Political Forums - Sow Wind, Reap Trump

Political Forums (http://www.politicalchat.org/index.php)

- Politics (http://www.politicalchat.org/forumdisplay.php?f=25)

- - Sow Wind, Reap Trump (http://www.politicalchat.org/showthread.php?t=10523)

Sow Wind, Reap Trump

There was a time, believe it or not, when I used to think paleo-conservative was cool, and I hung in the online company of SF author and conservative commentator Jerry Pournelle. A repeatedly-expressed opinion of Jerry's was that we were 'sowing the wind' through lousy education, and would 'reap the whirlwind.'

I wonder if he expectrd that lover of the uneducated, Donald trump?

Anyway, Kathleen Parker's column from yesterday points out that Plato, also, expected this, and his warnings of the power of rhetoric over those not properly educated are relevant. Here's the first 2 paragraphs from that column, which certainly point up the value of a classical education:

Quote:

Distilled, Aristotle thought rhetoric good for democracy, though his definition of "by the people" was closer to our Founding Fathers' intent of only certain people than to today's more-the-merrier model. Given this assumption of a narrow, educated, self-governing populace, Aristotle likely envisioned that those practicing rhetoric would be guided by accepted rules of argument and engagement, emphasizing ethos (trust and credibility), pathos (appropriate use of emotion) and logos (logical argument and facts).

Plato, who was Aristotle's mentor, thought otherwise -- that rhetoric, or the art of persuasion, in the wrong hands was dangerous and likely to be abused to appeal to people's base motives. He foresaw the unethical, dishonest uses that a skilled but immoral speaker could put his persuasive powers to, with credulous people eager to believe or buy whatever he was selling.

Which brings us unavoidably to Donald Trump, as if you hadn't guessed.

Access the rest here: http://www.arcamax.com/politics/mod/...rker/s-1823335

Whatever, Ms Parker.

She can blather on about how Trump gets an F in debate style - a point I wouldn't necessarily disagree with by the way. But it seems to me that none of that is terribly relevant when you look at the alternatives, as well as the current state of affairs in DC.

Should we continue the Clinton dynasty of self serving, narcissistic corruptability? Nope.

Do years of expansion of gov't activism and income at the expense of economic growth mean that it's time for a far more of the same under Sanders? Nope.

Is Trump, in my opinion, head and shoulders a better alternative than the other two? Yes.

Did our political system yield the best possible candidates for president? Nope

Are there individuals who might have been better than any of the above? Hell yes, but our current political system as constructed by the major parties would never be remotely attractive to any of them.

Part of the attractiveness of the audacity of Trump is that he's demonstrating that he doesn't need that decrepit system to gain access to elected office. I hope others are noticing.

Fine example of dishonest rhetoric there, Whell. Both you and Trump get an F in debate SUBSTANCE, not debate 'style.'

Quote:

Originally Posted by donquixote99 (Post 311883)

Fine example of dishonest rhetoric there, Whell. Both you and Trump get an F in debate SUBSTANCE, not debate 'style.'

Yeah, whatever. You and Kathleen Parker can wring your hands about the folks who support Trump. However, I have yet to see a "pro Trump rally" result in anything quite like this:

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...428-story.html

Parker writes:

Second is pathos, which Sayler defines as the sparing appeal to emotions. For The Donald, another "F." Says Sayler: "Trump routinely rages, flush-faced, anger-spewing, sputtering, especially when challenged." He has spoken of people leaving his rallies "on stretchers" or deserving a "punch ... in the face," while promising to pay assailants' legal fees.

While Trump may engage in some good old-fashioned, NY - style ball-busting once in a while, here's some probable Bernie / Hillary supporters who might need to have their legal fees paid.

Quote:

Originally Posted by whell (Post 311888)

A response which Trump has carefully nurtured.

Quote:

Originally Posted by donquixote99 (Post 311883)

Fine example of dishonest rhetoric there, Whell. Both you and Trump get an F in debate SUBSTANCE, not debate 'style.'

Not that I agree or not but what on earth was wrong with his reply that makes this reply of yours not just trolling?

This is a serious and none provoking question.

I honestly want to understand if you had any point other than arrogance.

Thanks

Quote:

Originally Posted by whell (Post 311882)

Part of the attractiveness of the audacity of Trump is that he's demonstrating that he doesn't need that decrepit system to gain access to elected office. I hope others are noticing.

This is important and profound.

I can see no one not supporting this even if all else about Trump is reviled.

Quote:

Originally Posted by whell (Post 311888)

nice post for the much needed balance it brings

Your buddy and Larry Niven wrote one of my all time faves.

The FF were far more P than A and the EC reflects this. A lot of SF shows a preference for Plato. The Foundation Trilogy and The Mote in God's Eye come to mind.

A lot of the educated support Trump and a lot of the uneducated support the Democrats.

DQ, are you an elitist?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...umps_wall.html

Quote:

Sanders supporter actress Susan Sarandon explains why she "broke up" with Hillary Clinton.

“I’m more afraid of Hillary Clinton’s war record and hawkishness than I am of building a wall,” Sarandon said to CBS's Stephen Colbert. “But that doesn’t mean I would vote for Trump.”

“I told her don’t go in Iraq — I’m very upset about that,” Sarandon said. “I said, you know, there’s not enough evidence and there’s no exit strategy — everything that everyone was saying — and she went in.”

“Fracking is absolutely the worst thing you could do for the environment,” she said. “She goes behind my back and she’s selling it all over the world.”

“Wait a minute — I said some people say (Trump would bring the revolution faster),” Sarandon said. “I’m more afraid of, actually, Hillary Clinton’s war record and her hawkishness than I am of building a wall, but that doesn’t mean that I would vote for Trump.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTL-IL4qZFM