Political Debate Thread!

[Dead Flag]

My theory, when I get around to ordering all my thoughts into a viable document, will hopefully allow both local and central governments to rule in the areas in which they do best and shy away from the areas in which they do worst.

 

[sir_schwick]

yes this is true. and, in a cruel twist of fate (or perhaps karma), the USA is now getting massive amounts of foreign investment here! this is mainly because of the destabilizing of the dollar (it is CHEAPer to invest here now). So i expect our own country to be sacrificed to the gods of the Transnationals.

Soon almost every global citizen will be controlled by an elusive set of shadow governments run by Transnationals and those who share in their power schemes. However a big problem emerges if it becomes obvious one world government exists, so these interests will still perpetuate interstate conflicts to prevent any kind of worker/civilian solidarity. Expect a lot more wars and animosity perpetrated about foreigners in the next few decades.

 

[Bahmo]

Yes in a way, but we all have to agree, as large a central gov't that the usa has, is too big and not at all approachable. and furthermore, a century or more has been spent making this government uncontrollable. i think that it is the nature of centralized goverment to do this, and it is what undermines liberty at every turn.

It is undeniable that the US government was designed from the beginning to be controlled by the same fortune-families. Considering the initial situation, this was not entirely a bad thing. At the time, the USA was a rural nation where the vast majority of people had too little education to govern effectively; meanwhile, the founding fathers were brought up with enlightenement ideals.

The problems evolved gradually, as such things as industrialism, mass-media, and corporations rose, though. By the time the majority of the people had a chance to determine the course of the US government, the politicians and their corporate cronies had dug in deep to make sure this could not happen. 18th-Centure Classical Liberalism is antiquated and did not predict the happenings of such things. Thus, the US government is far less flexible and responsive to the people than most democracies now.

 

[GarretSidzaka]

@dead_flag
yeah, get something up when your ready. just make a new thread in these forums when you have it

@sir_schwick
yeah, not a good thing. the wars will just be so the Weapon contractor transnats will be able to play, and will be a great way to keep the brown people subjecated

@Bahmo
presicely. but it doesn't mean it should stay that way

 

[Dead Flag]

Already got it up on this forum, Garret!

 

[DVS]

It is undeniable that the US government was designed from the beginning to be controlled by the same fortune-families. Considering the initial situation, this was not entirely a bad thing. At the time, the USA was a rural nation where the vast majority of people had too little education to govern effectively; meanwhile, the founding fathers were brought up with enlightenement ideals.

The problems evolved gradually, as such things as industrialism, mass-media, and corporations rose, though. By the time the majority of the people had a chance to determine the course of the US government, the politicians and their corporate cronies had dug in deep to make sure this could not happen. 18th-Centure Classical Liberalism is antiquated and did not predict the happenings of such things. Thus, the US government is far less flexible and responsive to the people than most democracies now.

That is an excellent assessment.

 

[DVS]

Soon almost every global citizen will be controlled by an elusive set of shadow governments run by Transnationals and those who share in their power schemes. However a big problem emerges if it becomes obvious one world government exists, so these interests will still perpetuate interstate conflicts to prevent any kind of worker/civilian solidarity. Expect a lot more wars and animosity perpetrated about foreigners in the next few decades.

agree with this too, dead on.

 

[GarretSidzaka]

DVS420 is ready to light up the fires of the debate thread! excellent.

now all we need is an agitator....

 

[DVS]

ha, ok well I didn't really contribute anything to this conversation, probably shouldn't have bumped it now that I notice the dates of the posts. I was reading it and by the time I got around to posting I had worn myself out in this thread.

 

[GarretSidzaka]

hey dont worry. my threads don't sleep, they wait

so heres something to start the conversation then:

Should Anarchists Vote for Obama?

 

[DVS]

Not with Ron Paul running as an independent.

 

[GarretSidzaka]

aaahhh crap

come on man? Ron Paul?

 

[DVS]

Yeah definitely. He's not perfect but he's much closer to a real candidate than anything the major parties are capable of offering. Any three of the remaining candidates being elected will be a continuation of the past 30 years of neo-liberalism/conservatism.

 

[GarretSidzaka]

well i expect obama to continue the policies of neoliberalism. but i also see him as the begining of a trend...

 

[Bahmo]

I honestly don't see the appeal of Ron Paul. He's portrays himself as a "peoples' conservative," but I see him more like a presidential version of Arnold than any other thing. He's a man with little actually in common with average Joe American, with a media campaign nonetheeless portraying him as hip. There would certainly be positive things about a Libertarian if he slashed at the military-industrial complex and allowed those wasted funds to be reinvested in the economy, but ultimately, what I believe America needs is a strongman who forces the mass-construction of solar plants and railways across the nation.

 

[GarretSidzaka]

he is a pro-tariff isolationist. he still supports big business, and would try for a Libertarian style country.

The only thing i agree with him on partly is the Iraq War being bad.

 

[Dead Flag]

Yeah he's the only Republican to have a sensible-ish view on Iraq.

 

[GarretSidzaka]

yeah, but what gets me is all the young people flock to his banner for this reason. but his domestic and foreign policies still stink

 

[DVS]

I honestly don't see the appeal of Ron Paul. He's portrays himself as a "peoples' conservative," but I see him more like a presidential version of Arnold than any other thing. He's a man with little actually in common with average Joe American, with a media campaign nonetheeless portraying him as hip. There would certainly be positive things about a Libertarian if he slashed at the military-industrial complex and allowed those wasted funds to be reinvested in the economy, but ultimately, what I believe America needs is a strongman who forces the mass-construction of solar plants and railways across the nation.

He's an anarcho-capitalist basically. He does still support big business as GarretSidzaka said. In fact, if we did institute his ideal "liaise fare" free market, the world economy would collapse even faster than it is now. Fortunately that could never happen, but as President he could do a lot to change the country and world for the better.

I don't know who's portraying him as hip (don't watch TV), but in my eyes, it's his libertarian message that people are latching on to. Getting rid of the police state and the military industrial complex are his key stands that appeal to me and probably most of his other supporters. He is also the only politician who will even mention the completely artificial US currency which they continue to print endlessly, now without even reporting how much they print. This would be my number one issue, if I weren't a Canadian with all his money invested in gold and silver. Anyone who relies on US currency or the stock market to insure their futures should seriously examine how this system works. It is propped up by blind faith basically, and will completely collapse in our lifetime. Paul would remove US troops from every country, restore people's constitutional rights, stop all of the eavesdropping/surveillance cameras, etc. For these reasons the powerful interests would obviously never let him become President, but if he were, it would be the most important change to the United Stats since 1776.

Every other candidate is a continuation of the top down economic dictatorship we've all been living under. No difference between what the country will be like under Bush, Obama, Clinton, or McCain. Maybe diversion issues like gay marriage will get righted, but the economic, military, and police policies will remain identical.

I like Obama too, have since the 2004 speech, but he's beholden to the same CFR types Bush is, and he is not going to change anything. They want us to go from blaming the dumb guy to either blaming the black guy, the woman, or the old guy. Anything to make sure we don't blame the system.

 

[GarretSidzaka]

thats right. our current system is propped up with an artificial belief in its own 'righteousness'. and this is believed by enough proles that the elite maintain the status quo easily. Whats so sad is that our 'leaders', the corporate governemnts, are doing such a sh*tty job with their absolute power.

The shadow governments are made up of ******s or paranoids.