I don't think these are predictions of anything. I don't know when each quote was written, but I would bet it could correlate with what year each was written in. Nostrodamus effect.
BSL,I know you love it,but #10 dosent quit resonate.Seems a bit far fetched.
It does have a doom and gloom ,there is no future ring to it,so that might fall right in your wheel house.
This really struck me, reading this, because I was just now replying to a friend in our conversation about how big business and government are taking over organic farming and and pushing out small organic farmers. This is really happening. My reply to my friend was, "This is that boot in the face Orwell was talking about".
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
I wasn't trying to necessarily have a positive effect. Just pointing out hypocracy. I completely agree with you that Orwell wouldnt have made the quotes in a dem vs. rep way but some people here seem to see it that way. I agree with your post above about the media, and would suggest that it is significantly more than half the politicians.
I somewhat see what you are saying but I still don't see the need to talk about democrats vs republicans. On the other hand, I think it's fair to say that in general conservatives will have a more difficult time agreeing with the Orwell quotes than people who tend to be more progressive.
I've said it in other threads. Maintaining that we're on a side will in fact keep us a divided nation. You can bet on that. And I'll clarify myself.
#8: “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.”
Refer to the Wisconsin thread. Team Conservative in that thread would not even hear of it that there is a major national problem with the police and minorities even with all the factual evidence pointing it out. Not one of them would even acknowledge it and one or two even said that there is no problem at all.
It is so funny to me that you seem to be so enlightened, yet you don't even have a sweet clue who is even truly on these respective teams of yours. Many of us are not even on a team, but in order for your personal agenda to be forwarded, that is the only strategy that will work, to label and marginalize people into neat little boxes. Boxes that most of us stepped outside of long ago.
I own my liberal nature. Most of the greatest minds ever among humans would be considered radical liberals right now, hell most of them were considered so in their own times. Conservatism by nature doesn't change the world, it seeks to uphold the status quo. I will err on the side of Shelley and Keats, Einstein and Bohr, Chavez and Ghandi over Milton and Donne, Popes and Priests, Thatcher and Bush.
I own my liberal nature. Most of the greatest minds ever among humans would be considered radical liberals right now, hell most of them were considered so in their own times. Conservatism by nature doesn't change the world, it seeks to uphold the status quo. I will err on the side of Shelley and Keats, Einstein and Bohr, Chavez and Ghandi over Milton and Donne, Popes and Priests, Thatcher and Bush.
Now, that's not to say I take my stance on an issue based on what's considered liberal... I approach each issue with a liberal toolset, ie. compassion and reason. It just so happens that if you approach a topic with compassion and reason foremost, you will be likely to arrive at a "liberal" conclusion.
I own my liberal nature. Most of the greatest minds ever among humans would be considered radical liberals right now, hell most of them were considered so in their own times. Conservatism by nature doesn't change the world, it seeks to uphold the status quo. I will err on the side of Shelley and Keats, Einstein and Bohr, Chavez and Ghandi over Milton and Donne, Popes and Priests, Thatcher and Bush.
gambs, I respect this (and you). I too stand by my views with eyes open to other perspectives. In ways similar to rr - conservative in some respects, not so much in others, and somewhere in between with yet others...etc.
I just don't understand (and have grown weary of) the "us and them" mentality. It serves no purpose, seems to shut down the potential for a meeting of minds.
I own my liberal nature. Most of the greatest minds ever among humans would be considered radical liberals right now, hell most of them were considered so in their own times. Conservatism by nature doesn't change the world, it seeks to uphold the status quo. I will err on the side of Shelley and Keats, Einstein and Bohr, Chavez and Ghandi over Milton and Donne, Popes and Priests, Thatcher and Bush.
gambs, I respect this (and you). I too stand by my views with eyes open to other perspectives. In ways similar to rr - conservative in some respects, not so much in others, and somewhere in between with yet others...etc.
I just don't understand (and have grown weary of) the "us and them" mentality. It serves no purpose, seems to shut down the potential for a meeting of minds.
To me, that is their goal. Divide us and keep us arguing over things like gay marriage, religion, and personal preferences that don't have anything to do with what really matters. It allows them to have a platform to run on. Most politicians care about money and power.
I own my liberal nature. Most of the greatest minds ever among humans would be considered radical liberals right now, hell most of them were considered so in their own times. Conservatism by nature doesn't change the world, it seeks to uphold the status quo. I will err on the side of Shelley and Keats, Einstein and Bohr, Chavez and Ghandi over Milton and Donne, Popes and Priests, Thatcher and Bush.
gambs, I respect this (and you). I too stand by my views with eyes open to other perspectives. In ways similar to rr - conservative in some respects, not so much in others, and somewhere in between with yet others...etc.
I just don't understand (and have grown weary of) the "us and them" mentality. It serves no purpose, seems to shut down the potential for a meeting of minds.
To me, that is their goal. Divide us and keep us arguing over things like gay marriage, religion, and personal preferences that don't have anything to do with what really matters. It allows them to have a platform to run on. Most politicians care about money and power.
Your last two sentences - that's what sticks in my craw! Agenda - appealing to emotion vs common sense. It can't / shouldn't be one or the other. Surely there's a place where compassion meets pragmatism?
I own my liberal nature. Most of the greatest minds ever among humans would be considered radical liberals right now, hell most of them were considered so in their own times. Conservatism by nature doesn't change the world, it seeks to uphold the status quo. I will err on the side of Shelley and Keats, Einstein and Bohr, Chavez and Ghandi over Milton and Donne, Popes and Priests, Thatcher and Bush.
BSL,I know you love it,but #10 dosent quit resonate.Seems a bit far fetched.
It does have a doom and gloom ,there is no future ring to it,so that might fall right in your wheel house.
This really struck me, reading this, because I was just now replying to a friend in our conversation about how big business and government are taking over organic farming and and pushing out small organic farmers. This is really happening. My reply to my friend was, "This is that boot in the face Orwell was talking about".
I was wondering about #10 before you posted this, but knowing something about the situation you're talking about - have you heard of the doc called Farmaggedon; an excellent film talking about this very issue - it makes a lot of sense...
Now, that's not to say I take my stance on an issue based on what's considered liberal... I approach each issue with a liberal toolset, ie. compassion and reason. It just so happens that if you approach a topic with compassion and reason foremost, you will be likely to arrive at a "liberal" conclusion.
Nice post. I must add to that toolset, in approaching each issue, also having an open mind and admitting we have faults and actively working to change things for the better (the greater good of the whole) and seeking solutions rather than merely complaining. It is work, but it's actually in getting to a better place, and not cycling ourselves in the status quo, THAT may be liberalism but it's progress at work. Which is what liberalism is about. Progress.
My favorite #8 is about hearing and admitting our faults, and the faults of our country. How can one progress and evolve when we refuse to acknowledge faults of our society and ourselves and things we have said but now choose to ignore or even pretend never happened? You can't, hence the cycling.
I own my liberal nature. Most of the greatest minds ever among humans would be considered radical liberals right now, hell most of them were considered so in their own times. Conservatism by nature doesn't change the world, it seeks to uphold the status quo. I will err on the side of Shelley and Keats, Einstein and Bohr, Chavez and Ghandi over Milton and Donne, Popes and Priests, Thatcher and Bush.
gambs, I respect this (and you). I too stand by my views with eyes open to other perspectives. In ways similar to rr - conservative in some respects, not so much in others, and somewhere in between with yet others...etc.
I just don't understand (and have grown weary of) the "us and them" mentality. It serves no purpose, seems to shut down the potential for a meeting of minds.
You're not going to get a meeting of the minds when some people won't even acknowledge difficult issues, when an objective perspective is refused, and there's a refusal to hearing of any opinions but their own. Reason and hearing differing opinions have to be present for ANY meeting of the minds. That's why cable news networks are so successful, they only broadcast what the audience want to hear, rather than hard facts, which would cause the viewer to turn the channel and affect the stations precious ratings.
I own my liberal nature. Most of the greatest minds ever among humans would be considered radical liberals right now, hell most of them were considered so in their own times. Conservatism by nature doesn't change the world, it seeks to uphold the status quo. I will err on the side of Shelley and Keats, Einstein and Bohr, Chavez and Ghandi over Milton and Donne, Popes and Priests, Thatcher and Bush.
gambs, I respect this (and you). I too stand by my views with eyes open to other perspectives. In ways similar to rr - conservative in some respects, not so much in others, and somewhere in between with yet others...etc.
I just don't understand (and have grown weary of) the "us and them" mentality. It serves no purpose, seems to shut down the potential for a meeting of minds.
To me, that is their goal. Divide us and keep us arguing over things like gay marriage, religion, and personal preferences that don't have anything to do with what really matters. It allows them to have a platform to run on. Most politicians care about money and power.
Your last two sentences - that's what sticks in my craw! Agenda - appealing to emotion vs common sense. It can't / shouldn't be one or the other. Surely there's a place where compassion meets pragmatism?
Makes the last line of Floyd's "Hey You" vibrate.
Yes it does. Don't get me wrong, things like gay marriage are important. To me it pales in comparison to genocide, climate change, income inequality and war in general. I'd like to see both sides work together towards actual solutions, instead of the hate and fear mongering that goes on.
I own my liberal nature. Most of the greatest minds ever among humans would be considered radical liberals right now, hell most of them were considered so in their own times. Conservatism by nature doesn't change the world, it seeks to uphold the status quo. I will err on the side of Shelley and Keats, Einstein and Bohr, Chavez and Ghandi over Milton and Donne, Popes and Priests, Thatcher and Bush.
gambs, I respect this (and you). I too stand by my views with eyes open to other perspectives. In ways similar to rr - conservative in some respects, not so much in others, and somewhere in between with yet others...etc.
I just don't understand (and have grown weary of) the "us and them" mentality. It serves no purpose, seems to shut down the potential for a meeting of minds.
To me, that is their goal. Divide us and keep us arguing over things like gay marriage, religion, and personal preferences that don't have anything to do with what really matters. It allows them to have a platform to run on. Most politicians care about money and power.
Your last two sentences - that's what sticks in my craw! Agenda - appealing to emotion vs common sense. It can't / shouldn't be one or the other. Surely there's a place where compassion meets pragmatism?
Makes the last line of Floyd's "Hey You" vibrate.
Yes it does. Don't get me wrong, things like gay marriage are important. To me it pales in comparison to genocide, climate change, income inequality and war in general. I'd like to see both sides work together towards actual solutions, instead of the hate and fear mongering that goes on.
Amen, mister.
To the OP, ears and eyes are open. Perhaps the "je refuse!" mindset seen / ascribed to others is misplaced...
Eh after reading responses stick with my post. Look at Orwell's quotes and can't help thinking about all the threads we've had along with rhetoric from our favorite news sources.
As to what you consider yourself well that's on you.
Hedonist, if you can't see my point, and it all began with the Wisconsin thread, then perhaps there is no point of trying to get to middle ground.
ETA: Kinda defeats the point in meeting of the minds, doesn't it? It takes work to meet half way, it means rather than just saying our minds are open, it means altering our perspective, and using reason to actually meet half way.
Hedonist, if you can't see my point, and it all began with the Wisconsin thread, then perhaps there is no point of trying to get to middle ground.
ETA: Kinda defeats the point in meeting of the minds, doesn't it? It takes work to meet half way, it means rather than just saying our minds are open, it means altering our perspective, and using reason to actually meet half way.
But I'm still, Movin' on...
Not sure of the reason for reposting (not really moving on, is it?).
Neither of us are idiots. No need to educate on what an open mind means. I think we both get it.
Look - ask me anything you want. These references to the Wisconsin thread (many pages, and as I've said before, be specific in your quest for answers and I'll be honest in response, but do the legwork yourself), the kind of creepy "coming to terms with being a Conservative" - again, my words here speak for themselves and while I don't feel the need to defend my views to you or anyone else, more than happy to clarify.
Found a couple more quotes that could easily be added to the list:
“Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear”
“For the ordinary man is passive. Within a narrow circle (home life, and perhaps the trade unions or local politics) he feels himself master of his fate, but against major events he is as helpless as against the elements. So far from endeavoring to influence the future, he simply lies down and lets things happen to him.”
"People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome."
Hedonist, if you can't see my point, and it all began with the Wisconsin thread, then perhaps there is no point of trying to get to middle ground.
ETA: Kinda defeats the point in meeting of the minds, doesn't it? It takes work to meet half way, it means rather than just saying our minds are open, it means altering our perspective, and using reason to actually meet half way.
But I'm still, Movin' on...
Not sure of the reason for reposting (not really moving on, is it?).
Neither of us are idiots. No need to educate on what an open mind means. I think we both get it.
Look - ask me anything you want. These references to the Wisconsin thread (many pages, and as I've said before, be specific in your quest for answers and I'll be honest in response, but do the legwork yourself), the kind of creepy "coming to terms with being a Conservative" - again, my words here speak for themselves and while I don't feel the need to defend my views to you or anyone else, more than happy to clarify.
No, I'm done. I just wanted to show you that if you were interested in the "meeting of the minds", you would actually try to make that happen, by meeting half way, doing your own legwork. And when people fail to do the work to meet half way, the illusion of "sides" is more evident. That's why we will never get rid of the two sides in America.
Hedonist, if you can't see my point, and it all began with the Wisconsin thread, then perhaps there is no point of trying to get to middle ground.
ETA: Kinda defeats the point in meeting of the minds, doesn't it? It takes work to meet half way, it means rather than just saying our minds are open, it means altering our perspective, and using reason to actually meet half way.
But I'm still, Movin' on...
Not sure of the reason for reposting (not really moving on, is it?).
Neither of us are idiots. No need to educate on what an open mind means. I think we both get it.
Look - ask me anything you want. These references to the Wisconsin thread (many pages, and as I've said before, be specific in your quest for answers and I'll be honest in response, but do the legwork yourself), the kind of creepy "coming to terms with being a Conservative" - again, my words here speak for themselves and while I don't feel the need to defend my views to you or anyone else, more than happy to clarify.
No, I'm done. I just wanted to show you that if you were interested in the "meeting of the minds", you would actually try to make that happen, by meeting half way, doing your own legwork. And when people fail to do the work to meet half way, the illusion of "sides" is more evident. That's why we will never get rid of the two sides in America.
You lost me, and your clinging to this - whatever "this" is...I don't even know anymore at this point...call me out, I'm fine with it. ASK me anything, again. Me doing your legwork?
"Clarify and defend yourself, but YOU figure out exactly what I want clarified and defended"
Silly...and weirdly passive-aggressive.
Again (with a sprinkle of please and thank you), make clear what exactly your issue is with me and what you would like to know, otherwise - actually move on.
BSL,get out and enjoy some sunshine.(It's the big shiny fire ball in the sky)
I think you have been locked inside with the shades closed in a basement type lair a little to long.Put down the keyboard.Tell your folks your heading out and throw caution to the wind.I know it's scary out there,but you got this.
Breathe in some fresh air(yes I know big corporations have polluted the air with deadly levels of whatever,but it's still clean enough to breathe for now trust me.)And relax.Slow it down and just breathe.
Found a couple more quotes that could easily be added to the list:
“Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear”
“For the ordinary man is passive. Within a narrow circle (home life, and perhaps the trade unions or local politics) he feels himself master of his fate, but against major events he is as helpless as against the elements. So far from endeavoring to influence the future, he simply lies down and lets things happen to him.”
"People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome."
Comments
What was the question again?
(cheers, rr)
www.headstonesband.com
I just don't understand (and have grown weary of) the "us and them" mentality. It serves no purpose, seems to shut down the potential for a meeting of minds.
Makes the last line of Floyd's "Hey You" vibrate.
My favorite #8 is about hearing and admitting our faults, and the faults of our country. How can one progress and evolve when we refuse to acknowledge faults of our society and ourselves and things we have said but now choose to ignore or even pretend never happened? You can't, hence the cycling.
To the OP, ears and eyes are open. Perhaps the "je refuse!" mindset seen / ascribed to others is misplaced...
Food for thought?
Movin' on...
As to what you consider yourself well that's on you.
ETA: Kinda defeats the point in meeting of the minds, doesn't it? It takes work to meet half way, it means rather than just saying our minds are open, it means altering our perspective, and using reason to actually meet half way.
But I'm still, Movin' on...
Neither of us are idiots. No need to educate on what an open mind means. I think we both get it.
Look - ask me anything you want. These references to the Wisconsin thread (many pages, and as I've said before, be specific in your quest for answers and I'll be honest in response, but do the legwork yourself), the kind of creepy "coming to terms with being a Conservative" - again, my words here speak for themselves and while I don't feel the need to defend my views to you or anyone else, more than happy to clarify.
“Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear”
“For the ordinary man is passive. Within a narrow circle (home life, and perhaps the trade unions or local politics) he feels himself master of his fate, but against major events he is as helpless as against the elements. So far from endeavoring to influence the future, he simply lies down and lets things happen to him.”
"People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome."
"Clarify and defend yourself, but YOU figure out exactly what I want clarified and defended"
Silly...and weirdly passive-aggressive.
Again (with a sprinkle of please and thank you), make clear what exactly your issue is with me and what you would like to know, otherwise - actually move on.
I think you have been locked inside with the shades closed in a basement type lair a little to long.Put down the keyboard.Tell your folks your heading out and throw caution to the wind.I know it's scary out there,but you got this.
Breathe in some fresh air(yes I know big corporations have polluted the air with deadly levels of whatever,but it's still clean enough to breathe for now trust me.)And relax.Slow it down and just breathe.