Political advertisement

For non tiki-talk:

[ Edited by: kahukini on 2003-03-27 11:50 ]

Definetly beyond tiki and very interesting. No offense but is Tiki Central the place for political advertisements?

based on the interest stirred by my religion thread, I had to post this too.
https://tikicentral.com/viewtopic.php?topic=1225&forum=6

On 2002-12-16 23:20, Tiki Rider Five-O wrote:
is Tiki Central the place for political advertisements?

I belive that's why it is posted in "Beyond Tiki". I thought anything that is not Tiki goes here.

Anything non tiki should be posted here, but I have to agree maybe the descriptor should be 'anything non-tiki except politics and religion'.

Sex, of course, is heartily encouraged.

Beyond Tiki
Got something to share that's not Tiki, but you think the members of Tiki Central would like it? Share it here. Lounge, Retro, Swing, Cars, Tattoos, Art, and beyond

Do you think the members "like it"
And people, if you don't like a thread don't post on it, it goes away faster.

Kahukini,

The site you posted sounds more libertarian than liberal left. Libertarians don't believe in much government either.

Unfortunately, governement is a necessary evil. Human nature being what it has been since it's inception dictates it. The theory behind you new left site states that if people just 'did the right thing', all would be good in the World. Right.

Let me guess, you're in your 20's and probably are in college somewhere and thought this sounded like a good thing to pick up chicks with.

I agree with Bax Dog. This area was created because we had built a community of people here who are interested in Tiki, but also a lot of other over lapping things. When the "Other things you collect" thread ran, we saw all these folks are interested in atomic, vintage, etc. stuff. So I and others suggested this spin-off area so we could post about Tease-O-Rama and the new Shag whatever and this new lounge sampler. If it's just wide open, it's just spam.

This is an advertisement for my new site swanky. And since I am not a part of the tiki community, having never contributed to this forum before or helped start any events, and since I put it in the most high traffic forum rather than the one most relevent to it, you're right, it is just spam.

Regarding the age comment, yes I am an idealistic med student in my 20's, and am very familar with the Churchill quote to the effect of "if you're not a socialist in your 20's you have no heart, and if you're not a conservative in your 40's you have no brain" or something to that effect, as I have been told that by rich doctors before. I don't think you guys in California know what rich doctors are, I don't think the opportunities for greed are so fast as they are here. But we have them in Alabama, and If I meet one more pathologist with a private jet, limosine, and yacht, or vascular surgeon with several vacation homes and daughters in swiss boarding schools, I'm going to puke. They aren't even 3% of the problem though - it's the insurance companies that are actually massing the immense quantities of profit from people's pain and hardship, without even having anything directly to do with relieving it, they are just banks. Anyway, I'm a socialist because I support universal healtchare and free merit-based education. And there are plenty of 40-somethings who agree with me. The largest party in the new European Parliament is, guess who? Socialist. And in case you had any doubt, Britain's ruling Labour party is part of it.

Trent Lott has my vote, AGAIN!

Kahukini,

I think you're right! We have no rich doctors in California. All the Hollywood elite go to Alabama for plastic surgery I hear.

What is 'free merit-based education? What merits is it based on? How is it considered 'free'?

That Europe is Socialist I have no doubt. But one fact is that many European countries that were very socialistic are now backing away from it due to the fiscal reality that it will eventually bankrupt them.

I would be interested in hearing your opinions on this subject in say, 20 years. You see, I was once where you are now; but you have never been where I am - yet!

'A thing of Tiki is a joy forever'

Celebrate 'International Tiki Day' the second Saturday in August!

[ Edited by: Tiki_Bong on 2002-12-17 14:16 ]

OK, so we got politics covered. Can we change the topic to sex now?

So a topless hula girl walks inot a bar with a parrot on her shoulder....

and the bartender sez....

You are going to have to cover up your friends pecker if you want a drink in here.

So here's my advertisement. Radical Son by David Horowitz. The autobiography of a former leftist who now isn't exactly fond of your guy Chomsky.

Horowitz proves the term "conservative intellectual" is oxymoronic. There are so few "rigorous" conservative academics you can count them on one hand. It has to do with the fact that the tenets of conservatism directly contradict with open inquiry.
Here are my book recommendations:
Political Liberalism by John Rawls, perhaps the greatest political philosopher of the 20th century: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0231052499/qid=1040166097/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/104-5040940-0721554?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

The Needs of Strangers by Michael Ignatieff. One of the most moving nonfiction works ever written:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0312281803/qid=1040166212/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-5040940-0721554?v=glance&s=books

Acheiving Our Country: Leftist Thought in 20th Century America by Richard Rorty (Horowitz' arch nemesis)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0674003128/qid=1040165841/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/104-5040940-0721554?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

Leftist intellectuals, unlike their conservative wannabies, are the first to admit the astounding failures of leftism in the 20th century. But that's what differentiates real academics from seminary school - the intellectual grit to take it when your wrong and come out of it the better for it, in other words, to practice science.

Why don't you try

-------T-H-E B-O-O-K O-F T-I-K-I

Kahukini,

I never said I was a conservative (?). I was a free-loving hippie before you were born sonny!

But I would like to know the answers to my questions I asked of your views a few posts back regarding something you heard someone call 'free merit-based education' . If you've actually thought through what you've stated that should be easy - shouldn't it?

Now that you're on this 'Left America' gig does this mean you're done with your 'Deist' stint?

Rigorous academics measured in degrees.
B.S. Bullshit, M.S. more shit, PhD piled higher and deeper. A degree in sociology only marked the start of my education. There is just no substitute for experience, particularly experience away from the distortion of today's typical university.

DUDES! ya'll just needs to chill it out

kick back

and

smoke

more

doobys!

if i wanted to here about potilics i would just watch the news on cnn or something.

why you want and go ruining the party with all this commie pinko doggie doo doo - CUZ DATZ ALL IT IS!

TIKi FOR PRESIDENT !

Kahukini, I don't mind your leftist politics, but I think they're better "left" off this list. Even if your post wasn't about politics, it's just not interesting to read your nasty comments about rich people or conservatives or whatever other categories you wanna disparage. I don't know whether you're intentionally offending or provoking any of the people on this list who might fall into one of the categories that you have such distaste for, or maybe you're just assuming that no such people are here.

Likewise when someone else posts something anti-gay or whatever. I don't get it, what's the point of saying it on a tiki list?

You have a right to be left, and you may feel it is right to be left and wrong to be right, but others who are right should have the right to be right too, and should be left to be right, even if you think they are wrong.

Right?
-Randy

On 2002-12-17 16:08, kahukini wrote:
Horowitz proves the term "conservative intellectual" is oxymoronic. There are so few "rigorous" conservative academics you can count them on one hand. It has to do with the fact that the tenets of conservatism directly contradict with open inquiry.
Here are my book recommendations:

who gives a rats A$$! why dont' you quit ruininin the party man? ahve a mai tai and chill to the MAX.

if you go carrying pictures of chairman mao you ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow.
(I don't just listen to the Buffmeister)

lite one up and liten up dude -

In my opinion, the problem with talking politics on this board has more to do with the quality of discussion than whether it is appropriate or not. I'm always up for reading an intelligently argued political point, even if I don't agree, but when that discussion turns to tired cliches about idealistic youth or intellectual conservatism then there is really nothing to be gained by it.

-Mike

i had too many doobies last weekend. or was that boobies? but doesn't politics make more sense when you're drunk and stoned? does for me.

i'm sure most tiki folks are liberal, that's why i posted this here (and of course I'm stating the obvious - but if you don't want to read a thread about politics don't click on one so named :)

regarding the education stuff. no I haven't thought it through. it's just a principle we should work towards, like free energy and other star trek concepts. Of course anyone should be able to pay $40k/year to go to princeton if they want, just like anyone can fly to so cal for a boob job and a tummy tuck, but the concept of making people individually pay for education and healthcare in a rich capitalist society only serves to further create vastly disparate economic classes, as education and health are necessary both for access and to have a reasonable chance at competing. To buy low and sell high is no more your natural right anymore than it is my natural right as a free animal on this planet to knock you over the head and take what I want for free. For a healthy society we have to inculcate values of respect for one another, and that can't be done when the society is grossly unfair.

Okay, a couple things:

I told Kahukini to he could post this here (yes, he did ask me before he posted)

There's nothing really controversial in his (original) post. If you don't like it or agree with it, please ignore it. It would be different if he were linking to an anit-gay site, or something like that.

But PLEASE discuss it on another board. It ruffles people's feathers, justifably or otherwise.

I find that religion, politics, and censorship are all controversial here. The problem is getting rid of the first two without promoting the third.

~Hanford

true. my hope is that whatever microscopic percentage of people here that would like to discuss political topics would do so here:
http://leftist.us/forums

OK ITS TIME....FOR......

http://www.createfarts.com/

So is Politiki coming out with a George W Bush mug?

Trader Woody

I'm all about debating left wing and right wing topics... so, which is better: the left wing or the right wing on Steve Crane's hypnotic chicken bowl?

Just kidding.

Don't assume most people in here are left wing. Remember what they say about people who assume!

TO ASSUME MAKES AN ASS OUT OF U AND ME

If you're unsure if your left, right up or down, find out HERE.

Sulltiki,
Is this one of those tests where no matter how you answer, the results indicate you are liberal? I consider myself to be politically conservative, but my score showed I am a liberal-leftist. Maybe I've been fooling myself all these years.

[ Edited by: Kailuageoff on 2002-12-18 08:07 ]

On 2002-12-18 08:01, Kailuageoff wrote:
Is this one of those tests where no matter how you answer, the results indicate you are liberal?

Not at all. This is something that was passed around my office around election time. Try selecting different answers and you'll see that you will have new results.

I guess answering in the affirmative that anti-drug laws are a waste of time and money, tilted my otherwise conservative score to the left. And come to think of it, indicating I don't approve of laws against sex must have jolted my profile into the extreme liberal category. Maybe they should ask more questions about national defense and tax policy. Kind of a fun survey anyway.

Libertarianism is the scariest political philosophy to me, because it makes sense to intelligent people. But of course it does! On one libertarian site I visited, one of the features was "see which celebrities are Libertarian!" - well why wouldn't any rich and successful person be libertarian? But we have to think about what it means for government when the people on the top pick the system (rather than using John Rawls theory of justice - ie, in a mind experiment, what society would everyone consent to before they entered the world, if they didn't know what their lot in life would be? - This is what makes Churchill's sentiment that so many share worthless). Libertarians have freedom down pat, but in nixing equality of access and opportunity they will have us living in a post-apocalyptic wasteland where if you don't have the muscles, wit, and good looks of Mad Max, you're screwed.

Take a more detailed quiz. According to this one, with 0 being most liberal and 100 being most conservative, I got a 12.

http://www.madrabbit.net/webrabbit/quizshow.html

That was great. I came in at 15.

The vice of those who consider themselves "Intellectual" is cruelty.
-Father Andreas

On 2002-12-18 08:01, Kailuageoff wrote:
Sulltiki,
Is this one of those tests where no matter how you answer, the results indicate you are liberal?

I came out Libertarian and right-conservative! and on the second one - me and georgy bush got the same score... the more intersting page is the description on the scoring... http://madrabbit.net/text/pqsscoring.txt

[ Edited by: Futura Girl on 2002-12-18 17:05 ]

Has anyone else here read Atlas Shrugged?

On 2002-12-18 15:57, Swanky wrote:
The vice of those who consider themselves "Intellectual" is cruelty.
-Father Andreas

The vice of those who consider themselves tiki is rum.
-KailuaGeoff

About discussing politics on a tiki list, I think it would be fine (in Beyond Tiki of course) if people were capable of doing so without succumbing to just writing provocation or insult. Just as an example, kahukini's initial post accomplished this, but he lost that by his third or fourth one on the thread. TheMuggler said it well in commenting that it's the quality of discussion more than the actual topic. It's especially pointless when it gets to the level of "Bush is dumb" or "Clinton can't keep his pants on." The thing with religion and politics is that it's a pretty reliable fact that the quality drops fast, since inevitably nobody convinces anybody of anything and both sides just get mad. So it's reasonable to just avoid those kinds of topics.

Suggesting that we avoid this kind of topic, or more specifically these kinds of divisive comments on any topic, is NOT censorship. No control is being exercised, and no rights are being abbreviated. People are exercising judgment when they decide to post something, and it's reasonable for other people to say when they think something is inappropriate - as a matter of judgment, not a dictate.

Kahukini, one little point responding to your logic (hopefully without getting into the left vs. right politics). You commented that leftist intellectuals are the first to admit the historical failures of leftism, and are therefore more scientific in their continued practice or study of leftism. But the continued faith in an ideology despite a priori evidence of its "failures" is in fact the opposite of science. Either such people are in fact zealots and not rigorous academics as you suggest, or they actually refuse to admit the failures of leftism, preferring instead to explain away each historical failure with some excuse other than leftism itself. I don't think you helped your case there with that example.

-Randy

I don't think it's censorship, either, if it's decided that these topics don't belong. I would perhaps think it's censorship if one side got exposure and a differering opinion wasn't allowed to post. I think it's totally appropriate for Hanford to act as a moderator occasionally and say that some topics are best discussed elsewhere.

That said, these things work themselves out ultimately -- if no one wanted to talk about this stuff, the post would quickly sink into the sunset. And yet, here we are, so apparently this is something we want to discuss.

But then! Perhaps the reason this topic isn't going away has more to do with the Ultimate Deadly Sin of Bulletin Boards -- talking about the boards on the boards. Which I'm doing right now. Ack!

aquarj, thanks for making my thread worthwhile. I get to explain to you and perhaps others that leftism is a science in itself.. it is a topic like biology or chemistry. When a new paradigm is discovered in a science, the participants learn from it and move on (CHANGING the science itself). Why is leftism a science and conservatism not? Because conservatism is about preservation of the old order, while leftism is a continual process of trying to figure out how government and society can best preserve and encourage flourishing individuals and a flourishing planet. Over the course of the last century we have learned that too much fairness causes injustice. So conservatives and libertarians would have us chuck that principle altogether, simply because we have witnessed its horrible extremes. They would have us in response go to extremes of freedom that can also create injustice. Thus leftists have become the party of moderation on the political spectrum, arguing for a balance of freedom and fairness, with the purpose of public policy being to thoughtfully research and consider the impact of new and old laws on these social ideals.

On 2002-12-18 13:52, kahukini wrote:
Take a more detailed quiz. According to this one, with 0 being most liberal and 100 being most conservative, I got a 12.

http://www.madrabbit.net/webrabbit/quizshow.html

I read it as a score of 40 being most conservative. BTW, I got a 28.

oh, so it is. Any such quiz is obviously too simplistic. I'm more liberal than Bill and Hillary. There are several instances where the obviously "liberal" response doesn't make sense as its stated, but would otherwise - I picked what made sense to me to be true to the quiz.

On 2002-12-17 12:29, kahukini wrote:
The largest party in the new European Parliament is, guess who? Socialist. And in case you had any doubt, Britain's ruling Labour party is part of it.

Ha! You won't find many people in the UK describing the Labour party as being Socialist. (Think in terms of the Democratic party in the US and you'll be far closer to the truth).

Trader Woody

kahukini,

maybe you should quit while you're not ahead, i.e. you won't get out of your hole by continuing to dig it.