Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My perception is that P&C is spreading across the forums. Country’s highly polarized and just about every topic seems fair game for someone to politicize.
If a post does not comply with the higher standards required for the Great Debates section, report it by using the red triangle in the upper right corner. Those of us who value civil, intelligent discourse need to work together to keep the nasty, ignorant posts out.
you can certainly tell some of the idiots here by their proclivity to start topics here and POC, and their inability to string together 2 sentences. The majority of page 1 topic titles - dead giveaway too.
My perception is that P&C is spreading across the forums. Country’s highly polarized and just about every topic seems fair game for someone to politicize.
Sadly, that appears to be the case. The way liberal and conservative get thrown into a lot of non political conversations attests to that.
Politics is ubiquitous, as it permeates how we think, let alone how we react. But I think that at least in this subforum, it should be possible to avoid overt mention of Team A or Team B, or their titular champions.
My own view is that how we react to nearly any question about society, the individual vs. the state, the essence of morality and of ethical questions, of how to spend money or what to treasure and what to abjure - well, all of that, depends on whether in said context we feel "strong" or "weak". If I am weak, then I desire assistance, possibly at others' expense. If I am strong, then I chafe at the obligation of having to assist others, or at the limitations imposed onto the strong, to protect the weak. And as I'm weak or strong in different contexts, to different extents, well, how I lean on one or another topic, wil depend accordingly. So for example if I feel myself to be vulnerable to disease, and lack resources for treatment, or lack physiological fortitude to survive it, then I will vociferously argue for extensive public health measures. If on the contrary I feel myself (perhaps falsely?) to be impervious, then I'd clamor for a looser policy, a policy of every-man-for-himself. And that, in a nutshell, IS politics, is it not?
I don't know what you're talking about but there's been some great discourse on Great Debates.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
