No, my personal example is an example for why I didn't say that. I addressed people in leadership positions that you had no control over, who adversely effected your life and future generations.
I think that's the point I've struggled to make. Its not the hating her I find distasteful but the way its being projected. Maybe I don't like seeing people I respect for their ability to debate falling to base emotions. I dunno.
I was going to say something along the lines of "but nothing stopped you before" but I think you're right (I think it was you. I'm too lazy to open another page) that its just her death has caused a resurgence of emotion.
Fair enough
I really did do a terrible job expressing that whole thought process. It was a hypothetical
I didn't miss the point of your post, I was just interested in that particular bit. It's not a "badly made point," it's a bad point. It's ludicrous to suggest it in any context in my opinion. I am unconvinced of its legitimacy, and I do get what you're trying to say.
Funny how that goes, when you have such respect for other people based on one environment, then learn they are detestable in another. Sucks when you realize people are human.
Telling you that I don't think you understand where people are coming from due to a lack of life experience is not condescending. Would it be condescending if somebody told me I shouldn't give an opinion about raising kids? I have a million opinions on the subject that are probably great and may actually work, but I don't have kids. Half the stuff I would say now I probably wouldn't if I had kids, and that's the point. Your opinion of your opinion and how you got there is what I think is too high, and because of that you're reading me as condescending. I assure you that condescending is not my tone.
So many replies in a small space of time I'm struggling to keep on one track. So just to clarify, were you saying I don't really know what hate is full stop, I don't understand hate towards a political leader, or something else I didn't understand because I'm incredibly slow?
It is a bad point but because I'm convinced you can get blood out of stones I'll keep on with it. If its a good thing she's dead and it would of added to your happiness for her to die, why not do it yourself assuming a world with no practical limitations and legal consequences?
It'll be like the day I learn I'm not infallible.
It is considering you have no idea what my life experiences are. Granted, the older someone is the more things you can safely assume they've been exposed to, but deciding some of those things I haven't been exposed to purely because I haven't hit some magical number of years on earth is dumb.
You know I'd probably say some of your ideas might hold more weight than someone with kids because you're more impartial. Obviously someone with kids has more experience to draw upon and so has a more weighted opinion, but it doesn't completely invalidate all of your ideas simply because you don't have one.
Risking another crap example but if you decided now that, for instance, your children should be taught proper sex education because evidence points to that being a far more effective for of preventing nastiness than an abstinence only one, but then had a a daughter and changed your mind because you didn't like the idea of a guy touching her, then your original idea isn't proven wrong by the latter just because you have kids. Your ideas on the subject have instead been weakened because you're emotionally blinded.
I'm certain thatis a god awful example and doesn't translate to the point about Thatcher at all, but hey. Would actually be an interesting idea for another thread.
My point moves beyond the topic of the thread which may be causing confusion. I'm trying to relate the understanding of other people and their emotions vs. knowing about them and why they're there. If you haven't experienced said emotion, then the reactions of people who do have them would seem completely out of the norm and sometimes detestable (such as how they appear to you in this thread). That doesn't mean you don't understand why they feel it or how they got to feel it, it means you don't truly sympathize with it.
Right.So my position on it all is that I get the emotion, but on a personal level. Its the public display of the emotion I don't understand.
Your point is that since my understanding of hate is on a one to one basis rather than a person who effected many others in the same way I'm not able to understand the group hatred thing.
More in the ballpark? Sorry, I know its hard work explaining but I really am frazzled tonight and the amount of replies I've had to make to differnet people has me confuddled.
Lots of replies in little time get worse following when you don't Quote correctly : P!
I can PM you what I would do in a world without sanctions. Seriously, tell me to do so and have your opinion of me drop into the negative numbers. It'll come with a disclaimer though, don't read if you don't want to throw up.
You're 20 years old in a developed country, sorry man but there are certain things a person can generally attach through statistics and shared experiences of that age group. Same goes for me over here in the U.S.. I had to go the extra mile and bring up a situation I was put in that is unique in comparison to the majority of my age group. If you feel that was not legitimate then say so and I'll probably scoff but we're both entitled to our opinions. You haven't offered anything on your end to legitimize yourself (and I'm not asking you to) so I only have what I have to go off of. Younger people tend to think their life experiences are some huge, new thing and unique to them as well (I am no different in this, although not nearly as strong as when I was 20) which is also another reason a young age is often seen as an indicator for a lack of understanding. It really isn't anything against you man, seriously. If you can refute my points you're free to do so.
As far as the child thing goes . . . . I am darn confident that I could raise a good child, good being the measurement of productivity to society and self. But I haven't done it, I haven't experienced it and because of that I'm stuck with my beliefs that hold no weight to people who actually have kids. That's just the way things are and I accept it because I think those with actual experience and their opinions hold a lot more weight than somebody without.
Not exactly how I would put it, but pretty much yes. What you suffer by yourself is your problem, what you suffer through with your brother gets amplified by every individual involved. Group/shared emotion is a lot more intense than the individual and you have to deal with it an entirely different way.
Which really leaves us unable to carry on the conversation unless I share why I think I understand hate I guess. I can PM you that if you're interested although it will be very blunt. I do understand where you're coming from though dude. Obviously I disagree with my great and wonderful opinions being discarded by my age because I can't do anything about it but I get your point. Its all possible I've had too many people comment on my intelligence/maturity whatever and have a completely inflated ego. But that could never happen to me.
I'll leave the child one alone because as much as I want to carry it on I'm worried about it being completely off topic. I know you used it as an example that relates to this thread but I find it really interesting as an idea of its own and would derail it myself.
I don't think anyone is questioning the validity of your statements based on your age entirely, but rather disagreeing with it and saying your age is likely the best explanation for an opinion they don't agree with. You can't argue that age is heavily associated with experience and valid opinions, just argue with a 16 year old about their life opinions. Because of this, assumptions are made. Not invalidating you or your life with this. I'm held to the same standards as well, big reason I keep my mouth shut a lot of the time : P.
If you make the child thread don't expect me in there : P. I was just using it as an example, not an interest!
Forgetting the politics; she was somebodies family.
She has left behind two children, who have now lost their mother. Grandchildren who have lost their grandmother.
Put your self, or your family in their position. An entire nation; celebrating, not commemorating, the death of their loved one.
If you don't understand why people hate Thatcher so much. You will by the time Cameron and Osborne are done privatising what's left of the state. Hopefully Scotland will be independent by then and free to create it's own disasters.
I find it interesting that the BBC seem to have had trouble finding any politician in Scotland who had anything nice or civil to say about Thatcher. Other than the leader of the Scottish Conservatives, everybody else was diplomatic at best.
Scotland and the North of England, along with Wales and Northern Ireland are still to this day recovering from Thatcherite policies.
Many people praise Thatcher for her "decisive action" during the Falklands war with Argentina. But the truth of the matter is Argentina caught her off guard completely. She totally failed to understand the pre-war situation. She never thought in her worst nightmares Argentina would actually invade the Falklands. Many British service men lost their lives fixing her mistake. The Falklands was a war that should never have happened.
Many people also praise Thatcher for allowing people to buy council houses. Those houses were built to lift working class people out of the slums and give them somewhere clean and decent to live that was affordable. Now we have an affordable housing crisis and once more people are forced to live is disgusting conditions that are harmful to their health.
I was in Geography class when we heard Thatcher had resigned. We all cheered. Interestingly back then the topic of debate in school was Scottish independence.
yep she was the unintentional harbinger of devolution and by exstention independance if its achieved. The falklands war may be the only event of her time in government I am not totally against her on, it certainlly wasn't a war she saw comming but she made the most out of it and incedants like the sinking of the belgrano are more shadows at her door, but the actions of the Argentinians could not have been allowed to carry on with impunity by any government.
I'd of been happy for a nurse to of cut off her still warm head, throw open the windows, lift her head aloft and pronounce "the woman is dead!" To kick off the celebrations x
This would be unthinkable in any civilized country - can you imagine Republicans celebrating the death of Jimmy Carter? Were there any Democrats celebrating when Reagan died?
Death is a solemn affair, and I would personally not celebrate the death of anyone unless he/she was a proven mass murderer with years of best efforts at hurting others.
Thatcher, for all her failings, clearly does not fit this bill. Plus, she's been retired for 20 years now, and died an old, dementia-ridden woman in comparative obscurity. Anyone celebrating this fact is sick, and should be ashamed of themselves. Given the degenerative state that we seem to be aproaching, however, I am not holding my breath. The country now espouses the worst of both right and left-wing political spectrums, and is close to failing as a result.
Maybe im being to soft skinned but, I just find it deplorable behaviour, by "adults".