Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Extremism

Posted by on Mar. 28, 2011 at 5:56 PM
  • 8 Replies
Political extremism involves two prime ingredients: an excessively simple diagnosis of the world's ills, and a conviction that there are identifiable villains back of it all.
John W. Gardner


Thoughts? Agree? Disagree? Why?
by on Mar. 28, 2011 at 5:56 PM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-8):
lovinangels
by on Mar. 28, 2011 at 6:07 PM

No, I don't agree. It doesn't account for the extremism based in religion, and there's a nice amount of that.

I would say those are two possible components, sure, but not the prime ingredients.

Clairwil
by Ruby Member on Mar. 29, 2011 at 12:59 AM

BUMP!

Mandipants
by on Mar. 29, 2011 at 1:02 AM


Quoting lovinangels:

No, I don't agree. It doesn't account for the extremism based in religion, and there's a nice amount of that.

I would say those are two possible components, sure, but not the prime ingredients.

I'd say it also sums up religious extremism quite nicely as well.

Simplicity and the Devil?

Sounds about right.

I am Mandipants and I approve this message.

Every Child a Wanted Child

stormcris
by Christy on Mar. 29, 2011 at 1:05 AM

I don't agree only on the fact that I do not think you really can classify an identifiable villian, ie. when the whole of a group  is a villian or the whole of those who are not like you is the villian, is it really identifiable. Perhaps a conviction that there is an evil to work against either real or imaginary.

Mandipants
by on Mar. 29, 2011 at 1:14 AM


Quoting stormcris:

I don't agree only on the fact that I do not think you really can classify an identifiable villian, ie. when the whole of a group  is a villian or the whole of those who are not like you is the villian, is it really identifiable. Perhaps a conviction that there is an evil to work against either real or imaginary.

What do you mean? I think we (as Americans) have always had an identifiable villian. Even if that villian was a concept rather than a concrete entity.

I am Mandipants and I approve this message.

Every Child a Wanted Child

stormcris
by Christy on Mar. 29, 2011 at 1:22 AM

Well that is sort of my point we have always had an evil to work against even when we could not identify it. I am taking the situation in Afghanistan for an example. We were working against Russia then we were working against Al Queda whom we were previously working with. The reason was not against an identifiable villain but it was for securing a resource. So technically the villain was anyone who got in the way of that resource but they could have been anyone not necessarily some person or concept that is identifiable. Perhaps what I am trying to say is there is always a goal to work for but not always an identifiable villain just any thing that prevents the goal becomes the villian.

Quoting Mandipants:


Quoting stormcris:

I don't agree only on the fact that I do not think you really can classify an identifiable villian, ie. when the whole of a group  is a villian or the whole of those who are not like you is the villian, is it really identifiable. Perhaps a conviction that there is an evil to work against either real or imaginary.

What do you mean? I think we (as Americans) have always had an identifiable villian. Even if that villian was a concept rather than a concrete entity.


Everyone is a genius. But, if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree it will think it is stupid.
Mandipants
by on Mar. 29, 2011 at 1:30 AM

So we find ways to villainize something in order to get the masses on board? Terrorists? Commies? American way of life threateners... etc? It's all kind of nebulous and hard to pin down.

I guess what I mean is that as a whole the American public is only as smart as its most gullible constituents. The abstract is too much to grasp so it is embodied at least in conceptual villians even if we don't have actual people to fear...

So I think we are speaking of the same thing. I just needed a little clarification. I just needed to suss that out. Long day.

Quoting stormcris:

Well that is sort of my point we have always had an evil to work against even when we could not identify it. I am taking the situation in Afghanistan for an example. We were working against Russia then we were working against Al Queda whom we were previously working with. The reason was not against an identifiable villain but it was for securing a resource. So technically the villain was anyone who got in the way of that resource but they could have been anyone not necessarily some person or concept that is identifiable. Perhaps what I am trying to say is there is always a goal to work for but not always an identifiable villain just any thing that prevents the goal becomes the villian.

Quoting Mandipants:


Quoting stormcris:

I don't agree only on the fact that I do not think you really can classify an identifiable villian, ie. when the whole of a group  is a villian or the whole of those who are not like you is the villian, is it really identifiable. Perhaps a conviction that there is an evil to work against either real or imaginary.

What do you mean? I think we (as Americans) have always had an identifiable villian. Even if that villian was a concept rather than a concrete entity.



I am Mandipants and I approve this message.

Every Child a Wanted Child

stormcris
by Christy on Mar. 29, 2011 at 1:49 AM

I think so too. 

Quoting Mandipants:

So we find ways to villainize something in order to get the masses on board? Terrorists? Commies? American way of life threateners... etc? It's all kind of nebulous and hard to pin down.

I guess what I mean is that as a whole the American public is only as smart as its most gullible constituents. The abstract is too much to grasp so it is embodied at least in conceptual villians even if we don't have actual people to fear...

So I think we are speaking of the same thing. I just needed a little clarification. I just needed to suss that out. Long day.

Quoting stormcris:

Well that is sort of my point we have always had an evil to work against even when we could not identify it. I am taking the situation in Afghanistan for an example. We were working against Russia then we were working against Al Queda whom we were previously working with. The reason was not against an identifiable villain but it was for securing a resource. So technically the villain was anyone who got in the way of that resource but they could have been anyone not necessarily some person or concept that is identifiable. Perhaps what I am trying to say is there is always a goal to work for but not always an identifiable villain just any thing that prevents the goal becomes the villian.

Quoting Mandipants:


Quoting stormcris:

I don't agree only on the fact that I do not think you really can classify an identifiable villian, ie. when the whole of a group  is a villian or the whole of those who are not like you is the villian, is it really identifiable. Perhaps a conviction that there is an evil to work against either real or imaginary.

What do you mean? I think we (as Americans) have always had an identifiable villian. Even if that villian was a concept rather than a concrete entity.




Everyone is a genius. But, if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree it will think it is stupid.
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)