Friday, September 24, 2010

Posted Without Comment

Committed to the Inter-tubes by on
Labels: ,

6 comments:

  1. Dave (aka Buckskins Rule)24 September, 2010 15:17

    No comment required.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Moogie P24 September, 2010 15:23

    Well isn't that just the God's honest truth?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Buck24 September, 2010 15:56

    Yes, to the both of ya.

    ReplyDelete
  4. mkfreeberg26 September, 2010 11:48

    That "World's Shortest Political Quiz" thing, the one shaped like a diamond, sparked an interesting debate. Somewhere. Maybe at my place, maybe not. You'll recall it operates by two spectra, and one spectrum is authoritarianism vs. anarchy.

    Anyway, the debate gave rise to a theory and I've seen this theory before: If you follow this spectrum in one direction or another, you find out it doesn't have two endpoints like a true spectrum, it actually goes around in a circle. One guy exiles himself from society and takes on a life of ultimate freedom, the other commits crimes and is sent to prison and is denied his freedom. At day's end, they end up living essentially the same lifestyle.

    Perhaps, if this theory has something to it, we have an explanation as to why the folks holding the signs in these cartoons feel a kinship with Islamic extremists. One is rigid authoritarianism completely lacking in respect for individual rights, the other is complete anarchy.

    Each can see the other from their house. You betcha. ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Buck26 September, 2010 14:16

    At day's end, they end up living essentially the same lifestyle.

    No. Not at ALL. Us Exiles (in Portales!) have beer and cigars, prisoners don't. And there aren't any screws to beat on us Exiles, either. Although that could be seen as a drawback... see today's post. ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  6. mkfreeberg26 September, 2010 23:03

    Oh, I get what you're saying there. Keep in mind this is not my theory...

    I think the way they reply to that, is this: You're creating this differential that is based not so much on your ability to decide you want beer and cigars, but on your ability to acquire them. It is quite easy to envision a scenario in which the prisoner could enjoy such items -- the Warden would say okay. Could happen. And you, in your freedom, do not have the ultimate say in whether the brown truck o' happiness will be bringing you your cigars. New Mexico could pass a law, and that very day the web site would tell you how sorry they are and how much they appreciated your business.

    So what they're saying is is these two situations are essentially the same since the answer in both is a "maybe" -- you don't see it that way, because you have become accustomed to the "yes," but it still isn't within your control.

    Or something.

    Again, this isn't my argument. I'm just pointing out this difference you've raised is not where the debate ends.

    As to the question at hand -- it is perplexing and puzzling. This is the only viable answer I've been able to find. The anarchy-enthused left seems hell-bent (heh! sorry) on putting the U.S. under Sharia law, or insisting there'd be nothing wrong with such a thing. And they're the first ones whose heads would be separated from shoulders if it were to happen.

    ReplyDelete

Just be polite... that's all I ask.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)