Does anyone wish politics was not so boring/unengaging

Post Reply New Topic

I find it interesting to follow world events such as anti war protests, against exploitation of workers etc. Something like the privatisation of a needed resource and people taking to the streets with molotov cocktails and changing things. But when it comes to the nuts and bolts of things like, the soap oprea of parliament, all the posh people who seem removed from reality, whos backing who, who took what money etc. (I remember they vowed to change drinking laws after a tv prog showing binge drinking and loads of people fighting and pissing in the streets. It shouldn't take a prog IMO they should know whats going on without that.) I find economics interesting to an extent, for instance big concepts like "Trickle up/down" are interesting to ponder. But the the little details lose me. I think I'm too much of an ADHD to follow things. I think things should be more engaged with the ordinary person. But then, maybe I'm just too lazy to learn the details.

That's why they made the Rhinoceros Party.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhinoceros_Party_of_Canada

The problem with politics is that it's so full of BS.

Most people who are politically active have no depth beyond parroting the tag lines passed down by party organizers. They can be very intelligent, but when it comes to politics, it's like some subroutine kicks in and dumbs them down to a common moron.

Anyone capable of critically evaluating a problem and thinking of a working solution are pushed to the fringe and ignored, and I conclude this is by design so the few who wield the power can satisfy the masses who want a voice, but the masses don't realize they are just playing their assigned roles rather than making headway to meaningful social and political change.

And the Monster Raving Loony Party: http://www.omrlp.com/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_M ... oony_Party

On a more serious note, that's why here in the UK, for the recent election, they had TV debates. The downside is what's been dubbed "X Factor politics", which basically means it becomes more of a popularity contest, as with reality shows like the X Factor, instead of about who has the best policies.

Though, actually, the less popular politician in the debates ended up getting the highest number of votes anyway.

Not that I'm a political junkie, but what sort of cracked open my interest was starting to be able to decode the lies. Practically everything they (politicians, spokespeople, the media) say is a lie, and the interesting part is trying to figure out why they're saying it. What's the real motivation, who's paying whom, what ideology is being appealed to, what think tanks came up with the bogus statistics (or even the entire argument), what statements are bald-faced provable lies (that won't get caught in the 5-minute TV interview), and so on. And also things like important issues that media outlets ignore or blitz the public with in perfect syncronicity with each other.

I guess it's like liking (not that I do) the Jerry Springer Show (IDK if you all have that in the UK? It's a very trashy "freak-show" type of talk TV program.) It's all so filthy and rotten and low. People selling out any moral value to service their financial masters. The lies upon lies upon lies. Media people who play along and don't ask 'the wrong' questions so that people come back to them, and then they can become big shot "players," too.

It's the ultimate reality show. The only downside, of course, is that we have to live with the results.

As far as trickle-down/supply-side/radical-free-market economics, maybe consider that it isn't supposed to be understandable. That it's just a tool to make an argument, and that the intractability isn't an accident. If you use it, and someone disagrees, just quote 10,000 pages of abstruse crap generated by the Cato Institute. While your opponent burns brain cells trying to understand all that, you've in the mean time won the argument (or at least made your opponent feel too stupid to feel confident in arguing back). Sophistry wins.

You seem to imply that you are bored by or put off by politics. That is you. Others may have a different opinion.

ruveyn

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.c ... hp?ref=fpa

Apparently Andy Schlafly of conservapedia, has recognized the theory of relativity for what it is: a liberal conspiracy meant to make us all relativists. Hopefully, brave men such as him, will combat the wickednesses of the scientists until such liberal lies are disproven!

Thank you for teaching me theory of mind

Politick-tock topic

I find politics an interesting hobby, but as a child, I thought it was all about putting up a sign to tell others who you are voting for. I found that to be a waste of time.

Here at PPR, I have actually learned something about the connections between religion, politics and philosophy., and others' points of view on these categories.

Boring? It's actually rather funny to see two pundits reduce themselves to the maturity level of elementary schoolers and battle it out.

This

And paying attention to the politicians nowadays is similar to a drinking game. Actually never mind, it just makes you want to drink. It's gotten so out of control and depressing to watch, you need liquor to cope with how bad it now is.

Oliver Wendell Holmes (or was it Bismarck? or Twain?) famously quipped, "People who like sausage and respect the law should never see either being made."

Politics is a messy business, but I don't think that it should be easy to acquire the public's authority to make law and levy taxes.

I, for one, would like to see some serious intellectual weight brought to bear on public policy making, but it seems that contemporary voters want more pedestrian leadership. If you aren't satisfied with the quality of your leaders, then the answer is to get your neighbours upset about it, too.