It's not about if I agree with him or not. It's about how a lot of posters here act like they have the lowest IQ possible and can still type. He's putting forward his view, in a reasonable manner, and yes, there are many things I don't like about Turkey's behavior, but that is irrelevant in also recognizing that this forum is full of stupid posts.
The thing is, There are many things I don't like about pretty much all countries. So many here try to simplify everything into their 1-2 line snide statements that they never even see how ignorant they look to many. That is why I said banal, but who knows, maybe they think they're the epitome of knowledge. One thing I notice in the Western nations, and I also live in the West, is the repeated attempt to make every thing tied to a personality. Nobody recognizes that even the most brutal dictator only rules with the consent of his elites at the very least. That is why the common modern idiotic fix is to get rid of X, Y, or Z, and think all will be well. Then everyone wonders why things got worse. Recent history is glossed over, so a rinse and repeat ad nauseum, causing untold damage to human lives in the process.
I assume you're an American, so how about this thought experiment. Name a country this century better off after being touched by the US? How do you think those countries and their citizens feel about that? War, and military action, should be the absolute last step to take, not the first. This is not pacifism,as I do believe unfortunately, that there are cases when armed conflict is the only path.
On Erdogan pushing for a theocracy, he must be insane, as he's not a mullah and I fail to see how he can remain at the top, in such a political arrangement. I guess I learn new things everyday.
Its not about me saying you need to agree with him or not. Its me pointing out that you're blatantly ignoring that he's trying to hide some horrible opinions with eloquence. Like I said, eloquence can be used to hide terrible intent. Its far more important to actually understand the argument itself. If him putting forward horrible views is ever "reasonable" then sorry we just disagree. I don't care how you dress up genocide, its still horrible.
How is that irrelevant in a thread specifically talking about Turkey? Seriously? WTF? "The actual information doesn't matter in the argument as long as you say it nicely" is what you're actually arguing and it is absurd. That is my point. You're not addressing his post at all but you're praising it. Its incredibly bizarre to do. Its right up there with those comedic setups where they have someone out pushing for the "end of women's suffrage" and women, not understanding it, supporting it.
I have absolutely no idea what you're arguing in that second paragraph, you're just throwing out general "people argue stuff and they think that'll fix stuff but it doesn't" like its because of the poor argument and not a multitude of other issues that is to blame for it not working. It again is ignoring any actual argument, and that is what matters. But then you clearly are just wanting to run around saying this place sucks because you pop in and see people pointing out a lot of blatantly stupid comments made as though there's no such discussion happening on here. Just about every thread you can find exactly what you seem so impressed by from that post. And typically you can find it actually backed up with real information via objective evidence. I will say you won't find many people supporting the things he does that will write as eloquently, but that's actually reflective of the quality of his opinions more than anything.
Yes I am, not that that should matter, but I'm going to assume that you're a person that assumes Americans are idiots? Thought experiment? Besides it having nothing to do with this thread, I'll imbibe you if you can provide a single salient point relevant to this topic, by all means, actually spend 5 minutes to read an article about the situation even.
This Century as in since 2000 or in the past 100 years? Actually either way, its most countries. That you seem to think I'll just act like its all positive shows that its you who are starting from a horribly dishonest place. You want to assume everyone here only argues simple things, or will only rah-rah America. You clearly have not actually spent much time on this subforum if you believe that as there's tons of people doing the total opposite of that. Ok, back to your "experiment" (that you felt the need to frame it "thought experiment" like you either think you're furthering endeavors of people like Socrates or because you're being condescending and believe "thought" is an actual formal experiment that requires extra work on my part, yeah, not exactly inspiring that you're wanting honest discussion).
China (we've massively helped their economic progress; but the proxy wars of the Cold War, not to mention stuff like the Boxer Rebellion probably give them pause; although I'm sure plenty are just mad because we regularly talk about their corruption when we have plenty of our own), Japan (ditto, economic prosperity even though it came about after WWII intense fighting), Germany (ditto), most of the EU (ditto), Saudi Arabia (super ditto, many of them are not happy about us pressuring them to change, but they definitely enjoy the money from oil), Iraq (certainly they have mixed feelings, but I know plenty of them are happy that we got rid of Saddam; even if they haven't returned to where they were before what helped him into power - which we also had a hand in), Ukraine (because we're helping them to try to do something about the overbearing corrupt Russian influence that dictated so much of their history), Mexico (certainly they'd have mixed feelings, and their cartel problems due to our drug and gun problems would be reasonable cause for them to not be super happy about us, but its more complex than that for sure), most of Central America (similar to Mexico, although we have sordid history with them too, be it Panama Canal), most of South America (but most would probably be favorable to many aspects even in spite of our meddling), maybe not Russia (although its hardly like all Russian hate America). Actually most countries (partly because we are a major trade partner and have helped foster stability that has helped the economies worldwide to prosper). Even countries where we fucked up badly (Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan) don't hate us absolutely and many have done well since in large part because of global economic work. Does that mean those countries like everything we do? Of course not. Does that mean America is perfect? Of course not. Hell, there's countries where they probably majority don't like us, but they reap the benefits of things that we enabled (be it economic progress, technological progress, or some other). Of course that's not absolutely positive (many American corporations have exploited foreign countries, and done some horrible stuff). For instance, even though its massively exploitative of its workforce, outsourcing has actually elevated billions of people out of poverty. You have to take the bad with the good sometimes. That doesn't mean people are ignorant of the issues, although often times they will be. So while America has fucked up plenty, and while I don't think we deserve all the credit or anything, but isn't it funny that as America became the dominant superpower, militarily, and economically, that the world saw peace and prosperity that it basically never had seen? Its not like wars didn't happen when we weren't around (not sure if you remember, but we sure as shit didn't start WWI or WWII), so that argument is just nonsense to begin with. That's not to say I agree with a lot of American foreign policy, especially that which used the military. Quite the opposite. And I am certainly not claiming that capitalism is perfect or magically made the world peaceful. There is no perfect economic system, no perfect government system. Technological progress (which the US fostered more than any other country in the past 75 years), and stability has helped the world thrive. America used to provide that, and it kept things progressing even in spite of the many many many many many many many many many many many many many many many many many problems that people face. America sure has plenty to deal with, but we also stop and when a country gets ravaged by disaster we go "can we help?". And we've been more open about those problems, and working to deal with them than any other country. And plenty of times our problems become other peoples' problems, or we screw up and make a problem where there was none.
I'm definitely concerned about America keeping with providing stability and pushing progress. But we're hardly the only place that change is evident, as alarmingly the world over is showing this descent into madness, because people would rather listen to someone telling them that someone else is to blame for their problems, so if we get rid of those people it'll fix everything. Things are complicated, to say the least. Which I think is what you seem to want to say, but you just generalized. Which is something that irritates me, as it makes your argument often look like the argument of ignorant people. Much like how many Americans complaining about the media sounds similar to how Turmp and other wannabe authoritarians complain about it, when it isn't, but because they don't articulate the issue it just joins the cacophony of people who have ill intent. You were doing the same thing you were chastising others for, but not actually forming a real argument and just casting dispersons. And that especially bugs me.
Is that enough thought for you?
Ok, now I'm sorry, because you genuinely just seem to be owning that you really are ignorant of Turkey's situation. But that also is why I was pointing out that you might not be so quick to praise someone for "sane" argument when they absolutely were not showing anything more than the ability to write more eloquently than is typical in online discourse.
Yes, Erdogan has been pushing for that. If you've been paying practically any attention to him, but especially in the past few years, you'd see it pretty clearly. I don't think there's anything preventing a theocracy from being ruled by a dictator, although I have little interest in arguing the specific technicalities - the point being Erdogan is citing Islamic beliefs as what should dictate Turkey's governance. Now, its gets more complex than that, as I'm not sure how much he actually is wanting that, versus him using it to gain power (which is quite common). Its kinda like with Putin, he wants former Soviet Union glory, but he's not an actual Communist. But he's settings things up to mimic a lot of Soviet methods and operation. But he's also changing (think he openly touts Russian Orthodox Christianity, which I think is probably mostly a ploy to appeal to conservative religious Russians; same deal with Turmp, I don't think he's very religious at all and he absolutely does not fall in line with what Christians claim to believe/follow, but he's somehow convinced evangelists in the US to support him). It boils down most simply that there are a glut of wannabe authoritarians (if not autocrats), and they are trying to seize power by exploiting problems and using simple xenophobia to stir chaos. You can argue the technicalities all you want, I prefer to focus more on the clear intent.
Facebook
Twitter