Well, when I Wrote the Below Post, I wasn't Expecting the Type of Comments that I Received, though I Mentioned the Accusation of Racism as One of the Main False Assumptions in Relation to Other's Motives, the Subject that Emerged was that which Liberals Think are False Assumptions about Obama being a Socialist, as well as Socialized Medicine. I Allowed it because I Figured that the Subject of False Assumptions could Actually be quite Broad.
As a Quick Review of the Previous Post, Aside from Issues of Racism, I also Talked about how People Assume they Know the Motives of those who have Decided to No Longer Participate in a Conversation.
When Talking about Accusations of Racism, I Discussed the Mosque. I Guess I Could Add Something that someone Said on Malcolm's Blog, which is that I Guess there was a Mosque that was Destroyed when the World Trade Center was Destroyed, yet as I Understand it, it was much Smaller than what they are Planning to Build Now in Order to Replace it.
I Guess Things can Get Very Confused at Times and it is no Longer Clear who is the Most Assuming the Motives of the Other. Are the Liberals Assuming the Motive of Racism or are those Opposing the Mosque Assuming the Motives of those who want to Build the Mosque? My Guess is that Both of these Things are Occurring. Politics are so Emotional and No One Seems to Give Anyone the Benefit of a Doubt for anything.
I Also Discussed Amnesty and Illegal Immigration and Reasons for Certain Positions other than that of Racism. And I Discussed Voting Against Obama.
Another Problem with Accusations of Racism is that Some People will Use this as a Means of Preventing all Criticism and Challenge, because any Accusation at all will be Taken as an Act of Racism, yet People Criticize and Challenge other People all that Time and this has nothing to do with Race.
I'm Really Surprised that so Little was Said About Racism in the Comment Section of the Below Post. Please do Feel Free do Do so here, yet if you Prefer, I am also Opened to Continuing the Discussion about Socialism and Health Care or about anything else that you Feel the Opposing Side has Made False Assumptions about.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
29 comments:
Interesting how perceived racism led to global economics. :) I agree with your comment below that DMarks would term
'buying American' as racist: prejudice against
SE Asians, and likely tongue in cheek. So, with
tongue in cheek, I might
accuse him of prefering
cheap goods from a Communist dictatorship, there for he must be a communist. :) While we tend to oversimplify the complexities of international business, an
identifiable problem related to US tax and regulatory policy are those of industrial subsidies . We see that type of competition among the states here as well, attempting to lure
business to their area.
This can be successful, although in my state, a
community (the taxpayers)
gave a company land, no
taxes and a large building.
They stayed three years before moving to India.
Interesting problem and we may perceive such government activity as good, bringing in business/or bad..gov't
interferring (albeit positively) in business.
Silverfiddle is right-business exists soley to make a profit and we live
with the good results: cheap goods, availability,
new products: and we live with the bad..fifty million Americans without
healthcare, 10% unemployment and talking to
service centers in Mombai about our new toaster....
Having a Mosque IN the World Trade Center PRE 9/11 is quite different than building one NEAR the WTC POST 9/11. PRE 9/11 our buildings were STILL standing and POST 9/11 we had 3,000 DEAD people.
I have nothing against ANY Mosque, just as I have nothing against a Church or Synagogue. I’m an Atheist, to set the record straight, but believe everyone has the right to practice whatever religion they choose. The only problem I have with this particular Mosque is the location being so close to the World Trade Centers. The Imam said he was a bridge-builder and as such I would think he would reconsider the location since so much hostility is tied to it.
My reason on this Mosque location is not racist. I have nothing against Muslims. I have stated my reason and expect people to take me at my word. It's called trust. And until such time I prove untrustworthy, then I should be believed. This also goes for immigration issues, etc.
No one should ever "assume" they know what goes on in another's mind. If a person tells you what they think, then believe them. Unless their words or actions prove otherwise.
That may be a bit short, but it's all the time I have right now. :)
BB,
Buying American is Good for the Economy and that has nothing to do with Racism. Also, I guess Buying Products from Over Seas must be Racist against Americans, huh? lol.
So the Next Subject is Subsidies? I May have to Put that One Off for now.
It's Funny how the Subject of False Assumptions is a Wide Open One that can Lead to Discussions on Just about anything. For Example if one Person was to Assume that "Government and Socialism is Good and Free Markets are Bad" and another is to Assume that "Free Markets are Good and Government is Bad", then the Entire Debate Between Democrats and Republicans is on Topic. Perhaps I should not have been so Broad, but so be it.
Pamela,
Thanks for Commenting and Thanks for Addressing the Racist Issue that so Far has been Avoided.
When I First Realized that a Mosque was Destroyed along with the World Trade Center, I could see how the Muslims should have Every Right to Build a New one to Replace what had been Lost.
What I don't Like is the Fact that they were Offered Land in a Different Location and Absolutely Refused to Reconsider the Offensive Location that they are Determined to Build the Mosque on. To not Even Consider Building the Mosque Elsewhere is Disrespectful.
I Enjoyed your Comment, Pamela, and Agree with you.
BB said: "I agree with your comment below that DMarks would term
'buying American' as racist".
If there were really no bias here, then why is it everyone bashes the Chinese and Mexicans for selling us products? Canada is the #1's number one trading partner for imports.
Lista: The most offensive thing about the ground zero mosque is the "Cordoba Project" name. It symbolizes something pretty bad. Cordoba was a city in Spain that was invaded and brutally occupied for hundreds of years by an extremely intolerant Muslims theocracy.
Canada is not a Communist Country and the Items that we Buy do not Say Made in Canada nearly as Often as Made in China or Japan. As for the Mexicans, I Admit that there is some Prejudice there, yet the Real Problem that Relates to them is not the Fact that they Sell Us Products, but the Illegal Immigrant Problem that Liberals don't ever Seem to Want to Address in any Way other than Amnesty, yet I Really do Wonder what Part of Illegal, they do not Understand and it is not as if there is not also such a Thing as Legal Immigration.
Buying American, though, is Good for Our Economy and it should not be Called Racists cause that is not the Motive of Everyone that does it.
As to the Ground Zero Mosque, there are so Very Many Things that are Offensive about it that I don't see How anyone could call the Opposition to it Racists. That's just really not the Whole Story at all.
"Cordoba was a city in Spain that was invaded and brutally occupied for hundreds of years by an extremely intolerant Muslims theocracy."
Nice city: Roman for 760 years, Visigoths ran the town for 150 years, Muslims for 525 years and
Catholic for 775 years.
In 1492 when Columbus set off to pillage new lands,
Cordoba fell to the Christians. Their first
act was to build the prison of the Inquisition, then to expell the Jews
(who were accepted in Islamic Morocco), then the
Muslims themselves.
Intolerance is a game any can play. Voltaire sums it
"The supposed right of intolerance is absurd and barbaric. It is the right of the tiger; nay, it is far worse, for tigers do but tear in order to have food, while we rend each other for paragraphs."
Voltaire likely thought the Romans intolerant in Cordoba. Oddly the Visigoth reign was tolerant, until they converted from Arian Christian to Catholic:
then Jews were forcibly
baptized or exiled. The Muslim reign typically taxed non-muslims, many
natives converted and Christian activity was
muted in Cordoba due to
legal restrictions. After
1236 and the reconquista,
the moriscos were tortured and burned in the name of
Christian justice. That is just history. As to the
Cordoba Mosque at NYC, I
will for once agree with
my friends at the Cato Institute ...
Interesting History Lesson, BB, but I Think the Point of Dmarks Comment was that the Name "Cordoba Project" Implies Domination. Your Comment Appears to be a "Well Others have Done it too" Sort of Comment, yet this is not an Argument that has Ever Justified Anything and in the Absence of Prejudiced, this Sort of Comparison Game is Not at all Necessary.
Another Form of Prejudiced or Racism is Favoritism. For Example, if a Person was to Judge Christians for the Actions that you Mention and then Let Muslims Off the Hook, then this would be a Form of Favoritism towards Muslims and Prejudice/Racism against Christians. Thus the Defending of the Mosque, in this Context, is the Action that is the Most Prejudice, Racist, Biased and/or Antisemitic against Christians.
I Might Read the Article and Come Back and Read More. For Now, I just want to Say that the Very First Paragraph is Nothing more than an Assumption of Motive.
"Religion stirs our deepest passions. That helps explain the furor over the planned construction of a mosque in lower Manhattan near Ground Zero. Why else would Americans..."
He Claims to Know the Reason, yet there is no Mention of the Things that have been Brought up in this Discussion about our True Reasons. I'll Eventually Read the Article in it's Entirety to Make sure that I'm Right.
Gee, just about anything can be dismissed by accusing someone of assuming a motive. What a great way to completely delegitimize and invalidate your opponent's arguments! And the best thing about it is that you can use it no matter what people say or what the subject is!
Lista, I often use history as a structure for why we
think and what we believe presently. The author above used a snippet of history, I placed it in the larger historical perspective. History exists, no matter what we think of it, and whatever 'spins' we put on it reflect more on our current thinking than what
happened over a span of
previous years. My link, with which I agreed, is to a very conservative and libertarian think tank- you need not read/analyze it, just understand that its logic is definitely
not liberal/progressive.
There is a Difference, Satyavati, between Real Evidence and the Assuming of Motives. It's not as if Real Evidence does not Exist. Eye Witness Accounts, for Example, are more Valid than the Assumption of Motive and I have Witnessed Personally the Inadequacy of the VA Medical System.
There are others who have Experienced, First Hand, the Inadequacy of the Medical System in Canada, as well as in Public Hospitals here in the States. These Arguments are not Assumption of Motive Arguments, but Actual Descriptions of the Facts.
BB,
I Have a Longer Response to the Article that you gave a Link to Above, yet Right Now I've got some Non-Blog Related Computer Projects that I've got to Work on, so I'll get Back to that Later.
"you need not read/analyze it, just understand that its logic is definitely not liberal/progressive."
Well, Unfortunately for you, I have Read and Analyzed it and in Doing so, I disagree with this Statement.
For those who may have Joined us in the Middle of this Conversation, the Conversation, in the Last Two Comments, between Satyavati and I, relate to Obama Health Care and a Conversation that began in the Comment Section of the Previous Post.
"Well, Unfortunately for you, I have Read and Analyzed it and in Doing so, I disagree with this Statement." Unfortunate, I guess. Suggest you 'read/analyze' again, for the author is a member of the Institute, and here is how they describe themselves..
"The Cato Institute is a public policy research organization — a think tank — dedicated to the principles of individual liberty, limited government, free markets and peace." Sounds a bit
more Tea Party than Liberal, don't you think?
Healthcare..I spent the last 9 months with awful
stomach problems. I pay over $5000 a year in healthcare premiums. It took that long for our
private system to get me
(finally) into see a gastroenterologist.
Canadians
wait for three months, and
have free healthcare. Sure they have a bad system, but not nearly as bad as ours. (just a personal opinion based on my personal experience)
I don't know what's the Problem with the Private Medical System in Idaho. Seems Odd to me.
As to the Previous Link, Like I said, I've got somethings to Submit in Relation to that, when I have the Time, yet for now, I'm just Going to say, that I Disagree with the Author of it Regardless of what his Political Persuasion is and as to the Next of your Links, Slow Down, BB, I'm still Working on the Last One.
I Chuckle, BB, as I Realize that Prior to Reading and Analyzing the Above, you Say that I do not Need to do so, but just Take you at your Word, yet once I have Read and Analyzed it and yet still Disagreed, now it is Important to you that I do Read and Analyze it Again. In other Words, if you are willing to Agree with me without Reading it, then don't Read it, but if you have Read it and Disagree, than you Better Read it again, or if you Agree don't read it, but if you Don't, then do Read it.
Forgive, BB, but I'm Finding that Humorous.
FACT: The United States has poorer outcomes in healthcare than THIRTY SIX other modern industrialized nations, despite paying more for healthcare than virtually the entire rest of the planet.
FACT: All of the thirty six countries whose healthcare outcomes are better than the United States' have some form of nationalized/socialized medical system in place.
FACT: Due to a lack of health insurance, millions of Americans have gone without access to routine and preventative care, deteriorating the nation's average daily health and increasing the numbers of those who have serious, chronic illnesses that could have been prevented by earlier intervention.
There you Go. That's Better. I get so Tired of the Assumption of Motive Arguments. It's almost Like Mud Slinging and Name Calling.
Obviously, we Need some Kind of Reform, yet the Democrats and Republicans Disagree about what that Reform should be.
The Second Fact that you Listed is Evidence that the Republicans may indeed be Over Reacting to the Fear of Socialism, yet Republicans are Needed in Order to Maintain the Balance, otherwise that which they Fear could Possibly Come About. In my Opinion, it is the Republican Voice that is Preventing the Negatives that they Fear from Occurring.
"I Really do Wonder what Part of Illegal, they do not Understand and it is not as if there is not also such a Thing as Legal Immigration."
My whole point about the illegal alien problem is from a conservative point of view. Ever listen to Rush? He talks about rugged individualism. Hard working families struggling to improve themselves, and making society better as a result.
Most immigrants come here to work hard, build a better future. This includes the illegals.
"Buying American, though, is Good for Our Economy and it should not be Called Racists cause that is not the Motive of Everyone that does it."
It's certainly not good for your personal economy to buy an inferior automobile and to bypass significantly better products just because of the country of origin.
"As to the Ground Zero Mosque, there are so Very Many Things that are Offensive about it that I don't see How anyone could call the Opposition to it Racists. That's just really not the Whole Story at all."
I do agree that anti-Islam is not racist. Bin Laden is after all a white guy.
The idea of a mosque in general ANYWHERE does not offend me in the least.
The idea of a mosque like this built by an antisemitic genocidal kook does bother me, but I respect freedom of religion.
Sat said:
"FACT: The United States has poorer outcomes in healthcare ...despite paying more for healthcare"
And now it is getting worse, with the Obama plan driving up costs, especially for medical equipment. There was a part of the bill specifically designed to make medical equipment a lot more expensive. This also impacts costs elsewhere.
"All of the thirty six countries whose healthcare outcomes are better than the United States' have some form of nationalized/socialized medical system in place."
Yet those countries send people here to the US, which has the best hospitals and the best innovation.
"Due to a lack of health insurance, millions of Americans have gone ...."
Not at all. This has nothing to do with health insurance.
After all, no one in the US has food insurance. Does this mean everyone starves?
List said: "yet Republicans are Needed in Order to Maintain the Balance,"
Why does there need to be a "balanced" between good ideas and bad ideas?
It is like the political movement called the third way, which seeks some sort of balance between freedom (capitalism, democracy, popular control and tyranny (fascism, aocialism, control by ruling elites). Why compromise with the unreasonable?
BB said: ""The Cato Institute is a public policy research organization — a think tank — dedicated to the principles of individual liberty, limited government, free markets and peace." Sounds a bit
more Tea Party than Liberal"
Well, the Cato Institute is libertarian. Makes them more like Ron Paul than the tea party. They are also isolationist, a view that holds the idea that foreigners are inferior to Americans and we don't need to be concerned if they die.
Hi Dmarks,
Thanks for Commenting. I've sort of been Distracted Lately and I Needed someone to Comment and Wake me Up to what I was Working on in Relation to my Blog. I’ll Try Really Hard, though, to Come Back and Respond to this before the End of the Day.
Opposition to the building of the Islamic center in Manhattan isn't racist. It isn't even necessarily due to anti-Islam sentiment. However, anyone who says that anti-Islamic feelings haven't grown in the past 10 years is being naive in my opinion. For example, Terry Jones' plan to hold a Koran burning ceremony, hate mail/vandalism directed at mosques and Islamic centers, and physical violence against Muslims. A conservative blogger actually said that she learned everything she needed to know about Islam after the 9/11 attacks.
By the way Lista, I hope you are able to come back to Diversity Ink and address the comments made by Dusty and I in regards to Fox News, the liberal media myth, alleged criticism of the Tea Party, etc.
Hi Malcolm,
Thanks for Commenting and I Still Need to Respond to Dmarks as well. I've been Getting Way Behind on what I want to Write and Respond to on the Different Blogs around the Blogosphere, but I'm going to Try and Catch Up just a Little Right Now.
As a Brief Response to you, though, I Never did say that Anti-Islamic Feelings are not Present, nor even that they haven't Grown Recently. I'm Only Saying that we can not Let the Behavior of all the Irrational Radicals on Both Sides of the Isle Prevent us from Looking Honestly at the Real Issues.
I do not Choose to Focus on the Radicals, Extremists, nor those who are Irrational, Prejudice, Racists or what Ever. Such are more Worthy of Being Ignored. My Focus is on those who are Rational and are Willing to Listen to Reason and it is not at all True that such People do not Exist.
Thanks again for the Express of Interest that I Come Back and Do not Drop the Ball in Relation to your Blog. I do Appreciate that because it Makes me Realize that you do Care about my Opinion, for which I so Greatly Thank You.
Hi Dmarks,
"Most immigrants come here to work hard, build a better future. This includes the illegals."
Right, so what is so Wrong with also Requiring them to Work Hard at Getting Legal Immigration Status?
"It's certainly not good for your personal economy to buy an inferior automobile and to bypass significantly better products just because of the country of origin."
Whether or not American Automobiles are Really all that Inferior is Subject to Debate. Also, there is a Balance between Individualism and Collectivism. No Man is an Island. We do all Need to Work Together. I do not Believe in Socialism, yet I also do not Believe in Totally Unregulated Capitalism with the Exclusion of all Social Programs. In Short, I am not a Libertarian and Never Will be.
"I do agree that Anti-Islam is not racist. Bin Laden is after all a white guy."
You've Missed my Point, Dmarks. I do not Believe that the Opposition to that One Particular Mosque Near Ground Zero is "Anti-Islam". "Anti-Islam" is Indeed a Form Racism, or at Least a Form of Anti-Semitism or Religious Prejudice, which I Believe to be another Type of the Same Thing and I’m Opposed to it.
Thanks for the Info. Relating to the Obama Plan Driving Up the Cost of Medical Equipment and the Countries that Satyavati was Talking about sending their People to our Hospitals. The First of These is Evidence that there are Negatives within Obama Care and the Second is Evidence that the Quality of the Health Care is not as Satyavati Claims. Satyavati is Right, Though, in that there are Problems with our Medical and Insurance System that Need to be Fixed. Republicans do not Deny this. They just have Different Answers.
Thanks also for your Info. About the Cato Institute.
More for Dmarks,
"After all, no one in the US has food insurance. Does this mean everyone starves? "
The Reason why People do not Starve, Dmarks, is Because of Government Assistance Programs.
"Why does there need to be a 'balanced' between good ideas and bad ideas?"
Because, Dmarks, Total Socialism, or Communism, is a Bad Idea and yet Total Unregulated Capitalism, without any Social Programs is also a Bad Idea. Any System that Gives One Set of People Everything that they Want without Compromise is a Bad Idea. Total Freedom is Anarchy.
"Why compromise with the unreasonable?"
Because, Dmarks, not ALL Democrats are Socialists and not ALL Democrats are Unreasonable. The Libertarian Idea is, however, Imbalanced and Unreasonable. Yet Fortunately, not all Republicans are Libertarian. Don’t you See? While the Libertarians are Saying "Why Compromise with Unreasonable Socialists?", the Socialists are Saying "Why Compromise with Unreasonable Libertarians", yet Fortunately, there are Moderates on Both Sides that are Reasonable and are Compromising with Each Other.
Lista said:
"The Reason why People do not Starve, Dmarks, is Because of Government Assistance Programs."
Yes, and likewise we should have government assistance for healthcare for the poor.
What we don't need is government Stalinizing healthcare (single payer), which also means government giving free healthcare to the rich and otherwise well off.
"The Libertarian Idea is, however, Imbalanced and Unreasonable"
Given a choice between the extremes of socialism (economic fascism). and libertarianism, I'd choose the later.
After all, look at the worst mass-murdering genocidal monsters of the 20th century. All but a few were socialists. None was a libertarian.
I Agree with Most of what you've Said, Dmarks, Including the Preference for Libertarianism over Socialism, yet I Believe that the Ideal is in the Middle, not Way Over to the Left, nor even Way Over to the Right.
You Know Dmarks,
I Guess I was Responding to your Question about Compromise and the Short Answer to this Question is that the Total Lack of Compromise would be to Go All the Way to the Right, which is the Position of Libertarianism. They do not Believe in any Social Programs. They do not Believe this to be the Role of the Government, but Instead of Private Charities and Churches.
Could this be Done in a Workable Way? I don't Know, but what I do Know is that the Liberals are not Going to Allow it. Compromise is Necessary, Dmarks, or Nothing will Ever be Accomplished Politically.
Thanks for Commenting Purador. You are Welcome here any Time.
I've been away from the Computer for a Few Days and Hope to get back to it soon. Out of Town Company Mixed with a Few Things that are Up in the Air, but Hopefully, my Schedule will Clear again Soon.
Post a Comment