|
|
| Post Number: 1
|
damien_s_lucifer 
Emperor of Detnet
Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: Jan. 1970
|
 |
Posted on: May 31 2002,02:09 |
|
   |
As I'm sure you all know, I am unabashedly liberal. Like most good liberals, I'm a member of the Democratic Party, the people who, at least in theory, are supposed to represent us in government.
But lately, they haven't represented much of anything... in fact, they haven't done a damn thing except roll over and die every time the Republicans introduce another idea that will further their totalitarian ideals. So I started thinking about switching to a party that will represent me rather than sit around being useless.
Of course, there was the problem of finding a party that would do that... so I hit up Google for the address of the Green Party on the basis that Ralph Nader might be an intelligent, caring person... after all, this is the man who wrote Unsafe At Any Speed and singlehandedly saved millions of people from getting impaled by their steering wheels.
Boy, was I wrong.
The Green Party is the the party of the left. A quick rundown of their platform revealed that they are more radical and doctrinaire than the Peace and Freedom Party. The P&F's may be socialists, but at least they uphold the Constitution... hell, they even like the right to keep and bear arms; they just want to make sure the poor have as much right to bear them as the rich 
The Greens claim to support the Constitution as well, but they then suggest that we "Abolish the disproportional, aristocratic US Senate" which happens to be the ONE THING that will invalidate the entire Constitution. Good work, guys.
I poked around a little more on google, and came to the chilling conclusion that at the moment there is NO ONE representing liberalism. The ONLY party that is potentially able to do so is the Democrats, and they seem to be asleep at the wheel.
Do you think there's any way we can wake them up?
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 2
|
kuru
Detonate.net's 9mm wielding geek-hit-Goddess
Group: Members
Posts: 2566
Joined: Aug. 2000
|
|
Posted on: May 31 2002,02:23 |
|
 |
The Democrat party line seems to be 'We can solve it all with more government, more government programs, more government spending and higher taxes.'
They've also seemed extremely fond of the Bill of Rights as long as the Second Amendment is ignored entirely or curtailed.
I can't jump on that bandwagon.
--------------
kuru
'dancing is the vertical expression of horizontal desire.'
-robert frost
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 3
|
PokeSmot
FNG
Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: May 2002
|
|
Posted on: May 31 2002,02:28 |
|
|
I have a hell of a time picking a political party these days. I like some of the morality that republicans preach, but I also like my government to be for the people, not for the rich people. It's real tough sorting out issues these days, and I've certainly figured out why the most attractive candidate garners the female vote. Nobody cares enough to go through the issues and define their views one by one, so they pick the easiest view to grab on. Hence, the debate about which candidate is stupider or better looking. We have a big enough bureaucracy that any candidate, even if he is a monkey with an IQ of 30 and can't name foreign diplomats, he'll still do just fine. Advisors and cabinets are there for a reason. The issues don't play enough of a role.
Personally, I think its going to require a lot of comprehensive, long term changes to get our country to fix that problem. But, nobody seems to think its a problem, so it won't get started for a while still. We will continue to elect Repucrats and Demoblicans until somebody figures out a way to get the public interested.
Or it might just be inherent faults in our democratic system that promote the dominance of two centrist parties. I still don't like it.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 4
|
CatKnight
Jedi Republican
Group: Members
Posts: 3807
Joined: Dec. 2000
|
|
Posted on: May 31 2002,02:31 |
|
|
| Quote | | The P&F's may be socialists, but at least they uphold the Constitution... |
those two are mutually exclusive.
| Quote | | at the moment there is NO ONE representing liberalism. |
thats because a majority of people now realize/are starting to realize that liberal ideas DON'T WORK.
| Quote | | every time the Republicans introduce another idea that will further their totalitarian ideals. |
I will paypal you $1 for each one that you can name, right now.
--------------
[url=http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/d/b/dbl125/dfa.jpg]If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful that you can possibly imagine.[/url]
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 5
|
chmod
Jedi Knight
Group: Members
Posts: 373
Joined: Jul. 2001
|
|
Posted on: May 31 2002,02:42 |
|
|
When it comes to Democrat-bashing, jeez... where do I start?
Liberals, although their ideologies might sound great (more racial/social/political equality for everyone, redistribute wealth, more education, health care, social security, prescription drugs for everyone) are completely ineffective. Here's why: their policies don't work!!!!! 95% of the time they will translate into ineffective government programs that simply bloat our bureaucracy even more, higher taxes, and billions of wasted taxpayer dollars.
Liberals need to realize that the government can't provide the solutions to every problem. The government is meant to protect our natural rights and security, not to babysit everyone.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 6
|
damien_s_lucifer
Emperor of Detnet
Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: Jan. 1970
|
|
Posted on: May 31 2002,09:16 |
|
|
Ah, the old "liberals love Big Government, and Big Government Is Bad" lie.
For those of you who are stupid enough to swallow this hook, line, and sinker - I can't help you. You don't listen anyway. Just know that I am sworn to fight you at every step, and I am determined to make your lives every bit as miserable as those you mislead.
For the rest of you - those of you who are reasonable instead of reactionary - I'd like to point out one little problem with the Conservative belief that smaller government = more freedom for everyone.
Nature abhors a vacuum.
Do you really think that if the government abdicates most of its power, all of that power is going to be returned to the people?
Yeah. Right. I'll tell you where it goes... exactly where it has gone every time the government has deregulated an industry : into the hands of the corporations and the rich.
Not to you, the lowly individual just trying to mind your own business.
You know why?
In the absence of government control, money is power - and power is something you can't afford.
There are those who are so paranoid about The Government that they can hardly see straight... but I'd like to point out that in a democracy, The Government = The People.
So what, are we paranoid that we're going to regulate ourselves to death? Isn't that kind of schizophrenic?
Now, I am certainly not advocating that the Government should regulate everything. I want the Government to exert its authority in the areas where money=power rules if they don't... but I also want the Government to leave individuals the hell alone, unless said individual is trying to intrude on someone else.
It's an insult to me every time a conservative claims that liberals want to regulate every aspect of an individual's life... because that is so fucking stupid that it's an insult to my intelligence.
But I do wonder... quite often, those who are the most paranoid about a thing are those who want to do it the most... so they think everyone else must think that way as well.
Do you suppose that, when it comes right down to it, the conservatives are the ones who want absolute control?
Hey, they're the big law & order nuts, the ones always complaining that everything's going to shit and that the problem is that people have too much freedom to think for themselves. And it's interesting that every time they get into power, the first thing they start thinking about is how we can throw more people in jail.
Law and order... especially order that keeps individuals in line, while letting the wealthy do whatever they damn well please. That's a good idea... hey, it worked for Mussolini!
At least right up until the people shot him, then hung his dead body in public to make sure they got their point across... guess they didn't like Order as much as he thought they would.
yes, I'm really pissed off. I'm sure your average Conservative will snicker and tell you that's proof that I'm the unreasonable one... which may seem very true until you realize that your average Conservative keeps his cool demeanor by deciding that he's always right, then switching his brain off and never thinking about a goddamn thing except how to get more power in his hands and more money in his pockets.
Personally, I am real tired of their shit. I am tired of power collecting in the hands of the wealthy, I am tired of power collecting in the hands of the corporations, and I am tired of the greed, the arrogance, and the lies of those who spend their time convincing people that hacking back the Government is the best way to "increase freedom" while knowing damn well that the only freedom that its going to increase is theirs.
As for the little people? Fuck 'em... let them eat cake.
/me starts polishing the guillotine...
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 7
|
veistran
We don't listen to people that don't like us.
Group: Members
Posts: 967
Joined: May 2000
|
|
Posted on: May 31 2002,09:34 |
|
|
Heh, this is degenerating quickly. My 2¢ is that neither of the major parties do much for me as far as representing my ideals. And most of the other parties are so narrowly defined as to be useless. Other than that, you couldn't get me to touch this topic with a 10' pole... hell even this post is just asking for trouble.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 8
|
Wiley
©0®ÞØ®4+3 whØ®3
Group: Members
Posts: 1268
Joined: Oct. 2001
|
 |
Posted on: May 31 2002,16:28 |
|
|
I don't care about political parties, I just want lower taxes ...the money I am willing to give you should go to keeping me safe, educated, and subsidize my need for transportation (ie build roads and negotiate better gas prices with other nations ...with guns if nessisary). I can give a rats ass what you do with the rest of it. Feed the poor who can't figure out a way to feed themselves even though monkeys can find a way to do it, clean up the oceans, fight big tabacco companies, or whatever else makes you happy ...just lower my damn taxes! And if every 2 weeks I personally (out of my own pocket) pay for two DMV workers to be there then I don't ever want to wait in line ....I own those two people who are going to help me anyway ...you should be happy I don't charge back the government the 364 days out of the year that they are helping people who aren't me.
--------------
There's a sucker born every minute ...but swallowers are hard to find.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 9
|
kuru
Detonate.net's 9mm wielding geek-hit-Goddess
Group: Members
Posts: 2566
Joined: Aug. 2000
|
|
Posted on: May 31 2002,18:02 |
|
|
The United States is a representative republic, not a democracy.
Eliminating 'big government' doesn't mean elimiating government altogether.
Representative republics exist to prevent the 'tyranny of the majority' from overriding the rights of the minority.
The ideal situation in government is the smallest government that gets the job done, weaker in power as it's geographical scale gets larger: i.e. more power to local governments and less to federal.
The United States was founded on that principle.
Money isn't power. As rich as Bill Gates is, he cannot force me to do anything. He can't threaten my life, break my legs, or do anything else to meet his ends because even under a weak central government, this would be illegal. Of course if he did put a gun to my head (or hire someone to) I could always pull out my own gun and shoot him back. A shotgun shell costs about 79 cents.
And the last thing.
Your freedom exists only so far as you personally are willing to fight for it.
--------------
kuru
'dancing is the vertical expression of horizontal desire.'
-robert frost
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 10
|
Pravus Angelus
Codito Ergo Sum
Group: Members
Posts: 81
Joined: May 2002
|
|
Posted on: May 31 2002,18:41 |
|
|
DSL, a couple thoughts...
| Quote | Nature abhors a vacuum.
Do you really think that if the government abdicates most of its power, all of that power is going to be returned to the people?
Yeah. Right. I'll tell you where it goes... exactly where it has gone every time the government has deregulated an industry : into the hands of the corporations and the rich. |
One might consider it a mistake to think of there being this one 'government' entity. There's a federal government, state governments, local governments and each one is fairly complex. To say 'big government bad' or 'big government necessary' can be oversimplifying the situation. For example, one of the main concerns of liberatarian thinkers (see http://www.reason.com/) is the expansion of the federal government. If you reduce the power of the federal government, one of the places it might go would be to the rich (more on this later), but it can (and likely would, in many instances) also go to state and local governments.
There are several reasons why this is a good thing (for those of you well versed in federalist concepts, you can probably skip this part). In a very simply way, there's more voting (the federal government doesn't have propositions whose outcome is determined by the vote of it's citizens, but many states do). Another important aspect is that there's a lot more self-government. First off you have more control over your local and state governments than you do the federal government. The simple fact that there's a smaller citizen:rep ratio means your vote counts more, and it's a lot easier to meet people face to face. There's also a bunch of arguments that have to do with state by state experimentation, which helps elevate good legislation and filter out bad legislation because states have a tendancy to adopt those policies that worked well in other states and ignore the ones that failed (MTBE/CA for example).
Okay okay, so what? State government > Federal government in some cases? Well, a lot of the criticism of democrats is that their programs are very frequently federal programs. Federal programs are necessary when there is need for a singule national body (for example, the military), but it works poorly in most areas. It's a lot easier to tackle education issues on a per district basis than on a national basis (because educational issues differ widely based on region). This is the principle that has kept federal involvement in education at a minimum...but that's been changing, and there's good reason for people to be concerned.
| Quote | | in a democracy, The Government = The People |
Well, the government derives it's just powers from the consent of the governed (plagurism == good), but this doesn't make them the governed. If the governed feel that they have given the federal government too much control, some might argue it is their responsibility (as well as the responsibility of the government) to ensure that some of that power is relinquished.
I could go on, but I think you get the point.
On the subject of the rich screwing the poor...let me begin by saying this can be a very involved argument so forgive me if my summary of it here seems somewhat simplistic.
When we consider the majority of Americans, it is easy to see why they think the rich are out to get them. Driving a 1980's Nissan is certainly far from a brand new BMW 5 series. Obviously it's not as fun to pay rent on your apartment, rather than putting money toward a 6 bedroom mansion. But it should be noted that the lower middle class American's lifestyle sucks...really really sucks... only because he insists on comparing it with the lifestyle of the rich and wealthy! If one were to evaluate the lifestyle of lower middle class America with no regard to the top 10%, are they being screwed?
Clearly, there's room for debate on this one. But the way I see it, in lower middle class America (and above), you have more than enough opportunity to lead a happy life. There're plenty of sources for entertainment, some more expensive than others, but everyone has access to public parks, the freedom to spend time with whoever they want, and there's a lot of electronics and high-end entertainment that is not that expensive. Nobody (sure, some exceptions, but for the most part) is forced to work under inhumane conditions...a lot of people have taken great pains to make sure that everybody's work conditions are at least barable (this is a bigger deal than you might think). Bottom line...if you're lower middle class in America, you have a damn good opportunity to lead a happy life. Maybe you won't be on the all star team, and maybe you won't live a life in total luxury, but you're still better off than damn near everybody else on the planet.
Not only that, but a lot of this is thanks to exactly those rich people they claim are screwing them. People innovate because they have incentive to do so. Many people with great innovations become successful, form giant corporations and become the rich and wealthy that are so despised today. Yet Sony's not rich because it's some kind of tyrannous establishment...AOL doesn't launder money and Microsoft doesn't steal. Companies are rich because people make them rich...in other words lower middle class America and everybody else is happily shelling out the $20 for a basketball game. So what if a handful of NBA execs are making a killing off of your hard earned money? They're doing it by increasing the quality of your life!.
The bottom line is, the oligarchy most certainly does explote the masses. They certainly do lead a life of luxury as a result, and they certainly do take the money from the masses. But they do so in a manner that enriches the lives of those same people. If you're in lower middle class America your life sucks compared to one of the top 10%. But if you stop worrying about how well other people are doing, and just appreciate that you have the opportunity to lead a happy, fulfilling life and give some of that to your offspring then maybe you'd realize just how beautiful your life is...and maybe you'd realize that a lot of it is thanks to that same oligarchy you insist on hating so much.
--------------
"Lately, the only thing keeping me from being a serial killer is my distaste for manual labor"
--Dilbert
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
