Consensus in Politics

[nutronjon]

I cannot make sense of this. I can guess that you meant "clue" and not "glue", but I do not understand what you are saying when you say a "high tech military capability" takes our "war machine out of the hands of the people, and puts it in the hands of industrialist."

 

:umno::lol::) Sorry, my writing is pathetic. I mix my letters and words so badly, some times I can't figure out what I meant to say. Yes, I meant to say clue, instead of glue.

 

In the past, it took a good year to mobilize our country for war. WWI and WWII involved every man, woman and child, because of the huge effort these wars took. I will gladly provide more detail, but that might not be necessary. We had nothing like the weapons industry we have today, and ur weapons had nothing like the capability they have today.

 

In the past, it would have taken a year of prepare for our invasion on Iraq, if we were to have enough men and weapons to do want we could do in 4 hours with planes and today's bombs. Extremely few of us have any involvement in the present wars, other than paying taxes to support the war effort. We are not rationing rubber, wheat, sugar, nylons, etc.. All our men are not engaged in the war, so industry is not dependent on women as it was during previous wars. If we avoid the news, the wars go on without our awareness. Except for paying taxes, we have made painless to ourselves, and this seriously changes our consideration of the value of war. The government isn't taking the men of family. At least not yet. Isn't this nice? I guess we learned something from Vietnam. End the draft and reduce the war post test.

 

Esienhower spoke of the Military/Industrial Complex, and during his administration liberal education was replaced with education for technology for military and industrial purpose, radically changing the culture of the US. Bush senior and Bush Junior spoke of the US as ruling the New World Order. I don't think the average person has a clue of what this is all about. Think are thinking about their lives and their families, not world domination.

[Overdog]

:umno::lol::) Sorry, my writing is pathetic. I mix my letters and words so badly, some times I can't figure out what I meant to say. Yes, I meant to say clue, instead of glue.

 

In the past, it took a good year to mobilize our country for war. WWI and WWII involved every man, woman and child, because of the huge effort these wars took. I will gladly provide more detail, but that might not be necessary. We had nothing like the weapons industry we have today, and ur weapons had nothing like the capability they have today.

 

In the past, it would have taken a year of prepare for our invasion on Iraq, if we were to have enough men and weapons to do want we could do in 4 hours with planes and today's bombs. Extremely few of us have any involvement in the present wars, other than paying taxes to support the war effort. We are not rationing rubber, wheat, sugar, nylons, etc.. All our men are not engaged in the war, so industry is not dependent on women as it was during previous wars. If we avoid the news, the wars go on without our awareness. Except for paying taxes, we have made painless to ourselves, and this seriously changes our consideration of the value of war. The government isn't taking the men of family. At least not yet. Isn't this nice? I guess we learned something from Vietnam. End the draft and reduce the war post test.

 

Esienhower spoke of the Military/Industrial Complex, and during his administration liberal education was replaced with education for technology for military and industrial purpose, radically changing the culture of the US. Bush senior and Bush Junior spoke of the US as ruling the New World Order. I don't think the average person has a clue of what this is all about. Think are thinking about their lives and their families, not world domination.

 

 

Ahh...I see your point. Thanks for the clarification, it is a good point, and there is wisdom in considering it.

[Nitack]

Oh wow, where to begin...

 

1. Capitalism: Capitalism, although imperfect, offers the opportunity to be justly rewarded for your efforts and risks taken.

2. Collectivism: Read: 'socialism'. Collectivism is a fatally flawed concept. The idea of socialism is that every person will do their part for the betterment of all. This is not how things work in a practical sense though. It is in our nature to try to get the most while doing the least. That is an instinctual imperative for humans. You need the resources but if you consume more energy (work) than you secure (food/money) it is a losing proposition. Unfortunately the US is moving towards this type of socialist society. Welfare, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE, are all just socialist programs that are designed to redistribute resources from those who have to those who have not. These are doomed to failure though, because we have a population with unlimited wants that are all after the same limited resources. Right now we are suffering from what is called the "Tyranny of the Majority" by political scientists.

3. Larger government to serve the citizen's needs: Government is by nature inefficient. As others have pointed out, with out a profit motive, there is no compelling incentive to reduce waste and inefficiency. Most economists will tell you that taxing a population in order to set up government programs will only end up hurting your economy, and lowering the overall standard of living.

4. Equality of citizens: The purpose of government is to secure the rights of the citizens. A tenant of democracy is the equality of all citizens. A bit of soap boxing here... but we do have a significant population that is denied equal rights in statute. Gays and Lesbians are denied the simple protections that I and my wife enjoy. This is no less an injustice than what the civil rights movement sought to correct.

5. Political correctness: If you do not respect the right of another person to be politically incorrect (or just to be an *** hole) then you have no expectation to the right of your own opinion being respected. It is only through the guarantee of your right to dissent that we truly have democracy. The emphasis on political correctness continually erodes the rights of an individual to form their own opinion. I do not agree with racists and bigots, but I respect their right to be wrong :).

6. Biblical morality: Biblical morality has a right place... it is called a church. It is not the business of the government to dictate morality at all. Morality is an individual decision. The only place of the government is to ensure that your morality (lets say you were into human sacrifice) does not intrude on the rights of another to their morality (people who don't want to be sacrificed :umno:).

7. Self reliance: ABSO-FRIGGIN-LUTELY. Every person should be responsible for taking care of themselves. If they can't, then it is up to their family, kin, clan, community, if they so choose to. The idea that individuals are not expected to supply for their own wants and needs (see my comment on collectivism/socialism) is ridiculous.

8. Increased government regulation of large corporations: Here is where I will diverge from my libertarian/small government bent slightly, but only slightly. Because things like pollution can have an impact on the lives of others, that should be regulated. Also, although I am a hard line capitalist, I think that for a PUBLICLY TRADED company, that there should be limits on executive compensation. Bob Nardelli, of Home Depot infamy should not have gotten a $200+ million dollar pay check for being fired. Executive salaries for publicly traded companies, where they have solicited money from the public in an IPO and they have share holders, should be regulated back to the realm of reasonableness.

9. Government job creation: NEGATIVE. Get your hands out of the economy! Business will take care of it, government will just **** it up.

10. Hiring and pay raises based solely on merit: This falls under two other categories, regulation of large corporations and equality.

 

I am a Libertarian. I believe that government exists to protect my individual rights and everything else is up to me to take care of. As more and more of my generation see that Social Security and Medicare are just elaborate pyramid schemes we know they will not be there for us. All money we put into those systems is basically gone. Unfortunately our futures were sold out by our grandparents and parents. They decided to force us to pay for their retirement through legislation and we were apathetic enough or felt guilty enough to let them, or too young to do anything about it.

[questor]

Well said Nitack. You have a grip on reality.

[questor]

Zythryn, please read what I wrote so you can quote what I said rather than what you thought I said.

Reason has the same chance as all of us. As he matures and gains EXPERIENCE, he can combine that with his INTELLIGENCE and POWERS OF OBSERVATION to achieve WISDOM. When he achieves wisdom he may change his mind about the human condition---or he may not. He may stay as he is, the wiring is a very strong influence.

[InfiniteNow]

Questor,

 

I'm really tired of you labelling and denegrating people who disagree with you. You really make every thread in which you participate frustrating, personal, and completely untenable. You are counter to everything Hypography stands for.

 

If I'm going to get in trouble for calling you a bigot and making the site less friendly, then I expect the staff to deal with your ridiculous replies in kind.

[questor]

Please explain where you see bigotry in my post. Have I been constantly attacking you? or insulting you? On the above post.I'm not even addressing you. If there is a complaint, let the aggrieved one complain.

[Nitack]

Questor,

 

I'm really tired of you labelling and denegrating people who disagree with you. You really make every thread in which you participate frustrating, personal, and completely untenable. You are counter to everything Hypography stands for.

 

If I'm going to get in trouble for calling you a bigot and making the site less friendly, then I expect the staff to deal with your ridiculous replies in kind.

 

I have to say, I responded before reading through the entire thread and then went back to read through it. I have two observations now about questor.

1. He was not looking for a discussion, he had an agenda when he started this post. He really only wanted to pick a fight or find people to agree with him.

2. I have to agree with IN. Although I enjoyed the questions and the chance to add my knowledge and beliefs in government to the discussion, Questor's intent is rather counter to what this site is about. Questor, you need to check your attitude dude, this place is not about that. You have talked down to MANY people in this thread and that is not how this place works.

[questor]

I do have my own ideas about a number of subjects, and it takes two to make an argument. Obviously a number of you have been upset at my statements. I have also been upset at some of the statements made to me. My purpose in this thread is to explore the possibility of reaching consensus in the realm of politics. It is demonstrably difficult when people in the same culture cannot agree on morality, economics, an optimum society or many other issues. Maybe it's my fault that both my recent threads have degenerated into something I was not looking for. Nobody learns much from vituperative posts. It's too bad, because I thought both posts had substance, but if the water has been poisoned, there is no reason to continue. Questor

[Zythryn]

Please explain where you see bigotry in my post. Have I been constantly attacking you? or insulting you? On the above post.I'm not even addressing you. If there is a complaint, let the aggrieved one complain.

 

Ok Questor, here is one of many examples:

 

I think homosexuals should be treated like anyone else, and I think they should behave like anyone else instead of indulging in their ''freak'' show parades, slobbering on each other in public and playing grab-*** at the White House like Degeneres.

 

It is from page 3 of this thread.

I try to give everyone the benifit of the doubt. I was sure that I must have misunderstood you, and in part I did. It only took half a dozen page to clear up that part.

However, you have still refused to answer the simple question of how you see the homosexuals as not being treated like anyone else and how they don't behave like anyone else.

Your one attempt at this listed an example of someone that is homosexual being treated just as others would be (being arrested for public nudity), stretching the definition of 'nudity' to include 'almost nude' and a site showing images of child #$@% which, although incredibly disturbing, doesn't show homosexuals being treated differently than others.

On top of this, the use of the words "freak" and "slobbering" seem to be terms intended to denigrate and insult.

So please, address the questions asked in a civil manner.

[Nitack]

I do have my own ideas about a number of subjects, and it takes two to make an argument. Obviously a number of you have been upset at my statements. I have also been upset at some of the statements made to me. My purpose in this thread is to explore the possibility of reaching consensus in the realm of politics. It is demonstrably difficult when people in the same culture cannot agree on morality, economics, an optimum society or many other issues. Maybe it's my fault that both my recent threads have degenerated into something I was not looking for. Nobody learns much from vituperative posts. It's too bad, because I thought both posts had substance, but if the water has been poisoned, there is no reason to continue. Questor

 

Questor, your intentions may have been good, but you did not go about it in the best way.

As he matures and gains EXPERIENCE, he can combine that with his INTELLIGENCE and POWERS OF OBSERVATION to achieve WISDOM. When he achieves wisdom he may change his mind about the human condition---or he may not.

Emphasis added by me. How much do you know about Reason? Because unless you know him personally, saying that "as he matures and gains experience" is rather judgmental and presumptuous. I have always been impressed by his maturity when posting in this forum. As for changing his mind, who are we to say his current mindset is wrong?

 

Social sciences are subjective to the point of madness. I have strong opinions, and I base those opinions on as much data and observation as possible, but that does not always mean I am right (although I am 99.9999% certain that I am always right ;)). We can look at the data of global warming and know the deniers are wrong. We can't look at the data for government and know which is better or which model is the best. Those sorts of judgments are entirely dependent on the personal beliefs of the person answering the question. I believe in economics and the inherent inefficiencies of a government, so I believe a libertarian model of government is the best. However, there are bleeding heart liberals out there that want everyone to get an equal share, regardless of their lack of earning it, and to them that is the best form of government. I know they are wrong, but they are only wrong when measured by MY STANDARDS.

[questor]

Zythryn, I would like for you to find my offending passages and post them verbatim. I will answer them.

As far as the word ''freaks'' it is a word used by some gays to describe their activities. ''Slobbering'' means;;intransitive verb

1 : to let saliva dribble from the mouth : drool

2 : to indulge the feelings effusively and without restraint

transitive verb

slobbering - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

 

the links you requested about naked gay parades, I copied at random

from a google search-- naked gay parades. I did not know the content of the sites. You could have done this search yourself.

[questor]

Nitack, you have made your feelings known.

[Nitack]

Nitack, you have made your feelings known.

 

Is that to indicate I am dismissed from this thread? ;)

 

Wasn't trying to be harsh dude, just was trying to hopefully put things in perspective for you from what it looked like on this end.

[questor]

I don't control the thread or the site. I put up the post to encourage conversation. You can judge for yourself what happened.

[Zythryn]

Zythryn, I would like for you to find my offending passages and post them verbatim. I will answer them.

 

I just did, in my previous post. Your statement's tone seemed very insulting and without answering the question I have asked a number of times, seems to have no merit.

 

As far as the word ''freaks'' it is a word used by some gays to describe their activities.

Fascinating, I had never heard of that slang before. I am very surprised you had, and would choose to use such slang.

However, from what I could find out, you misused it.

 

From wrestling freak - Gay Slang Dictionary

wrestling freak

1. colloq.
   This term was used in the 1960s and '70s in want ads. Rarely used in the 1990s. This is someone that reaches sexual gratification through wrestling. rubbing against the wrestling partner until sexual climax.
   Source: [1960's]
   

 

Note, I was unable to find any slang term for just "Freak" or "Parade Freak".

 

 

''Slobbering'' means;;intransitive verb

1 : to let saliva dribble from the mouth : drool

2 : to indulge the feelings effusively and without restraint

transitive verb

slobbering - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

 

Quite true, however it the context used, it came across as quite derogatory. If you didn't intend insult, I suggest finding less emotionally laden words to use. I take it you were being critical of public kissing? If so, why use 'slobbering'?

the links you requested about naked gay parades, I copied at random

from a google search-- naked gay parades. I did not know the content of the sites. You could have done this search yourself.

 

So to back up your statement, you made a search of google and posted the links, without knowing their content???

The second link even had the word "arrested" in the very text you copied. If you won't even review the text you copy to the site why should we ever believe you are posting links to articles/pages which you have read the content?

 

Questor, in all seriousness, your original posts do tend to have interesting subjects of discussion. However, your statements are often inflamitory, vague and off topic. When asked to clarify, you get defensive and insulting AND refuse to clarify.

If you did clarify I think your discussions would be much more constructive.

[Moontanman]

7. Self reliance: ABSO-FRIGGIN-LUTELY. Every person should be responsible for taking care of themselves. If they can't, then it is up to their family, kin, clan, community, if they so choose to. The idea that individuals are not expected to supply for their own wants and needs (see my comment on collectivism/socialism) is ridiculous.

 

Nitack, I am curious about your response to #7 do you think that someone who can no longer make a decent living due to circumstances beyond his or her control should just be shoved into the pit and covered up like a worn out or broken tool by businesses? What if their family clan or what ever cannot support them? What if their injury prevents them from taking care of themselves in a decent manner? Please clarify this.