have a great time talking political theory here

You're too kind Ray. I fear you would be disappointed and quickly retreat to a thoughtful examination of the burn on your cigar. I'm more of a moralist than political theorist. My contribution to this topic was one of those Edgar Allan Poe moments (cue Alan Parson's Tales of Mystery and Imagination):

"There is, however, a class of fancies, of exquisite delicacy, which are not thoughts, and to which, as yet, I have found it absolutely impossible to adapt language.... They seem to me rather psychal than intellectual. They arise in the soul (alas, how rarely!) only at its epochs of most intense tranquillitywhen the bodily and mental health are in perfectionand at those mere points of time where the confines of the waking world blend with those of the world of dreams."

Like I said it was rather early when I saw the original post. Still, this has been one of the thought provoking threads, and I look forward to more of the same. Thanks and cheers.

[headstand]

I'm not saying it was aliens... but it was aliens.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk

Oh comfort! And here I thought I was the only one who saw them.

[Guest rob]

Here in Australia, it's both sides of politics that hate tobacco.

Political pundits of all affiliations know that the majority of citizens detest tobacco, and know it will popular to create laws that tighten importation, distribution and sale. Anything anti-tobacco is sure to win support.

[Maplepie]

it's both sides of politics that hate tobacco.

the majority of citizens detest tobacco,

Anything anti-tobacco is sure to win support.

Those 3 clauses probably sums it up the best.

Sent by the Enigma on BlackBerry.

[PigFish]

Here in Australia, it's both sides of politics that hate tobacco.

Political pundits of all affiliations know that the majority of citizens detest tobacco, and know it will popular to create laws that tighten importation, distribution and sale. Anything anti-tobacco is sure to win support.

This was the intent of the thread, not as a commentary on USA political alignment and smoking bans, but as from a geopolitical perspective.

I have opinions about how Australia is run certainly, but I am not Australian and don't wish to be critical of her government. So from the perspective of Australians, is the Australian government generally then, left or right of center?

To be clear, our party system generally aligns left and right of center. But party designation is not the final arbiter. There are individuals surely. There are election periods where politician will pander to their base. They will withhold votes if not necessary, to cover their position if the whips of both parties have gathered enough votes to pass. …enough of that!

Thanks for you opinion Rob! -R

[JHands]

Hell of a read. You sir, are the man!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited September 14, 2014 by Fuzz
Language