"I do not watch films I find offensive. I don't read books I find offensive."
I do. Sometimes several times. Otherwise how do I know exactly how outraged to be?? Thats the Daily Mail way!
My sketchbook thread:
Yet the system you have at the moment is the anti-thesis to that. It's said that in america everyone can be successful if they want. But looking at countries with a more socialistic structure it's much easier for anyone to "move up" in society and be successful if they want to.but we don't want a system that holds people down. That's what we proudly refer to as the American dream.
Last edited by tobbA; November 3rd, 2012 at 04:03 PM.
The problem with actual communism is that it hasn't really worked anywhere it's been tried. And, it has led to large numbers of mass graves and wheelbarrows full of skulls.
Surely, Karl Marx must be rolling in his grave about now considering the working conditions of the Chinese kids who make iPads for Americans and Europeans in yet another "workers' paradise."
And the reason Commies aren't taken too seriously today: refer to Peta's campaign promises in my above post-- she wants to "seize the banks"(!)-- that's just crazy talk. . .
I would not say that it is the anti-thesis...
The thing is right now the employment situation is pretty bad, so I can see where that impression comes from. However I know a lot of people that have made it, in fact more have than have not. They may not have made it so well as they would like, but to be middle class over here means to live pretty well. Even a lot of our poor are fat. We take for granted one of the highest living standards in the world. It is possible over here for an individual to amass enough wealth to rival world nations.
One of the major problems over here at the moment is the drive to make everyone go to college. If everyone has a degree then it is the same as no one having one. Now we have companies demanding degrees for jobs that should require none. At the same time skilled labor is cheapened since it is so readily avalible. The fear is that soon McDonalds and their ilk will require a degree.
Another major problem we have over here in the jobs market is illegal immigration. Don't get me wrong because I've worked in construction for many years and have many friends who aren't legal. It is though a fair statement to say that they take jobs from legal US residents. I have seen jobsites flooded with illegals. The companys that hire them sometimes pay them top dollar, because they still get them at half the price by avoiding all the taxes, workman's compensation, and other Issues. People say that they only take the jobs that no one else want, but that's just not true. Illegals aren't all nice honest people either, some actually are criminals... I've known a few.
"The problem with actual communism is that it hasn't really worked anywhere it's been tried. And, it has led to large numbers of mass graves and wheelbarrows full of skulls."
We covered this already: "Communism is a superficially comprehensive theory of human behaviour that is based on flawed axioms and, if acted upon, would result in either failure or a hellishly unpleasant state of post-industrial feudalism."
"What is vital for such a scheme, however, and what was always missing in the planned economies of our world's experience, is the continual, intimate and decisive participation of the mass of the citizenry in determining these goals, and designing as well as implementing the plans which should lead towards them."
"Even a lot of our poor are fat. "
Sounds great! Go America!
Last edited by Velocity Kendall; November 3rd, 2012 at 01:05 PM.
Marx would be horrified at the way communism turned out - it was meant to be based on the middle classes.
Any one read In The Wet by Neville Shute? That had a novel way of voting - everyone had one, but you could gain extra votes for getting so far in education, giving something back to society. There was a maximum of 5 votes a person could earn. Not sure how it'd work in practice, but it would cut down the nutters.
Actually, the main reason for that is that if you're above a certain level of poverty, a lot of fat food is the most expensive food you can afford. Which in itself is a problem.Even a lot of our poor are fat.
But sure. Compared to some parts of the world even being below the standard of living in the western world makes you fortunate. I'm sure most bums live healthier lives than a lot of people in the third world. But does that really mean we should be content with "not good enough, but I'll get by", when there's something to be done about it?
As for the rest... Sure, those are legitimate issues, which I think are more or less common all over the western world. But it's kind of besides the point I was making.
I'm not arguing that we have a great system. I freely acknowledge that it has flaws like every other world government. I do however believe that while the ideologies of socialism and even communism are aimed at creating a greater good, they cannot work as long as there is greed. Corruption turns ideals designed for good into the practice of evil. That is why most Americans do not embrace either socialism or communism.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
sb's sb: Crit it! Hurt it! Make it cry!
Which is exactly the problem with a capitalistic system. It cannot work as long as there is greed. If everyone was altruistic, throwing their money around everywhere and trying to improve the well being of everybody else, then sure, capitalism would be great. However, that's not how the world works. Which is why you need a system that promotes this kind of cooperation. Lessening the value and importance of getting rich and "making it" will in fact also lessen the greed. Because the reward for being greedy is also lessened.. I do however believe that while the ideologies of socialism and even communism are aimed at creating a greater good, they cannot work as long as there is greed.
Well, yes. That's the definition of corruption. What's that got to do with anything?Corruption turns ideals designed for good into the practice of evil.
The only part I hate about the socialism stigma is the dent it puts in any plans for a universal type healthcare. Because the healthcare now is fucking pathetic. Pay out the ass for care which is a complete tossup whether you get good care or terrible care which could flat out kill you if you don't know any better.
Healthcare is one of the few things I think should not be a privileged in some countries the damn internet is a right but making sure people aren't dying in their own country isn't.
As far as I can work out, even rightwingish sociologists are of the opinion that Marx was correct in much of his diagnosis of the ills of society. They aren't always too enthusiastic about his proposed remedies.
The problem is that, despite subjects like political "science," politics is one field where humans remain pretty much mired in medieval thought, in that we tend to put ideology before everything else. Politics should be a real science, based on observation and experimentation. If you think the economy will be improved by, say, nationalizing all the mines, then nationalize all the mines under carefully controlled conditions, monitor the effects carefully, and see if it works or not. If it works, it works, whatever your ideology says. If it doesn't, privatize the mines again.
Ideally, the voting public will base their vote on how effectively and in how rational a way governments go about this sort of experimentation, rather than on whether a particular policy worked or not. Here in South Africa, our biggest problem at the moment isn't that our government's policies are all wrong-headed. Some of them probably are; many are not. But the government is corrupt and utterly inefficient in implementing any of its grand schemes. Thus it seems to me that within reasonable limits, it actually doesn't matter all that much what policies a government follows, as long as it can implement them effectively and is flexible about changing them if necessary.
Alas, most of our politicians (and most politicians all over the planet), and most of the voting public (and I may well be as guilty here as anyone else), look at everything through spectacles that are so heavily tinted by their pet ideologies that they simply cannot see the world clearly.
Last edited by blogmatix; November 3rd, 2012 at 11:48 PM.
My sketchbook thread:
Back to da arection. . .
Here're interesting portraits of Romney and Obama:
Yeah. . . yeah. . . it's from that "socialist" PBS. . .
Interesting seeing clips and debates from early in their political careers (Well only Romneys so far in the video, not that far into it).
Heres the BBC's Andrew Marr on Obama and the differences between this election and the one before.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20168393Originally Posted by Andrew Marr
Last edited by Velocity Kendall; November 4th, 2012 at 09:14 AM.
To date in the Presidential run, that's also been a critique of Romney-- he's pretty short on details.
Nowadays, as someone I can't remember stated: "Out of 315 Million Americans, the RNC picked the one guy who can't run against Obamacare. . ." Considering, as many critics on the Left have pointed out, Obamacare is basically Romneycare applied on a Federal level.
And, Romney, being the father of the "individual mandate," has pretty much shot himself in the foot in re many conservatives. But, as you'll see from the video, the "individual mandate" actually has its roots in the conservative think tank the Heritage Foundation!
But, of course this gives evidence to the idea that Obama has actually governed the U.S. from a "center right" stance which greatly pisses off the American Left over his failure to secure some sort of Canadian style "single payer" system.
Romneys running on the So Youre Sick of All the Problems Barack Obama Invented like How Youre Poor Now and Shit, Vote for Some New Guy ticket.
he'll be just as useless as Obama, flying death robots abroad, squabbling and frustration at home, the whole system seems broken.
Last edited by Velocity Kendall; November 5th, 2012 at 08:59 AM.
The squabbling at home is what happens when your society is a melting pot of the world and everyone has a view they are trying to express. When Americans are unified on something that is when the shit hits the fan.
Normally I don't express political views anymore because it starts up debates and I just frankly don't care as much anymore. I still say it's a douche vs a turdsandwich as southpark had it pretty much spot on.
The one thing I will say is that video and the whole "Bain revolutionizing industry" little section just kind of proves my viewpoint. The guys companys entire purpose was making companies 'efficient'. He fired god knows how many people from these companies and I don't know Bains history but I would bet anything they were ridiculously quick on the gun to outsourcing labor overseas because their entire purpose was profits.
It went into how this mentality 'got rid of' the golfing buddy type ceo. They thought they were heroes type of thing. But now what do we have? CEO's that do things like raise their pensions and completely remove their employees instead. Hey since our profits are up lets bump up our exec bonus's.
Simply how can you run on the campaign of job growth when you spawned that kind of shit. It's the complete opposite. But then again Romney changes his stances every day. Whatever gets votes I guess. Just this flip flopping alone means you can't trust a word he says *shrugs*.
There's so many videos I'll just pick one at random they all make the point.
But, it's kind of what we're stuck with, politically.
In the first case, it's the Democrats "Keynesian Economics" of spending us into prosperity. In the second case, it's your described "trickle down" idea of the Republicans where, supposedly, if the ultra-rich get tax cuts it'll free up money they will magically use to "create jobs."
It doesn't seem that either ploy works very well.
Clinton may have been a morally weak, self-serving scoundrel, but he was a pretty effective politician. Obama's pretty much squandered four years in not being able to "reach across the aisle" and get things done in the manner of Clinton. His greatest asset at this point, politically, has been the RNC's choice of Romney as their candidate!
Over all David Icke's perpective is right. All governments turn against their citizens. Why?
Help yourself. It's around nine hours of presentation.
David Icke – Remember Who You Are (Wembley Arena London 10-27-2012)
Last edited by k2mountain; November 4th, 2012 at 11:54 PM.
I haven't heard that name in ages..... ... ... but.... .... ... isn't that the same guy that spouts crap about reptilian shape shifters controlling the world and such conspiracies?
"Over all David Icke's perpective is right."
haha no it isnt.
its interesting how Clinton is rememebered. i was in Kansas during the Clinton years, and travelled to both coasts from that central spot through middle America, and the country felt confident and optimistic, long before the nightmare and collective insanity of 911.
But how much can Clinton really be held responsible for the economic boom that was happening at the time?
Clinton also bombed the shit out of Kosovo remember too. A just war perhaps but it still killed hundreds of bystanders by accident..
This is pretty interesting: Views on the elections from correspondants around the world.
and from many other places round the world
I think this reflects many global citizens views on the election in general
I thought this part of the German one gave a very good breakdown of most Europeans attitudes to the Republicans:Originally Posted by India
Originally Posted by germany
Last edited by Velocity Kendall; November 5th, 2012 at 09:12 AM.