Ranting and Raving of the future of the US of A

Originally posted by EQandcivfanatic
THis is just seemingly the best area for a rant and rave of ideas that have been spinning out of my head.

-------------

With what follows, don't ever call me unpatriotic. I sing the national anthem, I have an American flag on my house (one of the few in the neighborhood i might add), and I believe that the ideals in the Declaration and Consitution are the noblest in the world. However, I do not believe democracy can work.

When the Founding Fathers first made our nation into a democracy, the system was perfect for the 13 colonies. It was a relatively small nation compared to the modern day United States. Then there were no corporations. As the nation grew and economic ideas advanced, the United States democracy grew larger and like a big stick, became more unwieldy the larger it was. With the War between the States, the first cracks showed. As Lincoln said, "A house divided cannot stand". However what he neglected to mention that a house too focused on its neighbors and not the termites gnawing at the structures will not stand either.

After the Civil War, the American economy has boomed. The later world wars have expanded us to a world power and with the possible exception of China the most powerful nation in the world. However, two details have plagued us more than any terrorist attack, Cold War, or Asian war ever could. Corporations and the weak-willed people.

I'll start with the first one. Corporations. Corporate organizations are becoming the power in American politics, not the will of the people. Also they have begun to remove one of the American people's greatest traits, individuality. Corporations employ people and steal their ideas and patents and mark them as their own. No matter how the great the invention, the company will take the idea and sell it, leaving the inventor with his relatively small paycheck and middle class life. On the other hand, instead of selling inventions they will snuff them out. For example, numerous times, gas effienct, electric run, or even flying cars have come close to entering the market. However, gas companies and other transport organizations buy them out and prevent the ideas from spreading, leaving us with gas-guzzling SUVs and more air pollution. A comparision I've made with these companies before is to the Dark Age Catholic Church, snuffling out new ideas and theories in exchange for what is current, except the Catholics were motivated by more decent ideals.

But on to how these evil corporate beasts affect us as a nation. For one, perhaps you may have noticed corporate logos that frequently appear at Presidental or party rallies? The corporations fund a President's election whether Republican or Democrat, and no matter what they will always expect something in return. Some times we catch the President in his crime, but mostly we don't. Corporations one day could possibly even or perhaps already do influence the votes of their workers, undermining the whole democratic structure. No matter which canidate is elected, corporations will always be able to influence a President, Senator, or Congressman's decision. Hand in hand with these abominations are lobbyists, giving money to whatever congressmen will do what they want. Do we Americans want to see our democracy run by a few CEOs? I sincerely doubt it. All in all, our democracy has been corrupted from the bottom with influence on the voters, to almost outright bribery and "calling in favors" in the highest levels of our government. A nation based on corruption cannot last. Something must be done to remove the corporate threat to our nation.

Then on to the more sensitive topic, the people of the United States. I do not know how others in different nations may regard us, but i do know what i think of us. We have been brought up to make money. Education in colleges and high schools are to prepare us to make money. If we have "good" parents, they tell us to strive for the highest. We all wish to make money. Some may think that this is a good thing, and is best. After all, these people would say, isn't it the goal of the nation to remain prosperous and have a thriving economy? I say no. Those brave individuals who attempt to make business on their own are usually removed or bought out by the corporate America. Another definition of a thriving US economy is the CEOs getting richer with middle and lower classes perhaps making some decent money but without any hope of growing rich. These CEOs are opposed to change, and this influences the other people of the States. People have grown to distrust change and development. Of course, some say that we have embraced change and new ideas, look at all the new advancements growing everyday! Of course in my cynical view, I say, what? Do you mean the smaller cell phones and faster computers? The faster computers beginning delayed by the computer industry slowing things on purpose to sell upgrades? I do not call this progress.

Then on another point is our over cautiousness and short attention. After 9/11 the roads were a parade of flagged cars. How many flags on cars do you see today? After 9/11 would anyone have dared to say anything unpatriotic as we waged war against terror? Now protests are common (a detail which is of interest is that some corporations pay people to protest). People have moved on to new fads. We now care more about work and becoming wealthier than we do about the improvement of our nation. This must change. Unfortunately, anything short of a major war resulting in the invasion/destruction of the united States will fail to do this. Also genetics and cloning could one day prove to be a great boon to the world, and it is being held back by people afraid of a possible future in which they may lose jobs or be immoral to their religion. Even worse, is the natural skepticism which is being bred into many. I will not be a hypocrite and say that this is purely bad, but I will say that if it occurs to a massive extent this could hold technological advancement back even worse than corporations or our corrupt government ever could.

America stands still. We would like to think we are advancing, but we are not. A nation which does not advance will fall. A nation which does not expand will decay. During the Middle Ages the Church held back technology, prosecuting those with contrary views. Today history is being repeated with the corporations and the weakness of our people replacing the Church. Something must change. The government needs to be less corrupt, the people stronger in their will and longer attention span.

I believe that the American democracy cannot last much longer as corrupt as it is. Look at the former Soviet Union. As years past their leaders became corrupt and old Lenin and Marxist ideas faded away to capitalism with a communist cover. Then revolution occured and the Union collapsed. Like with the Soviets, a termite is gnawing at the structure of the house of the United States. With our government turning us toward foreign wars, and terrorist attacks, it is no wonder we begin to ignore and miss growing corruption in the ranks of Washington.

What will happen when the American government grows corrupt even to the ignorant public's notice? New elections? I doubt it. They would just install a new series of corrupt officials. Perhaps protests or riots? The corporations they work for will fire the rioters or protesters for going against the corporation's chosen government. There will only be one thing which could occur which would possibly succeed. Revolution. I do not want to see my nation torn apart like it was in the 1860s. The only way to avoid this is an end to corruption. We must investigate corporate crimes and allow no bail to the inevitable amount of CEOs caught. We must always watch our representatives in Washington, never keep our eyes closed. We must elect those who are not heavily "sponsered" by corporations. We must revive old America.
Click to expand...

You know nothing about corporations. Who made you car? Who made your shoes? Who gives you phone service, and cable TV? Where do you get your news? Who do you get food from, and who grows it? CORPORATIONS, CORPORATIONS, CORPORATIONS, CORPORATIONS, CORPORATIONS!!!!!!!!! Those corporations are what makes America great, they provide us with an economy, they provide us with paychecks and tax dollars, they give us technology, AND THEY DO IT IN A GOOD MANNER.


I WOULD RATHER LIVE IN A CORRUPT WORLD THAN DIE IN AN UNCORUPT WORLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Originally posted by Kamilian1
1. Along with the many who went into churches and temples and other places of worship, came police officers - something I witnessed at my own church. The police went in only to make sure that a) nothing that anyone might misconstrue as "anti-American" was said, and b) to make sure that the priest said "God bless America" at the end of the ceremony. This was appauling - I was supportive of the invasion of Afghanistan to oust the Taliban, but I was not supportive of the invasion of religion annd religious worship and ceremony.
Click to expand...

Since I was not not one of those people who rushed to church, can you perhaps expand upon this claim?

You are claiming that the "police" (Federal, State, County, City, Local?) went into church to ensure no Anti-American statements and that "God Bless America" was said.

How was this conveyed? Signs around their necks, a statement from the pulpit? Was a law passed somewhere dictating the content of religious rites?

What were the consequences of not saying, "God Bless America" after the service? Flogging? Thumbscrews? Arrest and trial?

Did no one speak out, or raise a hue and cry? Did not even one religious leader choose not to say, "God Bless America" to force the hands of the "police" and call this heinous treatment to light?

Most importantly, do you have any source that backs up this rather incredulous claim?
 
“One of which i believe is Arnold Schwartzenagger”

I knew it, just like I posted in the ‘support Arnold’ thread. Why do people think former actors are sincere?

“I admit that there will always be some level of corruption in society, but i see no need for it to be in government.”

There will always be corruption in society and even more in government. Ever hear the phrase ‘power corrupts’? There is a kernel of truth there, and moreover people who desire power tend to be more susceptible to corruption. That is why it is important to have a peaceful revolution every 4 years or so (also known as an election), and have checks and balances, and force government to operate out in the open.

“I can't stand people who complain that it was so much better "in the good old days." The truth is often far different from romanticzed fictions.”

I can stand the people, even like them. But I can’t stand it when the start the complaining on this line. It’s just like old folks complaining about how disrespectful and lazy the kids are nowadays.

“After the brick layer builds a foundation of brick, what holds up the house afterwards? The bricks.”

Well if the house was built improperly then it will fall. In some sense the invisible hand of the architect holds up the house.

What we need to do is lay out a blueprint for how to keep corporate influence on government to an acceptible level. The most important thing IMO is transparency of information. This can and should be done within the context of a 'democratic' system.
 
Originally posted by Noldodan
On the subject of corporations corrpting officials, and a solution: I definetly agree that we should have publicly funded elections. Each candidate for each post would be supplied with the same amount of money to fund his/her campaign.
Click to expand...


If you think Corporations exert power simply through "electoral campaigning" then you are much mistaken.

In deciding where to locate employment and their role in providing it and the degree to which they can be quite flexible in moving it around is of much greater leverage politically.

A Corporation will ask favours and the threat of doing damage t employment and/or the economy is a major reason why Politicians will pay heed.
 
h4ppy, who made th goods before corporations. individual owners. A world without corporations is possible.

Gothmog, Adam Smith's invisable hand does hold up economy of people after the structure is built. He also was ardent in his assistence that government sghould be separate from economy. However, (i have not finished the Wealth of Nations yet, so not sure about this) he says nothing about how some sections of the economy should stay out of the government. Also elections do nothing to replace power hungry CEOs who can influence one government just as well as the last.
 
Originally posted by EQandcivfanatic
h4ppy, who made th goods before corporations. individual owners. A world without corporations is possible.

Gothmog, Adam Smith's invisable hand does hold up economy of people after the structure is built. He also was ardent in his assistence that government sghould be separate from economy. However, (i have not finished the Wealth of Nations yet, so not sure about this) he says nothing about how some sections of the economy should stay out of the government. Also elections do nothing to replace power hungry CEOs who can influence one government just as well as the last.
Click to expand...

Not anymore. Family businesses can't make cars, or computers, or runs newspapers and TV chanels. Family farms cannot produce enough food for people to eat. Famliy owned businesses cannot charge descent rates on complex goods. It would cause uncontrollable inflation or deflation. Complex machines need to made on assembly lines. In the United States small businesses are geting out of the manufatering business altogether. Not only that but scientific progress and long distance transportation would grind to a hault.

I repeat, I WOULD RATHER LIVE IN A CORRUPT WORLD THAN DIE IN AN UNCORRUPT WORLD.
 
I didn't say anything about elections. Read my last comment again. I was just saying that it is possible to design a structure, within our current system, that will achieve the ends you seek.

One problematic issue is that even with access to information people will often still make the "wrong" choice. Just look at GWB, clearly under the influence of which you speak, the information was right there. Look at his vice prez for god's sake. Yet people choose to not see.
 
Originally posted by Gothmog
I didn't say anything about elections. Read my last comment again. I was just saying that it is possible to design a structure, within our current system, that will achieve the ends you seek.

One problematic issue is that even with access to information people will often still make the "wrong" choice. Just look at GWB, clearly under the influence of which you speak, the information was right there. Look at his vice prez for god's sake. Yet people choose to not see.
Click to expand...

The "wrong" choice?

The alternative was Gore :lol:
 
Yes, in that case the lesser of two evils - as I said a problematic issue. Still, GWB's depth of corruption is not approached by Gore IMO.

In a wold with access to the necessary information, and the education to use it properly, there would have been better options. R Nadar perhaps?
 
Originally posted by EQandcivfanatic
h4ppy, who made th goods before corporations. individual owners. A world without corporations is possible.

Gothmog, Adam Smith's invisable hand does hold up economy of people after the structure is built. He also was ardent in his assistence that government sghould be separate from economy. However, (i have not finished the Wealth of Nations yet, so not sure about this) he says nothing about how some sections of the economy should stay out of the government. Also elections do nothing to replace power hungry CEOs who can influence one government just as well as the last.
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as an invisible hand. That was just a mystical patchup for a hole in an otherwise excellent theory.
 
knowltok2. i did not say EVERYONE went to church after 9/11. i said MANY. "MANY" is hardly a synonym for "EVERYONE".
the priest hesitated at the end of the service cuz it was like "why is the police here" and THEN he said "God bless America" - AFTER he glanced at the police officers and the translators they had with them.
people were muttering and whispering about why the cops were there.
and, unless someone here goes to the same church I go to, and I will not reveal the church name or location for obvious personal-safety reasons, I can't "prove" it. It's not like I bring a digital camera to church to record and review what happened and what was said at the mass.
The only proof I have, the only witnesses, are close to, if not more than, 100 people that were there, too. And they're not in CFC. I did not make this up - I wouldn't make up a thing like that. It is true, it happened. You don't have to belive me, but it happened. It was an invasion of religious worship and freedom by the law enforcement officials. In fact, even before the end-of-the-ceremony procession (the priest always goes down the center aisle and goes towards the back hall where the exits are at the end of the mass), JUST AFTER he said "God bless America" the police officers just stood up and left, as if all they were waiting for were those 3 words. Didn't even have the courtesy and respect to stay the 4 or 5 minutes until the mass totally ended.
If you would want other witnesses, then you would have to a) know where I live, and I will not reveal it and b)interview about 100 people, and the priest of the church. If that wouldn't convince you, then NOTHING would.
I know what happened. I know what I saw. THOSE PEOPLE know what they saw. It DID happen. And I am SORRY that I don't photograph and record every single mass that goes on. But I just don't do that.
 
Originally posted by Kamilian1
knowltok2. i did not say EVERYONE went to church after 9/11. i said MANY. "MANY" is hardly a synonym for "EVERYONE".

Reread my post. You will not find that I said that you said, "everyone". I said I didn't. Period.

the priest hesitated at the end of the service cuz it was like "cuz it was like" sounds like your interpretation of what the priest thought. "why is the police here" and THEN he said "God bless America" - AFTER he glanced at the police officers and the translators they had with them.

So there were no signs, nor any other indication that saying, "God Bless America" was required in any way. This sounds like an assumption that someone made, nothing more.


I did not make this up - I wouldn't make up a thing like that. It is true, it happened.

What sounds true to me is that the police (you still didn't identify them) listened to a sermon. Beyond that, I see speculation. You don't have to belive me, but it happened. It was an invasion of religious worship and freedom by the law enforcement officials. I wasn't aware that police listening to a religious sermon was a violation of religious freedom. In fact, even before the end-of-the-ceremony procession (the priest always goes down the center aisle and goes towards the back hall where the exits are at the end of the mass), JUST AFTER he said "God bless America" the police officers just stood up and left, as if all they were waiting for were those 3 words. Didn't even have the courtesy and respect to stay the 4 or 5 minutes until the mass totally ended.

Again, it sounds like they were there to hear what was said. Much of the extra meaning appears to have been added by you. If they were discurteous in leaving before the close of ceremonies, that is too bad, but not a crime, nor an indication that they were there to hear those three words.
.... If that wouldn't convince you, then NOTHING would.Convinced that the police showed up and listened, yes. Convinced that they were requiring patriotic statements, no. I'll grant you that if the sermon had included "Death to America" and Calls for a holy war, there might have been follow-up surveilance.

I know what happened. I know what I saw. THOSE PEOPLE know what they saw. It DID happen. And I am SORRY that I don't photograph and record every single mass that goes on. But I just don't do that. Obviously not. However if you had, it sounds like all you would have is pictures and a recording of silent cops. Not damning evidence of persecution.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by andrewgprv


Please explain why publically funded elections would stiffle out the smaller parties and candidates, if anything I think it would give them a louder voice. Corporations usually only donate to rep or dems but if rep and dems and greens and libs all got the same funding I think the smaller guys would get more of a say.
Click to expand...

Winner-take-all districts still encourage a 2-party system.
 
And yet somehow we Canucks still produced a five party parliament with our winner take all system... :D
 
And yet somehow we Canucks still produced a five party parliament with our winner take all system...
Click to expand...

Hm, as foreigner, that makes me think, that in Canada, parties are very regional, strong in some states, very weak in other states. So, politics are a big part regional interest groups, bigger then in other countries.
 
Originally posted by Richard III
And yet somehow we Canucks still produced a five party parliament with our winner take all system... :D
Click to expand...

Ya we do suck, but not that badly, and that is the problem. PEOPLE DON'T SEEM TO MIND MEDIOCRITY
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GoodEnoughForMe
Should the US Invade Greenland (Denmark) & Panama
24 25 26
Replies
515
Views
18K
Crezth
Crezth
Birdjaguar
Fighting Back
3 4 5
Replies
81
Views
3K
Valka D'Ur
Valka D'Ur
Klaus Hergersheimer
Drugs and the US market
4 5 6
Replies
112
Views
4K
Hygro
Hygro
Zardnaar
Ethics of Power
2
Replies
27
Views
918
Klaus Hergersheimer
Klaus Hergersheimer
bene_legionary
Moments of Spontaneity
Replies
1
Views
264
warpus
warpus
Back
Top Bottom