We can all agree that...

Here's a new idea, in political discussion here. Let's find some points of commonality that we can all agree, instead of arguing on what we don't agree. Post a statement to follow the last one...if you don't agree with something...try to restate the position into some statement that you think that everyone would agree. Let's see how far it goes.

And so, the trick is to try and bring the conversation back into agreement, rather than disagreement. The thread would end, if two consecutive posts are in discord.

Got it? So, I'll start.

I think we can all agree that the US gov't is big, and that it benefits big businesses.

We can also all agree that much of its business is centered in investing in the military.

We can all agree that politicians do not always represent the interests of the people who have elected them. But, on some issues, they do.

We can all agree that the UN is an international body of gov't'l representatives, and there has recently been some question as to their effectiveness.

We can agree that there is a violent encounter going on in Iraq, and US soldiers are stationed there. The President has proposed an idea to end the Occupation, but most of the public are not in favor of it. Syria and Iran play also role, somehow: but the exact particulars are unclear.

Media coverage of the war is murky, and vague: mostly due to the danger to journalists, but for other reasons, as well.

Iraq is often discussed in America and around the world, because it is a major plank of Administration policy, and most people have strong opinons about it, one way or another.

Who's next?

Neil likes to write a lot of words.

Can we agree that the world needs less politics and more authentic leadership and people that genuinely care about helping other people to have happiness and a better life?

That the world needs more people to dialoque on how to accomplish this versus discussing politics or emotional based arguments?

Neil Mick and Mike Sigman are really identical twins who were separated at birth, Neil being stolen and raised by a caravan of 1960s flower children en route to a communal marijuana farm in Idaho, and Mike being mistakenly given to be raised by a clan of Ozark farm folk who thought the Germans had won WWII, and so were holed up in the backwoods raising hogs and making moonshine.

Plans are to bring them together on reality television on a new show called "Never Thought I'd See YOU Again."

We can agree that Cady's post might be the best in the history of Aikiweb.

With much less wit. . .

We can agree that if have leaders we have people who possess power over us.

Hopefully, we can also agree that Lord Action was correct when he said, "Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end...liberty is the only object which benefits all alike, and provokes no sincere opposition...The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern...Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

2+2=4?
F=ma?
Orgasms feel good?

Beyond this sort of thing, I doubt we can all agree on much.

Kevin Leavitt wrote: Can we agree that the world needs less politics and more authentic leadership and people that genuinely care about helping other people to have happiness and a better life?

We can agree that narrow political interests sometimes interfere with leadership that looks into the welfare and concerns of all ppl, not just one group.

That the world needs more people to dialoque on how to accomplish this versus discussing politics or emotional based arguments?

The world needs more people to dialogue on how to more effectively communicate.

Michael Varin wrote: We can agree that Cady's post might be the best in the history of Aikiweb.

We can agree that some people thought Cady's post was funny. Others, OTOH...

Michael Varin wrote: Hopefully, we can also agree that Lord Action was correct when he said, "Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end...liberty is the only object which benefits all alike, and provokes no sincere opposition...The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern...Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Yes, I think we can all agree to the sentiments, of the quote.

Can we also all agree, that some leaders misuse the term "liberty," "freedom," and "democracy," as a cover for their own political agendas?

Kevin Wilbanks wrote: Beyond this sort of thing, I doubt we can all agree on much

We can agree that some of us do not think we'll be able to agree on anything except objective facts. But,

Ronald Reagan wrote: "Facts are stupid things."

Cady Goldfield wrote: Neil Mick and Mike Sigman are really identical twins who were separated at birth, Neil being stolen and raised by a caravan of 1960s flower children en route to a communal marijuana farm in Idaho, and Mike being mistakenly given to be raised by a clan of Ozark farm folk who thought the Germans had won WWII, and so were holed up in the backwoods raising hogs and making moonshine. Plans are to bring them together on reality television on a new show called "Never Thought I'd See YOU Again."

Now, who could disagree with that?

David

David Orange wrote: Now, who could disagree with that? David

Anyone considerate of the feelings or attitudes of the butt of the joke.

Neil Mick wrote: Anyone considerate of the feelings or attitudes of the butt of the joke.

Let me see....if I disagree with you, does that end the thread?

David Orange wrote: Let me see....if I disagree with you, does that end the thread?

OK, let me step out of the framework, for a second.

This thread is in the nature of a NVC experiment. Can ppl talk about politics and not descend into bickering acrimony? A large part of it is the intentions of the participants. I was hoping for a round-robin, daisy-chain sort of affair where ppl would take one post and add to it oor change it as they like...sort of like a good soup.

That joke was in the nature of a personal comment. Would YOU like it to be compared as a twin brother to me, or to Mike Sigman?

So OK, it's a joke. The original time was fine; twice was overdoing it; and mentioning it 3x is taking on the nature of being a troll.

So which is it, David? Are you willing to participate in the spirit of the thing: or are you more interested in throwing in smarmy asides and trolling?

Neil Mick wrote: That joke was in the nature of a personal comment. Would YOU like it to be compared as a twin brother to me, or to Mike Sigman?

Chill, Neil. The truth is, we're all pretty much the same, hardheads and softheads, rolled into one. Have a little sense of humor.

Neil Mick wrote: So OK, it's a joke. The original time was fine; twice was overdoing it; and mentioning it 3x is taking on the nature of being a troll. So which is it, David? Are you willing to participate in the spirit of the thing: or are you more interested in throwing in smarmy asides and trolling?

See? Lack of a sense of humor is 90% of what leads discussions and games into bickering. And it's probably a big part of why aikido is now split into at least 100 different "styles".

David

David Orange wrote: Chill, Neil. The truth is, we're all pretty much the same, hardheads and softheads, rolled into one. Have a little sense of humor. See? Lack of a sense of humor is 90% of what leads discussions and games into bickering. And it's probably a big part of why aikido is now split into at least 100 different "styles". David

David - Neil has NO sense of humor whatsoever; that is actually required of all anti-american commie pinkos.