Sydney Uni Liberal Club's Official Publication: Libertas! (1 Viewer)

[Phanatical]

I am NOT Latham. He's an inspiration, and a great man. But that doesn't mean I have to be a carbon copy. It's not necessarily the policies, but his ways of thinking about things, his approaches and his attitude that I respect, and aspire towards.

And I don't know what you're calling "chiche", but I've been advocating a far less severe model of student unionism for years - long before any of you even knew what VSU was. There is a Quah Report from early 2004 detailing how a paradigm shift in terms of student representation could make for better relations and lower costs between the Union, the Societies and the students. In the same year, there is a Quah Report talking about the effect of political bias in the Union. I've been doing this a lot longer than you, so shut your trap.

 

[wheredanton]

I am NOT Latham. He's an inspiration, and a great man. But that doesn't mean I have to be a carbon copy.

Your inspiration supports late term abortion and believes that the decision should be left to the mother? I'm very confused. He was also a product of the ALP factional system which you seem to hate.

This type of fellow is your enemy. It's like Tony Abbot saying his inspiration is Karl Marx.

 

[Phanatical]

The ALP has become corrupted in recent times. It doesn't mean that the ideals it was founded upon are any less for it. I believe the ALP WAS a force for social change. I believe that it is thanks to the ALP that society begun its move towards a societal structure based on community spirit, rather than self-interest. We can thank the ALP for introducing universal medical services, among many other great policies. But those days are over, and the Party has become so corrupted that it has become everything it used to fight against. It's a tragedy, but it's true.

 

[wheredanton]

The ALP has become corrupted in recent times.

Only in recent times ay?

The ALP factional system has been crook since the inception of the party because factionalism is democratically flawed.

As for being a force of social change. All parties are a force for social change whether they be regressive/conservative (ie you and not the ALP) or progressive.

I am NOT Latham. He's an inspiration, and a great man. But that doesn't mean I have to be a carbon copy.

Your inspiration supports late term abortion and believes that the decision should be left to the mother? I'm very confused.

This type of fellow is your enemy. It's like Tony Abbot saying his inspiration Germain Greer because she struggled against the popular opinion like he has.

 

[Phanatical]

A difference of opinion does not mean one is fundamentally superior to the other. My best friend in the whole wide world is SRC councillor and The Greens/Keep Left candidate James Jansson. I might disagree with him on a lot of things, but I'll defend his intentions and his integrity until my last breath if that's what it takes. I play endless card games with former SULC President Sonia Stavreff, and even though I might disagree with her policies, I don't doubt that her policies aren't grounded in what she honestly believes to be the best thing for society. Hell, in high school when I ran for SRC President there, I pretty much declared war on my opponent one day, then took her dancing the next.

The Independent Students' Association is the greatest testament to this. There are Socialists, Liberals, Fascists, Communists all working together for a greater good. Even though we may disagree with each other on certain issues, we know that every single one of us has nothing but the best intentions towards our constituency - and this common bond allows us to cooperate, instead of fight.

 

[wheredanton]

A difference of opinion does not mean one is fundamentally superior to the other.

I never said that...that one is fundementally superior to the other? huh?

My best friend in the whole wide world is SRC councillor and The Greens/Keep Left candidate James Jansson.

You are a left winger phanatical. You would agree with most of Green's economic policy.

I might disagree with him on a lot of things, but I'll defend his intentions and his integrity until my last breath if that's what it takes.

Even if his party and his personal views suggests that all abortion at all times are the right thing?

The Independent Students' Association is the greatest testament to this. There are Socialists, Liberals, Fascists, Communists all working together for a greater good. Even though we may disagree with each other on certain issues, we know that every single one of us has nothing but the best intentions towards our constituency - and this common bond allows us to cooperate, instead of fight.

Thats right. Hitler had good intentions to serve his constituency. It's just that the intentions of those groups of people above cannot ever be reconciled. A socilaist's idea of what the greater good is simply cannot be reconciled with what a liberal would consider the greater good.

I hardly think you can bring together a group that is going to actively work towards a common goal on the basis that they have good intentions. You might as well call yourself 'the party of eclectic best intentions'.

Essentially you are aiming to create a mini party system within a political party. Wonderful. I believe that is called factionalism.

 

[Phanatical]

You completely missed the point. Come back when you understood the point of what I wrote.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

There are Socialists, Liberals, Fascists, Communists all working together for a greater good.

That is absolutely absurd, a socialist or communist will work with a liberal or even a fascist? One is the anti-thesis of the other!

oh my.

 

[wheredanton]

You completely missed the point. Come back when you understood the point of what I wrote.

That is absolutely absurd, a socialist or communist will work with a liberal or even a fascist? One is the anti-thesis of the other!
oh my.

I actually think he may a few cents short of a dollar.

If you would like to point out how I missed your point, other arrogantly affirming that I should bang my head against the wall until I actually agree with what you said (because you know you are obviously right and anyone who questions or makes a mockery of your undoubted, unquestioned and universally unmocked brilliance is clearly someone that should be shot as they are waylaying your grand plan for the universe), you are welcome to do so.

As you know all great and prestigous leaders as you and Mark Latham should know their arguments inside and out. Well enough at least so you can tell ignorant plebs like me how, the so obviosuly talented and unquestionable owner of all things that are correct (you but of course I didn't need to remind you of that), plans to make a party work that is made of political extremes only guided by the common thread that they will all work in 'the best interests of society'.

I hope it occured to you that all those political extremes have very very different notions of what is in the 'best interests of society'.

 

[Phanatical]

Whether a fascist and a communist can work together is besides the point. It doesn't have anything to do with the points I'm trying to make. Considering the context of the argument, it shouldn't be that hard to see what IS the point - that even if you disagree with somebody, you can still respect them. And I gave several examples to reinforce that point which you've completely ignored to avoid looking stupid.

 

[wheredanton]

Whether a fascist and a communist can work together is besides the point.

Why is it beside the point when you brought it up? What is the point? Or are you going to attempt to avoid telling people what the issue is?

I mean what is your point? Not many people seem to actually get your point mainly because you cloak any point you have in meaningless chiches. You then stand back and proclaim that you are the ruler of the universe and that you won.

It's like watching a year 6 kid act all high and mighty because because someone let him win at tennis.

So what is your point, other than you believe you can get political poles to get to like eachother through the mystery of dancing and cards.

And I gave several examples to reinforce that point which you've completely ignored to avoid looking stupid.

Your only examples are you playing cards with people who do not share your political views. Playing cards with such people has nothing to with the formation of successful policy or world view. Also whether the people are communists are capitalists has no relevance to card playing or other such non political activities. Care you enlighten me on the 'several' examples you gave in the previous posts which you argue reinforce your 'point' which no one seems to get.

But do you do this often? You fail to rebut anything. You then fail to actually tell me what the point is. Surely it is so simply a point that you can get it to me in one setence. If it is so abundently clear it should be so very clear that you should be able to express your point in a couple of sentences. Now here is your chance. Do so, rather than telling me I'm an idiot for not understanding your brilliance.

Tell me please tell me your point. If it's so obviously surely you can contain it to a sentence or two.

 

[Phanatical]

The point is that left-wingers and right-wingers don't have to be enemies, hate each other or even have animosity whatsoever. Just because you might disagree with somebody else, doesn't make that somebody else an idiot, asshole or whatever other derogatory term you may come up with. I have friends from the far left all the way through to the far right, and even though somebody might have an opposing viewpoint to myself, I don't call them names because I know that their position is based on what they honestly believe to be the best policy - and not "to screw everyone else over".

 

[wheredanton]

I have friends from the far left all the way through to the far right, and even though somebody might have an opposing viewpoint to myself, I don't call them names because I know that their position is based on what they honestly believe to be the best policy - and not "to screw everyone else over".

What does lefties and righties being all culddly outside of political matters got to do with forming good public policy?

Simply because they won't agree. Sure you can play cards together, but when it comes to getting together to make policy people form opp ends of the spectrum will not see eye to eye...ever.

 

[Phanatical]

I disagree, but the point is that we can still respect each other, and take inspiration from each other's examples.