General Music Chat

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/11/01-11

Neither.
A Moral Republic.

lol... Yeah I know, moral will probably never go with power.
If representatives actually represented their people honorably, things would be pretty good. Then votes would matter, and a person would stand a chance of figuring out where their vote should go.

It sounds bad, but I don't think every person should be able to vote. Much like I don't think every person should be allowed to drive, own a gun, or use alcohol or other behaviour changing drugs.

I wouldn't let my autistic nephew own firearms and tote them around - and I wouldn't send him to the polls.


Ya dig, or do I just sound like an a-hole?

Ya dig, or do I just sound like an a-hole?

No, just like THIS a-hole

http://youtu.be/8GBAsFwPglw

You have to acknowledge that a pure democracy has some serious risk. Every vote holds the same weight, wether it's a well informed, intelligent person, or a crazed midget.

In this day and age with technology, an 'every individual vote tallied' approach is possible, but is it wise?

Should we elect our officials via facebook? (shudder)

Come on Mikey, we know what the answer is in the near future - Ron Paul.
I want you to take the church of the subgenius symbol and use Ron Pauls face instead. Then I'll help you spread it virally.

Ron Paul loves you.

You have to acknowledge that a pure democracy has some serious risk. Every vote holds the same weight, wether it's a well informed, intelligent person, or a crazed midget.

In this day and age with technology, an 'every individual vote tallied' approach is possible, but is it wise?

Should we elect our officials via facebook? (shudder)

Come on Mikey, we know what the answer is in the near future - Ron Paul.
I want you to take the church of the subgenius symbol and use Ron Pauls face instead. Then I'll help you spread it virally.

Ron Paul loves you.

America has never had a "pure democracy." We are a democratic republic. The founders were quite aware of the risks of too much or too little public involvement. That is why the balance of powers were devised.

But they also mistrusted political PARTIES and tried to prevent them from forming, nevermind the corrupt influence of legalized bribery known as "campaign donations." Until this system can be changed, to produce better candidates, it doesn't matter WHO votes. The choices have already been made FOR YOU. In the present system, choosing between the given candidates by lottery would make little difference.

Like ants, humans aren't very impressive on an individual level, but they often compensate for their shortcomings in masses.

http://www.archive.org/details/crowdsstudyofgen00leeg

Right, but the title said "Democracy or Finance?"
So I went with neither because of the risk of 'Democracy', and typed Moral Republic.

I'm stressed and sad now...

Mike, actually people ARE impressive individually. It's those countries that have relegated humans to worker ant level (North Korea, Cuba, Soviet Union, etc.) that aren't ver impressive....

You have to acknowledge that a pure democracy has some serious risk. Every vote holds the same weight, wether it's a well informed, intelligent person, or a crazed midget.

In this day and age with technology, an 'every individual vote tallied' approach is possible, but is it wise?

Should we elect our officials via facebook? (shudder)

Come on Mikey, we know what the answer is in the near future - Ron Paul.
I want you to take the church of the subgenius symbol and use Ron Pauls face instead. Then I'll help you spread it virally.

Ron Paul loves you.

America has never had a "pure democracy." We are a democratic republic. The founders were quite aware of the risks of too much or too little public involvement. That is why the balance of powers were devised.

I call Bullshit.. ... Can you prove what you just asserted about the founders...? The reason for the balance of powers has NOTHING to do with public involvement . What a f**k moron you are!

But they also mistrusted political PARTIES and tried to prevent them from forming, nevermind the corrupt influence of legalized bribery known as "campaign donations." Until this system can be changed, to produce better candidates, it doesn't matter WHO votes. The choices have already been made FOR YOU. In the present system, choosing between the given candidates by lottery would make little difference.

Please, Just make sure you don't vote..

Like ants, humans aren't very impressive on an individual level, but they often compensate for their shortcomings in masses.

Correction Mike, You aren't very impressive on ANY level , let alone individual.. Go Seek help from a psychiatrist. You have just demonstrated the classic signs of narcissism and socio-pathic tendancies

Correction Mike, You aren't very impressive on ANY level , let alone individual.. Go Seek help from a psychiatrist. You have just demonstrated the classic signs of narcissism and socio-pathic tendancies

WOW did you just learn those big words?
Because you don't understand what they mean.

I've been to psychiatrists.
I've had my fill of them.
I know what I am and what I am not.
Do you?

Mike, actually people ARE impressive individually. It's those countries that have relegated humans to worker ant level (North Korea, Cuba, Soviet Union, etc.) that aren't ver impressive....

I think you are confusing what I tried to say as somehow supportive of dictatorships, where power is concentrated in the hands of a few. Quite the opposite.

America has never had a "pure democracy." We are a democratic republic. The founders were quite aware of the risks of too much or too little public involvement. That is why the balance of powers were devised.

I call Bullshit.. ... Can you prove what you just asserted about the founders...? The reason for the balance of powers has NOTHING to do with public involvement . What a f**k moron you are!

I got ahead of myself.
By "balance of powers" I was not referring just to the balance of government branches. I was more broadly speaking of their view of human nature and how to blunt the negative aspects of direct voting while maintaining a system that represented the will of the electorate. But, that is a very long complicated subject to get into. Like, should only white wealthy landowning men be allowed to vote? Are slaves 3/4 of a human being? And other such nonsense.

why does no one call out china for being communist , is it because they offer a capitalist market to the economic powers of the west ? they are waging economic war on the USA by manipulation of currency & getting all the help they need from multi national corps. my generation invested 54,000+ lives in the domino theory & now thanks to big money we are making them the new super power. by the way I think the word plutocrasy may appy here.

why does no one call out china for being communist , is it because they offer a capitalist market to the economic powers of the west ? they are waging economic war on the USA by manipulation of currency & getting all the help they need from multi national corps. my generation invested 54,000+ lives in the domino theory & now thanks to big money we are making them the new super power. by the way I think the word plutocrasy may appy here.

For that matter, why doesn't anyone call out multinational corporations for betraying America and helping China do that.

Oh, yeah! "snap" There is that Occupy Wall Street movement, which is doing that right now.