So, here we are. by Wulfenstar

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

So, here we are.

POSTED BY: WULFENSTAR
UPDATED: Sunday, August 8, 2010 10:55
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1278
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, August 6, 2010 9:53 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Time is counting down to the November elections.

But will things really change?

I'm of the opinion that a 2 party system is just a fucked up attempt at pitting people against each other in order to cover up what nastiness is really going on.

It may take something stronger than a vote to reset all the stupidity of the last 60 years.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 6, 2010 10:13 AM

BYTEMITE

Look for grassroots, not for astroturf.

But... yes, you're right. You can vote grassroots and Independents, but your candidate won't have a chance... Not unless you knock out the propaganda machines telling the sheep who to vote for, or the money behind it.

The good news is, if the agenda money is backing someone, chances are good this is someone they've also got dirt on. Find the dirt, expose it, make the sheep hear, show the candidates for the non-option they are. Then knock out the reserves until the hydra runs out of time and can't grow more heads.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 6, 2010 10:14 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
a 2 party system is just a fucked up attempt at pitting people against each other in order to cover up what nastiness is really going on

Pretty much.

But don't get your guns out yet, Wulf, much as I know you'd like to (or THINK you'd like to). Guns won't solve it, they'll only make it worse.

All I know is in my adult lifetime, when Dems are in power it's "slightly less worse"--but I'd give my eyeteeth for a REAL two-party system which even TRIED to represent the people, maybe 35% of the time?

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 6, 2010 10:21 AM

BYTEMITE

Quote:
but I'd give my eyeteeth for a REAL two-party system which even TRIED to represent the people, maybe 35% of the time?

Wow, we're really shooting for the moon here.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 6, 2010 10:24 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

I'd give my freedom (or life) and a .308 for a government that represented the people.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 6, 2010 10:35 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Yeah, I know Byte, but as I say...I can dream!

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 6, 2010 10:41 AM

KANEMAN

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
I'd give my freedom (or life) and a .308 for a government that represented the people.

That is coming sooner than most people think. This country is fired up.....

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 6, 2010 10:46 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

"I'd give my freedom (or life) and a .308 for a government that represented the people."

Hello,

A lot of people say they'd be willing to give their life to fight for a just cause. However, they usually mean they'd die for it. Few people are ever willing to devote a life to something.

Killing and Dying is much easier, even if it's futile.

Wulf, at least take a lesson from Sun Tsu if you're going to contemplate war or violence: The battle needs to be won before the troops are ever assembled. If you haven't beaten your enemy before a single rifle is loaded, then you're doing it wrong.

So... Maybe try devoting a lifetime, instead of shortening a life. Maybe use a ballpoint instead of a bullet.

Maybe get somewhere, instead of getting nowhere.

Maybe.

--Anthony

Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 6, 2010 10:59 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Wow, Anthony, that's elegant. Downright elegant.

Quote:
they usually mean they'd die for it. Few people are ever willing to devote a life to something.

I'm impressed; I never thought of it that way! "Give" my life...that's gonna stick in my brain, thank you!

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 6, 2010 12:33 PM

PEACEKEEPER

Keeping order in every verse

This is a Brit opinion of your two party system.There isn't one.Here, we have Conservative and Labour as the two main parties.And they are diametrically opposed, Right and Left respectively.Not as far apart as in recent years, but apart nonetheless. We see your two parties as Right and Far Right. There are those of you that consider yourselves LEFT, but I kid you not, your left would make our left look positively militant.

Peacekeeper---keeping order in every verse!!!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 7, 2010 5:57 AM

BYTEMITE

Our two parties are "blatant corporate/industrial-military suck-ups" and "not-so blatant corporate/industrial-military suck-ups." Everything else is just lies they tell the public to get elected.

Though having yourselves represented by left and right wing extremists isn't exactly the best way to go either. Nor is having PARTIES a particularly smart idea, because all it does is make it so the people with the most money and power control the political and propaganda machinery.

I refuse to accept the idea that a parliamentary system is better because it still has the same fundamental problem.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 7, 2010 6:34 AM

PEACEKEEPER

Keeping order in every verse

So what Byte, as a matter of genuine interest, would you replace it with? Communism? Anarchy?

Peacekeeper---keeping order in every verse!!!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 7, 2010 8:40 AM

BYTEMITE

Quote:
So what Byte, as a matter of genuine interest, would you replace it with? Communism? Anarchy?

I might be reading into this too deep, but this strikes me as a loaded question. There's almost an implication here that you think the only alternative to your parliamentary system would be absolute state control or anarchy interpreted as chaos.

All I said was that the party system doesn't work. Single party system doesn't work. Two party system doesn't work, because outside influences, systematic construction, and common interests eventually make them a one party system. And it seems to me like the multiple parties found in a parliamentary system don't work because it's still generally controlled by the rich. Am I wrong?

A better system for choosing elected officials, is something less structured, that relies mostly on local level grass roots. Even then you get corruption, but at least it wouldn't be backed by quite as much money, so others might still have a chance to defeat someone so backed.

Ultimately, there's real flaws in the premise of having elected officials, as bad as there are flaws in having hereditary officials or rule by force. The only system I believe that can stay honest is one based on mutual consent and compromise, not consent by majority over minority, or more commonly, rich minority over majority.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 7, 2010 9:09 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello Byte,

I wonder if there is a threshold of government size when it becomes too difficult to prevent abuses to the system, or where those abuses become so large that they threaten the welfare of the people in serious ways.

I cynically wonder if mutual respect and cooperation and compromise are most likely to work on a small scale.

--Anthony

Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 8, 2010 6:26 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Anthony, I agree with your conclusion, I just don't see it happening...humans being what they are...

As to Brit v. Yank politics, I think the Brits have it a few steps better than we do, insofar as they have multiple parties which can make a coalition to have power, ergo giving more voices LESS power. I like their idea of "vote of no confidence", too...very much!

But neither is perfect, nor is any form of governance. Once a government gets big and powerful, more and more things start going wrong with it, in my opinion.

One things I'd ADORE to see is campaign finance reform. Of course, given SCOTUS' recent actions, that probably got pushed waaaay back as a possibility!

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 8, 2010 6:39 AM

BYTEMITE

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello Byte,

I wonder if there is a threshold of government size when it becomes too difficult to prevent abuses to the system, or where those abuses become so large that they threaten the welfare of the people in serious ways.

I cynically wonder if mutual respect and cooperation and compromise are most likely to work on a small scale.

--Anthony

Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.

I definitely think there's a threshold of government when it becomes run-away, and power and abuse just accumulates.

And I don't see small scale as a bad thing, so there's no reason at all to feel cynical about it. Where else but on a small scale do people actually give a damn about each other? Where else but on a small scale do people have a chance of confronting abuses of power, where those abuses of power would then hopefully be limited to that same scale?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 8, 2010 6:49 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello Byte,

It's a cynical view, because if it's a correct view, then the entire country is malformed. And not in any tinkerable fashion.

--Anthony

Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 8, 2010 8:24 AM

BYTEMITE

Or it might just mean we have a bunch of unnecessary infrastructure mucking up a basic something which does work underneath it all. If we can distill back down to that, either through the structure above it failing, or a controlled reduction, then it might be fixable.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 8, 2010 10:55 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

Amazing just how applicable that document is to our current situation, isn't it ?

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE