Subject:
|
Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 17:19:51 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1338 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Duane Hess writes:
>
> > Why does LUGNET (in general) attract well educated white males? From my
> > observations, Larry is right. LUGNET does not represent the statistical
> > make-up of the countries in which it resides. Is this due to education?
> > Economical status? Genetics? Lunar phase? Who knows?
> >
> > The LP is probably like LUGNET in that it attracts a certain kind of person,
> > who just happens to be the higher educated white male.
>
> Are you implying a causative relation between higher education and some
> realization that the Libertarian Party is the "correct" path? I'm not
> trying to misread you, but I want to understand if this is what you're
> asserting.
No, I'm just alluding to the fact that certain individuals are attracted to
certain types of groups. Nothing more.
> Regardless (and this is the point that Bruce, Scott, and I are
> contesting), LUGNET doesn't push an agenda for achieving a "better" nation.
> LUGNET's aims are, by its tiny and focused nature, confined to its own
> domain, namely a part-time hobby of a small number of individuals. The LP,
> however, *does* have an agenda for the nation, and, in that light, the
> wildly skewed demographic of the LP is an appropriate issue to investigate.
> Again, let me state clearly that the demographic makeup of any group is
> independent of the validity or nonvalidity of that group's philosophy, but
> if such a group has its sights on national reform, and if something about
> the aims of that group seems to attract a very particular type of
> individual, then it is not inappropriate to wonder about correlation between
> the aims of the group and the benefits to that type of individual (or the
> detriment to other types of individual).
I can't debate anything regarding the LP. I'm largely ignorant to it's
political agenda and demographic, which seem to be the root issues.
>
> > Is this discriminatory? No, because there doesn't seem to be a conspiracy to
> > keep anyone out.
>
> It's interesting that you use the disclaimer "doesn't seem," but that's a
> rhetorical sidebar. In any case, I see your point. As another example, it
> is generally true that "blacks" in a cafeteria will sit together in one area
> and "whites" will sit together in another. This isn't discrimination either
> (barring "whites only" segregation nonsense); it simply reflects the choices
> of individuals to sit near those with whom they identify in some way.
I used the disclaimer on purpose. I'm of the opinion that if you dig deep
enough and look hard enough, you will eventually see what you want to see
regardless of the facts presented. I feel that is true in most any situation.
One neat thing here. While watching a documentary on the making of "Planet
of the Apes" it was noted that since the make-up and costumes were so
cumbersome and time consuming to put on and remove, actors stayed "in
character" during the entire workday. This meant that eating and other
necessary biological functions were tended to while still in costume. The
stage crew noticed that actors in chimpanzee costumes tended to socialize
with other actors of the same "species" with very little cross-over to the
other "species". The same was noted for the gorillas and orangutans. An
intersting observation I think...
> > It just means that a certain type of individual is attracted to the
> > organization.
>
> Again, though--if the organization has an agenda at the national level,
> and if that certain type of individual is attracted to the the organization
> due to its national agenda, it is appropriate to wonder why certain groups
> would favor such a national agenda while other groups do not.
The goal of the organization is the sum of it's members, isn't it? If the
members favor a particular agenda, then the organization favors the agenda.
If the members do not agree with a particular agenda, then the organization
can't favor the agenda. To favor an agenda without the consent of it's
members would cause an organization to suffer a mass defection of it members
to an organization that DOES represent their views. The members can survive
no matter what the organization does, but the organization cannot survive
without it's members.
> Racism and
> discrimination are not necessarily present, but the demographic imbalance is
> at the very least conspicuous.
The members drive the organization. The organization is just a vehicle for
the views of the members. I don't understand how an organization can be
accused of racism and discrimination based soley upon the demographics of
it's members. The sum of it's members would have to be racist and
discriminatory.
> > Just because I participate in a community where people who look, act and
> > think like me reside, doesn't mean that it's a racist community. It just
> > means that we tend to attract people who look, act and think like us.
> > Sometimes the simple answer is the right one....
>
> As they say, every complicated problem has a simple solution, and it's
> wrong. Don't be too hasty to insist that a problem isn't a problem simply
> because the rhetoric can be spun. And it *is* a problem, since the LP,
> presumably, hopes to achieve national significance in a nation made up of
> more than "the higher educated white male."
Then the LP must find a common interest to appeal to the rest of the
national demographic. The thing is it's a complicated problem for the LP,
not me. To me it's a simple problem since I'm not an LP member or supporter.
>
> Dave!
-Duane
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
| (...) Are you implying a causative relation between higher education and some realization that the Libertarian Party is the "correct" path? I'm not trying to misread you, but I want to understand if this is what you're asserting. Regardless (and (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
271 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
