May 11, 2004

• Christ...I should learn to spell.....!!!
• anyone else feel like the era of metafilteresque political argumentation links has arrived, to interrupt the era of uninterrupted best of the web linking?
• So what is "metafilteresque political argumentation"?
• Bushfilter.
• People's Bushes
• So what is "metafilteresque political argumentation"? It's when the whole point of a post is to bash one side or the other, rather than present a well-supported idea.
• I guess I'm just as guilty as anyone in fostering this kind of environment. I will do my best to police what I say and when...
• Humm...if the claim is that I am engaging in metafilteresque political argumentation, then I beg to differ. First, I would say that this forum does not lend itself to rigoriously supported political argument. Even if it did, I would say that the model of thought that most Americans draw upon is the proverbal "market place of ideas". Assuming this, one can pretty much pick and choose their references and support. That said, I don't think that this resigns me to a relativistic position (whatever that is?). Rather, let me say that claiming that I have engage in metafiltereque political argument is a cheap shot. Apparently, I must write a f'n thesis. Put another, way to assert that I have somehow leveled a "straw-man" argument claims too much.
• My comment was not a comment on this post btw. I have no opinion about this post.
• the reason i posted the above comment is that your post consists of: a link to a page of information about neoconservatives (nothing very novel or interesting there) and some tacked on criticism of bush (So my question is where did Bush outline in his 2000 campaign that the Neocons would be running the show? Invade Iraq, The Create of American Satellite States in the Mideast, all done with on credit from the US Tresury.) such posts have been plaguing metafilter for ages, but i hadn't seen them here until quite recently. the fundamental problem is the links are practically always of low quality. it doesn't help that the comment section normally fills up with discussion taking the form of "i don't like bush" "oh yeah? well he's not that bad" "no, he's really bad." how many times must that ground be covered?
• So what is "metafilteresque political argumentation"? it's what i live for. but not here.
• that said, bush is really bad. :-)
• Your criticism seems to be normative in nature. That is, my "tack on criticism" apparently lacks the requisite intellectual depth and breadth. Clearly, I was wrong about the existence of a market place of ideas, where pragmatically speaking, one can buy into, or choose not to buy into ideas as one sees fit. Or maybe this is one group that is not buying what I am selling. One final question and a statement. I wonder what the purpose of quality, well supported argument is given the present political circumstances? We have a "conservative" president who is spending far more than any "liberal" ever dreamed of spending. A president, who keep coming up with new reason as to why we invaded Iraq. You see your desire for well reasoned, supported argumentation is naive. We are long past argument and dialogue. Rather, we have an adminstration that does what it likes irrepective of the views of others. This is why your criticism re: "metafilteresque political argumentation" comical. You should realize that the political discussion today is about power not argument and support. This is not an ideal, rather it is just the way things have become.....
• hey, i don't even live in america... my desire isn't for well-reasoned, supported argumentation on the topic of george w. bush... it's for good links to interesting things. i don't even understand how all that stuff you just said relates to your post!?!? if "we" are beyond dialogue and argument then you should go start a revolution and overthrow the american government. watch out man, you just about slipped on a banana peel
• This ain't Metafilter, and the community here has proved itself able to conduct civilized discussions. If this thread doesn't suit you, there are plenty more to choose from. For a bunch of monkeys, we don't fling poo very often. (Unless it gets a laugh) That said, the CS Monitor is a pretty good source for this kind of discussion, and the links explaining Neo-Con ideas are useful for understanding how they think. Here's NeoCon 101. What does a neoconservative dream world look like? Neocons envision a world in which the United States is the unchallenged superpower, immune to threats. They believe that the US has a responsibility to act as a "benevolent global hegemon." The above statement chills me to the bone. This administration has held itself above the law since the beginning. The dismissive attitude towards international law, inability to admit mistakes, and intolerance for contrary opinion has, I believe, created a culture where abuse of power will thrive on all levels. To answer theoss' question, Bush never directly outlined his plans for the New American Century while campaigning, but anyone familiar with his staff and advisors could easily read between the lines.
• I think sutureself's point--which is pretty accurate in my opinion--is that is just gets so tedious after awhile. We get it. The Bush administration makes lots of people angry and the word neocon is now a perjorative. I think it's just argument fatigue from the deep political chasms in the U.S. It's easy to forget that there are so many other things out there that are interesting to talk about and don't lead into the same Mobius strip arguments from both sides.
• Gah, election season. Kill me. What pretty much everyone else has said: Bush isn't the best of the web. And yes, that's Mefi's slogan but we're a blatant Mefi ripoff. Let's see how long we can avoid political issues and focus on finding stuff that's cool and thought-provoking in other ways. /suggestion
• I find myself hoping that we could be better monkeys than those at, um, some other sites. If you don't like a post, why not just ignore it? For me, one of the more annoying things at mefi is not the political posts, but the inevitable NewsFilter / PoliticsFilter / WhateverFilter callouts that those posts inspire. It's not like the political posts are displacing other posts that you might like more. Just have a banana and move on to something more interesting... On preview, I guess I don't quite agree with Monkeybashi's suggestion that we should be trying to avoid politics (does that make me a bad monkey?). I do agree with the general principle of exercising self-restraint when it comes to political posts, but I think this self-restraint should apply both to those wanting to post political stuff and to those wanting to snark about the political posts that do show up.
• the_leviathan & tracicle-- I get your point, and you're right: it does get tedious when all we hear is the same old. I guess I was hoping some neocon might join the fray and help us understand their side of things. On the violence thread, f8xmulder has done an admirable job of presenting his conservative views without things getting too nasty. This discussion could have gone the same way. OK, I'm done here. Time to move to another thread. You were saying something about Mobius strips?
• one of the more annoying things at mefi is not the political posts, but the inevitable NewsFilter / PoliticsFilter / WhateverFilter callouts that those posts inspire Yo. *trips merrily around the circle of conversation monkeys, throwing in daisies out of a pile of them held in a marsupial front pouch and hopping into the circle from time to time to lay a big wet kiss on a few cheeks randomly selected, only to dash away again*
• Nah, you're right zedediah -- people who don't want to hear about Bush don't need to read it, especially when it's clearly labelled a Bush thread. I'm having disturbing images of every Bush thread devolving into the same "Bush sucks/doesn't suck!" argument. It would be nice if we could get it all out of the way in one thread, but I know that can't happen. :) But hey, there's a google blog, did you notice?
• MarsupialFilter
• Right thats it. Im off to find something interesting, non Bush, beheading, Abu Graib, Iraq related and linkable to put on the Front Page. See you in a few hours.
• on preview (here's to you Wolof) BUSH FILTER *kiss me again, PF
• Ach, you dahlink! Come to my armsses!
• PF is a Soviet Gollum?
• Well, we certainly seem to have reached the Metafilter event horizon where people breeze into the discussion attached to a post with the sole purpose of whining about it. Which, I would suggest, enhances nothing.
• ...thing about paranoia, man... creeps... up on you... then... *BAM*! ...you're thinking about it again... Seriously, though, is this all MeFi comparison just separation anxiety? Me, for one, I don't have any interest anymore in going to the big leagues. I think this is a grown-up site, and is how it is. Theoss, sorry about all the urine, honestly. *relaxes in unexpected warm spot in shallow end of pool*
• With regard to "you should go start a revolution and overthrow the american government", my point is that this administration is beyond dialogue. They had an agenda from the outset, an agenda that was never disclosed to the American public. More importantly, compromise is or was not part of this agenda.
• i didn't come in to complain about this post. i came in to mention a trend i saw emerging. theoss, understandably, took it personally. most of what has followed is a discussion of that trend and whether or not it exists. frankly, i think this is a perfectly fine post to carry out that discussion in, since few people have anything to say about the topic itself
• I think the problem is that I am not clued in on the issue of "metafilteresque political argumentation". I was hoping that my post would generate some discussion re: Bush's Agenda, but instead it had a different affect. It's sad that nobody had anything to say. I guess Sutureself was initially correct. Too bad, for I really do care about what is happening to this country.
• here is a rough outline of what i was going to post. however, i'm too lazy to make this pretty or coherent right now, so... you know. sorry or whatever. it's readable. 1) i agree with all of you; 2) monkeybashi's sentiments 3) kwanzaar's reasoning 4) zeb's point. levi, f8x, and other neocon monkeys are necessary to prevent groupthink from setting in. incivility hasn't been a huge problem here. so far. if it ever got to the point of having to regularly, flamboyantly, and dramatically post "MonkeyTalk" threads... then it might be time to push the red button and totally nuke political discourse from mofi. it's also a good opportunity for us to show the neocons what it means to be tolerant, rational, and amicable. 5) theoss's point about the marketplace of ideas, stifling debate. and he's new, so cut him a little slack. (welcome, theo!) 6) most or many monkeys are here because metafilter wouldn't let 'em in. (SHOUT OUTs for: Orbit, CLF, jb, gyan, & all the other new metamonkeys!) hence, many of us are unable to tell hama7 or 111 that they are totally full of shit, and how, when needed. not a big problem, since someone usually does. frustrating, nonetheless... even though monkeyfilter is, as mayor curley so lovingly described, mefi's AAA farm team. (though, we all know that mofi is, in fact, the better best of the web.) so, i would hate to see mofi become 100% politic-free, i guess. or rather, i would hate to think that we couldn't handle such a thing.
• theoss: We're not apathetic monkeys who want to hide their heads and ignore everything. But think of it this way: 1. Only half of us are in the US. 2. Most of us do agree that Bush is eevveeel. (Sorry, f8x!) 3. Will ranting about it here actually do anything? Do those who foam at the mouth online "really do care" more than those who don't? re: Bush's Agenda, I can tell you it will all too easily devolve into a Bush did wrong/Bush is right argument. We have no power here to make Bush or his people think or do anything differently. Hence this won't be a marketplace of ideas, to borrow your phrase, but merely a marketplace of increasingly disparate and uncivil opinions, if we did argue about it. I do have my opinions about the US, its government and its President, but as one who doesn't live in the US, I don't express these opinions. Not because I don't care, but talking about it to the left crowd is just singing to the choir, and talking about it to the right crowd is just adding oil to the fire. No good either way. On Preview: What Wedge said. Welcome theoss. Don't be disheartened. There's a time and place for everything, and I personally don't think that we're any less 'intellectual' for not wishing to go swimming about in the murky depths of American politics. Just my 2 bits. Ok, I'm outta here. Back to my little vapid world of holes and second-hand bridal gowns.
• Just a footnote, that's a really great googlism hama7's got, I wish mine was that cool. Also, I'm happily exploring this link, posted by that same hama7, which is a great one, link I mean. And on the third hand, theoss, we're all friends? Pinky swear?
• Notes on feet? Third hand? Who knew?
• Here's an idea to keep things civil, if that's what people want, and let it rip, if that's what others want: What about expanding that erstwhile list of categories, and then allowing to view by category. That way, those people wanting to avoid the political banter (heh!) could avoid the posts marked as political. (I'd help if I could, but I'm still having trouble with the VCR.)
• "this is in the wrong category" !!!! the opportunities for griping would be quadrupled. but yeah, good idea. 'political' is an easy flag. and if, in conjunction with that, there were a way of setting a preference so that all, say, political posts show up in a size 4 font that would be great
• hence, many of us are unable to tell hama7 or 111 that they are totally full of shit, Thanks for the morning laugh.
• theoss: what everyone is trying to say in a roundabout way is that the subject of your post - while remaining a valid issue worthy of discussion - is at first blush typical of the posts we have all seen over at metafilter that contribute to what I call the "gladiator school" mentality over there, and result in threads that are characterized by entrenched philosophical position, increasing vituperativeness and, eventually and inevitably, personal attack. We here at Mofi have openly eschewed that result, and are thus sensitive to posts that on their face seem either purposefully (as is often the case over at Metafilter) or inadvertantly (as seems to be the case with yours) designed to generate not reasoned, collegial debate but rancor and heat. In addition, I would venture that most (if not all) of us are experienced blogusers, and thus have seen dozens (if not hundreds) of what are referred to by both sides as "Bush is Bad" posts. There is little room for debate on whether, for example, Bush and the "neocons" had an unspoken agenda upon entering office (they almost certainly did, as I would guess every incoming president and staff does), what that agenda was (we have no idea, although we might hazard a few guesses, none of which would be provable), and whether their current activities are in furtherance of that agenda (again, maybe-maybe not, the answer is predicated on unprovable ideas on what that agenda might have been). No offense to you personally, theoss - I have every confidence that you posted this in an effort to generate substantive discussion on the subject - but you can see, from the point of view of some of the members here, that your effort seemed to mimic the alternative. That said: there is no reason why you should not continue to post items that you feel would be interesting and worthy of discussion, regardless of topic. However, it never hurts to be cognizant of content and what people might perceive the reason behind your post to be, and perhaps to reconsider. To paraphrase Marcus Garvey: Consider twice, post once. At the same time, we all might do well to critically scrutinize our own posts twice as much, while critically scrutinizing the posts of others half as much.
• *hands Fes a golden banana* Wonderfully said.
• Wonderfully put, Fes. I may quote that sometime on the posting page if you don't mind and if the need to do so emerges.
• Can we start Martin-filter now? Because that guy really cheeses me off. /not meant in seriousness :) Except that maybe I'll be posting a Curious George, because I hear nothing of what's happening back home, and so have no idea if Ottawa has imploded or what. Do we even have a date for the election yet?
• jb, yeah - November ;)
• Certainly looks like a dickhead.
• jb, i was totally going to make a joke like that! :)
• In the wake of Iraq, the term "neo-conservative" may come to mean "dangerous innocence about world realities"
• Thanks for the link, homunculue -- been so used to hearing such charges directed against the left end of the political spectrum that this article's quite refreshing as well as amusing. I do love farce -- onstage, though, not when we're all compellled to participate in it.
• I do love farce Well, we all love our own scent.
• I would like to say something as a newcomer, if I may. Ahem. Like many here, I came to MoFi because I wanted a MeFi account and couldn't get one. Initially just stumbled into the room and saw all the 'nanners, decided I wanted to hang out and see what happens next. After nearly a month among the simians, I can tell you that I now check this site roughly twice as much as MeFi. I still go there a couple of times a day, mostly because 17 times the members means quite a few more FPPS per day, but I don't read the comments there nearly as much as I do here. The reason is that you all, dear, beloved ladies and gentlemonkeys, are one hell of a good group of people. Over there half the threads dissolve into partisan bitching and name-calling. In short, MeFi's in danger of turning into a more interesting version of /. or K5. But even given some of the "copyfilter" and "Bushfilter" tendencies of late, you all have done a pretty good job keeping the ink smudge-free. Now, I've posted a comment or two that weren't exactly friendly (sometimes they turn red, my hackles), but I'm gonna do my best to follow your lead and keep it friendly. That said, I don't know that political posts should be banned outright, given that said posts be interesting and spark honest-to-Gawd debate of the issues concerned. In short, thank you all for building this. I'll try to help keep it up. Hell, any of you monkeys live near Little Rock, you can come to my housewarming, how's that?
• Confession time. I've never voted, because there was no-one running whom I wanted to vote for. Voting "against" always seemed like it was wrong. But now, I've registered and am urging my like-minded friends to do the same, just to vote against GWB. I'm not that fond of Kerry, but anyone else than the Shrub would be better in my opinion. And, middleclasstool, I'd come if I could, 'cause Arkansas is lovely.
• Political Obituary for the Neocons
• What's Left To Like? I confess: I don't get it. What do you see in him? Is it just because he's such a big Jesus guy? Is that what keeps you knotheads hanging in there, telling pollsters you approve of the way he's doing the job? Is that all that matters to you ... that the silly son-of-a-bitch goes to church?