Obama smashes GOP again, and fills positions in recess, in a strong show of power

[GamezRule]

so is ours, we have a republican house and democrat senate, and a idiotic governor, so nothing ever gets done

 

[civ_king]

so is ours, we have a republican house and democrat senate, and a idiotic governor, so nothing ever gets done

does your budget get done 2-6 months late?

 

[GamezRule]

actually, it was like 3 months late last year.

 

[Perfection]

Good.

Why??

 

[Tani Coyote]

We should really amend the constitution so all states become regularly-elected(say every 5 years) dictatorships, with legislatures downsized and meant to serve as an advisory council.

That way they're quick and (hopefully) efficient, and if they become brutal, the feds can quickly knock them out. A democracy composed of a bunch of little dictatorships... think the fact nearly all properties - businesses, homes, etc. - are dictatorships more or less, with a few outside limits imposed on what the dictator/owner can do...

 

[GamezRule]

Our politicians are too corrupt to run something by themselves.

 

[The Imp]

Why??

Because.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Our politicians are too corrupt to run something by themselves.

I suppose the argument for the inefficiency of a democratic structure is that, while it is prone to inefficiency and corruption, the corruption of the various competing elements inside prevents the wolves from looking upon the lambs that are the general population... Democrats and Republicans might be inefficient as hell when they fight tooth and nail, but if they ever truly became buddy buddy... well, they'd rape us all pretty well.

A bit of a dilemma: an inefficient government that nullifies most of its evils(democracy), or an efficient government with practically no limits on its evils(dictatorship).

And I wonder why so many people don't bother with politics anymore.

 

[Earthling]

You're still not doing a very good job of telling me why silver, who at least claims to want to overthrow capitalism or whatever, is more of an enemy of capitalism than people who claim not to want to overthrow capitalism.

Is this some sort of purposeful misunderstanding, to confuse Karalysia, a girl, with some other user? Or are you confusing Cutlass with someone, whoever he is?

Anyway, I think Cutlass' point, while somewhat sarcastic, was that he thought someone who really wanted to discredit conservatives would pose as an insane fundamentalist, presenting racist etc... views - to contribute to discrediting them, as it really can't be distinguished these days if someone was "faking" like that or those who are unfortunately serious.

 

[GamezRule]

In regulated capitalism, with SOME social programs to help the poor, the poorest people are still pretty wealthy compared to the people living under communism. Oh, and if communism is so wonderful, then how come the east germans had to build the berlin wall to keep people IN

 

[cardgame]

Because that was Stalinism.

 

[Karalysia]

Because that was Stalinism.

Which was also awesome albeit in the "I'll slaughter you in the millions" sort of awesome rather than the "I'll feed your children" sort of awesome. There's a difference.

 

[civ_king]

In regulated capitalism, with SOME social programs to help the poor, the poorest people are still pretty wealthy compared to the people living under communism. Oh, and if communism is so wonderful, then how come the east germans had to build the berlin wall to keep people IN

That is Totalitarianism, not Communism

 

[GamezRule]

What I am trying to say is that due to the Corrupt nature of people, If you give the government the power to control the economy, they will end up controlling your lives, too. If not, show me one good example to prove otherwise. (Europe doesn't count, just give them some time and you will see my point) Also, although Communism is NOT Totalitarianism, it becomes that as soon as people become unhappy with the status quo. (they don't like the job they have been "assigned" to)

 

[Karalysia]

Show me an example of a capitalist nation that doesn't exploit its people. Just one.

 

[GamezRule]

Not until you show me a communist nation first. Good Luck.

 

[Karalysia]

Not until you show me a communist nation first. Good Luck.

You're confusing terms. A "communist" nation being of the higher phase has never existed and is unlikely to ever exist in the foreseeable future, and furthermore communism by definition is a stateless society with no government to compel or coerce as the state has withered away.

Countries that have professed socialism have existed. Though I wouldn't classify any of the European states as that, they're all welfare capitalist or social democratic states. Not socialist. I would say the USSR during the time of Lenin would qualify as one such state perhaps. As would the Paris Commune perhaps though it was more of a worker state, and it didn't quite do what Marx wanted, however the Paris Commune came very close to what a proper socialist society may look like. And of course there are communes, collectives, and cooperatives that exist today.

Oh yeah, and my signature:

"Of all the modern economic theories, the economic system of Marxism is founded on moral principles, while capitalism is concerned only with gain and profitability. The failure of the regime in the former Soviet Union was, for me, not the failure of Marxism but the failure of totalitarianism. For this reason I still think of myself as half-Marxist, half-Buddhist."-The current Dalai Lama Tenzin Gyatso

 

[GamezRule]

What I am TRYING to say is that you cannot have a Marxist (that better) state that is not also totalitarian. I already explained my reasoning in a previous post.

 

[Karalysia]

What I am TRYING to say is that you cannot have a Marxist (that better) state that is not also totalitarian. I already explained my reasoning in a previous post.

You are incorrect. Marx also is not the only socialist philosopher around.

 

[GamezRule]

whatever, you are skipping the point.