🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <PA146008.247.714246487@utkvm1.utk.edu> PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal) writes:
>In article <1992Aug19.134718.25883@mcshub.dcss.mcmaster.ca> bunker@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca (Alex Bunker) writes:
>>Xref: utkux1.utk.edu misc.headlines:6647 alt.activism:17120 talk.politics.misc:50849
>>Newsgroups: misc.headlines,alt.activism,talk.politics.misc
>>Path: utkux1.utk.edu!utkcs2!darwin.sura.net!wupost!cs.utexas.edu!torn!maccs!mcshub!physun!bunker
>>From: bunker@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca (Alex Bunker)
>>Subject: Re: Intellectuals and totalitarianism (was Re: WORLD GOVERNMENT)
>>Message-ID: <1992Aug19.134718.25883@mcshub.dcss.mcmaster.ca>
>>Sender: usenet@mcshub.dcss.mcmaster.ca
>>Nntp-Posting-Host: physun.physics.mcmaster.ca
>>Organization: Dept. of Physics & Astronomy, McMaster University
>>References: <1992Aug18.052117.14913@ncar.ucar.edu> <1992Aug18.170319.26789@bmerh85.bnr.ca> <1992Aug19.033102.28965@ncar.ucar.edu>
>>Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 13:47:18 GMT
>>Lines: 35
>>In article <1992Aug19.033102.28965@ncar.ucar.edu> gary@isis.cgd.ucar.edu (Gary Strand) writes:
>>>f > "Frank" (Robin Collins)
>>>
>>>f > Some extremely intelligent people have been fundamentalists, or dogmatists.
>>>f > Such is fuel for fascism.  I think some of the libertarians are right in
>>>f > this area of thought (and which is why people like Chomsky call themselves
>>>f > libertarian socialists, I suspect.) Any thoughts?
>>>
>>>  On what? That we agree that being an intellectual is no safeguard against
>>>  falling for totalitarian's propaganda? Or that being an intellectual is
>>>  no guarantee against being wrong, or just ignorant and stupid? Makes one
>>>  wonder why so many intellectuals are of leftist persuasion, doesn't it?
>>>
>>>  Sometimes I think your average blue-collar Joe Steelworker has more sense
>>>  and wisdom than all the lefty intellectuals infesting academia and the
>>>  "elite".
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>Gary Strand                      Opinions stated herein are mine alone and are
>>>strandwg@ncar.ucar.edu            not representative of NCAR, UCAR, or the NSF
>>
>>and that explains why your average Joe blue-collar steelworker is a socialist
>>and votes NDP in Canada,Labour in the UK,SDP in Germany,
>>socialist in france ,liberal-democrat in the US etc..
>
>     You are just about flat out wrong.  Joe blue-collar steelworker in
>the United States is fairly apt to be Republican.  Many blue-collar
>fields are Republican conservatives.  You are making an unfounded
>generalization to suggest otherwise.
>
>>and Idiotic intellectuals like William F Buckley and Milton
>>Friedman debate in an esoteric vaccumn totally out of
>>touch with the cruel realities of poverty homelessness
>>desperation crime etc...
>>
>>Your average Joe Bluecollar steelworker is a very sensible fellow
>>and knows who's side he is on.
>
>     Which is just as apt to be conservative in the United States as it
>is to be liberal.  Don't assume that because the liberal Democratcs shout
>that it is *they* who support the poor blue-collar workers that all of
>the poor blue-collar workers support *them*.  Many, many do not.
>
>===========================================================================
>|David Veal  PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  University of Tennessee             |  
>|                                     Division of Continuing Education    |
>===========================================================================


well there you have it I guess there are several chickens out there who will
vote for colonel saunders but not too many intelligent Chickens. I concede
on the US point but in Canada,UK,Germany,France, etc.. the workers do have a 
party and vote for this party and this party is social-democratic.

ALEX
.