Shut Up, Stupid

joyboytoy79

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Posts
3,686
Media
32
Likes
61
Points
193
Location
Washington, D.C. (United States)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
We agree on most things that I've read and I think this topic suffers from a lack of clarity in regards to the subjects it is targeted at. So before you lampoon my attempts at being playful (not trying to be condescending, certainly not to someone who posts with the quality that you do) let me... re-posit the initial sentiment.

Everyone has a right to an opinion. Certainly, everyone should take some vested interest in the political system in the United States, and no one is really an "expert" on politics, but rather on the subjects that constitute the label. That being said there are people who are extremely vocal that fall into one if not all of the following;

1.) They aren't interested in politics deeper than the surface. Think of it like reading the headline of a newspaper and not the actual article.

2.) They aren't informed due to their lack of actual interest. (The Inquirer example isn't uncommon. I hear things like that in line at the grocery store all the time. Actual political commentary being made based on the headlines of what is basically science fiction.)

3.) They don't actually engage in debate (if they did they'd be exposed) because doing so might force them to learn something about the other side.

If you fall into one of these three basic examples and are still extremely vocal about your disdain for... let's say George W Bush or Barack Obama, my question is why? Where does that comfort come form? These same people (again, the limited populace I'm referring to) wouldn't do that in regard to anything else (or at least they seem not to) so what is it about politics that makes it alright?

I'm not talking about elected officials or people who have opinions that I think are wrong, or people that aren't "scholars" on the subject but people who obviously have no information upon which to base an opinion, being extremely vocal on what said unfounded opinion entails specifically.

This portion of the population seems like its growing... and if the intent is to remain uninformed and get louder, my response is... shut the fuck up. If that doesn't clarify the original post... I don't really know how to make it any clearer. I'm laboring under the assumption, at some point, everyone who has watched a television or attended a rally has said to themselves "Who gave this nutbag the mic?"



JSZ

Well, JSZ, I agree that there are too many people who know nothing of the political process, yet prognosticate profusely about its imminent collapse. I agree that they have the right to shut up. I disagree when you say that there are not same-such people in other arenas of discourse. As a geneticist, I hear a lot of people talking about the horrors of GMF. These same people eat cornflakes on a daily basis. Knowing that you're not a geneticist, I bet you are unaware that over 90% of the corn grown in the US is genetically modified. Then again, I don't really have a way of assessing your knowledge until I get to know you better.

Likewise, I meet many people who have never read an actual scientifically sound medical journal, yet pontificate about the dangers of vaccinations. I hear people who are not well-versed in law insist that taxes are illegal. I see people posting articles about how pesticides are over-used on farms, although they've never set foot outside a major metropolis. Therefor, I conclude that your argument is unsound. This phenomenon is not limited to the political realm. It is widespread, and it highlights a profound disrespect for education within a large proportion of our populace. People "know in their hearts" that the facts learned people have worked decades to decipher are untrue. This "heartfelt knowledge" is more important to them than any book learning could ever be.

Politics is a complex beast. The topics of debate within politics touch on every aspect of the human condition. Most people feel they have a right to participate in all levels of the political process, regardless of their level of understanding about the topic being discussed. I tend to agree that they have a right to participate, but disagree that they don't have to know something about the topic at hand. But then again, I want to work with stem cells, one day... and if we limited that debate to only those who know something about stem cells, we'd have never had a ban on such research.

And after all of that, I think I buried my point: Politics is not unique with its armchair experts, and the answer is not to shut them up, but to calm them down long enough to get them to learn something.
 

D_Percy_Prettywillie

Account Disabled
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Posts
748
Media
0
Likes
22
Points
53
Well, JSZ, I agree that there are too many people who know nothing of the political process, yet prognosticate profusely about its imminent collapse. I agree that they have the right to shut up. I disagree when you say that there are not same-such people in other arenas of discourse. As a geneticist, I hear a lot of people talking about the horrors of GMF. These same people eat cornflakes on a daily basis. Knowing that you're not a geneticist, I bet you are unaware that over 90% of the corn grown in the US is genetically modified. Then again, I don't really have a way of assessing your knowledge until I get to know you better.

Likewise, I meet many people who have never read an actual scientifically sound medical journal, yet pontificate about the dangers of vaccinations. I hear people who are not well-versed in law insist that taxes are illegal. I see people posting articles about how pesticides are over-used on farms, although they've never set foot outside a major metropolis. Therefor, I conclude that your argument is unsound. This phenomenon is not limited to the political realm. It is widespread, and it highlights a profound disrespect for education within a large proportion of our populace. People "know in their hearts" that the facts learned people have worked decades to decipher are untrue. This "heartfelt knowledge" is more important to them than any book learning could ever be.

Politics is a complex beast. The topics of debate within politics touch on every aspect of the human condition. Most people feel they have a right to participate in all levels of the political process, regardless of their level of understanding about the topic being discussed. I tend to agree that they have a right to participate, but disagree that they don't have to know something about the topic at hand. But then again, I want to work with stem cells, one day... and if we limited that debate to only those who know something about stem cells, we'd have never had a ban on such research.

And after all of that, I think I buried my point: Politics is not unique with its armchair experts, and the answer is not to shut them up, but to calm them down long enough to get them to learn something.


You're right. At one point or another I suppose I have heard people make comments that they don't even realize are hypocritical. "I only buy American products!" coming from the guy wearing a sweater from the Gap, typing away on a laptop made by Dell. I hadn't really thought about it from that perspective but it's valid; the people I'm thinking of really don't limit themselves to just politics, they'll espouse an opinion about basically anything, and unfortunately it just so happens to encompass politics more often than not.

"Calm them down long enough to get them to learn something," is a fantastic idea... but how? I mean look at Turkeyinanoven or whatever- He won't even read the post. Rather than accept a statement of the obvious "Idiots are speaking with a louder and louder voice" he has instead made this about how I'm a elitist and by commenting on the limited level of understanding of a very specific group of people, I'm saying I'm better than everyone else on the planet. For suggesting the notion that there are people who shouldn't be speaking out loud on certain issues I've basically been turned into a James Bond villain in this thread.

So how do you work with that? How do you quell this portion of the electorate that instantaneously vilifies anything resembling actual information and casually substitutes the word "elitist" for "educated?"




JSZ
 

dude_007

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Posts
4,846
Media
0
Likes
116
Points
133
Location
California
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Everyone has a voice in politics, that is the difference.

It is like some of the modern art from 50s and 60s. A lot of people called it crap, essentially telling artists to STFU, while others considered them masterpieces.

To each his or her own. Certain opinions bug you; however, others might and have said the same about your own haughty rumbling. How would you like to be told to STFU?
 

D_Percy_Prettywillie

Account Disabled
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Posts
748
Media
0
Likes
22
Points
53
To each his or her own. Certain opinions bug you;
I'm not talking about elected officials or people who have opinions that I think are wrong, or people that aren't "scholars" on the subject but people who obviously have no information upon which to base an opinion, being extremely vocal on what said unfounded opinion entails specifically.

however, others might and have said the same about your own haughty rumbling. How would you like to be told to STFU?

I have no doubt the crazy woman in line Safeway would think I'm "haughty." I have no problem with that. If we're both going to be speaking, however, she's talking about how the government is concealing the existence of extra terrestrials who have started a colony under Fort Knox and I'm probably talking about how little faith I have in Congress to get anything of substance accomplished. If one of us is going to be played off by the orchestra I'm thinking it's her.

See? This is what I mean. How do you work with this? Ideally, explaining the situation in a calm and rational manner would be my go-to response. But the explanation to this has already been given and then clarified after the fact. Literally every piece of that has been responded to and yet here it is again.

Joyboytoy79, you're a scientist in a field that draws some pretty fierce commentary from the wholly uneducated so you probably have first hand experience with this; after you've made your case and cited research and facts and examples and then someone asks you the same question that started it all... at what point do you throw your hands in the air and say "I can't help this person."
 

TurkeyWithaSunburn

Legendary Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Posts
3,589
Media
25
Likes
1,225
Points
608
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
"Calm them down long enough to get them to learn something," is a fantastic idea... but how? I mean look at Turkeyinanoven or whatever- He won't even read the post. Rather than accept a statement of the obvious "Idiots are speaking with a louder and louder voice" he has instead made this about how I'm a elitist and by commenting on the limited level of understanding of a very specific group of people, I'm saying I'm better than everyone else on the planet. For suggesting the notion that there are people who shouldn't be speaking out loud on certain issues I've basically been turned into a James Bond villain in this thread.

So how do you work with that? How do you quell this portion of the electorate that instantaneously vilifies anything resembling actual information and casually substitutes the word "elitist" for "educated?"




JSZ
If you want to be a drama queen at least you could actually read what *I* actually wrote: "That's what I get out of it too. Sorry to say, his posts are coming to quickly fall under the TL;DR category - a lotta words, but with little meaning, clarity or purpose." Which means I read your rant and most of your posts are becoming rants so therefore I shouldn't be reading them because you are just venting. AND I was the THIRD person to say that your post was a rant but yet you single me out because I actually gave you criticism instead of a one liner. I quoted someone else that said "All I get out of the OP is his admonition "I'm smarter than you and you should STFU!"" Please use some reading comprehension skills for clarity and understand what various posters are actually stating.

If you're thinking I'm some neocon harping on your liberal-ishness you're wrong. I said liberal ranter in the post because there are (actually were-eventually they got banned) several neocon ranters on here that would spout rants much like your own. And since I'm actually a moderate I figure I would point out a post as a rant from the opposite side of the spectrum. That and I didn't understand why it was posted in politics at all.

Vilifies anything resembling actual information? What actual information did you post in the OP? Other than some people are stupid and happy that way? NO shit sherlock, want a cookie for that observation? And I didn't substitute elitist for educated in my making my opinion of your post.

Weren't you captain of the debate team or something? Then you should know that changing the opponent's name to something other than stated is dismissive and is a weak argument. [Although I'll admit I've done it in the past, I try to watch my language more closely now.] Glad to see that you do hold a high and mighty opinion of your own opinions though!:cool:
 

Sklar

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2006
Posts
1,640
Media
25
Likes
3,494
Points
368
Location
Everett, Washington, US
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Is it just me or does this entire post seem designed to inflame opinions? The OP has already been successful at getting members banned. The more I read this thread and the OP attempts at justification and his immature responses to valid points against his, this thread is now, to my opinion, looking more and more like an excuse for the OP to go crying to Moderators and saying his feelings are getting hurt.

So saying, this will be the last time I post in this thread or any other started by the OP.

He seems to be trouble waiting to happen.

Sklar
 

D_Percy_Prettywillie

Account Disabled
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Posts
748
Media
0
Likes
22
Points
53
Is it just me or does this entire post seem designed to inflame opinions? The OP has already been successful at getting members banned. The more I read this thread and the OP attempts at justification and his immature responses to valid points against his, this thread is now, to my opinion, looking more and more like an excuse for the OP to go crying to Moderators and saying his feelings are getting hurt.

So saying, this will be the last time I post in this thread or any other started by the OP.

He seems to be trouble waiting to happen.

Sklar


You got me. In addition to being an exercise in my narcissistic ego mania, this entire thread was designed to inflame opinions so I can "go crying to the moderators" and get people banned because they hurt my feelings.

And I'd have gotten away with it too were it not for your genius detective work. Keep a watch out- it can't be long before I team up with Cobra Commander and try to take over the world through use of an Earthquake generator.


Turkeywithasunburn actually put this entire thread into perspective in a private message to me. It sums up what I was initially getting at in a way I thus far have failed to articulate;

TurkeyWithaSunburn said:
A better way to say it would be, why do people who hold extreme and willfully ignorant opinions spout them to everyone within earshot? That is the term you are looking for "willfully ignorant" - I don't know a lot about this subject but it's just WRONG I tell ya! And they will never fail to tell it to anyone they talk to.


Hopefully, since someone else said it (and said it better) that can keep this topic from being about... you know, what's wrong with me.





JSZ
 
Last edited:

august86

Experimental Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2010
Posts
286
Media
31
Likes
16
Points
53
Location
Ask...
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
I agree. I have met people who have the basic facts of an issue completely backwards and truly believe that their misinformed opinions are correct and no amount of proof is enough to dislodge them for those opinions. They honestly don't know what they are talking about and are too stupid to realize it.

On the topic, it's true that in general, a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing and that most times we should let professionals do their jobs. However, I think one should endeavour to inform themselves and do enough research to know whether or not the person we are hiring and trusting is competent. Just because someone has a PhD or MD after their names or is a "Certified" mechanic, does not mean they are good at their jobs.

Same goes for politicians and the chattering classes of full time and well informed pundits, advisers, generals and financiers. Look at the state of things in the US with a perfectly good economy in the toilet and the government in deadlock. The results that the pros have delivered suck. Mostly because they are corrupt.
Absolutely, a qualification doesn't speak to competence, but rather, is just an attestation to the fact that the person has satisfied the minimum requirements.

wherever political rhetoric can trump critical thinking and rational decision making. And old quote still applies 'A country gets the government it deserves'.
Sadly, politics just outlines a distasteful undercurrent though which satisfying the needs of the voters are hindered, to the extent their direct funders wish. This is highly evident from the fact that so many important pieces of legislation are merely "talked about" for decades, and others get swifty passed.

How do you quell this portion of the electorate that instantaneously vilifies anything resembling actual information and casually substitutes the word "elitist" for "educated?"
JSZ
Unfortunately for some educated individuals, through word and general condescension toward the majority of the populace or the stupids, the aforementioned words are equated.


I digress, what was the topic about again? Ah yes, whether only those who have knowledge on politics are allowed to express an opinion...
Well, that means that politicians shouldn't be making decisions on things they haven't studied like taxation, health, education, economics, etc. So what's left then? what they're qualified for, I guess.
 

Klingsor

Worshipped Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Posts
10,888
Media
4
Likes
11,638
Points
293
Location
Champaign (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
Is it just me or does this entire post seem designed to inflame opinions? The OP has already been successful at getting members banned. The more I read this thread and the OP attempts at justification and his immature responses to valid points against his, this thread is now, to my opinion, looking more and more like an excuse for the OP to go crying to Moderators and saying his feelings are getting hurt.

So saying, this will be the last time I post in this thread or any other started by the OP.

He seems to be trouble waiting to happen.

Sklar

Maybe it's just me, but if I manage to get myself banned someday, I'm probably gonna' say, "I did it"--not, "He made me do it."

I guess it all depends on who you hold responsible for your actions.
 

vince

Legendary Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Posts
8,271
Media
1
Likes
1,674
Points
333
Location
Canada
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
I want to remind everyone to stick to the topic and leave the personal commentaries out of the discussions in the Politics forum.
 

OhWiseOne

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Posts
4,518
Media
251
Likes
2,967
Points
358
Location
Florida
Verification
View
Sexuality
60% Straight, 40% Gay
Gender
Male
Well the people we elect or are appointed to a public office should resign based on their inability to understand the issues. The title "politician" grants them the honor of knowing how to run a nation. Even though they are in these positions because they spout off what their base wants with no knowledge of the outcome. It's not what is best for this country only their own selfish goals. "We need to pass the healthcare bill so we can see what's in it" said by one knowledgable politician. Lets set the bomb off John so we can see how many it kills, then we will decide if we should have or not.
I may not have complete knowledge of a subject, but this is America isn't it? A right to free speech, expressing ones opinions. Or are we now saying leave it to experts? That's a scarry proposition in itself.
Guess I will "SHUT UP, STUPID"...
 

Mensch1351

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Posts
1,166
Media
0
Likes
341
Points
303
Location
In the only other State that begins with "K"!
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
I get your point that people really bash politics without necessarily knowing what they're talking about in a way that they wouldn't criticize for example medical professionals, but since politics isn't an exact science, I think people feel more free to criticize its leaders.

It also occurred that I think people do the same thing with aspects of the entertainment industry. People will just completely ridicule music they don't they like or bash movies or celebrities that they just don't know a whole lot about. And people will even go as far as to criticize a movie or an album that they haven't actually seen or listened to. It's possible that you can differentiate this by saying that people don't really go out of their way to vocally criticize individual music engineers or cinematographers, but I think in both cases, people are bashing the end product, so it would qualify as the same level of being informed on the topic.

Both of these comments you've made so far on this thread are EXTREMELY good points! Whether we like it or not -- we are all involved in politics because it effects our lives. Therefore we are entitled to our opinion informed or not! I would rather listen to a stupid idiot who is at least "engaged" in a vigorous debate than try to rouse someone who apathetically ignores the issues altogether. My mother's basic political philosophy when we'd enter into discussion, "Awww they're ALL just a bunch of crooks!" But at least she voted. My uncle's basic political philosophy when we'd enter into discussion, "Awwww they're ALL just a bunch of crooks!" But he NEVER voted!

If we just learn to listen to each other and talk TO rather than PAST each other -- some information gradually seeps in. Remember how "unpatriotic" it was to oppose the war in Iraq and Afghanistan just a few years ago -- how passionate the arguments were? Now many of those same people are calling for troop withdrawl and a paring down of Military spending! And if you REALLY think about it ---- the more the "idiots" speak, the more the sane are able to formulate & articulate their own positions!

Coming from a church body (ELCA) that has just spent 30 years "talking" about taking a stance on homosexuality and the ministry, I had to listen to a lot of idiots share their passions! But the PROCESS of the dialogue finally became formulated into a reasonable position. That's what dialogue is -- PROCESS.........and the idiots do play their role!! So........
 

OzCock2009

Admired Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 6, 2009
Posts
253
Media
5
Likes
891
Points
423
Location
Melbourne
Verification
View
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
So why are people so comfortable voicing their blatantly uninformed opinions on politics?

Well, in my view, the problem isn't the "voicing of an opinion" part, it's the "blatantly uninformed" part that's the killer. It kills informed decision making among voters, it kills honest, sensible progress, it silences or at least distracts people from legitimate debate.

When someone like Bachmann makes the blatantly uninformed comment she made about the HPV vaccine, she immediately derails legitimate debate over the role of said vaccine in a standard vaccination regimen, who should pay for it and whether it should be mandatory or not. Instead the debate is reduced to sound bytes about how stupid she is or vague, demonizing generalizations about govt invading your private life.

I have my own little personal theory about WHY this happens. There's something about the human ego/id that makes us desperately want to be 1) "right," and 2) "better" than the person standing next to us. If my ideology insists I am "right" and better than someone who isn't "right" I can comfortably ignore a massive, overwhelming body of factual evidence to the contrary. It also makes it acceptable to 1) silence opposition by any means necessary, after all they're "wrong" and 2) force my view/will/way of doing things on you and everyone else, after all I am "right" and everyone who doesn't know what's good for them.
 

D_Percy_Prettywillie

Account Disabled
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Posts
748
Media
0
Likes
22
Points
53
If we just learn to listen to each other and talk TO rather than PAST each other -- some information gradually seeps in. Remember how "unpatriotic" it was to oppose the war in Iraq and Afghanistan just a few years ago -- how passionate the arguments were? Now many of those same people are calling for troop withdrawl and a paring down of Military spending!

And I agree with that, I really do. I think discussion amongst those who aren't hard boiled to simply go with their gut reaction to something and are willing to accept new facts and perspectives leads to greater understanding and eventual solutions.

Those people who are willing to do so are the same people who are willing to pick up a book, read facts (basic facts... numbers, data, etc) and come to conclusions based on more than "It's wrong I tells ya!" and are not the people toward which this was targeted, originally.

There is a growing segment that will vocalize this "I just know it in my heart of hearts" style opinion to anyone who will listen to it. Beyond that they aren't swayed by facts or numbers (as they're almost always biased somehow and the "debate" with said people if it can really be called that, devolves into war over the question itself rather than the answer.) There's even some evidence that, when presented with the actual plain, brass tacks facts of a situation, their support of the exact opposite actually solidifies (Think climate change or the number of babies born with defects- these aren't scientific happenings due any direct environmental consequence, but the acts of God as punishment for homosexuality etc.)

The original post obviously came across as "if you're not a scholar you should be quiet" and I don't think that. I don't mean to say that you need a PHD to engage in politics. What I mean to say is that there is a growing segment of the population that is not only willfully ignorant but also extremely vocal and the people being spoken of here aren't those people.

And if you REALLY think about it ---- the more the "idiots" speak, the more the sane are able to formulate & articulate their own positions!

That, however, I... do mostly agree with. That's largely why I bother posting here (still.) Not that people who post here are idiots, but to sharpen and articulate my thoughts on various positions through spirited conversation. However, even that has it's limits.

When Horrible and I debate or when DazedandConfused and I debate, there's a baseline of respect from one side to the other. In spite of the fact that we disagree on a lot of things, it's still a conversation being had between two people rather than one person arguing with a slogan-generator. At some point (and we've all encountered these posters somewhere) nothing of benefit can be had from anything beyond the initial exchange.

Up to a point the willfully ignorant can be great sharpening stones... beyond that however... I mean how much more can be gained from "He's a secret Muslim! He engineered 9/11! His mother was a terrorist?" Being vocal isn't a vice and being willfully ignorant of a topic isn't a crime. Being both at the same time, I feel, is a detractor from the actual discussion more than it's beneficial in any limited capacity.

Coming from a church body (ELCA) that has just spent 30 years "talking" about taking a stance on homosexuality and the ministry, I had to listen to a lot of idiots share their passions! But the PROCESS of the dialogue finally became formulated into a reasonable position. That's what dialogue is -- PROCESS.........and the idiots do play their role!! So........

I think that's laudable. I think there are examples (like this one) where the fringe discourse helped to make opposing something reasonable and measured seem as crazy as it was (I'm now thinking about the politicians like Strom Thurmond and the Civil Rights Act of 1957). That's certainly a benefit to some extent... but again, I would argue, only to a point.

At some point the spouting of this vitriol, the fact that it gains in momentum and support until it reaches a boil (Barack Obama's birth certificate anybody?), and that it has become more and more popular as practice is what I find troubling. It isn't even motivated, seemingly, by philosophies or ideals but by some indescribable "in my heart of hearts" reaction. Whereas in the past ideological differences would be cited as a reason for supporting what is now taken for the status quo (treating people equally regardless of what they look like on the outside) now, what's being cited as a reason for some of this insanity boils down to even less (far less in a lot of cases.)

Again, I really can't stress enough that I never meant to imply that this is something I think of all voters or of all people who just have an opinion. All of this is about a small but growing portion of the population that is comfortable vocalizing opinions based on very, very little if anything at all and are even opposed to the actual facts of the situation. I think everyone has heard from or about a person that fits this description either on the news or on the web. Obviously, the ideal solution would be to invite them to the discussion, educate them through debate, and articulate our own thoughts after engaging them.

That, however, is less and less an option when the person vocalizing these sorts of willfully ignorant notions are more and more inclined to substitute intuition (which is maybe even too strong a word) for actual data and common sense.







JSZ
 
Last edited:

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Even though they are in these positions because they spout off what their base wants with no knowledge of the outcome. It's not what is best for this country only their own selfish goals.

I have my own little personal theory about WHY this happens. There's something about the human ego/id that makes us desperately want to be 1) "right," and 2) "better" than the person standing next to us.

It is worse than tailoring to their base vote. Parties have a base vote which will support them come what may, so there is no need to say things to please them. The ones who matter are the ones who may be persuaded to vote for them. A tiny proportion of even those who bother to vote. Of course, all politicians believe that whatever they have to promise to get the job, it is better they get it than the other man. If they didnt believe this, why would they stand at all?

If my ideology insists I am "right" and better than someone who isn't "right" I can comfortably ignore a massive, overwhelming body of factual evidence to the contrary. It also makes it acceptable to 1) silence opposition by any means necessary, after all they're "wrong" and 2) force my view/will/way of doing things on you and everyone else, after all I am "right" and everyone who doesn't know what's good for them.
I think perhaps you are crediting politicians with too much honesty. You are saying they honestly if illogically believe whatever it is they are espousing. Whereas they may not believe it at all, but know if they stick to it a certain block of votes will come their way. So doesnt matter how daft it sounds to 90%, its that 10% which matters.
 

OzCock2009

Admired Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 6, 2009
Posts
253
Media
5
Likes
891
Points
423
Location
Melbourne
Verification
View
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
I think perhaps you are crediting politicians with too much honesty. You are saying they honestly if illogically believe whatever it is they are espousing.
Hmmm, interesting. You're probably right, Now that I think of it I probably am operating under the assumption that they believe what they say.
 

Perados

Superior Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Posts
11,002
Media
9
Likes
2,505
Points
333
Location
Germany
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I'm not a doctor, I'm not a lawyer, I'm not an astronaut, and I'm not a mechanic. I've been sick, I've had a traffic ticket, I think Pluto deserves to be a planet still, and I drive a car. So in spite of not being any of those things I have at least a passing familiarity with the professions having needed or read about them at one time or another. Beyond a certain point, however, I am full and well aware there are discussion topics posed by and posed about those professions that will go above my level of comprehension.


I'm not an idiot but I'd never dive in on a group of doctors debating the treatment course for a woman with cancer just because my great grandmother had it. Likewise, I wouldn't propose the best way of getting to Mars because I've seen a few episodes of Star Trek. Same goes for getting out of a prosecution based on what I saw on Law and Order. I can't fix a car just because I so happen to have seen someone do it in at a Jiffy Lube.

So why are people so comfortable voicing their blatantly uninformed opinions on politics? It is an occupation that is equally as complex as any of the aforementioned yet people who a.) have no hope of understanding machinations of Congress and b.) typically have no real want to understand politics feel perfectly fine belting out their ignorance to anyone who will listen. While astronauts and lawyers and doctors conduct business that isn't decidedly everyone's business (the way a Congressman, Senator or President conducts business that is) they are still afforded a certain... I dunno, respect that not just any ape with a wrench can do what they do.

There are political topics that the majority of the population can't possibly come to an informed opinion on and yet? We hear about it, from the horses mouths more often than not, on a daily basis. If you're not politically savvy or just aren't well versed in one area or another?

It's perfectly alright to STFU.

Has anyone else noticed this? Thoughts on why people are more comfortable exposing themselves for idiots in terms of politics as opposed to other professional occupations?



JSZ


By this logic everyone should have to solve a test bevor a vote... To profe that he understand for what he is voting...

When you say stfu cause you dont know enough... Then you also have to say stop voting cause you dont understand everything...
 

houtx48

Cherished Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2006
Posts
6,900
Media
0
Likes
308
Points
208
Gender
Male
Right , Wrong , indifferent............This is a place where everybody gets to have an opinion don't, tough shit.
 

midlifebear

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Posts
5,789
Media
0
Likes
174
Points
133
Location
Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
The answer to your question is simple: There is no such thing as expertise in politics, as there is in medicine, automobile mechanics, law, astronomy, and so on. There are, therefore, no experts to defer to.

Further, if you think that only "experts" should hold political opinions, then your real problem is with democracy. Plato certainly had a problem with it: he thought that it was the worst form of government, and that the best form was rule by an elite with expertise in True Politics (capital letters to indicate the mythological nature of this subject). I believe that the nearest that politics on earth has come to this arrangement has been Soviet communism, which, as I recall, did not work out very well.

This post waaaaaaay back on the first page answers the OP's rant quite well. Sr. Cal del Boner has made something the OP thinks is supposedly so difficult to comprehend as very easy to understand. In short, government is us. Now, go take a nap. Your kindergarten teacher will have cookies and milk for everyone when you wake up.:smile:

EDIT: But I was a Liberal Arts major, so what do I know? LOLOLOLOLOLOL!
 
Last edited: