Seems to me that you two are in vicious agreement, and talking past one another. Your point is fine, and you’ve made it clear enough, but even if you’re only wielding a whiffle bats, you could let up on beating one another about the face and neck.
I know both of you well enough to know that one, neither of you downvoted one another, and two, that neither of you is happy about the tone set here.
The other guy’s point in this case is, and you know it on some less contentious level, about the charged meaning of the term ‘socialism’ and whether every other country in the world is, for a particular interpretation, socialist. Let’s consider the ‘happiness metric’ on a purely Snapzu level and try not to get carried away, even if you are wearing protective headgear for this conversation, kids.
The other guy’s point in this case is, and you know it on some less contentious level, about the charged meaning of the term ‘socialism’ and whether every other country in the world is, for a particular interpretation, socialist.
I'm fully aware of the connotation of the word "socialist" and the way it's been dishonestly advertised. Which is why I challenge the notion that socialism is inherently bad for us or that the US' reticence to adopt it the way every other industrialized nation has created benefits for any but an elite minority.
Oh, I know that, and you know that. The other guy might know that too, I’ve found, if you point out that the U.S. military, that they may’ve served in, is a centrally-planned government-run socialized institution. In this particular case, yes in fact the other guy served.
Or if you point out that government spending is a full third of the U.S. economy without which the other thirds collapse. That's all around convincing, though, rather than defending, which you’ve done admirably well.
Hang around long enough, watching people talk and word get around, you hear things. Like that teeming majorities of people whatever their political stripe or color share some key exceedingly common views. Not the McCarthyism and Bushism that years on /r/politics/new might lead you to believe. Instead, you notice, vast numbers of people know they’re being used by what we laughingly call leadership and that there’s precious little to be done about it as things are.
A challenge we all have is finding any kind of unity given the Punch and Judy show of our politics, and the wounded pride of our shared long defeat. You two are a microcosm.
Seems to me that you two are in vicious agreement, and talking past one another. Your point is fine, and you’ve made it clear enough, but even if you’re only wielding a whiffle bats, you could let up on beating one another about the face and neck.
I know both of you well enough to know that one, neither of you downvoted one another, and two, that neither of you is happy about the tone set here.
The other guy’s point in this case is, and you know it on some less contentious level, about the charged meaning of the term ‘socialism’ and whether every other country in the world is, for a particular interpretation, socialist. Let’s consider the ‘happiness metric’ on a purely Snapzu level and try not to get carried away, even if you are wearing protective headgear for this conversation, kids.
I'm fully aware of the connotation of the word "socialist" and the way it's been dishonestly advertised. Which is why I challenge the notion that socialism is inherently bad for us or that the US' reticence to adopt it the way every other industrialized nation has created benefits for any but an elite minority.
Oh, I know that, and you know that. The other guy might know that too, I’ve found, if you point out that the U.S. military, that they may’ve served in, is a centrally-planned government-run socialized institution. In this particular case, yes in fact the other guy served.
Or if you point out that government spending is a full third of the U.S. economy without which the other thirds collapse. That's all around convincing, though, rather than defending, which you’ve done admirably well.
Hang around long enough, watching people talk and word get around, you hear things. Like that teeming majorities of people whatever their political stripe or color share some key exceedingly common views. Not the McCarthyism and Bushism that years on /r/politics/new might lead you to believe. Instead, you notice, vast numbers of people know they’re being used by what we laughingly call leadership and that there’s precious little to be done about it as things are.
A challenge we all have is finding any kind of unity given the Punch and Judy show of our politics, and the wounded pride of our shared long defeat. You two are a microcosm.