The WAYWT Discussion Thread - Page 5767

I do not believe that everyone should have kids, and I've heard a lot of good reasons from people why they do not want to have kids, but this has to be the stupidest one I've ever heard. Tegs, I hope there is more thought than that behinds your reasons.

What I Wore Approximately Two or Three Weeks Ago:

Teger is my online dickesis.

While i respect Synthese for his epic fits. Swd has a dumb bias against .25 zips. Idk what your fit looked like so i can't speak to it. Got in the ring post redact.

The two are neither comparable nor interchangeable, having an animal is like having a glorified cactus compared to having a child.

Probably because he's in his 20's, has his whole life ahead of him, feels like he hasn't devoted nearly enough time to himself yet, has no desire to drop everything and devote himself to raising a tiny human being when he barely feels like an adult, has no real career, because babies are expensive, because blindly creating life isn't a good reason to do it, because he likes his beagle, because he would prefer to minimize stress rather than increase it, because he knows how hard life is sometimes and it's tough to wish that on something you're creating, because feeling a bit at sea is no reason to drop everything and make a child, because because because

but what do i know

whatever i can do avoid my thesis. WHATEVER I CAN DO.

this as well as ..

I didn't have the best childhood so I don't know if I'm emotionally equipped to be a parent

I have some health problems with genetic indicators and I would feel guilty fathering I child that potentially would have these same health problems

Show us the exception to the rule Bene

I think you a word.

Can we all grow up now?

For the sake of posting something, alternate take of my previous fit (I wish I walked more places just so I can wear this like a backpack and look like an idiot)

These are all good reasons but if that was the case the original post should have read, "I do not want to have a child right now I would rather have a pet as it is more fitting with where my life is currently at. Maybe things will change maybe things won't." That would've gone over a lot better than a blanket statement of puppies are greater than children. Not that it really matters to me who has kids and who doesn't, that's a personal decision. It was about the statement, not tegers personal life choices.

Synth - Thanks for the detailed feedback, I will reply to that later. I don't want you to think that I ignored it.

Loewenstein views Spain’s prospects in a similar light. Like Germany, during the 1920s Spain “failed to build up a strong middle-class party holding the balance between right and left,” leading to an ill-timed revolt by the leftist parties against the state and military. With little prospects of succeeding, this revolt will serve as a pretext for the Spanish right to further entrench themselves in power, using the “menace of dictatorship of the proletariat... for the organization of a ruthless white terror preparing the way for the establishment of fascist or authoritarian rule.” In this prediction, Loewenstein sees a similarity to the destruction of the Weimar state, wherein the tension (and open conflict) between the left and the right has provided enough “hatred to bid for a ferocious application of the fascist suppression.”

Second, by using military language to describe the European political situation, and exaggerating the threat to the European democracies – only two years earlier England was described as immune to fascism – Loewenstein is using fascisms’ own appeal to drum up support for militant democracy. As he has discussed repeatedly, fascism is grounded in emotion, and fascist parties make great use of the emergency situation, frequently using expediency as a justification for a quick transition to a fascist government. Loewenstein is in essence doing the same thing. To him the threat to democracy is so dire, and so apparent, that actions must immediately be taken – democracy “must live up to the demands of the hour.” Such an appeal is the essence of emotionalism: just as the fascists use the threat of economic depression to mobilize a population, Loewenstein is attempting to use fascism to mobilize a government. To him, there is no time to think, only to act, and democratic governments must immediately follow the course laid out by him or risk destruction. There is something fundamentally different from simply proscribing the means by which a democratic government can protect itself from fascism, and casting the conflict between democracy and fascism as an apocalyptic and historic clash of worldviews. The fact that Loewenstein is doing the latter is significant, and has up until this point been glossed over by scholars working with his theories. Further, the stark differences between “Militant Democracy I” and “Autocracy Versus Democracy” are obvious, and show his increasingly pessimistic worldview, his growing personal involvement in the defense of democracy, his mounting hysteria, and his transition from academic to advocate.