--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann" wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Seraphita" s3raphita@ wrote:
> >
> > Actually I'm neither right-wing nor left-wing - I'm happy to leave
that
> > kind of dualistic thinking to the unenlightened.
>
> Oh no, does this mean you're enlightened?
Lord help us - another FFLifer who's had an irony-bypass operation.
>
> >If anything, I'm closest to being anti the state in my approach to
politics, so on the
> > political right I enjoy those conservative writers who oppose the
> > encroaching nanny state and on the political left I'm a big fan of
those
> > old anarchist theoreticians (and I'll give a nod to the hippies
also).
> > If over your side of the pond you call someone with views like mine
a
> > "right-wing fundamentalist" then that's what I am! The terminology
is
> > misleading though.
>
> Most terminology is misleading but words written by others usually
speak volumes.
Then why use the terminology? You mentioned "right-wing" and
"fundamentalist" first.
>
> > But re your comment "Why you care enough about this subject" :
because I
> > care about justice! What would you think of someone who couldn't
give a
> > shit if Zimmerman was convicted or not?
>
> If you interpret "justice" to mean the guy you happen to think is
innocent doesn't get convicted then I don't care about that kind of
justice. This case does not particularly interest me but when vitriol
erupts from someone posting about it I find that more engaging. This is
why I chimed in. I am not convinced that anger, insults and mudslinging
are warranted by caring about the Zimmerman case as you profess to do. I
prefer civilized, open minded dialogue that is why I started this
discussion with you.
Yes! Funnily enough, I do interpret "justice" to mean the guy I believe
is innocent doesn't get convicted! I think OJ Simpson should have been
found guilty. The fact that the jury disagreed with me is a matter of
sublime indifference to me. I'll make my own mind up thanks. > >
