Tue, 21 Jan 2003 12:07:59 -0800
Well, no. If the issues were really what was at stake then the same
people wouldn't wind up taking opposite positions on nearly every issue
that comes up.
That they tend to points to something far more basic than the particular
facts in the issue at hand.
Thomas Sowell did it best in "A Conflict of Visions". He lays out two
opposing but coherent visions of how the world works, the nature of
The interesting thing about that is that I can look at his model and say
that IF I ACCEPTED THESE PARTICULAR PREMISES then that would lead me to
support communism or any of the other insanities of the left.
But it is easier to talk about the left and the right than it is to
discuss the different implications behind how you view 'knowledge' --
what it is, how much there exists, how much is needed to organize a
> From: On Behalf Of Mike Masnick
> If you're going to argue, argue on the fucking issues, and not on
> meaningless generalizations about "the rights is this, the left is
> the right believes this, the left believes that". Come on. We're
> talking about individuals who have their own brains, right?