Turned off by a womans lack of knowledge in new or politics

[irc333]

I've met people who deliberately don't watch the news or read it because it's too depressing for them. It's as simple as that.

[Chocolat]

Questions for you guys then;

 

1. Do you find folks who follow important news events or politics (or the things within politics ) to be more intellectual than others? When I say the thing within politics, Im talking general economic and social issues that shape our lifes. In my experience, people with a greater interest in how the world runs tend to be more intellectual due to their knowledge of particular topics.

 

2. Are you turned off by people who dont stay up to date on important news or important events (like elections) that affect us all?

 

3. Is it me or does it seem that men generally follow politics way more than women? And because of this I notice more guys are interested in economics and social issues. It would seem to me that there are more women than men who simply go along in their life not caring about what makes life the way it is...or if they have complaints about certain aspects of society, theres more women than men who dont educate themselves on ways to change it.

 

1. It depends. I have no interest in hearing a regurgitation of the mainstream news media.

 

2. See above.

 

3. I have not noticed a gender difference. Seems that women more than men are active in social services types of organizations.

 

No, not necessarily.

 

Note that a lot of news is propaganda and distraction from the real issues. I myself have tuned out on a lot of it.

 

 

Exactly. I am so tired of hearing non-news that's been packaged to hit everyone's hot buttons.

 

Libertarian...

 

:love:

[Emilia]

I feel I have more than sufficient control over my life that I don't need to influence external forces to set more favorable conditions.

Maybe I'm just lucky...

 

Probably a bit deluded, sorry

 

especially taking your line of work into account

[Bristolius]

Ooo, i can totally not feel a sense of superiority masked behind that ignorance.

 

I'll put it mildly for you kaylan.

 

You see the world in black and white, not in shades of grey.

You have no ideea what it's like to live in a system where corruption is rampant on all levels of government.

You have no ideea how it is to live in a 3rd world country, how little your voice matters.

And as someone who lives in a 3rd [now 2nd] world country i can tell you what 'we' think of you americans.

Get the hell out of our political systems and deal with your own sh*t, we are tired after 6 decades of involvement and fuc*ing things up.

You are experimenting on us, and we don't like it

 

 

You messed up South America, Central America, you armed Iraq before causing an estimated 1m deaths in 2 decades of involvement there.

You supported the drug cartels at the expense of your own ppl, and now you are morally guilty for 60k deaths in Mexico in just half a decade.

You failed in Afghanistan [miserably], and Iraq will never be what you guys want it to be.

 

Just sort your own problems, before you again mess up Africa and Asia.

 

 

At least the Chinese are not hypocrits.

 

---

 

See the above ?

That's where the terrorist's hatred comes from.

It's caused by 5 decades of involvement and abuse of 3 continents.

 

 

 

Some of us Americans see our foreign policy the way you describe it and are involved in politics to criticize and change it.

 

On topic, the values that inform political opinions are too important for me to disregard within a close personal relationship.

[Jane2011]

1. Often but not necessarily. I know several people who are very intellectually curious, but who turn their attention towards literature, music and art rather than politics and current events, or towards more abstract philosophical questions like the nature of 'love' or 'truth' or something of the sorts.

 

Somewhat agree with this. The last guy I dated (open relationship guy from last year) was into politics, but from what I can tell, in a very "I follow the daily news" type of way. Each time I would see him, (or sometimes over text), he'd ask me, "Did you hear what Herman Cain said?" or just some general comment about a just-breaking news/political development. I give him credit for being into politics and the news, yet, he's just following the daily news; it wasn't necessarily intellectual.

 

The guy I'm seeing now is probably more intellectual than the other one; he is deeply political and into social issues, but very theoretical, philosophical, and ideological about it. He writes articles and papers about things. He's not a news junkie who asks me if I heard about this and that.

 

Not saying the first guy wasn't intellectual; he was. But the second guy is even more, yet he might not have heard what just happened yesterday or the day before. Also, he finds the democrats and republicans in the U.S. silly altogether.

 

At any rate, as others have said, I'd be turned off by a guy not knowing anything at all, but he doesn't have to be way into politics and news.

 

That being said, most of the guys I've dated keep up with the news/current events, and/or, like the current guy, are really into politics/the world in a theoretical/intellectual way.

Edited September 7, 2012 by Jane2011

[Untouchable_Fire]

Local politics and news is about as snooze-worthy as it gets. I totally ignore most of it, unwilling to waste my time. Save me from stupid human interest stories or even the Olympics. Do not care.

Give me international politics, particularly when superimposed over economic conditions and trade patterns. Waves through spacetime, anyone?

 

Everyone has their interests, but local news is so much more relevant to me. National news is biased, filtered, and repackaged dog poop. I'm only passingly interested in what people in Arkansas do.

 

Local news is the stuff that impacts my life.

 

I actually think that those with the most interest in politics are the least satisfied with their lives...as my very own generalized speculation. If one is satisfied with the condition of their life in relation to the world, why would they seek to rock the ship outside of curious interest?

 

Holy crap is this true! I was with the Democrats in 2000, 2004 and 2008... I was actively involved in some campaigns. I learned that those people who are most motivated and most involved typically have the biggest ax to grind. They are the most unhappy and want change.

 

I've never seen it that way. I believe that if you want to have a say or have any kind of (perhaps perceived) control over your life, you should understand what's going in the world and at home in the economy, politics, current affairs, etc. Otherwise how can you influence the outcome? I'm content enough but I want to participate.

 

Most people like this chat about politics a bit and vote. I rarely see them get passionately involved.

[fortyninethousand322]

1. Do you find folks who follow important news events or politics (or the things within politics ) to be more intellectual than others? When I say the thing within politics, Im talking general economic and social issues that shape our lifes. In my experience, people with a greater interest in how the world runs tend to be more intellectual due to their knowledge of particular topics.

 

Politics or public policy? Political junkies who hang on to every word that so and so politician said or watch the political party conventions are not necessarily "intellectual". In fact, they're usually not at all.

 

2. Are you turned off by people who dont stay up to date on important news or important events (like elections) that affect us all?

 

I would be turned off by somebody who thought the election was important. I'd probably be turned off by somebody who was completely ignorant of what's going on around them.

 

3. Is it me or does it seem that men generally follow politics way more than women? And because of this I notice more guys are interested in economics and social issues. It would seem to me that there are more women than men who simply go along in their life not caring about what makes life the way it is...or if they have complaints about certain aspects of society, theres more women than men who dont educate themselves on ways to change it.

 

I think men might be typically more interested in public policy. But I'm not totally sure on that.

[USMCHokie]

especially taking your line of work into account

 

How so...?

[Emilia]

How so...?

 

You have very little control over your life. You have to go where they tell you to go when they tell you to go. You have to put your life on the line for ideals you don't necessarily believe in. To a degree you are viewed as expendable - although with all fairness that's true of 99% of the population.

[USMCHokie]

A privileged person taking their blessing for granted....nothing new to be honest. Its all good though...not everyone was meant to help others.

 

We all help in our own little way. Some try to be crusaders for a cause they believe to be "righteous" while others get blown up serving the president you elect.

[USMCHokie]

You have very little control over your life. You have to go where they tell you to go when they tell you to go. You have to put your life on the line for ideals you don't necessarily believe in. To a degree you are viewed as expendable - although with all fairness that's true of 99% of the population.

 

This is true, but I don't really think on such a broad scope in regards to my life...so I don't feel like I've lost control of my life, per se, when they tell me to go here or shoot there. I still get to have my coffee every morning and that's good enough for me.

[Emilia]

so I don't feel like I've lost control of my life, per se, when they tell me to go here or shoot there. I still get to have my coffee every morning and that's good enough for me.

 

fair enough

[fortyninethousand322]

It doesnt bother you that Africa and South East Asia have ridiculous amounts of poverty?

 

What does this have to do with American politics?

 

And thats one reason why Im interested in politics. I think about the good of everyone.

 

That's kind of scary.

[Bristolius]

This thread is pretty good. Mostly it's on topic regarding dating.

 

Here's a new question. Is there a difference between the rights and responsibilities of citizenship versus the cat fight/horse race of politics?

 

Keyword: Civics.

 

If we take citizenship seriously, how can it not influence our relationships?

[Star Gazer]

Suburbs don't count?.

 

I don't live in the Bay Area, city or suburbs. See the assumptions you make?

 

And I'm not about to give you my location, so stop trying.

[Star Gazer]

I actually think that those with the most interest in politics are the least satisfied with their lives...as my very own generalized speculation. If one is satisfied with the condition of their life in relation to the world, why would they seek to rock the ship outside of curious interest?

 

I tend to agree with this, but I'd clarify and say those most interested in politics and being the most vocal AT A PARTICULAR MOMENT tend to be those who are dissatisfied with the current administration, not necessarily dissatisfied with their lives on the whole. I'd say most folks on the left are quite happy right now, whereas the right is discontent and looking for change and thus being the most vocal.

 

In the same vein, during the Bush administration, the right was content and the left was more vocal.

 

I mean, it's only human nature to not want to rock the boat when you're satisfied with the status quo, but screaming when you're not.

[Eternal Sunshine]

I don't live in the Bay Area, city or suburbs. See the assumptions you make?

 

And I'm not about to give you my location, so stop trying.

 

Star lives in LA, everyone knows that

[Art_Critic]

With all of the information we have access to these days...to not have any of it ...my 16 year old daughter reads 2 papers on line every morning, not all of it, not business or sports but...she can have a conversation about subjects that effect...oh, the human race.

 

Just the comics ?

 

I always read the comics...

[SteveC80]

The only time i ever truly wanted to leave a relationship over politics was when i was arguing with a girl ive been seeing for only a month or so and i told her how do you not see the disconnect between classes these days when my grandparents raising 7 and 8 kids respectively only needed one parent to work and got by

 

In todays economy you need two incomes to rasie one kid and her response was well the mdidle class doesnt work hard enough like rich people do

 

I pretty much lost it and told her to go

[Negative Nancy]

voting and politics shapes so many important aspects of our life

 

and she has no idea what Im talking about

 

no wonder

 

 

 

[Feelin Frisky]

I most likely won't be voting this year. I don't feel excited about either side - I did, four years ago, for the first time in years.

 

I posted something on my FB yesterday, that I'd read about Obama, that I didn't like. I said how disappointed I was, and someone jumped in with a link to spread the blame around a bit - it still doesn't change the fact that it was something he did, as president. He didn't have to do it, but he chose to.

I prefer Obama over Romney, for several reasons, but they won't get my vote by being slightly better.

 

 

Please go out and vote. All we really get to do is block the worst outcome of elections. That's it. It's never about getting exactly what we want or even about liking or loving one of the two candidates. It always about massive directional shifts. Massive shifts like we can see in how President Obama did not get the US mired in any new conflicts whereas McCain surely would still have America in Iraq and us fighting in Libya. Abstinence enables the worst outcome. And though it seems to be an election of just two persons, it is not. I can't imagine there is any one thing President Obama could have done or not done that is damning enough to turn the country over to a proven liar, an incompetent one-term governor who won't even talk about his time as Governor of Massachusetts, a heartless plutocrat who has made his fortune by putting people like you and your parents out of work and pension, a man now bought by military industrialists to take America back into foreign conflicts we can't afford which will be paid for by taking away what's left of the US social safety net.

 

It's a mistake for anyone to look back at the fiasco that was America of the first decade of the 21st century and lay the blame on the incompetent George W. Bush. No. It is on everyone who voted for the worse of two evils and everyone who thought themselves above it all who abstained and convinced themselves that their abstinence sent a message. It didn't. It simply enabled terrible outcomes. Don't go to the voting booth thinking pulling the lever for one candidate versus the other as endorsement of everything one person or the other stands for. Humans are not perfect and every one of us will get something wrong in our lives. But do go and pull the lever or press the button to stand in the way of the ideology that will take America backward--maybe even taking away your rights as a woman to make your own choices. There are more levers there than just Obama and Romney--you will be dragged in one direction or another whether you vote or not. So why not choose the way you less like to be dragged?

[kaylan]

We all help in our own little way. Some try to be crusaders for a cause they believe to be "righteous" while others get blown up serving the president you elect.

And given your job, how can you not care about certain aspects of politics? Politics affects your daily life, and not just the ones that directly affect spending on defense or whether we have a certain number of troops deployed.

no wonder

 

Lol @ negative nancy trying to make a point with out of context chopped up quotes. What is your point anyways, because you rarely make one with short silly posts like this one.

What does this have to do with American politics?

Who said this thread was just about American politics? Its about news and politics in general. And American politics has direct affects in many areas of the world. The USA and the EU's policies regarding agriculture has a huge impact in Africa. While their policies regarding outsourcing and taxes has a direct affect on labor issues in South East Asia.

 

That's kind of scary.

Oh really now?

Edited September 7, 2012 by kaylan

[Star Gazer]

Libertarianism and libertarians are NOTHING like the Tea Party.

 

The Tea Party is a party funded by families that own some of the largest American corporations with the goal to control the lower classes. You'll hear Tea Party people support standpoints that only benefit the upper class elite, as in the billionaires of the US. They tend to be uneducated brainwashed loonies.

 

Libertarianism is NOTHING like that. Libertarianism is not an ideology particular to the US and has its roots in Europe, where economic policies were formed around the ideology, like by the Austrian School Of Economics by Hayek and more academics like that.

 

Libertarians in the US are asked to sign a document where they pledge non-violence.

 

Also Libertarianism is on the right of the political spectrum, whereas Anarchism is on the far left of the political spectrum. Libertarians want a small government that acts as a referee in society, whereas anarchists want no government at all and want complete self-rule by the people, with no government acting as a referee between the people.

 

I have to respectfully disagree with you about this, particularly because the bolded just doesn't make sense. Republicans, the right, want less government. So it doesn't make sense to say that anarchists are on the opposite side, on the left, where there is arguably more government control and regulation.

 

Libertarians are not asked to sign a pledge saying anything. No major party does. Where do you come up with that?

 

I also think that comparing terms of parties in Europe to the US just doesn't make sense. A liberal in the EU is different than a liberal in the US.

[aj22one]

I have to respectfully disagree with you about this, particularly because the bolded just doesn't make sense. Republicans, the right, want less government. So it doesn't make sense to say that anarchists are on the opposite side, on the left, where there is arguably more government control and regulation.

 

Libertarians are not asked to sign a pledge saying anything. No major party does. Where do you come up with that?

 

I also think that comparing terms of parties in Europe to the US just doesn't make sense. A liberal in the EU is different than a liberal in the US.

 

haha you're one of the rare people who actually thinks about this logically. Unfortunately history is not very logical. Historically most anarchists are socialist, believing that private property is exploitative and only exists because of the state. They equate the state with capitalism and believe that in order to end capitalism you must end the state. How that makes sense to them I don't know, but that's how it is haha.

 

The anarchists you're thinking of are like me: anarcho-capitalists.

[kaylan]

The derailing we have all been doing has been interesting. But lets keep the thread on topic with regards to dating.