Support NeoGAF

[Salvor.Hardin]

Austrian economics is deliberately anti-research and anti-science. Anyone who knows anything about philosophy of science will look at a field of study rejecting empiricism and testing and call it for what it is: Worthless as an attempt at understanding the universe and anti-science.

While Austrian economics is certainly unorthodox, I wouldn't say it's anti-research or anti-science. In fact much of the labors of the Austrian school have helped modern researchers understand the problems in mainstream methodology and why macro research can often mislead, and has little predictive powers.

It's not that the adherents to the Austrian school don't believe in empiricism, they just feel that human beings are far too complex for a general prescribed economic theory to apply to entire nations.

 

[Synth_floyd]

Wasn't that line that Romney said to a protester about "going back to Russia" or whatever exactly like the guy from South Park?

"If you don't like 'Merica then you can giit out!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nT0OqHr3wHQ

 

[The Librarian]

You guys do realize that a left-libertarian is pretty much synonymous with libertarian socialism right?

Aren't you the guy that posts these ridiculous political threads on GAF with a whole bunch of reading material, then claims no one had read anything when everyone disagrees with it?

 

[Black Republican]

Looks like Egypt's a lost cause

Egypt's Islamist parties win elections to parliament


The final results in Egypt's first post-Mubarak parliamentary elections confirm an overwhelming victory for Islamist parties.

The Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) won the largest number of seats under Egypt's complex electoral system.

The hardline Salafist Nour party came second.

The liberal New Wafd and the secular Egyptian Bloc coalition are some way behind them.

Egyptians voted in three phases over a six-week period to elect the 498 members of the People's Assembly.

Former President Hosni Mubarak was forced to resign last year after a popular uprising.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16665748?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

Looks like Egypt's a lost cause



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16665748?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Why do you say that? Let me guess. Because the party that you wanted to win did not win. Your assertion that Egypt is a lost cause is ridiculous. Egypt is not a lost cause because people for the first time in their lives have chosen their government. Islamist won so, it´s not a big deal. As long as they don´t make Egypt a theocracy like Iran which i really doubt that they will do, it´s a huge victory for the Egyptian people and North Africa as a whole. Do you really think that other countries in North Africa won´t pick an Islamist party after they achieved democracy? Don´t be so naive. Islam is a part of their heritage as Christianity in the US.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Wow, Matt Lewis was absolutely useless on Real Time. He even agreed with Maher that Obama was a corporatist.

He is

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Looks like Egypt's a lost cause

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-midd...medium=twitter

I'm reminded of:
THE PALESTINIANS NEED TO HOLD ELECTIONS
(weeks later)
THE PALESTINIAN ELECTIONS ARE INVALID

I imagine many foreign observers will say the same thing if Romney wins the general.

 

[Y2Kev]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...en-colbert-president_n_1218614.html?ref=media Did this actually happen? How could someone be so clueless?

 

[Arrowgigantic]

So wait, WTH did Romney say today?

Second clip.

"Romney Affirms Obama's Economic Record"

Skip to 9:24

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/

Oh, sweet Mormon Jesus. Goodbye, Mitt. At least you've got hundreds of millions of dollars to go back home(s) to.

Here is a direct link to the clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCOSy6AM4jg#t=9m15s

 

[Aaron Strife]

So wait, WTH did Romney say today?

Second clip.

"Romney Affirms Obama's Economic Record"

Skip to 9:24

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/

Someone on Gaf back on 2008 said (and I'm paraphrasing) that Barack is so good at his shit, his opponents beat themselves first. Kinda reminds me of boxers who stepped in the ring with vintage Mike Tyson.

Just wrote a great campaign ad for Obama.

If he's even the nominee.

 

[Tim-E]

Soft sciences lean more right. I can say with confidence that Economics does, for example. Still liberal, actually, overall (moderate democrat), but it's much closer than it is with, say, Physics. Or even softer sciences like sociology.

I have a BA in sociology and everyone in the department was in heavy pinko commie territory.

 

[Maxim726X]

Oh, sweet Mormon Jesus. Goodbye, Mitt. At least you've got hundreds of millions of dollars to go back home(s) to.

Doesn't change much.

As far as his party is concerned, it's anyone but Obama. As far as everyone else is concerned, it's the economy. If the economy is further into the shitter by the time the general election rolls around, Romney wins. If the economy continues its recovery, Obama wins.

Rest is just noise.

 

[Mortrialus]

While Austrian economics is certainly unorthodox, I wouldn't say it's anti-research or anti-science.

It's not that the adherents to the Austrian school don't believe in empiricism,

Austrian economics being anti-research and anti-science is part of the foundations of Austrian Economics. That is the reason why praxeology, the methodology they use if you could call it that, exists. If it wasn't anti-research or anti-science, it would adhere to the methodology and standards for evidence the scientific method entails.

In fact much of the labors of the Austrian school have helped modern researchers understand the problems in mainstream methodology and why macro research can often mislead, and has little predictive powers.

A claim which would require scientific testing to validate, a process they openly reject. Austrians are not responsible for understanding the problems in statistical modeling, real scientists and mathematicians did long before they showed up, they're simply parroting the claims with no real understanding of them. They follow a methodology which offers no real way of understanding anything and has no way of self correcting.

they just feel that human beings are far too complex for a general prescribed economic theory to apply to entire nations.

No. Austrians feel humans are impossible to understand specifically because they make "conscious choice" completely separate from the body and the brain which makes them unique from animals (They don't) which renders probability, statistics, and evidence moot because humans can invalidate all of that on a dime should they chose.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Just wrote a great campaign ad for Obama.

If he's even the nominee.

Only if the economy continues to improve

 

[Bulbo Urethral Baggins]

Doesn't change much.

As far as his party is concerned, it's anyone but Obama. As far as everyone else is concerned, it's the economy. If the economy is further into the shitter by the time the general election rolls around, Romney wins. If the economy continues its recovery, Obama wins.

Rest is just noise.

Exactly. If the economy improves, Obama has another 4 years. If not, Romney is President. Everything else is just background noise.


But I'm not ready to write off Gingrich yet. He's going to win SC.

 

[Frank the Great]

So wait, WTH did Romney say today?

Second clip.

"Romney Affirms Obama's Economic Record"

Skip to 9:24

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/

Someone on Gaf back on 2008 said (and I'm paraphrasing) that Barack is so good at his shit, his opponents beat themselves first. Kinda reminds me of boxers who stepped in the ring with vintage Mike Tyson.

i mean it really bothers me when politicians pretend that the economy is doing badly just so they can win elections. especially when so much of the economy is based on psychological factors such as consumer confidence. so credit to romney for keeping it real.

he probably thinks he can be more nuanced in his criticisms of obama, but he must have forgotten how simple the electorate is. if we had sophisticated political discussion in this country then romney could present a valid critique of obama despite the recovery. but laura ingram made clear that he is going to have to deny reality to have any hope of winning the election. in effect, if the economy is still recovering he is going to have to argue against the fact that the economy is recovering in addition to criticizing obama, which is pretty shitty but speaks to how great our political discourse is.

btw this also reminds me of his defense of his healthcare plan, does he really think the public will buy that he supports it at the state level but that all of a sudden it becomes unacceptable at the federal level. i mean technically it's a valid argument but that shit just doesn't fly.

 

[Salvor.Hardin]

Austrian economics being anti-research and anti-science is part of the foundations of Austrian Economics. That is the reason why praxeology, the methodology they use if you could call it that, exists. If it wasn't anti-research or anti-science, it would adhere to the methodology and standards for evidence the scientific method entails.

A claim which would require scientific testing to validate, a process they openly reject. Austrians are not responsible for understanding the problems in statistical modeling, real scientists and mathematicians did long before they showed up, they're simply parroting the claims with no real understanding of them. They follow a methodology which offers no real way of understanding anything and has no way of self correcting.


No. Austrians feel humans are impossible to understand specifically because they make "conscious choice" completely separate from the body and the brain which makes them unique from animals (They don't) which renders probability, statistics, and evidence moot because humans can invalidate all of that on a dime should they chose.

Um this is simply wrong. Ludwig Von Mises is quite clear that his objection to the scientific method for studying human behaviour lies in induction, and that the complexity surrounding a human action cannot be derived by studying a simple action, nor can a simple action even reveal much about human nature. So instead he advocated logical analysis.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...en-colbert-president_n_1218614.html?ref=media Did this actually happen? How could someone be so clueless?

Holy chalupa this is hilarious. He cares more about the Republican candidates being mocked for their use of the super pac than he does about the problems with the super pac.

 

[Arrowgigantic]

Exactly. If the economy improves, Obama has another 4 years. If not, Romney is President.

How is that going to happen when Romney doesn't get nominated? Because that clip has just ensured that will not happen.

 

[Mortrialus]

Um this is simply wrong. Ludwig Von Mises is quite clear that his objection to the scientific method for studying human behaviour lies in induction, and that the complexity surrounding a human action cannot be derived by studying a simple action, nor can a simple action even reveal much about human nature. So instead he advocated logical analysis.



Holy chalupa this is hilarious. He cares more about the Republican candidates being mocked for their use of the super pac than he does about the problems with the super pac.

"Conscious or purposeful behavior is in sharp contrast to unconscious behavior, i.e., the reflexes and the involuntary responses of the body's cells and nerves to stimuli. It is sometimes not easy to establish whether concrete behavior is to be considered voluntary or involuntary. But the distinction between consciousness and unconsciousness is nonetheless sharp and clearly determined."

http://books.google.com/books?id=e8...conscious actions toward chosen goals&f=false

He is right about one thing, the distinction between consciousness and unconsciousness is sharp and clearly determined, at least when it comes to behavior; Conscious choice doesn't exist. Every action taken by a person is the result of your brain reacting to stimuli. You have no conscious control over your own body like Mises asserts. And yes, human behavior can be studied with science. You observe and study the brain, rather than piss about with his bullshit pseudo-science which is founded on false axioms.

 

[effzee]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/...ama-to-Preserve-Israels-Existence?via=siderec

Gotta love Israel holding our elections hostage.

I lean left, far left probably, and by default have to vote Democrat but its disgusting to me to have to support such a cowardly party that can't stand up to Israel.

 

[j_k_redtail]

I think it's pretty simple. Newt is the best of the 'non-Mitt's'. Newt still has strong respect for his leadership in the mid-90's. Newt is also clearly the best debater among the group.

That last one is key. Quite often when I hear talk radio or read right wing blogs, there is this constant complaint that no one is effectively challenging Obama in public. The media is seen as being passive, they rail about how few press conferences he has had, etc.

Bingo. More than anything else, the present day GOP is motivated by anger about any number of issues, not the least of which is Obama's election way back in 2008. So they have a desire to see someone tell him off in public and put him in his place. Newt has figured that out.

 

[Bulbo Urethral Baggins]

Obama's 3rd year

Obama's Third-Year Average Is Among the Lowest for Elected Presidents

I didn't see this posted.

From Gallup:

Looking just at other elected presidents' third-year averages, Obama's 44% is among the lowest, better than only Jimmy Carter's 37% average in 1979-1980.

Comparing Obama's third-year numbers with all presidential years in Gallup records, Obama's 44% average job approval rating is well below average, ranking 53rd of the 68 presidential years measured.

Obama's 12th quarter ranks as the lowest Gallup has measured in the comparable quarter for all elected presidents.

President Obama's recent job approval ratings look weak compared with those of his predecessors; his 44% third-year average ranks in the lower fourth of all years for which Gallup has data, back to the Truman administration.

 

[The Librarian]

How is that going to happen when Romney doesn't get nominated? Because that clip has just ensured that will not happen.

Why do you think one single thing he says is going to be his downfall? Sure, there's an argument that this, in conjunction with everything else he's said, will bring him down. But this alone? Unlikely.

 

[RustyNails]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...en-colbert-president_n_1218614.html?ref=media Did this actually happen? How could someone be so clueless?

Chuck Todd is a right winger.

 

[AlteredBeast]

How is that going to happen when Romney doesn't get nominated? Because that clip has just ensured that will not happen.

GTFO

 

[Meadows]

Soft sciences lean more right. I can say with confidence that Economics does, for example. Still liberal, actually, overall (moderate democrat), but it's much closer than it is with, say, Physics. Or even softer sciences like sociology.

Sociology is hard, hard, hard Left.

Like really fucking left.

And I'd think that most Sociologists wouldn't agree with calling Sociology a science because society isn't measurable and the amount of factors in societal events makes a cause = effect statement really hard to prove.

/is about to graduate in Sociology

Oh and although I'm British, I'd argue American sociology tends to go further left than UK stuff.

 

[RustyNails]

lol damn

New SC Poll: Newt 40%, Romney 26%

Columbia, South Carolina (CNN) -- A new poll released as South Carolinians are voting in their Republican primary shows Newt Gingrich's week-long surge taking him past Mitt Romney into a substantial lead among likely voters in the Palmetto State.

The American Research Group poll, conducted Thursday and Friday, shows Gingrich leading Romney by a 40%-26% margin. ARG's last poll, released Thursday, showed a virtual tie with Gingrich at 33% and Romney at 32%.

 

[Tawpgun]

Obama's 3rd year

Obama's Third-Year Average Is Among the Lowest for Elected Presidents

I didn't see this posted.

From Gallup:

Looking just at other elected presidents' third-year averages, Obama's 44% is among the lowest, better than only Jimmy Carter's 37% average in 1979-1980.

Comparing Obama's third-year numbers with all presidential years in Gallup records, Obama's 44% average job approval rating is well below average, ranking 53rd of the 68 presidential years measured.

Obama's 12th quarter ranks as the lowest Gallup has measured in the comparable quarter for all elected presidents.

President Obama's recent job approval ratings look weak compared with those of his predecessors; his 44% third-year average ranks in the lower fourth of all years for which Gallup has data, back to the Truman administration.

How much of it is really his fault though?

 

[Meadows]

Just wanted to remind people of the prediction that I made of Obama steamrolling this election. If Obama gets less electoral votes than he did last time I'll take a 1 week ban.

Boom.

 

[Refrigerator]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...en-colbert-president_n_1218614.html?ref=media Did this actually happen? How could someone be so clueless?

It's sad that a man who supposedly 'idolized' American politics chooses to constantly amplify the most baroque, theatrical parts of it. The over-sized influence of corporate money makes a mockery of American politics, not Colbert's satire.

Looks like Egypt's a lost cause
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16665748?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Is there something implicitly wrong with an Islamist government?

 

[The Librarian]

lol damn

New SC Poll: Newt 40%, Romney 26%

Was just about to post this. I mean, damn.

 

[Stinkles]

Why do you say that? Let me guess. Because the party that you wanted to win did not win. Your assertion that Egypt is a lost cause is ridiculous. Egypt is not a lost cause because people for the first time in their lives have chosen their government. Islamist won so, it´s not a big deal. As long as they don´t make Egypt a theocracy like Iran which i really doubt that they will do, it´s a huge victory for the Egyptian people and North Africa as a whole. Do you really think that other countries in North Africa won´t pick an Islamist party after they achieved democracy? Don´t be so naive. Islam is a part of their heritage as Christianity in the US.

Because less than 2% of representatives will be women, and the Brotherhood is only pretending to be even remotely liberal to take advantage of the Arab spring. Just as ludicrous is their stated intention to reach out to other parties and viewpoints. Give it a year. It will be just as oppressive as the army, and just as internally corrupt.

There is nothing democratic about squeezing half the population out of the conversation.

 

[Rur0ni]

lol damn

New SC Poll: Newt 40%, Romney 26%

As I recall from 2008, wasn't ARG the most inaccurate?

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Just wanted to remind people of the prediction that I made of Obama steamrolling this election. If Obama gets less electoral votes than he did last time I'll take a 1 week ban.

Boom.

Sack up and make it a month or something.

Because less than 2% of representatives will be women, and the Brotherhood is only pretending to be even remotely liberal to take advantage of the Arab spring. Just as ludicrous is their stated intention to reach out to other parties and viewpoints. Give it a year. It will be just as oppressive as the army, and just as internally corrupt.

There is nothing democratic about squeezing half the population out of the conversation.

I think most of this post is pretty off-base, but assertion is particularly ridiculous. Women aren't even well-represented in the U.S. government--does that render us fundamentally undemocratic?

 

[Measley]

Obama's 3rd year

Obama's Third-Year Average Is Among the Lowest for Elected Presidents

I didn't see this posted.

From Gallup:

Looking just at other elected presidents' third-year averages, Obama's 44% is among the lowest, better than only Jimmy Carter's 37% average in 1979-1980.

Comparing Obama's third-year numbers with all presidential years in Gallup records, Obama's 44% average job approval rating is well below average, ranking 53rd of the 68 presidential years measured.

Obama's 12th quarter ranks as the lowest Gallup has measured in the comparable quarter for all elected presidents.

President Obama's recent job approval ratings look weak compared with those of his predecessors; his 44% third-year average ranks in the lower fourth of all years for which Gallup has data, back to the Truman administration.

Congressional approval is also at record lows. So its not just Obama. People in general are angry at the government for a variety of reasons.

 

[RustyNails]

As far as Engineering debate goes, Engineering doesn't require critical thinking and that is one of the reasons why there aren't many Engineering students from US. Most of the college students in the west like to learn, explore and think for themselves and Engineering is a very rigid discipline that penalizes you greatly for breaking any of its rules. Kids from China and India have no problems following rules, memorizing shit and wasting nights and weekends in labs simulating graphs and doing 50 problem sets every week.

I've been through all of that. There wasn't any room to "explore" ideas and beliefs or what have you, maybe outside of PhD research but that's in the engineering domain as well.

 

[Meadows]

Sack up and make it a month or something.

1 week is a good ban bet amount, 1 month is a bit much to be fair.

 

[Stinkles]

Is there something implicitly wrong with an Islamist government?

How would you feel tomorrow if your lawmakers were now grounded absolutely in the Old Testament law?

 

[Invisible_Insane]

How would you feel tomorrow if your lawmakers were now grounded absolutely in the Old Testament law?

I mean...

1 week is a good ban bet amount, 1 month is a bit much to be fair.

Obama is barely a favorite to win right now but you think he'll do just as well in the general? That seems unlikely.

 

[Refrigerator]

Because less than 2% of representatives will be women, and the Brotherhood is only pretending to be even remotely liberal to take advantage of the Arab spring. Just as ludicrous is their stated intention to reach out to other parties and viewpoints. Give it a year. It will be just as oppressive as the army, and just as internally corrupt.

There is nothing democratic about squeezing half the population out of the conversation.

I'm not sure what this criticism amounts to. Egypt has become a nascent democracy with weakened government institutions overseen by a powerful military. Measuring the outcome by the number of female representatives or their religious bent is beyond the point. We're not dealing with a mature, Western democracy.

There are far larger issues to work out, first among them what the final government structure will look like and whether the civilian leadership will have true control over the military.

 

[Stinkles]

Sack up and make it a month or something.


I think most of this post is pretty off-base, but assertion is particularly ridiculous. Women aren't even well-represented in the U.S. government--does that render us fundamentally undemocratic?

OK, so you think it's off base, feel free to refute it, but you moved the goalposts back to this country. We were talking about Egypt. Here's the current American political breakdown by demographics, which is pitifully top heavy with white Christian men. And I think this country is far too religious too. If all criticism of Egyptor theocratic movement is bizarrely off limits to you, then tough.

Demographics

In the Senate, there were 17 women: Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Susan Collins (R-ME), Kay Hagan (D-NC), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Patty Murray (D-WA), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and Debbie Stabenow (D-MI).
There were 13 Jews, one Hispanic (Bob Menendez, D-NJ) one Japanese American (Daniel Inouye, D-HI), one Native Hawaiian (Daniel Akaka, D-HI) and one African American, Roland Burris (D-IL). The average age of senators in 2007 was 62 years.[citation needed] The oldest senator was Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), born January 23, 1924. The youngest senator was Carte Goodwin (D-WV), born February 27, 1974.
The 111th Congress included the most religiously diverse House in history, including two Muslims (Keith Ellison, D-MN and André Carson, D-IN), two Buddhists (Mazie Hirono, D-HI and Hank Johnson, D-GA), 31 Jews, one Quaker (Rush D. Holt, Jr., D-NJ) and one atheist (Pete Stark, D-CA). There were 42 African Americans (including two non-voting delegates) and 75 female representatives. There were also 27 Hispanics, six Asian Americans (Joseph Cao, R-LA; Judy Chu, D-CA; Mazie Hirono, D-HI; Michael Honda, D-CA; Doris Matsui, D-CA; and David Wu, D-OR), and one Native American (Tom Cole, R-OK). There were three openly gay members (Tammy Baldwin, D-WI; Barney Frank, D-MA; and Jared Polis, D-CO..

I mean...

.

How would you feel?

I am not going to make any bones about it. I believe, very strongly, theocracy is bad. It's bad for democracy. It's bad for common sense and currently it's bad for geopolitics and economies. Egypt is not a theocracy, but if you don't think the election of an Islamist party is a step in that direction then I don't know what to tell you.

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

I mean...


Obama is barely a favorite to win right now but you think he'll do just as well in the general? That seems unlikely.

It's really just blind guessing right now. Obama and McCain were trading leads until the economy collapsed in October. And I believe Obama's popular vote total still ended up outperforming the polls by a bit.

Anything can happen. Generally the incumbent has an inherent advantage and has to be dislodged. On the other hand, a job approval rating of 44% is pretty anemic. But as has been said many times here, if the economy and unemployment are swiftly improving, the election will be a walk for Obama. If not, he probably loses. It's a long way to November.

 

[Chichikov]

As far as Engineering debate goes, Engineering doesn't require critical thinking and that is one of the reasons why there aren't many Engineering students from US. Most of the college students in the west like to learn, explore and think for themselves and Engineering is a very rigid discipline that penalizes you greatly for breaking any of its rules. Kids from China and India have no problems following rules, memorizing shit and wasting nights and weekends in labs simulating graphs and doing 50 problem sets every week.

I've been through all of that. There wasn't any room to "explore" ideas and beliefs or what have you, maybe outside of PhD research but that's in the engineering domain as well.

I'm not sure what was that engineering debate about, but engineering doesn't require critical thinking?
You so crazy.

I think we're short on engineers in this country because -
a. it's hard
b. the quality of science and math education in most high-schools is appealing.

 

[Stinkles]

I'm not sure what was that engineering debate about, but engineering doesn't require critical thinking?
You so crazy.

I think we're short on engineers in this country because -
a. it's hard
b. the quality of science and math education in most high-schools is appealing.

It's not that appealing to me.

 

[Tawpgun]

Engineering is critical thinking with a purpose. You have to solve a problem following the rules of physics.

 

[Salvor.Hardin]

It's sad that a man who supposedly 'idolized' American politics chooses to constantly amplify the most baroque, theatrical parts of it. The over-sized influence of corporate money makes a mockery of American politics, not Colbert's satire.




Is there something implicitly wrong with an Islamist government?

A political party that deems women unsuitable for the Presidency does seem implicitly wrong. And the fact that they want to govern the country according to Islamic law isn't encouraging.

But thinking in the context of the middle east, the party is more liberal than Islamist parties in other countries and hasn't made any crazy statements to make us think that the people of Egypt will suffer. And they will use a modified coda of Sharia to incorporate into the legal system, which isn't as bad a Sharia, which let's face it, can't work in a democracy nor should be allowed to.

So yes, the Freedom and Justice Party certainly isn't the best case for democracy, but at the same time, changes towards liberal politics take time and often necessitate the moderation of the religious segments to bring the appropriate freedoms that the Egyptians strive for. Perhaps then it is a good thing that the Muslim Brotherhood have won following an Egyptian revolution - they'll be forced to moderate and recent signs have shown just that.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

OK, so you think it's off base, feel free to refute it, but you moved the goalposts back to this country. We were talking about Egypt. Here's the current American political breakdown by demographics, which is pitifully top heavy with white Christian men. And I think this country is far too religious too. If all criticism of Egypt or theocratic movement is bizarrely off limits to you, then tough.

I am not going to make any bones about it. I believe, very strongly, theocracy is bad. It's bad for democracy. It's bad for common sense and currently it's bad for geopolitics and economies. Egypt is not a theocracy, but if you don't think the election of an Islamist party is a step in that direction then I don't know what to tell you.

I'm not trying to shift the goalposts. Your statement sounded as if you thought that the underrepresentation of women is in itself enough to delegitimize a democracy, in which case most things currently considered democracies would have that status revoked.

I also think theocracy is bad. I'm not as interested in it being bad for democracy, since I don't think that's necessarily the be-all end-all of effective governance. I think what's more important for Egypt is self-determination, and if they elect theocrats then negatively as I may view that outcome, its their decision and I respect it.

A political party that deems women unsuitable for the Presidency does seem implicitly wrong. And the fact that they want to govern the country according to Islamic law isn't encouraging.

Even if many of the Egyptian people believe that women would be unsuitable for the presidency? Even objectionable views can deserve democratic representation.

 

[Chichikov]

It's not that appealing to me.

Did I mention grammar is also appealing?

 

[Salvor.Hardin]

Even if many of the Egyptian people believe that women would be unsuitable for the presidency? Even objectionable views can deserve democratic representation.

Well, as I said, it's not the best case for democracy. I don't think such views should have any representation. An extreme example, but should the KKK be allowed to form a political party? Sexism is fucked up and deserves no platform anywhere in the world. Political rhetoric reinforces such views.

 

[Stinkles]

I'm not trying to shift the goalposts. Your statement sounded as if you thought that the underrepresentation of women is in itself enough to delegitimize a democracy, in which case most things currently considered democracies would have that status revoked.

I also think theocracy is bad. I'm not as interested in it being bad for democracy, since I don't think that's necessarily the be-all end-all of effective governance. I think what's more important for Egypt is self-determination, and if they elect theocrats then negatively as I may view that outcome, its their decision and I respect it.


Even if many of the Egyptian people believe that women would be unsuitable for the presidency? Even objectionable views can deserve democratic representation.

If an Islamist nation, not a theocracy, could create logical and legal barriers to separate church and state, much as the US and other countries have, then I don't care particularly what the individual citizenry believes - at that point it's just demographics. However, when the fabric of the democracy runs a danger of including anti-democratic ideals, or exclusionary laws, then obviously that's a bad thing. And I actually don't think objectionable views deserve majority representation. We have laws in place to prevent oppression of minorities for good reason. Not that our shit doesn't stink. This election cycle I particular is loaded with language and ideas that were ludicrous before the Bush Jr., Tea Party flag waving cross raising bullshit.