Pages: 1 2 3 … 5

 

2005-12-10 13:19:00
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|7054
It   " appears "   to be easily manipulated at best.

Most Citizens in the U.S.A. really don't understand its workings and
don't see its very good points which are many.

I do not really follow or study political science so a good one may already exist ( I am sure it does in fact ).

But it always strikes me that most people here  ( even the  really provincial thinkers ) seem very bright at best and I'd like to see some thoughts on it.



Try not to measure or evaluate  the opposing posters as this is a difficult place to judge people and talk is pretty cheap. Most people just want to make a point or share an opinion.



If it turns into a brawl, what harm done.
2005-12-10 14:35:59
FeloniousMonk
Member
+0|6952
The error is in thinking we have a two party system.

Last edited by FeloniousMonk (2005-12-10 14:36:09)

2005-12-10 14:46:55
FoodNipple101
I like grapes.
+1|6975
Ya we have more then Democrats and Republicans.
2005-12-10 15:04:40
Jeckelcopy
Ach du Sheisse!!!!
+2|6977
A better system is no system, we screw each other up because were "democrat" or "republican"...

Say:  Your a democrat, the majority of the people in the country you are running for high office in is republican, and they vote on party... They'll vote for the republican nommenie, and you lose, yet you are the best, most intellegable person for president/premier/chanselor/prime minester/dictator of your country...

George Washington said it best...
2005-12-10 15:49:06
Krappyappy
'twice cooked beef!'
+111|7037
dictatorships are the best form of government, easily. if the leader is intelligent and does what needs to be done, there's nothing like autocracy for complete efficiency.

the only good thing about 'democracy' [which in the case of the US isn't even democracy but parliamentary representation] is that people are duped into thinking that they control the government, and so are a lot more content and won't make trouble.

the reason we don't see dictatorships work is because usually the dictator is psychotic [pol pot] or moronic [mussollini]. we should have a merit system for rulers like anything else, they take a hard-ass test to see who's the most capable, and then what they say goes. get a genius in there and he'll be the best damned dictator ever.
2005-12-10 16:00:07
FeloniousMonk
Member
+0|6952

Krappyappy wrote:

dictatorships are the best form of government, easily. if the leader is intelligent and does what needs to be done, there's nothing like autocracy for complete efficiency.

the only good thing about 'democracy' [which in the case of the US isn't even democracy but parliamentary representation] is that people are duped into thinking that they control the government, and so are a lot more content and won't make trouble.

the reason we don't see dictatorships work is because usually the dictator is psychotic [pol pot] or moronic [mussollini]. we should have a merit system for rulers like anything else, they take a hard-ass test to see who's the most capable, and then what they say goes. get a genius in there and he'll be the best damned dictator ever.
Are you serious? Wow...someone actually advocating a system of government that strips away the very concepts of freedom that the majority of the world is fighting to protect.
2005-12-10 16:11:48
FoodNipple101
I like grapes.
+1|6975
actually no hes not. I believe in exactly what he believes. something like communism is perfect the way its written however how its executed is what makes it a bad thing.
2005-12-10 16:45:27
Jeckelcopy
Ach du Sheisse!!!!
+2|6977
yup, many forms of gov't are very good in the reasons and benefits, yet the people who run it just make it uterly a load of crap...
2005-12-10 16:47:48
FeloniousMonk
Member
+0|6952

FoodNipple101 wrote:

actually no hes not. I believe in exactly what he believes. something like communism is perfect the way its written however how its executed is what makes it a bad thing.
Do you understand what communism is? No, it's not perfect because it goes against the very facets of human nature that have allowed us to rise to the level we are at today.

And yes, he's advocating a system of government that denies freedoms. Dictatorships take away choices from the people, communism takes away personal property. My home does not belong to you or anyone else. No government is going to force me to share what I have with anyone else, that's something that I will choose to do when I see fit.

No, communism is the antithesis of freedom. If you want to live in a society like that, more power to ya. But I'll be damned if the US will ever allow a dictatorship or a communist economy, not after so many have given their lives to preserve the liberty that allows us all to play a video game and make threads about this kind of stuff.
2005-12-10 16:54:21
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|7054
I believe we really elect our leaders here. Sometimes its very close, some times its skullduggery. But your vote does count. I believe there are actually more Conservative Republicans then lib dems. We as a rule are independent and self reliant.  We don't like to have rally's, march in lock step, hold hands etc. Hell we don't even like each other. Most conservatives I know think they are the most conservative as you should be and anyone more conservative than them is "too conservative " and wrong !

libral dems seem to act more as one, When that Communist agent was busted in El Salvador with 1200 lbs of C4 Lieberman and Dod D Conn. declared her a Nun, got her off and took her back to the USA as a Hero.

I know of not one person who thinks McViegh a hero.
2005-12-10 16:57:41
Jeckelcopy
Ach du Sheisse!!!!
+2|6977
Meh... The US only has those rights since 200-some-odd years ago, a group of people were feeding the US public for peoples rights, the people didn't choose.  No matter WHAT, the governmet will get the last laugh at what you do, think, say, or allow, the government will ALWAYS rule you...
2005-12-10 17:02:43
Jeckelcopy
Ach du Sheisse!!!!
+2|6977

Horseman 77 wrote:

I believe we really elect our leaders here. Sometimes its very close, some times its skullduggery. But your vote does count. I believe there are actually more Conservative Republicans then lib dems. We as a rule are independent and self reliant.  We don't like to have rally's, march in lock step, hold hands etc. Hell we don't even like each other. Most conservatives I know think they are the most conservative as you should be and anyone more conservative than them is "too conservative " and wrong !

libral dems seem to act more as one, When that Communist agent was busted in El Salvador with 1200 lbs of C4 Lieberman and Dod D Conn. declared her a Nun, got her off and took her back to the USA as a Hero.

I know of not one person who thinks McViegh a hero.
Well, thats the whole point why parties are worthless, it seperates people and steriotypes people into groups because of their legal party, like race, people will group you because of your actions/lives, even if you're the complete other way...(Sorry for the double post)

Last edited by Jeckelcopy (2005-12-10 17:03:06)

2005-12-10 17:03:02
FeloniousMonk
Member
+0|6952

Jeckelcopy wrote:

Meh... The US only has those rights since 200-some-odd years ago, a group of people were feeding the US public for peoples rights, the people didn't choose.  No matter WHAT, the governmet will get the last laugh at what you do, think, say, or allow, the government will ALWAYS rule you...
You're right that the US is a young country but we have been under the same system of government for far longer than most other nations.

You're wrong in thinking that the government rules us. Governments only have power as long as the people are willing to recognize that power. Our Consitution provides us with the tools to remove any government that becomes tyrannical. The whole reason for the second ammendment was to give the people the ability to topple a potentially oppressive government. It certainly hasn't come to that but in the off chance it ever does we have the ability to fight back.

You have a very disturbing view of the world if you resign yourself to believing that governments have more power than the people are willing to give them.
2005-12-10 17:06:14
FeloniousMonk
Member
+0|6952

Jeckelcopy wrote:

Well, thats the whole point why parties are worthless, it seperates people and steriotypes people into groups because of their legal party, like race, people will group you because of your actions/lives, even if you're the complete other way...(Sorry for the double post)
Yes because without parties you'd only have one group of people representing one set of opinions and then you'd have your beloved dictatorship.
2005-12-10 17:18:37
Jeckelcopy
Ach du Sheisse!!!!
+2|6977

FeloniousMonk wrote:

Jeckelcopy wrote:

Meh... The US only has those rights since 200-some-odd years ago, a group of people were feeding the US public for peoples rights, the people didn't choose.  No matter WHAT, the governmet will get the last laugh at what you do, think, say, or allow, the government will ALWAYS rule you...
You're right that the US is a young country but we have been under the same system of government for far longer than most other nations.

You're wrong in thinking that the government rules us. Governments only have power as long as the people are willing to recognize that power. Our Consitution provides us with the tools to remove any government that becomes tyrannical. The whole reason for the second ammendment was to give the people the ability to topple a potentially oppressive government. It certainly hasn't come to that but in the off chance it ever does we have the ability to fight back.

You have a very disturbing view of the world if you resign yourself to believing that governments have more power than the people are willing to give them.
What I was saying was that the gov't pretty much has the last say as to which bill becomes law, or what becomes abolished/demolished...
EX: The Patriot Act.  This lovely bill alows the gov't to search a suspected terrorist's house without a warrant, and hold you in prison WITHOUT probable cause,  which goes against the 4th amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issure, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath of affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be siezed."

The probable cause is the only redeming thing about it, yet unless you have facts that you are a terrorist....AND, did the US people have a decision to prevent this law, no...

Also, I don't give a shit whether a country is a democracy, oligarchy, communist state, dictatorship, or scoshialist; as long as the the gov't isn't overpowering, the people have a say as to what becomes law, or such, and that EVERYONE is equal, no matter how fucking important, no one is above the law...
2005-12-10 17:25:23
FeloniousMonk
Member
+0|6952

Jeckelcopy wrote:

What I was saying was that the gov't pretty much has the last say as to which bill becomes law, or what becomes abolished/demolished...
No, the people have the last say because the people elect the lawmakers.
EX: The Patriot Act.  This lovely bill alows the gov't to search a suspected terrorist's house without a warrant, and hold you in prison WITHOUT probable cause,  which goes against the 4th amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America:
Read the actual text of the Patriot Act and you'll see that warrants are still most certainly required.
Also, I don't give a shit whether a country is a democracy, oligarchy, communist state, dictatorship, or scoshialist; as long as the the gov't isn't overpowering, the people have a say as to what becomes law, or such, and that EVERYONE is equal, no matter how fucking important, no one is above the law...
I confused you with the ding dong that thinks dictatorships are a good idea.

Last edited by FeloniousMonk (2005-12-10 17:25:40)

2005-12-10 17:27:57
atlvolunteer
PKMMMMMMMMMM
+27|6988|Atlanta, GA USA
I would truly love to see a legitimate third party in our Gov't.  By legitimate, I mean one that actually holds a decent number of seats in Congress.  I personally do not relate well to either Republicans or Democrats.  I think I would be more of a conservative Libertarian.  Unfortunately, I think this would be very difficult to accomplish.  To make matters worse, in my view both parties are becoming more extreme.  It seems to me that the Republican party's current agenda is very "conservative Christian", while the Democratic party has become extremely liberal.  Neither of these appeal to me.
2005-12-10 17:36:03
Jeckelcopy
Ach du Sheisse!!!!
+2|6977

atlvolunteer wrote:

I would truly love to see a legitimate third party in our Gov't.  By legitimate, I mean one that actually holds a decent number of seats in Congress.  I personally do not relate well to either Republicans or Democrats.  I think I would be more of a conservative Libertarian.  Unfortunately, I think this would be very difficult to accomplish.  To make matters worse, in my view both parties are becoming more extreme.  It seems to me that the Republican party's current agenda is very "conservative Christian", while the Democratic party has become extremely liberal.  Neither of these appeal to me.
Yes, they all changed so much, they aren't appealing, they've changed....


"No, the people have the last say because the people elect the lawmakers."
And, people change!  Bush, he got 49% of the vote, yet he won (AHA! A vital flaw in the election system of the US!), and people voted for him because he had a good agenda, yet he changed, and is a BIG ass now in the eyes of many Americans...
2005-12-10 18:08:24
atlvolunteer
PKMMMMMMMMMM
+27|6988|Atlanta, GA USA
BTW Jeckelcopy, I like your title.  I think it says "Oh you shit!!!", but my German is a bit rusty...
2005-12-10 18:12:19
Jeckelcopy
Ach du Sheisse!!!!
+2|6977
Yup!
2005-12-10 18:20:01
redfoxster
Chopper Whore Extraordinaire
+3|6990
Our American system is really just one party, you are a Republicrat.  Or if you prefer, a Demopublican, but the point is good people don't get into politics, just power mongering greedy evil people such as John Kerry, and the Kennedys and the Bushs and so on...
2005-12-10 18:44:46
Ty
Mass Media Casualty
+2,398|6992|Noizyland

Ther is no system of governemt that isn't flawed. Most governments are open to corruption, even the mighty US two party system. Anyway, in my opinion, Democrats and Republican's are pretty damn similar.

In New Zealand, we have a system that makes sure corruption is at a minimum, but also ensures that nothing ever gets done. Ever.
It's called "MMP" or Multi Member Parliament, or something, I forget.
It basicly means, (as far as my limited understanding goes,) that there can be heaps of parties in parliament, (at the moment there is... about seven or eight.) There are always the two main ones, National and Labour, (Labour is currently in and the Prime Minister is the butt-ugly Helen Clark.) Also, independants can be voted in by running in an electorate. See, you get two votes; one for a party, and one for a person, that person being an MP who is running in your designated electorate. Most electorate MPs are in parties anyway, but independants can run.
Fuck this is complicated, and hard to type.
The party vote goes into a percentage. You have to have a minimum of 5% of the party vote to have one member in parliament, and as it increases, there are marks to show when you can add another, (for example, at 5.4% or something you can add another member.)

Anyway, nothing ever really gets done in this government, but it is a fairly successful system of government that is an alternative to the Two Party system.

And no, I didn't expect anyone to read this.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
2005-12-10 18:49:30
FeloniousMonk
Member
+0|6952

Tyferra wrote:

even the mighty US two party system
We do NOT have a two party system. It's unfortunate that two of the parties have taken the majority of the votes but we are not limited to those two. The Libertarian party represents the majority of my views but they are tactically ineffective. In three decades they barely have anyone in Congress yet waste money on a Presidential campaign.
2005-12-10 18:50:54
FeloniousMonk
Member
+0|6952

Jeckelcopy wrote:

"No, the people have the last say because the people elect the lawmakers."
And, people change!  Bush, he got 49% of the vote, yet he won (AHA! A vital flaw in the election system of the US!), and people voted for him because he had a good agenda, yet he changed, and is a BIG ass now in the eyes of many Americans...
I agree that the electoral college seems stupid but in reality is prevents areas with larger populations from deciding the course for areas with smaller populations. It forces candidates to campaign and appeal to areas that otherwise wouldn't be paid attention to at all.
2005-12-11 02:27:33
kilroy0097
Kilroy Is Here!
+81|7061|Bryan/College Station, TX
I believe that this country (USA) is in need of a change in the party system. We have grown too stagnant in the Two Party system for further growth. The two parties no longer represent, to an accurate extent, the feelings and thoughts of the public. I believe that the UK has a better Multi-Party System. I would rather see a 3rd party who has at least a chance of getting people into office than not having any hope. Ideally I would like to see what Finland has which is a strong Three Party system in which all parties over the years have participated in the leading positions of the nation. But realistically I'm pushing it by just wanting a Multi-Party system.

You can read more on this here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_party

Also in the voting process I do not believe that the Popular Voting process we have now works at all. I would thinking the voting process to be much more effective if we were to go to a Single Transferable Voting process.
This is outlined in the following:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Transferable_Vote

While I am not a Republican and am more a Democrat, take a look at this site: http://www.mypartytoo.com/

I am in favor of a new party. The Moderate Party. I believe the more Middle of the Republican and Democrat Parties should leave and form their own party called the Moderate Party. This immediately leaves the most Right and Left Wing supporters on their own and brings in line the more centraly minded representatives together. This also gains the majority of support from the citizens of this nation who are vastly in the middle and not the Right or Left. They only follow the Rep or Dem because they have no other option other than a long shot no chance Independent who is often too Ultra Liberal or Conservative or wacko to be a viable candidate for the majority.

Last edited by kilroy0097 (2005-12-11 02:30:07)

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis

 

Pages: 1 2 3 … 5

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard