"someone who challenges the status quo and rejects the conventional standards of a society. " who does this ? does pop larkin or a master criminal do this more than let say george galloway and why cant they support bush doing it "I don't think we have an equivalent of libertarianism here, do we? " your talking like you need to have a group of other people involved to challenge the status quo and rejects the conventional standards of a society if thats what you think thats what these people do
Yes, that's the question I was raising; whether any kind of challenge to conventions, norms, and the status quo can be taken as "hippy" type behaviour. Like I said, could a Leninist communist or a libertarian be seen as a hippy or does "hippydom" necessarily entail social liberalism and economic equality? Any thoughts on that? Bush is the status quo and as Republican president elect he arguably represents the moral majority, and the "conventional standards" of American society. Neo-conservatism represents everything to which "hippies" have traditionally been opposed. To support Bush's brand of neo-conservatism is not to rebel or reject the status-quo, but to cow-tow to it. That's one of the points I made in my original post - it'd seem by any recognised definition of "hippy", that anyone who accepts unquestioningly the actions of a leader like Bush could not possibly lay claim to such a moniker. The question then reverts to "what kind of challenge" to conventional wisdom represents a progressive or "hippy" viewpoint? I realise this is all semantic ballet-dancing, but it's an interesting thought experiment, I feel. I was actually wondering aloud if there is a British equivalent to America's Libertarian party, since I'm not aware of one... I certainly don't think you need to be part of any named movement in order to challenge conventional wisdom. Glad you decided to join in!
I agree entirely. If jonny had just talked about how it was possible to be a hippy and still support the war, that would have been on-topic and fair enough. But instead, as always, he uses any available excuse to spread his anti-islamic agenda. And seeing as this behaviour is in fact trolling, I suggest we should request that our good mod deletes such comments when they're made off-topic.
if I had wanted to I could have pointed out on the thread where clairex posted the rock against fascism campaign that they had as one of their main supporters the man who led the campaign against salman rushdie and then collected money for terrorists this doesnt seem to bother you because your a bunch of fakes pretty much like the people who have a peace march and support hezbollah and hamas whats the difference between kalim siddiqui and the bnp
Your words cut me to the core! As usual, you're missing the point. The issue is not about the merits of your opinions. It's about hijacking a topic to promote your own personal agenda. This is what makes you a fanatic - you can't differentiate between people taking issue with your behaviour and people taking issue with your opinions. You can't actually conduct a discussion without using it as an opportunity to attack islam.
my comments dont cut you to the core and thats the problem "someone who challenges the status quo and rejects the conventional standards of a society" I dont see most of the people like you and showmet doing this you dont really care that someone like siddiqui is considered a anti fascist if you were concerned with people being killed you would be campaigning where the largest number are being killed your not all you go on about is isreal or Iraq I used to post on the human shields website and I asked them when they were going to sudan or Iran but thats not going to happen even though both of these countrys have worse human rights records so you have a agenda but it has nothing to do with the victims of oppression just bashing the west
You're still missing the point, yet again demonstrating how much of a fanatic you are. At no point in this thread have I said that I disagree with your point of view - just the manner in which you're expressing it. And yet again, you demonstrate your complete inability to stick to the topic in hand without wandering off into a pursuit of your own agenda. Troll.
Has anyone noticed how there are some very vocal members who have a very conservative right-wing bias in their writing? I am baffled as to how this can come to be on a "hip" or "hippy" forum. Hippyness is hard to describe but I think one thing that ties it all together is a desire to challenge the status-quo and consider alternative perspectives. Conservatism is the status-quo. We should never be so arrogant as to think we're always right, of course, and there are a great many mistakes made by "lefties", but you'd think we would agree that leftist or liberal thinking is closer to progressiveness or "hippyness" than conservatism is. This mostly relates to the larger, American-dominated forums. On the Politics and "America Attacks" forums there is a group of pro-Bush, pro-Iraq war cheerleaders - on a hippy forum! It's very strange. But it happens here too occasionally - what prompted this was reading Sal's "global poverty" thread. People disagreeing with the basic idea that corporations should act fairly towards their employees and the community. Most odd this is the original post that I responded too, showmet was asking why people could support bush the war and global capitalism I responded why I thought someone could support getting rid of saddam and why I personally didnt my reasons for not supporting george bush had to do with his lack of understanding of islam how is this going off topic since them all Ive done is point out that I think your fakes with double standards "someone who challenges the status quo and rejects the conventional standards of a society" I dont think your doing this
To respond to that, all you needed to say was something along the lines of "I think it's entirely consistent to be a hippy and support the war against Iraq because I believe a regime change justifies the use of violence". But instead, you take the opportunity to yet again air your grievances against islam. You responded to the topic, but you then ran off into your usual vitriol. As always, any excuse to attack islam, and you seize it like a rabid dog. Explain that, if you can. Where's the double standards? I agree with you regarding the nature of islamic regimes and the atrocities perpetrated by them. The problem is, you're so narrow minded that you translate any opposition to your extreme views as support for islamic extremism. This is what makes you a fanatic. You see everything in black and white, without any understanding of the subtlety of all the shades of gray in between. Whereas by embracing hatred and bigotry, I suppose you are?
double standards have you seen one protest about sudan or supporting democracy in Iran on this site we have a forum set up just to bash the americans in Iraq it seems wheres the interest in the countrys were the bigger number are being killed do you like the bnp whats the difference in warning of the spread of people who want to get into power and deport people and warning about the spread of people who want to turn the world into a islamic state lets say your a homosexual would you be discriminated against in a islamic state yes most likely you would be stoned to death you have national tv channels in this country indoctrinating muslims its called sheria tv why is this ok but it would be wrong to have the a tv station for nazis I dont want a tv station for the bnp but it seems that if you wrap up intolerence in a religion its ok and acceptable a lot of my friends are ex-muslims they are scared that muslims will find out that they are no longer members of their religion because they may get killed thats where the hatreds coming from
Hmm. You really can't see that the entire thread has turned from a question relating to the characteristic liberalism of hippies to you're ridiculous rant about war and why you're causes are right, everyone else's are wrong and of course everyone else is stupid and doesn't know what's going on around them? Muppet... Anyway, back to the original topic: I must admit that I'm not in any way a hippy and can be pretty conservative in a lot of my views, that's one of the reasons I like this forum, it allows me to bounce ideas off people with much more liberal points of view and more often than not brings me around to their way of thinking (I think I'm a hippy at heart really!)
And yet again, you seem intellectually incapable of grasping the point. Let me spell it out for you again. The issue in this thread is not your opinions. The issue is the way you attempt to hijack any thread where the opportunity presents itself in the pursuit of those opinions. You, more than anyone, contribute to these issues not being discussed in this forum. Whenever anything critical of islam crops up, you start sounding your mouth off, slurring all muslims with the same brush as the fanatics. The net effect of this is to suppress discussion of what you yourself seem to regard as an important issue. Excellent example. The BNP are an organisation of racists. Muslims are a wide and diverse community with many disparate opinions and ideals. Unlike the BNP, they are not, as a group, singularly dedicated to hatred. Although again, this is not the issue. The issue here is the way you hijack threads. See what you're doing? Yet again, rather than discuss the issue in hand, you're taking the opportunity to disparage islam. I'm not particularly interested in debating the rights or wrongs of your argument at this time, since that just fuels your thread-hijacking. I'm sure it is. Doesn't seem to stop you pouring petrol on the fire though, huh?
And once again jonny2mad's venomous self-righteousness reduces another thread to irrelevance, accusation and bitching. Well done that man! How many times has he done that now? How many times will he do it in future? He seems unable to participate constructively in a civilised discussion. He's consistently trolling and making this an unpleasant place to be. If you want to start your own topic exposing the double standards you see in the counter-culture movement regarding Islam and telling everyone who disagrees with you that they are "a bunch of fakes", please feel free to do so. This one used to be about the nature of liberal and progressive thought and the question of whether conservatives can be hippies! Unless you can participate with responses relevant to these issues, I'd be grateful if you didn't respond at all. *don't feed the troll*
Ahem... I'll try not to divert this thread or cause any ranting... Just reading Q magazine and I noticed this... Conservativepunk.com " what is it? A place for ageing punks to finally ditch their left-wing baggage and pay tribute to the current Bush administration. Contributors include Johnny Ramone and the amazingly bitter Michale Graves, once of the Misfits. " www.conservativepunk.com How's that?... Fly... .
