Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules (Everyone Must Read!!!)

1] What you CAN NOT post.

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this forum to post any material which is:
- abusive
- vulgar
- hateful
- harassing
- personal attacks
- obscene

You also may not:
- post images that are too large (max is 500*500px)
- post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or cited properly.
- post in UPPER CASE, which is considered yelling
- post messages which insult the Armenians, Armenian culture, traditions, etc
- post racist or other intentionally insensitive material that insults or attacks another culture (including Turks)

The Ankap thread is excluded from the strict rules because that place is more relaxed and you can vent and engage in light insults and humor. Notice it's not a blank ticket, but just a place to vent. If you go into the Ankap thread, you enter at your own risk of being clowned on.
What you PROBABLY SHOULD NOT post...
Do not post information that you will regret putting out in public. This site comes up on Google, is cached, and all of that, so be aware of that as you post. Do not ask the staff to go through and delete things that you regret making available on the web for all to see because we will not do it. Think before you post!


2] Use descriptive subject lines & research your post. This means use the SEARCH.

This reduces the chances of double-posting and it also makes it easier for people to see what they do/don't want to read. Using the search function will identify existing threads on the topic so we do not have multiple threads on the same topic.

3] Keep the focus.

Each forum has a focus on a certain topic. Questions outside the scope of a certain forum will either be moved to the appropriate forum, closed, or simply be deleted. Please post your topic in the most appropriate forum. Users that keep doing this will be warned, then banned.

4] Behave as you would in a public location.

This forum is no different than a public place. Behave yourself and act like a decent human being (i.e. be respectful). If you're unable to do so, you're not welcome here and will be made to leave.

5] Respect the authority of moderators/admins.

Public discussions of moderator/admin actions are not allowed on the forum. It is also prohibited to protest moderator actions in titles, avatars, and signatures. If you don't like something that a moderator did, PM or email the moderator and try your best to resolve the problem or difference in private.

6] Promotion of sites or products is not permitted.

Advertisements are not allowed in this venue. No blatant advertising or solicitations of or for business is prohibited.
This includes, but not limited to, personal resumes and links to products or
services with which the poster is affiliated, whether or not a fee is charged
for the product or service. Spamming, in which a user posts the same message repeatedly, is also prohibited.

7] We retain the right to remove any posts and/or Members for any reason, without prior notice.


- PLEASE READ -

Members are welcome to read posts and though we encourage your active participation in the forum, it is not required. If you do participate by posting, however, we expect that on the whole you contribute something to the forum. This means that the bulk of your posts should not be in "fun" threads (e.g. Ankap, Keep & Kill, This or That, etc.). Further, while occasionally it is appropriate to simply voice your agreement or approval, not all of your posts should be of this variety: "LOL Member213!" "I agree."
If it is evident that a member is simply posting for the sake of posting, they will be removed.


8] These Rules & Guidelines may be amended at any time. (last update September 17, 2009)

If you believe an individual is repeatedly breaking the rules, please report to admin/moderator.
See more
See less

A Rational Choice For November 2nd

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A Rational Choice For November 2nd

    by Butler Shaffer

    I can recall no time during my years on this planet when a presidential election has had less significance than this one. I know this statement flies in the face of the hyperbolic rhetoric engaged in, by Republocratic party drum-beaters, as they induce you to part company with your innate intelligence by joining the chuckleheads in a mad dash to the voting booths. The little stickers that read "I voted" – worn so proudly by those wishing to confirm their allegiance to the system that is destroying their lives – reminds me of the "kick me" signs teenagers used to tape onto the backs of their fellow students.

    This year marks my fortieth anniversary of not voting. Most of my colleagues attribute my non-participation to "apathy" or "protest," neither of which explains my refusal to dance the lemming two-step. I don’t vote for the same reason I don’t rob banks or molest children: it is not the way I choose to live my life. I am not "apathetic" about not victimizing others: to the contrary, I insist upon such a trait. My entire sense of being is incompatible with coercing others. I can no more hide my ambitions over your life or property within the secret confines of a voting booth than I could confront my neighbor with a gun and demand his money. Voting is nothing more than a periodic public affirmation in the faith of systematic violence as a social system.

    The state lives on the fears it has generated, for fear mobilizes collective thinking and action. This is the meaning of Randolph Bourne’s oft-quoted observation that "war is the health of the state." But fear has a way of feeding back upon itself in ways not always related to specific concerns. Warfare, inflation, increased taxation, immigration policies, corporate-state self-serving machinations, health-care costs, terrorism, crime rates, the failure of government schools, police-state practices, and other forms of social conflict, are just some of the outward manifestations of politically-induced fear. But such fears metastasize into undercurrents of unfocused anxiety that arise as desperation.

    It is this sense of formless apprehension that underlies much of this year’s election. I suspect that many people have become implicitly aware – even as they refuse to openly admit it to themselves – that the society in which they live doesn’t work well anymore. They are not yet prepared to consider that the social structures they have been conditioned to think of as timeless and immutable are collapsing; and that new systems of social organization – grounded in peace and liberty – must be found. Faith in the dying regime must be reaffirmed, and voting becomes the most visible, collective expression of political piety.

    Even many critics of the state, men and women who deem themselves "libertarians," have a difficult time transcending the mindset that social change arises through collective political action. Perhaps a few lessons in physics will disabuse such people of the belief that state power can be reduced – or even eliminated – by the pouring of more human energy into the political system!

    Such is the frustration that attends the terminal condition of political systems. Few are any longer convinced that the state can produce golden ages or great societies or workers’ paradises, but they dare not renounce their faith in an open fashion, and so content themselves with participation in the voting ritual. But look at what this year’s presidential campaign has become: not the uniting of people around a grand new social vision, but opposition to the other party’s candidate! Democrats continue to mouth the phrase "anybody but Bush," while the Republicans focus upon the shortcomings of John Kerry instead of the alleged virtues of George Bush.

    There is a sadistic quality to the political establishment’s selection of these wretched candidates as their front-men in this election. The established order cares not which man prevails, as its policies will be advanced with either. There is "bipartisan support" – a phrase reflective of the one-party system in America – by Bush and Kerry for continuation of the war in Iraq (and, perhaps, its extension to other nations); for the Patriot Act, with its police-state implications; and for further enlarging the size and powers of the federal government. While the Iraq war is foremost in the minds of most Americans, these two men have carefully skirted that issue, preferring to focus on the Vietnam War, and their respective roles therein.

    While the political establishment will be satisfied with either Bush or Kerry in office, it will be even more pleased with a large voter turnout that would create the impression of a reinvigorated support for statism. But the establishment wants the expression of choices confined to its two entries in this race: third party candidates (or what should more accurately be referred to as second party offerings) are to be discouraged – by the media, televised debates, and ballot access – because the establishment does not control these parties. The concerted effort to keep alternative political parties out of the process confirms the observation that, if voting could change the system it wouldn’t be legal.

    I suspect that, come next Tuesday, the voting booths will be filled with men and women who are so thoroughly conditioned in externally-directed, politically-structured thinking and behavior that they can conceive of no other way in which their lives and the rest of society could be organized. To such people, the phrase "anybody but Bush" could as easily be expressed as "any authority over my life but myself."

    A politically-dominated society squeezes the humanity and spirit out of most of its members. Perhaps the saddest manifestation of this is to be found in the continued willingness of men and women to revere the forms and participate in the rituals that have demoralized their lives. The political process produces men and women who sleep, but do not dream; people whose visions of the future are little more than recycled memories.

    Still, there is some hope that might emerge from next Tuesday’s national circus. Whether Bush or Kerry wins will be completely irrelevant to the quality of your life for the next four years, so you might consider abandoning any illusions to the contrary. The only significant message that could emerge from this election is if vast numbers of eligible voters refuse to participate in the spectacle. To paraphrase Charlotte Keyes, suppose they gave an election, and no one came? If American soldiers in Iraq can muster the courage to refuse to go on suicide missions, can the rest of us find the boldness to refuse to participate in the quadrennial rites that place these young people in such dangers? What if we began to understand the voting process as an integral part of a suicide mission undertaken on behalf of a system that is destroying our lives? Would not the sight of empty voting booths signify a real change in America, informing the political establishment that it no longer commands either our respect or our fears?
    Achkerov kute.

  • #2
    First of all this is an important election, I just wish we all thought it was, and that way we wouldn’t have to choose between 2 people…

    Originally posted by Anonymouse
    by Butler Shaffer
    The little stickers that read "I voted" – worn so proudly by those wishing to confirm their allegiance to the system that is destroying their lives – reminds me of the "kick me" signs teenagers used to tape onto the backs of their fellow students.
    So for you voting is not the option, what do you suggest genius? I do agree to some point, but you are so polarized about how evil this world is, that I cant completely agree with you.

    Originally posted by Anonymouse
    by Butler Shaffer
    This year marks my fortieth anniversary of not voting. Most of my colleagues attribute my non-participation to "apathy" or "protest," neither of which explains my refusal to dance the lemming two-step. I don’t vote for the same reason I don’t rob banks or molest children: it is not the way I choose to live my life. I am not "apathetic" about not victimizing others: to the contrary, I insist upon such a trait. My entire sense of being is incompatible with coercing others. I can no more hide my ambitions over your life or property within the secret confines of a voting booth than I could confront my neighbor with a gun and demand his money. Voting is nothing more than a periodic public affirmation in the faith of systematic violence as a social system.
    I can help your colleagues: I think you are a true realist, but sometimes that can be annoying and stupid… here is a translation of the definition of voting by anony: voting is like accepting that society can be herded by using fear?

    Originally posted by Anonymouse
    by Butler Shaffer
    But fear has a way of feeding back upon itself in ways not always related to specific concerns. Warfare, inflation, increased taxation, immigration policies, corporate-state self-serving machinations, health-care costs, terrorism, crime rates, the failure of government schools, police-state practices, and other forms of social conflict, are just some of the outward manifestations of politically-induced fear.
    Gandi preached that we all must become fearless, and so did Martin Luther King Jr. and I think that this years election does bread on fear, but where must we start? I say education.
    I say bring international news into this country. Make people learn 3 or 4 languages. When I tell people I read the French news, they look at my like I’m crazy, why? Its because there is this sense of fundamentalist nationalism in this country because people are TOO STUPID to realize that the US is not the world, its just another country.

    Originally posted by Anonymouse
    by Butler Shaffer
    Democrats continue to mouth the phrase "anybody but Bush," while the Republicans focus upon the shortcomings of John Kerry instead of the alleged virtues of George Bush.
    I haven’t heard any democrats say that, however I have heard others, who don’t really identify themselves w/anyone say it.

    Originally posted by Anonymouse
    by Butler Shaffer
    There is "bipartisan support" – a phrase reflective of the one-party system in America –
    You mean the two-party system, not one party…

    Originally posted by Anonymouse
    by Butler Shaffer
    While the Iraq war is foremost in the minds of most Americans, these two men have carefully skirted that issue, preferring to focus on the Vietnam War, and their respective roles therein
    I don’t think they have skirted the issue, bush keeps saying the same thing, as if he thinks we are stupid or maybe he is the stupid one, like he still tries to connect iraq and al quaeda, even after people point out the truth, and kerry keeps defending his record, because they keep attacking him, but at least he admits that there is not connection between the two peoples. I think I would rather have a president who can look at a glass of water, and say hey that’s a glass of water not a banana, which is what bush keeps doing…

    Originally posted by Anonymouse
    by Butler Shaffer
    I suspect that, come next Tuesday, the voting booths will be filled with men and women who are so thoroughly conditioned in externally-directed, politically-structured thinking and behavior that they can conceive of no other way in which their lives and the rest of society could be organized. To such people, the phrase "anybody but Bush" could as easily be expressed as "any authority over my life but myself."
    This entire paragraph can be trashed; because you start out with a message and then you go into this voting is not the solution thing; then what is it? And not it’s not not voting, its action, we must take some form of action. If we didn’t get involved, then the government would put people in there how ever they wanted, and they would do worse things to us, but at least we have some oversight this way.

    Voting isn’t suicide, we just want to live our normal lives, and OUR form of COURAGE is to speak truth to power, speaking truth to power means organizing and educating, or anything else I am forgetting to point out. That’s what we should do. Not bicker about how everything sucks, and call people names when they do try to change something.

    Not voting would work only if everyone did it, but that also must be organized and people must all be smart enough to understand the message and the impact that they will make.

    Comment


    • #3
      Bottom line.....
      No one is perfect, nithing is perfect that is thaught up by humans... so there will alwyas be this seperation of powers/views.. though i find it rather interesting how two people who want the same things in life can have such radically different views.. i think this is one of the biggest shortcomings of democracy, though it gets what the majority wants, it still leaves those who dont agree in a hole.. and a state of hate.. such as most democrats against bush...
      so i sujjest chaniging our democracy to a dictatorship.. or better yet we can have a goofball and call him saltan... (perhaps like the saltan in "Alladin" i mean.. hell its better than this... right anonymouse?????? HUH!!!>? UH???
      How do you hurt a masochist?
      -By leaving him alone.Forever.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by nunechka
        First of all this is an important election, I just wish we all thought it was, and that way we wouldn’t have to choose between 2 people…


        So for you voting is not the option, what do you suggest genius? I do agree to some point, but you are so polarized about how evil this world is, that I cant completely agree with you.


        I can help your colleagues: I think you are a true realist, but sometimes that can be annoying and stupid… here is a translation of the definition of voting by anony: voting is like accepting that society can be herded by using fear?


        Gandi preached that we all must become fearless, and so did Martin Luther King Jr. and I think that this years election does bread on fear, but where must we start? I say education.
        I say bring international news into this country. Make people learn 3 or 4 languages. When I tell people I read the French news, they look at my like I’m crazy, why? Its because there is this sense of fundamentalist nationalism in this country because people are TOO STUPID to realize that the US is not the world, its just another country.


        I haven’t heard any democrats say that, however I have heard others, who don’t really identify themselves w/anyone say it.


        You mean the two-party system, not one party…


        I don’t think they have skirted the issue, bush keeps saying the same thing, as if he thinks we are stupid or maybe he is the stupid one, like he still tries to connect iraq and al quaeda, even after people point out the truth, and kerry keeps defending his record, because they keep attacking him, but at least he admits that there is not connection between the two peoples. I think I would rather have a president who can look at a glass of water, and say hey that’s a glass of water not a banana, which is what bush keeps doing…


        This entire paragraph can be trashed; because you start out with a message and then you go into this voting is not the solution thing; then what is it? And not it’s not not voting, its action, we must take some form of action. If we didn’t get involved, then the government would put people in there how ever they wanted, and they would do worse things to us, but at least we have some oversight this way.

        Voting isn’t suicide, we just want to live our normal lives, and OUR form of COURAGE is to speak truth to power, speaking truth to power means organizing and educating, or anything else I am forgetting to point out. That’s what we should do. Not bicker about how everything sucks, and call people names when they do try to change something.

        Not voting would work only if everyone did it, but that also must be organized and people must all be smart enough to understand the message and the impact that they will make.

        Nunechka, that is not what I wrote you nerfbrain. It is an article by someone else, who I happen to agree with. If you think that voting changes anything, you are an idiot, simply put. Nor do you have enough grounding in American history nor the Constitution to understand why many things are not the way they were or are supposed to be. As far as not voting, you clearly did not read the article or understand, because it is purely an ethical matter you see. Some of us ( I know it sounds silly ) actually believe in ethics; believe in not telling other people what to do. By voting you are in effect reinforcing the politics of Statism, which is based on fear, and telling others what to do and how to live. It's not my forte.
        Achkerov kute.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by gevo
          Bottom line.....
          No one is perfect, nithing is perfect that is thaught up by humans... so there will alwyas be this seperation of powers/views.. though i find it rather interesting how two people who want the same things in life can have such radically different views.. i think this is one of the biggest shortcomings of democracy, though it gets what the majority wants, it still leaves those who dont agree in a hole.. and a state of hate.. such as most democrats against bush...
          so i sujjest chaniging our democracy to a dictatorship.. or better yet we can have a goofball and call him saltan... (perhaps like the saltan in "Alladin" i mean.. hell its better than this... right anonymouse?????? HUH!!!>? UH???
          Hahaha, well you're right. You might as well call it a dictatorship and be more honest. But beyond that, this unhampered belief in Statism, via voting or anything else, is a dead end. All throughout time we have seen people try to bring about "change" via politics, to establish their earthly utopias, be the worker or not, and all the times they fail. One of the things I like about the early Christians was their total unwillingness to be servants of the Roman Empire, instead chose not to recognize the earthly Statist God, but rather the heavenly God.
          Achkerov kute.

          Comment


          • #6
            i thought that was you who wrote that, you copied and article and didnt make that clear, talk about ethics... why do you insist on calling people names? are you suffering from a disorder of some kind? or is that the only form of defense system that you have?

            if you couldnt tell, i agreed with you... i agree that this system is f-ed up... it would be a true outcry if no one voted, it would be a real statement, but it wouldnt change anything...

            voting was created by the masses, because of our power in numbers, not by the ones who are rich & few and want to rule the world, if they had it their way, we wouldnt have any right to make any changes, take them to court, or anything else... but i do believe that the few and the powerful have changed it to suit their needs, and thats why we need to change our adgenda and our way of government...

            what makes you think i am not ethical? you imply in that statement of yours, infering that "some of us, who are ethical" as if i am not...
            i am a strong believer in social justice and humanitariaism... in my views, voting is not incorrect or wrong, because we must come to a consense somehow we must express it by giving everyone a chance, and maybe some people dont see the truth for what it is, and it takes people to change peoples.

            in my house we have a democracy too, my mom asks what would we like for dinner and we pick something, but if she doesnt ask and lets say we have been eating pizza for 5 days straight she will stop us... so we need to have law and order, and we need to force people to act humane and ethical...

            all forms of "force" are not unethical... murder is unethical, but to force people to comly with a law that says it is a crime and you will be punished is not unethical...

            you shouldnt jump to conclusions... see the entire picture first... it seems to me that sometimes you take a slice out of time, critiQUE it, and you dont look at what the causes are and the possible solutions... you should use your smart brain for not only pointing out the flaws, but also expressing the causes and the possible solutions...

            most of the time, causes of a problem will help in finding the solution...

            voting isnt bad, its how the few and the powerful have taken advantage of it... if you ask an average person, would you have invaded mexico for pearl harbor? they would say no, if you ask them if you knew that your president was clearly aware that 9/11 was going to happen wouldnt you impeach him? they would say yes... the problem isnt voting, it is the criminals who take advantage of it, but not voting isnt the solution, it is an outcry for help... but if they werent helping us in the first place, why would they help us now?

            so the media in the US, which is the most powerful and the most effective propaganda machine was to be taken out; and this fundamentalist nationalism was turned upside down, we could change something...

            when i was studying business in French society, some of the ways that the french approach conflict are truly the correct ways for the entire world... but this is only for the better half of the past that they have had... they do a lot of "lessons learned" and they teach it to new comers of the business world; in france the average person speaks 3 to 4 languages and has traveled all over the place... they wouldnt do business with you until they learn about the culture... but the BEST thing that learned from how they do business is that they look at the cause of the problem, rather then doing it the american way, to patch it up, fix it NOW, dont look at the past...

            what goes wrong in society is usually because of the few and the powerful... what goes right is because of the starving masses who wont take it anymore!...

            i always like to bring armenia into the example of what happens in a "democracy"... armenia declaired independece, and we had no water or electricity for 4 to 5 years... thats democracy for you... "democracy" works when you are economically powerful, when you have influence on other countries... because had a blockade from azerbajan and turkey and georgia.... etc...

            we are not experiencing shortage of water supplies in armenia, because our only source of water is SEVAN... so not only does a country need to be economically powerful, but they must have plenty of natural basic resources so that they dont rely on others for water or electricity for example...

            that ladies and gentlemen, that slow and subliminal act is a form of genocide but it is the "democracy" of today... but it wasnt before... remember the depressions, remember the social programs that helped people? well those are all gone, we now have 3 strikes and the patriot act 1 and 2, and all sorts of thngs that are truly not "democratic" but they put it under the name of deomcracy and lie to us...

            Comment


            • #7
              we are experiencing shortage of water, i ment to write "NOW" not 'not'

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by nunechka
                i thought that was you who wrote that, you copied and article and didnt make that clear, talk about ethics... why do you insist on calling people names? are you suffering from a disorder of some kind? or is that the only form of defense system that you have?
                What part of "by Butler Shaffer" did you not read? By the way, I like calling you names.

                Originally posted by nunechka
                if you couldnt tell, i agreed with you... i agree that this system is f-ed up... it would be a true outcry if no one voted, it would be a real statement, but it wouldnt change anything...
                Actually it would change everything, that is the reason why it would be a bold statement. For if no one voted where would the State find its legitimacy?

                Originally posted by nunechka
                voting was created by the masses, because of our power in numbers, not by the ones who are rich & few and want to rule the world,
                The masses do not have any power, they only have illusions of power. Voting was created by the elite to make the stupid hapless masses believe they have power. It is precisely the art of subterfuge that is in effect. What better way than to transform politics and make people believe that they are actually making real choices?

                Originally posted by nunechka
                if they had it their way, we wouldnt have any right to make any changes, take them to court, or anything else... but i do believe that the few and the powerful have changed it to suit their needs, and thats why we need to change our adgenda and our way of government..
                Changing government doesn't do anything. No matter who you vote for, the government always gets elected. Another form of government is still government because it demands the subservience of individuals to the needs of political elites. The fact that you are only given one choice, between Republicans and Democrats, and I say one choice because there is no difference, is a sad statement. When third party candidates are arrested, not given federal funding, are intentionally blocked off from ballots, that says alot. The government tries to make sure that the only one to get elected its the one party State.

                Originally posted by nunechka
                what makes you think i am not ethical? you imply in that statement of yours, infering that "some of us, who are ethical" as if i am not..
                You may think you are ethical, but you are not. Voting is the prime reason of why you are not ethical. Democracy in itself is no different than any other government in which coercion is used. There will always be a majority or minority that will be coerced by the winners. It is based theft, and violence. By voting you are reaffirming and putting your energies into that. Of course, when I bring this up, no voter wants to be associated with this sort of thing, that is why neurosis is an important thing, and why they must make themselves believe they are doing a noble thing by voting. It is nothing more than an opportunity to rob fellow citizens through the ballot box.

                Originally posted by nunechka
                i am a strong believer in social justice and humanitariaism... in my views, voting is not incorrect or wrong, because we must come to a consense somehow we must express it by giving everyone a chance, and maybe some people dont see the truth for what it is, and it takes people to change peoples.
                "Social justice" is an illusory thing that most Marxists/leftists subscribe to. Voting is not how someone comes to a consensus, it is how someone is coerced. You're simply an ideologue parroting the same democracy nonsense that you have heard endlessly. Western Civilization rests on the death of two people, Jesus and Socrates, both victims of popular will, which is democracy.

                Originally posted by nunechka
                in my house we have a democracy too, my mom asks what would we like for dinner and we pick something, but if she doesnt ask and lets say we have been eating pizza for 5 days straight she will stop us... so we need to have law and order, and we need to force people to act humane and ethical...
                This is a fallacy. A contradiction. That you have to force people to act "humane and ethical" is not ethical at all. This is my point. You just admitted that democracy is based on naked aggression and force; making other people conform to your will. Morality, or ethics, presupposes choice and free will, for in order for man to be free to do good, he must be free to do evil. If you take away that choice and force them, then there is no ethics at all, thus your whole statement is nonsense. So you believe in telling other people what to do, using violence and coercion. That is what socialism is. Democracy and Parliamentary government are not socialism, but they are all socialistic. The different between libertarians and socialists like you is that we believe in liberty, you believe in making everyone conform to you.

                Originally posted by nunechka
                all forms of "force" are not unethical... murder is unethical, but to force people to comly with a law that says it is a crime and you will be punished is not unethical...
                Force is unethical. This shows you do not understand law. The force that the government uses to make people comply with the law is unethical, because the government has a monopoly on jurisprudence. That means the government has a monopoly on violence and crime in a given territory. The government can go around killing people, bombing people, invading, stealing, and it is okay. When individuals do the same thing, they are criminalized. Do you see the hypocritical double-standard? Your political conditioning will not allow you to call it theft or murder because it is the government taxing. When an individual does it, he is a thief. You will not call the government murderer for bombing people or going to wars, but you will call individuals on it. That is what we call, thinking inside the box.


                Originally posted by nunechka
                voting isnt bad, its how the few and the powerful have taken advantage of it... if you ask an average person, would you have invaded mexico for pearl harbor? they would say no, if you ask them if you knew that your president was clearly aware that 9/11 was going to happen wouldnt you impeach him? they would say yes... the problem isnt voting, it is the criminals who take advantage of it, but not voting isnt the solution, it is an outcry for help... but if they werent helping us in the first place, why would they help us now?
                The problem is voting, my gullible friend, because criminals will always take advantage of that which is there. The flawed assumption you have is that man is naturally "good". No matter which party gets elected, we’re going to get pretty much the same result. Your vote will make no difference. The myth of the thoughtful citizen “making a difference” with his vote is less and less plausible, as more and more minority blocs, growing rapidly, vote almost unanimously (and often illegally) for the Democrats anyway. Elections have far more to do with social engineering and appeals to greed than with "making a difference".

                Mass democracy guarantees stupidity. Masses of people, even if they’re individually intelligent, can only act stupidly. “If every Athenian had been a Socrates,” John Stuart Mill observed, “the Athenian Assembly would still have been a mob.” Hitler knew this, and eloquently described it in Mein Kampf. G.K. Chesterton long ago identified the flaw in a two-party system: “The democracy has the right to answer questions, but it has no right to ask them. It is still the political aristocracy that asks the questions. And we shall not be unreasonably cynical if we suppose that the political aristocracy will always be rather careful what questions it asks.”

                The question the major parties ask is if we prefer Democrats or Republicans. It’s a loaded question because no one is allowed to reject the shared premises of the two big government parties. The myth of democracy requires the voters to be assured that they are making real choices. It isn't prudent to admit that the choices have already been made for you.



                Originally posted by nunechka
                so the media in the US, which is the most powerful and the most effective propaganda machine was to be taken out; and this fundamentalist nationalism was turned upside down, we could change something...

                when i was studying business in French society, some of the ways that the french approach conflict are truly the correct ways for the entire world... but this is only for the better half of the past that they have had... they do a lot of "lessons learned" and they teach it to new comers of the business world; in france the average person speaks 3 to 4 languages and has traveled all over the place... they wouldnt do business with you until they learn about the culture... but the BEST thing that learned from how they do business is that they look at the cause of the problem, rather then doing it the american way, to patch it up, fix it NOW, dont look at the past...
                You are an idealist. All socialists are idealists. Why do you have this impression that "the French model" is the best model "for the entire world"? Why do you have this belief of telling other people what to do? Why do you reside with this logic of somehow 'that system failed, but only this system is better for the world'? That is the problem with everything, not "wrong societies", it is poeple who like to use aggression and coerce other people into their will. Can't you just let people be and stop imposing your dictates on them? Your socialistic dreams of earthly utopias are the bankrupt result of secularism and believe in the omnipotent State.

                Originally posted by nunechka
                what goes wrong in society is usually because of the few and the powerful... what goes right is because of the starving masses who wont take it anymore!...

                i always like to bring armenia into the example of what happens in a "democracy"... armenia declaired independece, and we had no water or electricity for 4 to 5 years... thats democracy for you... "democracy" works when you are economically powerful, when you have influence on other countries... because had a blockade from azerbajan and turkey and georgia.... etc...

                we are not experiencing shortage of water supplies in armenia, because our only source of water is SEVAN... so not only does a country need to be economically powerful, but they must have plenty of natural basic resources so that they dont rely on others for water or electricity for example...

                that ladies and gentlemen, that slow and subliminal act is a form of genocide but it is the "democracy" of today... but it wasnt before... remember the depressions, remember the social programs that helped people? well those are all gone, we now have 3 strikes and the patriot act 1 and 2, and all sorts of thngs that are truly not "democratic" but they put it under the name of deomcracy and lie to us...
                What's wrong in society are people like you who believe 'they alone' know whats wrong with society and will not hesitate to import their brand of 'democracy' and 'knowledge' to the rest of the world to make them conform in order to have a better 'earthly utopia'. You have no idea of democracy, and I only refer you to my older thread on voting.
                Achkerov kute.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Look, if not voting makes any of you feel better, then feel free. But even if no one voted, each election would simply be decided by the electoral college. Each elector is appointed by the assembly of each state. State assemblymen would be elected based on whoever had the largest family, as they would almost certainly vote even if no one else did.

                  Even if you feel voting is unethical because you are telling someone else what to do, the only choices you have are to either tell others what to do, or to be told what to do. Government isn't going away unless by violent overthrow, and if you consider voting to be an unethical form of aggression, then what do you consider violent revolution to be?

                  Enough with the idiot and nerfbrain comments, too. Can't we at least keep the serious discussions serious? If you really want to make a statement, why don't you try introducing a ballot proposition next time dictating the abolition of all California government. See how many signatures you could collect. As Nune keeps telling you, do something, anything.

                  Whether or not voting in a presidential election will change anything is a dubious question, especially in a state that almost always swings democratic by landslide numbers, but to say that all voting is useless is pretty sweeping. But to say that no vote makes any difference is an untrue generalization. What about the vote for Prop 13? Had that not been passed, there would be no cap on California property taxes, they would be much higher, and due to the very high value of real estate in the LA area, many homeowners that had paid off their houses while prices were much lower would no longer be able to afford the taxes and would be forced to move to cheaper neighborhoods. If Measure A is passed, it will greatly increase the manpower of the LAPD. Is a doubled police force not a meaningful change? Heck, the entire Civil War hinged on the election of Abraham Lincoln. Had he not been elected (and the election was very close), South Carolina would likely not have seceded, nor would any of the other southern states. Had Thomas Jefferson (a man with a unique relationship to the country of France) not been elected, the US might never have acquired the Louisiana Territory, which accounts for half of the contiguous states. Is that not a meaningful difference?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    i have no idea where you got some of your beliefs about me... i am against the death penalty because i dont beleive that the government should kill people... ethics is not relative, and you make it seem like people for some reason have to comply with what you want... so if i want "A" thats bad, but if you want "A" then its good...

                    you essencially want the same thing that i do, but i dont know why you keep arguing with me...

                    i dont think we agree on everything, but you are so stubrun that even when i compliment you, you still dont get it...

                    i am on your side, but you dont get it...
                    i agree with the statement about how the system is f-ed up but you dont see it! you are a true MORON!
                    i am telling you that no action may be a form of action, but it doesnt solve anything...

                    STOP IT!

                    moron

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X