(March 30, 2013 at 5:07 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: All I meant to say, is that he is thinking of a different term by "realism". Realism in political science means something else. I think this is why he is talking about politics.
I don't believe in realism in the political science sense. It's a gross oversimplification of the world.
When I think of the term "realism" used in politics, then I think of Charle de Gaule and how he gave up colonial rule over Tunisia, Indochina, Mali and Ivory Coast against popular protest at home because it was the right decision. I think of Gerhard Schröder who although being a social democrat cut social spending because it was the right thing to do.
Realism in politics means - seeng things as they are and being very analytic - and out of making a realistic assesment of the situation, concluding to do the right thing for that situation.
Making weiro prophecies over how WW3 will come, and how everyone will be judged and whatever the fuck without giving any examples out of which the subject draws those conclusions is anything but realistic.
It is nothing else but pathetic and useless gibberish.