Suttree Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 Hereward - No, although Philip Larkin, Tory supporting old bigot though he was, only served to extend the general rule of thumb that, since poetry is an individualist and not a collectivist enterprise, there are almost no good or great poets who have ever gravitated to the Left.Not sure how you expect to be taken seriously with posts like that.13 pages and no discussion of bitcoin?Here you go mate.http://www.businessinsider.com/mycoin-ponzi-scheme-allegations-losses-2015-2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ormond Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 am not against miscegenation, I'm just against the implied suggestion it is somehow healthier than same race relationships. She does wind up with a version of the Doctor, but a lot later in the series after Donna has been jilted at the altar by a black guy and eventually gets married to a replacement black guy. The producers knew they might cause offence among the Left by having her wind up with a more reliable white guy, so they'd wrote themselves into a logically improbable corner. You can't deny an obvious agenda here; this sort of thing simply doesn't happen through a process of colour-blind casting, especially with the very bizarre and very politically blatant same sex relationiship between one of the characters and a Silurian going on (and the characters aren't even the same species), which suggests that the producers are indeed making a comment regarding how they are making political choices in the relationiships in the show. The crushes the assistants have had on white characters or on the Doctor don't count, as those are not examples of relationiships. I count the following: Rose: White woman/ black guy relationship.Donna: Same, but twice.Martha: Winds up with a black guy.Clara: As above. Rose: Eventually winds up with a white guy, a version of the Doctor.River: A Time Lord, but is with the original version of the same white guy.Amy: With a white guy. That's five for the former instance, and three for the latter, and the Doctor himself just counts as one person, and in any case isn't human. I'm not denying the healthiness of portraying miscegenative relationships on TV, but there's no evidence of a black woman/ white man relationship because the producers know there are a small number of black men, whose opinions they'd prioritrize over those of white men on the subject, who might consider that inflammatory, and the percentages of occurrence of the reverse in the programme are not credible in terms of real life. White woman/ black male relationships do exist and that's perfectly healthy, but it's an exception, not a norm. This is utterly amazing. There are continual assertions made about the motives of the producers of the show without providing a shred of evidence that they are correct. In what way did the show "imply" cross-racial relationships are "healthier"? How do you know "the producers know there are a small number of black men whose opinions they'd prioritize over those of white men on the subject". Have any of the producers of the show every said any such thing? Do you have any evidence for the beliefs of the producers outside of your own interpretation of what you see on the program? I don't see any evidence that your interpretations aren't the result of your own idiosyncratic beliefs about race and politics and aren't just pure projection. Whether or not you feel "angry" about that is irrelevant. It seems to me this has obviously reached a point where it's derailed the thread so I won't reply about Dr. Who again. If someone wants this conversation to continue, I think it should be in a new thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marquis de Leech Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 The show has become bludgeoningly Left Wing. In the classic series there was an equal opportunities of targets; it satirised both Left and Right establishmentarian perspectives in a subtle and creative way. Take The Happiness Patrol, for instance, which was ostensibly a satire upon Thatcherism, but it wasn't so much a satire on protectionist state capitalism so much as on the PC, dissidence suppressing policies against expression that actually were instituted first by Thatcher and not, as some would have it, Tony Blair. The last two seasons of the Classic series were far more overtly political (and specifically leftist) than anything in the New series. You've got Remembrance of the Daleks ("racism is bad"), The Happiness Patrol ("Margaret Thatcher is bad" with a subversive dose of pro-gay rights on top), The Greatest Show in the Galaxy (commentary on commercial entertainment), Battlefield ("nuclear war is bad"), The Curse of Fenric (which has us cheering for the Soviet guy), and Survival ("war and social darwinism are bad"). The only stories from the era without an agenda were the negligible Silver Nemesis and the incomprehensible Ghost Light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NestorMakhnosLovechild Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 This is utterly amazing. There are continual assertions made about the motives of the producers of the show without providing a shred of evidence that they are correct. In what way did the show "imply" cross-racial relationships are "healthier"? How do you know "the producers know there are a small number of black men whose opinions they'd prioritize over those of white men on the subject". Have any of the producers of the show every said any such thing? Do you have any evidence for the beliefs of the producers outside of your own interpretation of what you see on the program? I don't see any evidence that your interpretations aren't the result of your own idiosyncratic beliefs about race and politics and aren't just pure projection. Whether or not you feel "angry" about that is irrelevant. It seems to me this has obviously reached a point where it's derailed the thread so I won't reply about Dr. Who again. If someone wants this conversation to continue, I think it should be in a new thread. I mean, you are familiar with TheKillerSnark, right? He's the undisputed master of the Bizarrely Specific Anecdote From Which Only He Can Glean Universal Truths Of Questionable Provenance. You might think you know a little something about racism and the PC thought police, but what you don't realize is that TheKillerSnark's friend taught him everything he needs to know about the scourge of Political Correctness after relating an argument about affirmative action in the poetry industry with a middle class, Left Wing Jewish couple in a pub on the anniversary of Auschwitz to some random Black person the next day, who happened to be friends with a cafe owner who ejected the person in question because he wasn't a Cultural Marxist. So I'm not sure what you think you can add to the discussion, okay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ormond Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 I mean, you are familiar with TheKillerSnark, right? Sorry, I don't read every thread on this board or even read 100% of the threads I do read every day. I have a life. :) I don't recall having read a lot by him before this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wise Fool Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 If you don't watch the show, you can't comment on whether my views are ridiculous or not. I absolutely can, starting with this wormy little thought police attempt. Sorry officer, freedom of speech is allowed here, is that alright? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 13 pages and no discussion of bitcoin? You are right! :rofl: There, we've now discussed Bitcoin and covered every facet of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felice Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 The crushes the assistants have had on white characters or on the Doctor don't count, as those are not examples of relationiships. They get a hell of a lot more screentime than Martha/Mickey (one brief cameo) and Donna's marriages (the first prominent in a single episode, the other a minor background element that had slipped my mind)! The mutual attraction between Rose and the Doctor is central to the first two seasons (with occasional diversions when one or the other is attracted to a different white person, eg the Girl in the Fireplace), and Martha's unrequited attraction to the Doctor is central to season three while he falls for a white woman in a two-parter that shows them living an entire life together in flashforward. And Clara didn't wind up with a black guy - that relationship ended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerraPrime Posted February 18, 2015 Author Share Posted February 18, 2015 [mod hat] Yes, let's do move the alleged racism of Doctor Who's romantic interests to a separate thread and let this one be more about Libertarianism please. Thanks. [/mod hat] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Killer Snark Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 larrytheimp - Shelley, like Coleridge, wasn't a Leftist. He was a centrist liberal. Blake was roughly speaking an individualist without any explicit socialist ideology any more than Dickens had, who happened to be a centrist. Neruda was a sometimes decent minor poet and Angelou was a mostly bad one. Ginsberg changed his politics as often as he changed his clothes. The only two poets who really count in the twentieth century are Ezra Pound and Auden, the first a great poet in his early days, the latter just very good. Pound's poetry got worse he further he believed himself, in a state of half-insanity, to be a messiah against the side of Western capitalism in his mostly unreadable Cantos. Other poets you could bandy about are the very overrated Lorca, who stole his entire style in diluted form from Rimbaud, Pasolini, who was a great filmmaker but also a lousy poet, and the likes of Stephen Spender and Seamus Heaney, who were total mediocrities. Almost every poet in print now has been printed purely out of sympathy for their soapboxing Leftist social agenda convictions and they are the reason the mass public has turned its back on modern poetry, because none of these people have any artistic talent and do not write through artistic motivations; all of their stuff just sounds the same and all of them are bad. And before someone tries to bring Yeats into it, Yeats may have been a Republican but he was notably Right Wing. I'm sorry. I shall try harder to stay directly on topic now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seli Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 Aren't musicians (perhaps the songwriters among them) the modern day poets anyway ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The guy from the Vale Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 Aren't musicians (perhaps the songwriters among them) the modern day poets anyway ? Pretty much. Bob Dylan is a leftist poet, he just sings his poems instead of publishing them in print. Also, Heinrich Heine was one of the most prolific poets in the German language, and he was an avowed socialist (actually, even a close friend of Marx). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 13 pages and no discussion of bitcoin? Theres a bitcoin kiosk at the mall downtown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commodore Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Theres a bitcoin kiosk at the mall downtown. excellent, best jump on the bandwagon now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 excellent, best jump on the bandwagon now Heh. You mean 'best jump on the bandwagon three years ago'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marquis de Leech Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Hmmm. Blake, Ginsberg, PB Shelley, Maya Angenlou, Neruda... And Robert Burns. Is there for honest Poverty That hings his head, an' a' that; The coward slave-we pass him by, We dare be poor for a' that! For a' that, an' a' that. Our toils obscure an' a' that, The rank is but the guinea's stamp, The Man's the gowd for a' that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerraPrime Posted April 16, 2015 Author Share Posted April 16, 2015 *bump* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seli Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 Why do those on the left have so much disdain for libertarians? I can almostunderstand why neo cons do. Almost. How serious should people take an ideology that ignores that people are human beings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liffguard Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 How serious should people take an ideology that ignores that people are human beings? Speaking as an ex-libertarian, that's basically the core of my objection to it now. It's an ideology based around premises rather than outcomes. So long as any situation fits the libertarian premises then the outcome is - by definition - considered good, regardless of how much real-world harm results from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazydog7 Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 While I'm thinking about it I'm curious Marxism has the call to mass action organize the workers introduce them to the tenents of the faith and they will rise up as one with the usual counter revolutionary elements remaining. Is there such a concept in any branch of Libertarianism or do they just get hung up on "going galt?" If I could sum up my problem with Libertarianism as it is now known it reminds me to much of the extreme John Birch Society stuff I was exposed to as a child Government is evil Taxes are always bad US out of everywhere All problems can be solved if you are rich enough but those who don’t have it can go get fucked If occasionally they have a sane idea like ending the Drug War or cutting military spending to get to that you have to wade through all the Ayn Rand cliques in the world to get to them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.