Political Debate Thread!

Yeah, and I like to think of my mod as a tiny, microscopic piece that this group has helped me contribute!

I think that the way to lose the revolution is to leave america, like alot of us might feel tempted to do. Like Michael Ruppert, he left america, out of fear for his life. I think he should have stayed and been super careful.
 
Well, the USA isn't the only country in the world, or even a very good one for that matter. The only places where America is really good (bad would be a better term, though) are in deployable military power, and nuclear capability. For the average US citizen, these are bad because you have to support this gigantic military with unpaid labor (on average, for an 8 hour work day, you're probably doing close to an hour of work where your money is taken and given to the military), in order to protect a country which, at any time, could fire enough nukes to end humanity. Global warming, America, and Russia are the three greatest dangers humanity faces. The common US citizen has to slave themselves in order to protect one of the three greatest dangers to humanity.
 
Personally I'm slightly disappointed with developed countries. Though in Europe we've known strong communist parties/movements, and even the anarchists were occasionally powerful, we face the some illusions you do in the US; particularly that most people have more to lose than their chains, and their small comforts blind them so they don't see or care they're actually been exploited. Thus I'm more optimistic about the Southern American countries, where such illusions don't exist. Not that I'm giving up the fight in my country either.
 
its easy to despair over here, once you know whats going on. But i just have to keep my head clear of the lies and bullsh!t, and hope for a better world (or at least for the scales of history to balence once again.
 
I've been eyeing Norway, but I'll stay as long as possible.
 
It's ironic, really. My great grandfather moved to America to escape fascists in Norway, and now I will be moving to Norway at the earliest possible convenience to escape fascists in America. We've already lost the right to habeas corpus, and practically all other rights derive from that, so we are completely at the mercy of the Bush regime. I'm not sticking around for that fun. Don't worry though, if the **** hits the proverbial fan, I'm not going to sit around in Norway and suicidally let a nuclear power become openly fascist.
 
I very much doubt that the Armerican population would allow U.S.A. to be turned into a facist country, I'm pretty sure there would be many revolts if that were ever to happened, and if there's none you can be damn sure I will come across the sea and make one.

Anyways what I believe is that if you have a truly free society the only thing there would rule would be chaos. A free society would degrade and kill itself because of the control. Therefore I can openly support a society that is free, but got control over it's citezens too(not in the big brother way, it's fanatic).
For one I am a supporter communism, though not in the way the Sovjet went. I believe that elections of leaders are important to avoid that the power goes to the wrong person. People won't work to just help other people, they want something out if it themselves, thats why I would make a 'reward system' where you work and get 'points'(like money) and then you can speand the points on these 'rewards'(it can be things like a painting or a better computer etc. etc.).

Just my opinion though.
 
I very much doubt that the Armerican population would allow U.S.A. to be turned into a facist country, I'm pretty sure there would be many revolts if that were ever to happened, and if there's none you can be damn sure I will come across the sea and make one.

Fly over now, cause fascism is here to stay, in america in the form of Neo-Liberalism. Be glad that Denmark can keep america's bullfeathers at arms-length. :lol:


For one I am a supporter communism....

you sound like a market socialist
 
Personally I think that all political methods are based on one thing: Localised rule vs. Centralised rule.

One one hand you have Anarchism that is on the extreme localised side. On the other a despotism is on the extreme centralised.

The trouble is that in a localised system a centralised power will lose power and eventually stop having a monopoly on violence. This is perhaps what defines a state, they have a monopoly on leagal violence. As they loose this power they also lose the ability to make long-term comittments, go to the moon, or colonize space or something, unless all people involved agree and those that are not involved agree to pay. Considering how poorly humanity has preformed in the past it comes as no suprise that few would entrust a collective of people to make a unified decision without lumbering a project too much. We can even see this in the current ISS program where nations are fighting over who has/gets to do what.

On the other hand an extremly centralised government tends to be very beurocratic, although it retains power. It would however also need to have a monopoly on violence and du to this it will tend to be authorian. It will though have the power to make long term goals in the interest of the nation (although not always in the interest of it's citizens) and force citizens to work towards that goal.
 
As far as I can tell, more people are killed by their own or foreign governments than by criminals. For example, in 2003, 17,732 people were murdered in the US. Let's say 600,000 Iraqis have been killed in the course of the Iraq war (a low estimate). Let's say that 1/10th of those deaths have been caused by US forces (a very low estimate, IIRC, it's closer to 1/5th, but I'll stay on the low end until I can get the exact numbers). The war has been going on for three years, so, the yearly average is 20,000 thousand people killed by US forces alone. Now, we're an unusually violent country with a population of 300 million, so this should be saying something to you already about the brutality of war and fascism. We've also been to war at least 25 times in the last 100 years, and committed no small number of atrocities in dozens of countries, including establishing numerous dictators and nuking and firebombing German and Japanese cities.

Seriously, read through this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_history_events

If you get through all of that and still care about American interests abroad, I don't know how to help you.

I think that all of the military, political, and law enforcement power should be directly in the hands of the people. Not the American people, at least not now, but in a good a country that is the way things should be. In the absence of any authoritarian law enforcement I would trust the average American to use a gun to protect against tyranny about as much as I would trust a match to protect a stick of dynamite. In the hands of an American, that gun would just as likely be used to create tyranny. There's something deeply wrong and disturbing with our instant gratification, "I'm my own morality", claw your way to the top mentality. I suspect we'll just have to keep sleepwalking into fascism until we get a sudden and brutal awakening.
 
dude read ward churchill's "on roosting chickens". we have had an invasion or battle going on at least once a year (more often more) since 1776. america has been at non-stop war. we are a nation of war :cry:
 
Hi Guys,

Funny to read all the posts. As i'm probably more pessimictic than many, i only want to say that's it is in our human nature to want to control everything and everybody everywhere and everywhen. The plague is this planet is....us. Money, weapons, political systems, diplomacy,... all of our "creations" has the same goal: earning more control !


Hian the Frog.
 
yeah, but as intelligent beings, we have will, and we can change our behaviours over time. the catch all excuse "it is human nature" has perpetuated ages of atrocities and holocausts, simply because people refuse to be willful, thinking beings.

Look at the society of cattle in america today. oblivious to the crimes against humanity that are being committed, simply out of a refusal to take an iota of responsibility.

No, please don't say "human nature" because i havent committed any war crimes lately, and i am human.
 
America Is one of the best Nations in the world.

Your all crazy Paranoid.

How has the goverments "evils" made our lives harder? Aside from one of the gimic taxes that snuck 1000$ out of my pocket?

If anything I'd say we need more controll over the actions of radicals, expecially people flaunting and commiting unGodly acts.
 
America Is one of the best Nations in the world.

Your all crazy Paranoid.

How has the goverments "evils" made our lives harder? Aside from one of the gimic taxes that snuck 1000$ out of my pocket?

If anything I'd say we need more controll over the actions of radicals, expecially people flaunting and commiting unGodly acts.

Yes, brotha. Praise Jesus!
 
yeah, but as intelligent beings, we have will, and we can change our behaviours over time. the catch all excuse "it is human nature" has perpetuated ages of atrocities and holocausts, simply because people refuse to be willful, thinking beings.

Look at the society of cattle in america today. oblivious to the crimes against humanity that are being committed, simply out of a refusal to take an iota of responsibility.

No, please don't say "human nature" because i havent committed any war crimes lately, and i am human.

Sorry to bring this up now, but I've learned quite a bit over the last few months, and this popped up in my list of subscribed threads. I wasn't suggesting that it's human nature to be like people are today. I was referring specifically to Americans, and only the more recent breed of Americans. The Americans of 250 years ago could have easily handled anarchy.

I think it is human nature to be kind, compassionate, and to care for your fellow man. That's really the only way we could have survived this long. We got through ice ages, droughts, famines, diseases, and worse. We have only two things going for us, and that's intelligence, and cooperation. One guy alone is not going to live very long out in the wildneress. A group of idiots out in the wilderness are not going to live very long either. The only reason we have survived as a species is because, at least up until recently, we were multi-skilled, highly intelligent tool-using communal animals. We cared for each other, and we weren't afraid to try to help one another. That was human nature for all of natural human history (i.e. up until farming and the rise of civilization and the creation of class structures).

What we have in modern times is now a subversion of human nature. People are reeducated, taught that it's not ok to help someone who is getting beaten to death, that you should call the police. And if it's the police who are beating someone to death, you should look away and take any cameras with you. We're taught that sharing is communism, and is therefore evil. We're taught that it's unnecessary, homeless people in the street are homeless because, obviously, they want to be homeless. We have no obligations to anyone or anything, and any suggestion otherwise is fascist.

This is a capitalist/authoritarian defense mechanism, like an economic form of mutually assured destruction. Without the capitalists and their cronies in office, the society they have left us would implode. People don't know how to live without them, they've lost that core component of humanity that kept us alive through so much hardship. If you take the cronies out of office they can just put new ones in. If you get rid of the current capitalists new ones will take their places. But that's all moot, because, apart from a revolution you can't get rid of the current cronies or capitalists. You can't have a revolution either, because they control the media. No one would support it when all the propaganda opposes it, and everyone knows that the removal of their system would result in our society imploding, and even if a revolution suceeds, the massive failure would result in us going back to capitalism almost immediately. Most people just confuse our system with all of humanity, which is why you probably thought I was referring to society as a whole, like most people do.

The problem is that you can't go straight to anarchy. You need an intermediate step to get (some) people ready (obviously it's not a cookie cutter solution, different approaches are required for different societies). You need a new authoritarian power structure. Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Chavez and Castro and many others have already figured this out. Socialism is the preparation step, to destroy all the crap that capitalists have spewed around. The important part, though, is that the more authoritarian power-structure must be subjected to greater checks and controls from the people, like in Venezuela. The people must be able to vote politicians out of power. Politicians shouldn't need to whore themselves out to corporations to get into power. Politicians who do whore themselves out to corporations should be removed from power. If these aren't followed, the constitution must unequivocally guarantee the right of the people to rebel, must make it illegal for the government to use its influence to prevent legitimate revolution, and must provide everything necessary to guarantee that the people can rebel without getting massacred or scared away. If those controls are in place, then it will be safe for the government to start correcting the problems which have lead to people being irresponsible morons. A generation or two later, and it would be time for anarchy. It's a risky detour from the goal, but it's essential to make the progression from capitalism.
 
The americans of 250 years ago where a different species from Modern-Day Man. Those humans of old were capable of building a house where they needed it before winter came; capable of feeding themselves in any biome with wildlife. And when humans of this time fought, it was a personal, abrupt thing.

What the modern propaganda machine, humans are taken from the ages of four years old into a reeducation system that convinces children of lies. I believed heartily that "genetically modified foods" would make huge vegetables that would feed the world. I find out that the "modifications" where to make the food grow pesticides in its cells.

But if you really think about it, children in Western society are started on the path of systemization even earlier than 4 years old. The ever-present, invasive Television pumps out garbage round the clock for small children to absorb. When my wife watches shows like "CSI", for some reason I start to get mad, and uncomfortable watching shootings and seeing decomposing bodies.

The television, I think, is what brought the final downfall of Man. A self-devised way to strangle our own minds, and pollute our own reason.

As for transfer to anarchy: I have become a rather defeatist anarchist at times. I don't see how me or my friends could help the movement, except in small, meaningless ways. And I will second your opinion, I greatly support and admire Chavez, especially after learning his story as president. I also support Cuba and Castro, but not so greatly as I admire Chavez. I think that any rebuilding of post-climate change Earth (aka post-capitalist ;) ) will be brought about by countries like these, with their social governments.
 
I also support Cuba and Castro, but not so greatly as I admire Chavez. I think that any rebuilding of post-climate change Earth (aka post-capitalist ;) ) will be brought about by countries like these, with their social governments.
What a strange kind of anarchist. I don't support statists of any brand, whether socialist or capitalist, feminist or fascist. Although I will say that Chavez seems genuine and I like his in-your-face attitude to the Bushies, ultimately he is part of the problem. All Presidents are.
 
yes, but for revolution to occur, there must be sympathetic nation states to support an ugly insurgency in north america.

i agree with you, i do not like any national governments, and just as chavez gives to the poor, he takes from the rich, infringing upon them, emphasizing classism in new ways. And, as always, a remote government of any kind will be evil because of the centralization of power and the arbitrary ways it is excised.
 
Back
Top Bottom