Ever changed your mind re: politics?

RandomName2

It's often been said that people don't change their political persuasions, particularly when they in arguments with opponents. If anything people seem to get more entrenched in their opinions.

But have you ever changed your mind? Can you admit that you were *gulp*... wrong?

I used to buy the "America is the champion of peace and progress" idea - but events both at home and abroad (from Iraq to Snowden) have made me have to say I was wrong.

House of Blaze

I changed my mind from giving a **** to not giving a ****.

Links234

Not a whole lot really, but I've been told that I personally changed a lot of people's opinions about transgender issues, which is pretty damn awesome

MRnotlob606

Used to be a convinced socialist, but socialism is an attack on personal freedom most of the time.

Zed Bank

MRnotlob606 wrote: »

Used to be a convinced socialist, but socialism is an attack on personal freedom most of the time.

Socialism is a very broad term.

I have yeah, complete 180

The_Valeyard

Find myself getting but more conservative or centralist as I get older.

Used to be very left wing, suppose part of growing up.

Voted Labour before, that will not be happening again!!!

Saipanne

House of Blaze wrote: »

I changed my mind from giving a **** to not giving a ****.

This.

endacl

Yep. Used to hate SF. Now I despise them too.

Sunnyisland

I have, I am more cynical of politicians and there parties.

NipNip

You know you've lost the debate when even you agree with your opponent.

Yup, I've changed my mind some times.

Then again, sometimes I will listen, eventually agree with someone, only to discover they've been talking through their arse the whole time.

NipNip

Saipanne wrote: »

This.

And yet you opened, viewed and commented on a thread re politics? :eek:

endacl

NipNip wrote: »

You know you've lost the debate when even you agree with your opponent.

Nah. You've grown up when you can be swayed by compelling argument.

Peregrine

I've changed my mind on a lot of things including politics.

Through the opposition's arguments most of the time. Sometimes just grew out of certain opinions.

131spanner

I used to oppose the idea of making Irish optional in schools, having talked about it in a thread here on boards, I now see why people would question its role as a compulsory subject.

Holsten

Yeah I've changed my political, social, religious beliefs numerous times over the years.

Change is good.

Saipanne

NipNip wrote: »

And yet you opened, viewed and commented on a thread re politics? :eek:

*shrugs*

Muise...

The trap is having a political ideology in the first place. Then you can't change your mind because you're afraid you'll look like a right eejit tripping over your own thesis. It's so much easier to be open to better information than it is to shoehorn the information into a fixed opinion.

Adamantium

After reading up on history, human pyschology and how all this has happened before and all of this will unfortunately happen again. That's when I stopped caring about politics.

This is one of the best books I have ever read and is only a 128 pages long. Profound.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lessons-History-Will-Durant/dp/143914995X

Maphisto

Yep. I used to think FG were head and shoulders above the other shower, and then they got elected

Recondite49

RandomName2 wrote: »

It's often been said that people don't change their political persuasions, particularly when they in arguments with opponents. If anything people seem to get more entrenched in their opinions.

But have you ever changed your mind? Can you admit that you were *gulp*... wrong?

I used to buy the "America is the champion of peace and progress" idea - but events both at home and abroad (from Iraq to Snowden) have made me have to say I was wrong.

"When the information changes I alter my conclusions, what do you do Sir?" - John Maynard Keynes

coolemon

Muise... wrote: »

The trap is having a political ideology in the first place. Then you can't change your mind because you're afraid you'll look like a right eejit tripping over your own thesis. It's so much easier to be open to better information than it is to shoehorn the information into a fixed opinion.

Everyone has a political ideology.

The difference is that taking your approach most often leads to incoherency, inconsistency and contradiction of political beliefs and opinion.

Political ideologies (in the sense you are using it) are coherent and consistent frameworks with which to interpret the world (so long as the person understands the ideological framework).

So many people have political opinions that are just completely contradictory and circular because they are not contained within a coherent framework. Scatter brained people who are a nightmare to debate or talk politics/sociology with as they just go around and around in circles without a coherent reference point.

---

As for the op's question. I have been a libertarian socialist for what could be 14-15 years now. My political opinions have changed little.

Interestingly, people often throw that stupid Winston Churchill quote around about being a socialist when your young and a conservative when you get older. It is nonsense. A large proportion of socialists I encounter are in the older age bracket. It is more to do with the political climate and conditions as to what opinions are formed.

The Diabolical Monocle

Not a change technically, but a sidestep on Northern Ireland.
It costs 6 billion per annum subvention to the GB tax-payer.
It will also have too cool down/civilize before anything can be done with it.
So let them have it for the foreseeable future.

Clean before returning.

Muise...

coolemon wrote: »

Everyone has a political ideology.

The difference is that taking your approach most often leads to incoherency, inconsistency and contradiction of political beliefs and opinion.

Political ideologies (in the sense you are using it) are coherent and consistent frameworks with which to interpret the world (so long as the person understands the ideological framework).

So many people have political opinions that are just completely contradictory and circular because they are not contained within a coherent framework. Scatter brained people who are a nightmare to debate or talk politics/sociology with as they just go around and around in circles without a coherent reference point.

Ethics and reason make perfectly good frameworks, I find. And I hate the scatter-brained and circular just as much as the ideological lens. You sound like my mother when I left the church - she thought I'd have no moral framework. That was daft.

mfceiling

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

Not a change technically, but a sidestep on Northern Ireland.
It costs 6 billion per annum subvention to the GB tax-payer.
It will also have too cool down/civilize before anything can be done with it.
So let them have it for the foreseeable future.

Clean before returning.

Will have to cool down/civilise first...talk sh*t much?

Civilised compared to ballymun, jobstown, moyross?

Clean before returning...really?

You do realise about 95% of the population live their lives peacefully and with as much civilisation as you could try to muster.

Nemeses

I am a politician and I find this thread paints us all with the same brush!

JK / LOL

I don't give a toss about them as they are but empty promises.. bit like opening up a xmas present only to find its a cardboard box... True story.

coolemon

Muise... wrote: »

Ethics and reason make perfectly good frameworks, I find. And I hate the scatter-brained and circular just as much as the ideological lens. You sound like my mother when I left the church - she thought I'd have no moral framework. That was daft.

If only the world were that simple.

Is private property - ownership of, oh, say, a quarry, rational and ethical?

You see a very reasoned and ethical capitalist will say it is. While a very reasoned and ethical socialist will say it is not.

You see - as with reality - neither ethics or reason are sufficient.

You seem to think that political-ideological frameworks (isms) are not reasoned and ethical.

What is important is the consistency and coherency of a particular emphasis of many complex factors. Emphasis - and that is all it is. That is all sociology and politics is, - the placement of emphasis, of which reason and ethics are important factors in that placement.

But without an overarching framework that emphasis is most often incoherent.

I have yet to meet or discuss with a single person who, without a political-ideological framework, is either fully consistent or coherent as the discussion progresses. It progresses in a circle.

Muise...

coolemon wrote: »

If only the world were that simple.

Is private property - ownership of, oh, say, a quarry, rational and ethical?

You see a very reasoned and ethical capitalist will say it is. While a very reasoned and ethical socialist will say it is not.

You see - as with reality - neither ethics or reason are sufficient.

You seem to think that political-ideological frameworks (isms) are not reasoned and ethical.

What is important is the consistency and coherency of a particular emphasis of many complex factors. Emphasis - and that is all it is. That is all sociology and politics is, - the placement of emphasis, of which reason and ethics are important factors in that placement.

But without an overarching framework that emphasis is most often incoherent.

I have yet to meet or discuss with a single person who, without a political-ideological framework, is either fully consistent or coherent as the discussion progresses. It progresses in a circle.

Does private ownership of the quarry hurt anyone? No? Carry on.

coolemon

Muise... wrote: »

Does private ownership of the quarry hurt anyone? No? Carry on.

Well yes, it does. It can result in the denying of another person access to the particular resources therein. That can be harmful.

And this is the whole problem with the "im not ideological" people.

The inability or unwillingness to assemble reasoned arguments into a coherent and consistent political framework.

A roundabout discussion is almost inevitable.

Muise...

coolemon wrote: »

Well yes, it does. You are denying another person access to the particular resources therein. That can be harmful.

And this is the whole problem with the "im not ideological" people.

The inability or unwillingness to assemble reasoned arguments into a coherent and consistent political framework.

A roundabout discussion is almost inevitable.

I'd rather roundabout than tennis...

Why should I have to have "a coherent and consistent political framework"? Can I not just carry on being pragmatic and weigh up each question as it arises? Works in all other areas of my life.

Alright though - I'll bite: if you can show me that ownership of the quarry can be harmful, I will look into how best to balance opposing needs. If you insist I buy your manifesto on why all quarries should be free always, my eyes will glaze over and I will henceforth cross the street to avoid a conversation with you. (This must come as a relief, as you seem to think I'm scatter-brained and roundabout for taking each thing as it comes.)

Spunge

Yes, generally on things i dont know anything about and just assume then later actually do some research.

coolemon

If you insist I buy your manifesto on why all quarries should be free always

Careful now. Thread a middle ground and you'll fall into one of those dastardly ism's you are trying so desperately to avoid.

To avoid it, go around like a headless chicken and contradict yourself every second argument. Then you will fall within the gob****e category. Otherwise, if you do some research, you will find an 'ism' for which you fall. Republicanism perhaps?

God forbid.

Muise...

coolemon wrote: »

Careful now. Thread a middle ground and you'll fall into one of those dastardly ism's you are trying so desperately to avoid.

To avoid it, go around like a headless chicken and contradict yourself every second argument. Then you will fall within the gob****e category. Otherwise, if you do some research, you will find an 'ism' for which you fall. Republicanism perhaps?

God forbid.

I don't follow.

ever... :pac:

Rabbo

When I was a suggestive and rebellious teenager, I would have found Sinn Feins socialist & republican ideology very attractive.

When I eventually educated myself on their policies, I quickly changed my preference

Spring Onion

I have voted for all the parties except FF (definitely a Family/Collins hang-up). I only voted SF (#3) for the first time in the recent local elections. I used to be a strong FG supporter but I am disgusted with how FG have governed in the last few years. We needed a strong government with a strong leader and we got neither. Labour have Gilmore, Howlin and Moan Burton, all utterly useless. What sickens me the most is that we are still paying off private bank debts.

There is a good chance I will vote SF again at the next election even though I would like to see their magic money tree for myself. I am very curious to how they would handle Europe and the Bank debt but I do not like Adams at all.

The Diabolical Monocle

mfceiling wrote: »

Will have to cool down/civilise first...talk sh*t much?

Why dont you eat my words.

Civilised compared to ballymun, jobstown, moyross?

Give it another 11 days and even you will see that difference in civilization.

Clean before returning...really?

Yes really .... is that not what I wrote. Is that what was on your screen gawking at you when you very slowly read it aloud to yourself.

You do realise about 95% of the population live their lives peacefully and with as much civilisation as you could try to muster.

Did I ever say they didn't.

Its all a bit too complicated for you. But continue your rabble rabble.

mfceiling

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

Why dont you eat my words.




Give it another 11 days and even you will see that difference in civilization.


Yes really .... is that not what I wrote. Is that what was on your screen gawking at you when you very slowly read it aloud to yourself.



Did I ever say they didn't.

Its all a bit too complicated for you. But continue your rabble rabble.

In 11 days you will see a tiny proportion of knackers in pockets of belfast doing what they always do...creating trouble. Travel 10 miles in any direction and life will be taking place normally for everyone else.

Not too complicated for me lad..i lived there for 24 years so i have a fair idea of the landscape...you keep taking your info from the red tops and whatever else you are dredging your sh*t from. If it does get too complicated for you then i suggest you take a visit there...you might actually learn that it is civilised and doesn't need "cleaning"...knock yourself out.

Cienciano

I used to think voting was important, and the party and person I voted for made a difference. But now I know that it's a complete waste of time, a load of lads (mainly) that couldn't give a shíte about anyone but themselves.

On political issues the one thing I changed my mind about is abortion. Used to think "abortions for all", now I think it's fairly barbaric and should only be used in specialized cases, like rape.

pablomakaveli

Used to be an avid republican as a teenager and used to support Sinn Fein, the IRA and the cause but now i despise them.

Used to sympathize for religion when it came to politics as well but that changed a lot as well and i'm now strongly for secularism.

The Diabolical Monocle

mfceiling wrote: »

In 11 days you will see a tiny proportion of knackers in pockets of belfast doing what they always do...creating trouble. Travel 10 miles in any direction and life will be taking place normally for everyone else.

Not too complicated for me lad..i lived there for 24 years so i have a fair idea of the landscape...you keep taking your info from the red tops and whatever else you are dredging your sh*t from. If it does get too complicated for you then i suggest you take a visit there...you might actually learn that it is civilised and doesn't need "cleaning"...knock yourself out.

NI requires a multi billion subvention.
NI continues to have tribal divisions and sectarian problems.
It would be best left some time before the issue/timing of unity is brought up.

Even a complete fvcking moron who lived there for 24 years could see this if his screen wasn't covered in pie crumbs shot out every time he saw something he didn't like.
Word of the day - analogy.

mfceiling

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

NI requires a multi billion subvention.
NI continues to have tribal divisions and sectarian problems.
It would be best left some time before the issue/timing of unity is brought up.

Even a complete fvcking moron who lived there for 24 years could see this if his screen wasn't covered in pie crumbs shot out every time he saw something he didn't like.
Word of the day - analogy.

Yep...i don't like reading that a country isn't "civilised" or needs "cleaning" by someone who clearly hasn't the first idea of what that country is actually like.

I similarly don't like to read that Dublin is full of junkies or limerick is full of stab victims.

Word of the day - generalization.

The Diabolical Monocle

mfceiling wrote: »

Yep...i don't like reading that a country isn't "civilised" or needs "cleaning" by someone who clearly hasn't the first idea of what that country is actually like.

I similarly don't like to read that Dublin is full of junkies or limerick is full of stab victims.

Word of the day - generalization.

Really ... you dont like that.

I suppose you don't like reading lots of things.
I really dont give a fvck.

The place obviously needs bringing into the 21st century.
I would have thought 60ft pallet bonfires with flags on them, or being classed as a hun or a taig would have made that obvious.

GB can pay their 6 billion expense and fix it up so its no longer dependent on public sector and subvention, and no longer plagued by sectarian violence and riots.

Clean before returning.