|
On February 06 2013 02:33 sc4k wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2013 01:41 Barrin wrote:On February 05 2013 23:18 PassiveAce wrote:
People who make threads like these have never lived in countries that can actually be described as totalitarian, and if they had, they wouldnt be making threads like this. Some countries are going in that direction, and when that happens a lot of people really really want to deny it. Trust me, people who make these kinds of threads don't feel comfortable doing it, but mentioning so can hurt their credibility for those in denial (distinctly counter-productive). You're right, it's not totalitarian yet... so should we just shut up until it is? no offense but fuck what you just said You are just going so over the top. In fact this entire thread is full of people who are going over the top. Some stuff in the US is a bit draconic but a lot of it comes down to the Bush era and the reaction to the threat of global terrorism. Which is understandable...and you are not on a slope to a totalitarian government...you really aren't. I mean come on, England is so much more restrictive than your country...so so so much closer than your country to 'totalitarianism' in terms of the metrics you use. We are the leaders of CCTV everywhere. With the exception of the anti-terrorism laws, where the USA is insane (but we didn't have 9/11). But still, both our countries on the scale are like: Anarchy-------------------------USA---UK----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Totalitarian When the other end is occupied by countries that actually are close to or at totalitarianism (Cuba, China, Iran etc)
this is true. there's a reason why V for Vendetta takes place in England, and why Robocop takes place in the states. tv dont lie son!
|
On February 06 2013 02:42 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2013 02:28 farvacola wrote:On February 06 2013 01:33 Barrin wrote:I know the South are unfortunately going to be the last states to legalize it (lots of religious communities down here)... Florida in particular, where I live (REPRESENT~). But you know what, the South had something to say about this "big brother" govt. and the more I learn about it the more I realize where my loyalties lie. + Show Spoiler +Slavery is one of the most detestable things humans are capable of.. but that is not what this flag is about. My favorite politician explains it as well as I could: + Show Spoiler +Let me be very clear: FUCK YOU Big Brother. Power and freedom to the states and the people. That's what I care about. Legalize it. What a joke. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about, especially when it comes to popular symbology and the actuality of this cultish love for state governments that Ron Paul neophytes seem to oh so enjoy. You may think that flag means something positive, but many, many people do not share that perspective. Just know who else waves that flag in pride. Furthermore, what have state governments done to impress you so? Is it the gobbling up of federal dollars only to cut their own education budgets, the general handling of money like children, or is it the publishing of state state history books that gloss over Andersonville? Is it the elimination of the teaching of evolution from science classrooms, the partisan seat swapping in the state senate and house in order to further cut public service budgets or the wonderful gerrymandering taking place around the country in predominantly Red states? I guess there's lots to pick from. The moment popular libertarianism realizes what makes Ron Paul a fucking idiot and Jon Huntsman a reasonable man is the moment that libertarianism actually stands a shot at having a positive impact on this country. In the meantime, go ahead and worship the pork barrel double dealer racist from the good city of Galveston, I'm sure that'll show big brother. If you can actually watch that piece of trash on covering up notions of racism with some Civil War romance novel, then you are already too far gone. Oh yeah, as a fan of marijuana legalization, I'd like to hereby declare that a vast majority of potheads like myself are not bigoted racists with a poor sense of history like Barrin. Some truth in this post. I don't get what's so great about state governments over federal government. If anything, states like Florida, Arizona, Texas, Alabama, Mississippi (oh fuck just throw the entire south in there) show us that state governments can be absolutely atrocious. If anything, the federal government would be far better at running those states than their own state legislatures, and Congress is practically useless at the moment.
I really think you should include California in that list. That state's a mess, arguably worse than much of "the South."
I'd prefer state governments over one federal government simply on the basis of letting the states mess up so that they may learn from their mistakes on their own. Simply entrusting the power to one large government at the national level would be too easily tyrannized by the majority if you ask me. Would rather have more direct, community control of my local government.
|
With technological advances comes increasing automation which would presumably lead to a decreasing number of low level employment opportunities. The government will be responsible for caring for a larger and larger portion of society as this century goes on. I see that as an inevitability, but that's purely a welfare burden.
The 20th Century Big Brother paranoia stemmed from a fear that the government would take control of society to combat the erosion of morality and an increase in crime. Well, the problem with applying that to contemporary times is that morality has long since died, and crime has generally been on a downward trend since the massive flare up due to the Great Society's destruction of the black community.
|
On February 06 2013 02:51 cLAN.Anax wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2013 02:42 Stratos_speAr wrote:On February 06 2013 02:28 farvacola wrote:On February 06 2013 01:33 Barrin wrote:I know the South are unfortunately going to be the last states to legalize it (lots of religious communities down here)... Florida in particular, where I live (REPRESENT~). But you know what, the South had something to say about this "big brother" govt. and the more I learn about it the more I realize where my loyalties lie. + Show Spoiler +Slavery is one of the most detestable things humans are capable of.. but that is not what this flag is about. My favorite politician explains it as well as I could: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEC68vTQwP8 Let me be very clear: FUCK YOU Big Brother. Power and freedom to the states and the people. That's what I care about. Legalize it. What a joke. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about, especially when it comes to popular symbology and the actuality of this cultish love for state governments that Ron Paul neophytes seem to oh so enjoy. You may think that flag means something positive, but many, many people do not share that perspective. Just know who else waves that flag in pride. Furthermore, what have state governments done to impress you so? Is it the gobbling up of federal dollars only to cut their own education budgets, the general handling of money like children, or is it the publishing of state state history books that gloss over Andersonville? Is it the elimination of the teaching of evolution from science classrooms, the partisan seat swapping in the state senate and house in order to further cut public service budgets or the wonderful gerrymandering taking place around the country in predominantly Red states? I guess there's lots to pick from. The moment popular libertarianism realizes what makes Ron Paul a fucking idiot and Jon Huntsman a reasonable man is the moment that libertarianism actually stands a shot at having a positive impact on this country. In the meantime, go ahead and worship the pork barrel double dealer racist from the good city of Galveston, I'm sure that'll show big brother. If you can actually watch that piece of trash on covering up notions of racism with some Civil War romance novel, then you are already too far gone. Oh yeah, as a fan of marijuana legalization, I'd like to hereby declare that a vast majority of potheads like myself are not bigoted racists with a poor sense of history like Barrin. Some truth in this post. I don't get what's so great about state governments over federal government. If anything, states like Florida, Arizona, Texas, Alabama, Mississippi (oh fuck just throw the entire south in there) show us that state governments can be absolutely atrocious. If anything, the federal government would be far better at running those states than their own state legislatures, and Congress is practically useless at the moment. I really think you should include California in that list. That state's a mess, arguably worse than much of "the South." I'd prefer state governments over one federal government simply on the basis of letting the states mess up so that they may learn from their mistakes on their own. Simply entrusting the power to one large government at the national level would be too easily tyrannized by the majority if you ask me. Would rather have more direct, community control of my local government.
So when the states mess up at the cost of the mobility and quality of life of minorities and the poor, then what? Well at least its at the state level, amirite? The point is that state governments have and currently are showing exactly how they'd operate in the event of a lessening of the structure of the union; that is, cut public services, actively shape education to match an agenda, and play around in the state congress like children for votes.
|
On February 06 2013 02:51 cLAN.Anax wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2013 02:42 Stratos_speAr wrote:On February 06 2013 02:28 farvacola wrote:On February 06 2013 01:33 Barrin wrote:I know the South are unfortunately going to be the last states to legalize it (lots of religious communities down here)... Florida in particular, where I live (REPRESENT~). But you know what, the South had something to say about this "big brother" govt. and the more I learn about it the more I realize where my loyalties lie. + Show Spoiler +Slavery is one of the most detestable things humans are capable of.. but that is not what this flag is about. My favorite politician explains it as well as I could: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEC68vTQwP8 Let me be very clear: FUCK YOU Big Brother. Power and freedom to the states and the people. That's what I care about. Legalize it. What a joke. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about, especially when it comes to popular symbology and the actuality of this cultish love for state governments that Ron Paul neophytes seem to oh so enjoy. You may think that flag means something positive, but many, many people do not share that perspective. Just know who else waves that flag in pride. Furthermore, what have state governments done to impress you so? Is it the gobbling up of federal dollars only to cut their own education budgets, the general handling of money like children, or is it the publishing of state state history books that gloss over Andersonville? Is it the elimination of the teaching of evolution from science classrooms, the partisan seat swapping in the state senate and house in order to further cut public service budgets or the wonderful gerrymandering taking place around the country in predominantly Red states? I guess there's lots to pick from. The moment popular libertarianism realizes what makes Ron Paul a fucking idiot and Jon Huntsman a reasonable man is the moment that libertarianism actually stands a shot at having a positive impact on this country. In the meantime, go ahead and worship the pork barrel double dealer racist from the good city of Galveston, I'm sure that'll show big brother. If you can actually watch that piece of trash on covering up notions of racism with some Civil War romance novel, then you are already too far gone. Oh yeah, as a fan of marijuana legalization, I'd like to hereby declare that a vast majority of potheads like myself are not bigoted racists with a poor sense of history like Barrin. Some truth in this post. I don't get what's so great about state governments over federal government. If anything, states like Florida, Arizona, Texas, Alabama, Mississippi (oh fuck just throw the entire south in there) show us that state governments can be absolutely atrocious. If anything, the federal government would be far better at running those states than their own state legislatures, and Congress is practically useless at the moment. I really think you should include California in that list. That state's a mess, arguably worse than much of "the South." I'd prefer state governments over one federal government simply on the basis of letting the states mess up so that they may learn from their mistakes on their own. Simply entrusting the power to one large government at the national level would be too easily tyrannized by the majority if you ask me. Would rather have more direct, community control of my local government.
There is far, far more tyranny by the majority in individual southern states (see the plethora of pro-Christian and anti-liberal laws out there in the south) than done by the federal government. Furthermore, de-centralization doesn't magically protect you from tyranny of the majority; that's (partially) what the Bill of Rights does. Finally, no one is saying that we should give all of the power to the federal government, but it's long past time to stop looking at the federal government as the boogey-man and state legislatures as mystical forces for good. They aren't.
Oh, and letting states mess up doesn't just let them "learn from their mistakes". It comes at a huge cost, usually paid by the poor, non-white, and non-Christians in these southern states. Furthermore, it inevitably saps more federal dollars and resources that initially come from well-off and well-managed states from the Pacific Northwest, Upper Midwest, and Northeast.
|
The U.S. will never become a totalitarian state. Checks and balances insure it. The closest we have gotten to a king/totalitarian government is FDR during WW2. Our only 4 term president, who after him we capped the term limit at two. When FDR tried to stack the supreme court in order to get his way, checks and balances were there to stop him.
The rise in the seeming control of government might just be the illusion created by this information age we are in. We are giving out more and more information online, and the government can monitor the internet for security purposes. The right to privacy was never in the bill or rights or the constitution (thats france), however recently an ethical debate has arose about it.
3 wings of government, independent and each power hungry makes certain that the government will never become totalitarian. Conspiracy theories will be conspiracy theories, it will never come into fruition tho.
I'm shocked that as of now Seems likely is at 93, way more then Ha! yeah right at 40. People need to calm down. The information age has presented us with challenges towards keeping a balanced government, however we will figure them out.
|
If the U.S. becomes a totalitarian state, it will have George Orwell's face everything with his quotes warning us against totalitarianism.
Also,
“We are approaching a new authoritarian society. It will not be the old style fascism. It will be like Terry Gillian’s Brazil. Society that will be openly hedonistic and half crazy. Italy’s Berusconi came pretty close to this in my opinion.” –Slavoj Zizek
This makes more sense in my opinion given how in 1984, you were expected to pledge loyalty to the state and show it while in modern society, it seems more apathetic.
|
On February 06 2013 02:54 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2013 02:51 cLAN.Anax wrote:On February 06 2013 02:42 Stratos_speAr wrote:On February 06 2013 02:28 farvacola wrote:On February 06 2013 01:33 Barrin wrote:I know the South are unfortunately going to be the last states to legalize it (lots of religious communities down here)... Florida in particular, where I live (REPRESENT~). But you know what, the South had something to say about this "big brother" govt. and the more I learn about it the more I realize where my loyalties lie. + Show Spoiler +Slavery is one of the most detestable things humans are capable of.. but that is not what this flag is about. My favorite politician explains it as well as I could: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEC68vTQwP8 Let me be very clear: FUCK YOU Big Brother. Power and freedom to the states and the people. That's what I care about. Legalize it. What a joke. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about, especially when it comes to popular symbology and the actuality of this cultish love for state governments that Ron Paul neophytes seem to oh so enjoy. You may think that flag means something positive, but many, many people do not share that perspective. Just know who else waves that flag in pride. Furthermore, what have state governments done to impress you so? Is it the gobbling up of federal dollars only to cut their own education budgets, the general handling of money like children, or is it the publishing of state state history books that gloss over Andersonville? Is it the elimination of the teaching of evolution from science classrooms, the partisan seat swapping in the state senate and house in order to further cut public service budgets or the wonderful gerrymandering taking place around the country in predominantly Red states? I guess there's lots to pick from. The moment popular libertarianism realizes what makes Ron Paul a fucking idiot and Jon Huntsman a reasonable man is the moment that libertarianism actually stands a shot at having a positive impact on this country. In the meantime, go ahead and worship the pork barrel double dealer racist from the good city of Galveston, I'm sure that'll show big brother. If you can actually watch that piece of trash on covering up notions of racism with some Civil War romance novel, then you are already too far gone. Oh yeah, as a fan of marijuana legalization, I'd like to hereby declare that a vast majority of potheads like myself are not bigoted racists with a poor sense of history like Barrin. Some truth in this post. I don't get what's so great about state governments over federal government. If anything, states like Florida, Arizona, Texas, Alabama, Mississippi (oh fuck just throw the entire south in there) show us that state governments can be absolutely atrocious. If anything, the federal government would be far better at running those states than their own state legislatures, and Congress is practically useless at the moment. I really think you should include California in that list. That state's a mess, arguably worse than much of "the South." I'd prefer state governments over one federal government simply on the basis of letting the states mess up so that they may learn from their mistakes on their own. Simply entrusting the power to one large government at the national level would be too easily tyrannized by the majority if you ask me. Would rather have more direct, community control of my local government. So when the states mess up at the cost of the mobility and quality of life of minorities and the poor, then what? Well at least its at the state level, amirite? The point is that state governments have and currently are showing exactly how they'd operate in the event of a lessening of the structure of the union; that is, cut public services, actively shape education to match an agenda, and play around in the state congress like children for votes.
Point to those states and say, "See? They messed up big time. Here's why. We shouldn't be like that." Other states will let their bad policies fail and learn from the mistakes. Improvement is not ideal; sometimes you have to let others implement a bad policy in a different state in order to see why it would be terrible for the state/country. That said, we should be wise to not repeat the failures that history exposes to us.
On February 06 2013 02:56 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2013 02:51 cLAN.Anax wrote:On February 06 2013 02:42 Stratos_speAr wrote:On February 06 2013 02:28 farvacola wrote:On February 06 2013 01:33 Barrin wrote:I know the South are unfortunately going to be the last states to legalize it (lots of religious communities down here)... Florida in particular, where I live (REPRESENT~). But you know what, the South had something to say about this "big brother" govt. and the more I learn about it the more I realize where my loyalties lie. + Show Spoiler +Slavery is one of the most detestable things humans are capable of.. but that is not what this flag is about. My favorite politician explains it as well as I could: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEC68vTQwP8 Let me be very clear: FUCK YOU Big Brother. Power and freedom to the states and the people. That's what I care about. Legalize it. What a joke. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about, especially when it comes to popular symbology and the actuality of this cultish love for state governments that Ron Paul neophytes seem to oh so enjoy. You may think that flag means something positive, but many, many people do not share that perspective. Just know who else waves that flag in pride. Furthermore, what have state governments done to impress you so? Is it the gobbling up of federal dollars only to cut their own education budgets, the general handling of money like children, or is it the publishing of state state history books that gloss over Andersonville? Is it the elimination of the teaching of evolution from science classrooms, the partisan seat swapping in the state senate and house in order to further cut public service budgets or the wonderful gerrymandering taking place around the country in predominantly Red states? I guess there's lots to pick from. The moment popular libertarianism realizes what makes Ron Paul a fucking idiot and Jon Huntsman a reasonable man is the moment that libertarianism actually stands a shot at having a positive impact on this country. In the meantime, go ahead and worship the pork barrel double dealer racist from the good city of Galveston, I'm sure that'll show big brother. If you can actually watch that piece of trash on covering up notions of racism with some Civil War romance novel, then you are already too far gone. Oh yeah, as a fan of marijuana legalization, I'd like to hereby declare that a vast majority of potheads like myself are not bigoted racists with a poor sense of history like Barrin. Some truth in this post. I don't get what's so great about state governments over federal government. If anything, states like Florida, Arizona, Texas, Alabama, Mississippi (oh fuck just throw the entire south in there) show us that state governments can be absolutely atrocious. If anything, the federal government would be far better at running those states than their own state legislatures, and Congress is practically useless at the moment. I really think you should include California in that list. That state's a mess, arguably worse than much of "the South." I'd prefer state governments over one federal government simply on the basis of letting the states mess up so that they may learn from their mistakes on their own. Simply entrusting the power to one large government at the national level would be too easily tyrannized by the majority if you ask me. Would rather have more direct, community control of my local government. There is far, far more tyranny by the majority in individual southern states (see the plethora of pro-Christian and anti-liberal laws out there in the south) than done by the federal government. Furthermore, de-centralization doesn't magically protect you from tyranny of the majority; that's (partially) what the Bill of Rights does. Finally, no one is saying that we should give all of the power to the federal government, but it's long past time to stop looking at the federal government as the boogey-man and state legislatures as mystical forces for good. They aren't. Oh, and letting states mess up doesn't just let them "learn from their mistakes". It comes at a huge cost, usually paid by the poor, non-white, and non-Christians in these southern states. Furthermore, it inevitably saps more federal dollars and resources that initially come from well-off and well-managed states from the Pacific Northwest, Midwest, and Northeast.
I would rather have a majority tyranny relegated to the state level than drag the whole country into it. I would also rather not see states sap so many federal dollars in the first place.
State governments are far from perfect, but I still see them as preferable to one centralized government that thinks it better knows what's "better" for me. Citizens have a proportionally stronger voice at the local level, so that they can more strongly discuss the issues that more closely matter to them; that's why I espouse stronger state and city governments as opposed to a larger federal one.
|
On February 06 2013 03:06 Jisall wrote:
The U.S. will never become a totalitarian state. Checks and balances insure it. The closest we have gotten to a king/totalitarian government is FDR during WW2. Our only 4 term president, who after him we capped the term limit at two. When FDR tried to stack the supreme court in order to get his way, checks and balances were there to stop him.
What does a king have to do with totalitarianism? Also (since I am pretty sure many people here do not understand this), totalitarianism is not the opposite to democracy. Historically, totalitarianism is due to political extremism.
I chose to quote your post (rather than the many others) because you mentioned a king. Ironically in the case of the USA, having a king would reduce the chance of talking pigs taking over. The thing that could potentially push the USA towards political extremism is the distrust that people have for politicians from the other party, which means that roughly half the population distrusts the head of state and are therefore pushed towards the far right (when there is a democrat president) or the left (when there is a republican president).
|
|
|
Talking from experience, those who tend to be so confident in what they say is the truth and realizing it will wake you up are often the ones who tend to be the most brainwashed. This is pretty universal for all ideologies.
I think a better way to approach the notion of truth is being damn sure that the red pill you swallowed was not a blue bill dyed red.
|
I feel like it should the the other way around, americans should take more attention and control over their government that seems to act by and for big companys, control their finance world and military actions. USA seem to be under the influence of big lobbys instead of the will and interest of the people.
But i do agree with gun control, it's not freedom to have heavy machine guns with more then 10000 bullets in your home. It's stupidity and asking for trouble.
I'm "ok" with people owning guns, specially in a country that is so "into" guns and where they take such a importance in it's culture, but to have whatever war weapons you want and thousands off bullets it's stupid and dangerous.
TLDR: gun control OK! Instead of more government control there should be more people controling the state, big enterprise and wallstreet
|
|
|
On February 06 2013 03:20 Barrin wrote:I'm not a bigoted racist you little shit, I literally called slavery one of the most detestable things we can do. You have no idea how much effort I've put into denying racism with people I know in my culture, or of my success, but this isn't about that so what the fuck? --- FYI the state I've lived my whole life is one of the relatively few that actually pays more than it gets. But of course I understand you... if Big Brother wasn't so big there wouldn't be so much money to gobble up! Notice that I said the states AND the people... and when it comes to the people there un-sarcastically is a lot to to pick from which I did my best to summarize here: http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=389345If the people don't like the way it is in a certain state then they can just move to a new state no big deal. The problem is when Big Brother messes around with too much within every single state. I personally think most of these problems would be well on their way to being solved if it weren't for the overabundant of resources spent on the military-industrial complex. P.S. And no I do not claim to have a "great sense of history", but I do claim that I try very hard to learn every day.
If I have no idea how much effort you've put into denying racism with people you know in your culture, than it is entirely due to you putting a flag before the ideas that you want it to represent. If you were truly so concerned with the image of your culture, you would not so slavishly adhere to some outdated relic that meaningfully only stands for racism and historical denialism, when in turn you could be, you know, defending actual people instead of flags or ideologies.
Also, I am not a little shit, I am a rather large man.
|
On February 06 2013 03:33 Barrin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2013 03:30 Shiragaku wrote:
Talking from experience, those who tend to be so confident in what they say is the truth and realizing it will wake you up are often the ones who tend to be the most brainwashed. This is pretty universal for all ideologies.
I think a better way to approach the notion of truth is being damn sure that the red pill you swallowed was not a blue bill dyed red. And how does one approach that?
In your case, I would question the notion of what is means to be a cult member by watching other cult members. Since I assume you are anti-communist, listen to Maoists and Stalinists. A good start would be MaoistRebelNews.
|
|
|
On February 06 2013 03:43 Barrin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2013 03:40 Shiragaku wrote:On February 06 2013 03:33 Barrin wrote:On February 06 2013 03:30 Shiragaku wrote:
Talking from experience, those who tend to be so confident in what they say is the truth and realizing it will wake you up are often the ones who tend to be the most brainwashed. This is pretty universal for all ideologies.
I think a better way to approach the notion of truth is being damn sure that the red pill you swallowed was not a blue bill dyed red. And how does one approach that? In your case, I would question the notion of what is means to be a cult member by watching other cult members. Since I assume you are anti-communist, listen to Maoists and Stalinists. A good start would be MaoistRebelNews. I have questioned what it means to be a cultist for years, and I have indeed started listening to such people. --- If I were you I would question the notion of whether or not what symbols someone chooses to express their thoughts completely reflects their actual thoughts. I was hoping for more of a general approach btw.
I try, but self-examination is one of the hardest things to do in the world.
The method I try to do is what Avital Ronnel said which is generally, when people claim to know, such as calling someone a fascist, communist, or the Axis of Evil, you are ready to kill them. Basically, be careful with "knowing."
Also, I am aware of the potential comments about this post.
|
On February 06 2013 03:43 Barrin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2013 03:40 Shiragaku wrote:On February 06 2013 03:33 Barrin wrote:On February 06 2013 03:30 Shiragaku wrote:
Talking from experience, those who tend to be so confident in what they say is the truth and realizing it will wake you up are often the ones who tend to be the most brainwashed. This is pretty universal for all ideologies.
I think a better way to approach the notion of truth is being damn sure that the red pill you swallowed was not a blue bill dyed red. And how does one approach that? In your case, I would question the notion of what is means to be a cult member by watching other cult members. Since I assume you are anti-communist, listen to Maoists and Stalinists. A good start would be MaoistRebelNews. I have questioned what it means to be a cultist for years, and I have indeed started listening to such people. --- If I were you I would question the notion of whether or not what symbols someone chooses to express their thoughts completely reflects their actual thoughts. Indeed if you were to take your own advice I think you'd think twice before "assuming" I was anything - it seems like you who claims to know so much tbh. I was hoping for more of a general approach btw. That's how Socrates would've wanted it.
It is not intellectually expedient to ask "second guess" questions before taking a first guess, and what else is someone to do when faced with a giant Confederate flag image, a Ron Paul video entitled "The South was Right", and a bunch of "FUCK BIG BROTHER" quips that do not amount to constructive criticism? You entered into the discussion with symbols and ideology, and now we are to actively second guess the very things you put forward why? If your perspective is more about people and culture, then the onus is on you to make that clear to other posters, and you probably ought to focus on using language instead of symbols if you want to avoid misunderstandings. THAT is what Socrates would have wanted.
|
|
|
lol the government should represent the people not be a different entity. In a democracy this shouldn't be a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ifxNU1cZNp8/UIf6hzbLanI/AAAAAAAAk0k/YHI8X5aCG4Q/s1600/bandeira-flag.jpg)
