Yes, you're right, the question could have and should have been phrased in ways that would have reduced any excess indications of bias. The questions, however, have already been formulated, many responses have already been welcomed, and this issue has been addressed several times over; I have made it clear that I am in agreement with you, so why do you insist on beating a dead horse? You don't make your argument any stronger by reiterating the same point again and again.
If you're still convinced that I have come to this forum (which is, needless to say, predominated by conservatism, and by and large â Å“right-wingâ ? views) in search of having my commonly â Å“left-wingâ ? beliefs confirmed, particularly in the sense that the questions I have posed will 'sway' readers towards responding with more â Å“leftistâ ? ideals, values and supporting information, than they otherwise would, then I honestly don't know what more to say, Infanteer...
I have come here to have the very views and supportive evidence that I accept as â Å“truthâ ? to be challenged by alternative ways of thinking. If that weren't the case, would I not be at the local 'war resisters campaign,' bathing in 'idealist goodness'?
Furthermore, I have been erroneously painted with stripes of â Å“academic with a deficiency of real world experienceâ ?, â Å“leftist-eggheadâ ?, and â Å“idealism.â ? Although I can unearth validity in the ways in which â Å“idealistsâ ? paint the world, my views very much run parallel with the realist perspective. I believe that ideology, â Å“a set of expectations, assumptions, beliefs, values and prescriptions for the organization of society,â ? and the most fundamental ways in which human beings render the complexity of the world into something simplistic and comprehensible, inevitably breeds conflict, and conflict, for the most part, promotes change. I do, however, remain skeptical about the ways in which this particular conflict should be dealt with, be it with diplomacy or â Å“hotâ ? conflict. Therefore to paint me as an â Å“idealist war resister,â ? on the basis that I disagree with the fundamental basis and implementation of the Iraq War (for moreover philosophical reasoning than for aiding the Iraqi populace to live freely from an oppressive dictatorship) runs against the perspective in world politics that I most closely associate myself with: realism. Furthermore, to paint me as such also reveals the narrow line of thought in your ideological framework, because if I'm not entirely â Å“forâ ? the war, then I must be â Å“againstâ ? it. I think our good friend George W. Bush says it best: â Å“If you're not with us, you're with the terrorists!â ?
As per the â Å“attacks on Academia,â ? it is my belief that you lack an understanding of how the Academic World functions: academic institutions don't serve as a breeding-ground for â Å“leftistâ ? ideals, if anything, academic institutions provide grounds upon which one formulates and confirms one's own perspectives on local, national and international affairs. How else would one account for â Å“right-wingâ ? politicians (many of which complete their undergraduate degree within Political Science), Infanteer's generally â Å“right-wingâ ? views (who also studied Political Science at a local University, no less), and a large portion of the population who don't necessarily conform to â Å“left-wingâ ? values and ideals? I've had excellent professors, in every which field I have studied, that have come from â Å“left-wingâ ?, â Å“right-wingâ ?, and everything in between. Again, you wrongly assume that because one doesn't fall as far â Å“rightâ ? as possible on the spectrum, that they automatically fall as far â Å“leftâ ? as possible. I fall somewhere in between the rightist and leftist extremes, and refuse to make the case that the majority of individuals fall far â Å“leftâ ?, or far â Å“rightâ ?, when most of the political parties available do not hold fast to either extreme.
Similarly, on the same basis that you have argued that Academia births â Å“leftist-eggheads,â ? I could argue that military institutions birth â Å“right-wing war mongers.â ? Although I cannot speak for all, I personally refrain from this line of reasoning; I simply wanted to indicate that the coin could be flipped either way.
Lastly, no I have not served in the military, but unless you are suggesting that the military is the only means by which one may acquire real world experience, it does not inhibit my potentiality to gain real world experience, nor does it discount any real world experience that I have previously gained.
Likewise, on what basis can you argue that all military personnel have acquired â Å“real world experienceâ ??
Paint me if you so please, just know that you are colouring me on individual grounds, and not on the basis of my arguments.
