Not even stupid people believe that.Americans...prefer to believe that they live in this great utopian society...
Not even stupid people believe that.Americans...prefer to believe that they live in this great utopian society...
That doesn't change the plutocratic nature of your society.Um, that's quite an exaggeration there, young feller (gal?). I wouldn't argue if you'd said that probably a majority of Americans simply don't give it much thought. But of the ones who do, quite a large number of us more or less agree with you. Many Americans have a single-issue focus in their politics: racism, the environment, religion, drugs, abortion, animal rights, censorship, immigration, health care, terrorism, whatever. So they support organizations that work those issues such as PETA and AARP, rather than political parties.
So presidential powers such as veto or whatever are irrelevant? How about all the other powers that come from the president? Look all the shit that Bush accomplished and get me back on that, will ya?Actually that is the reason voter turnout is so low: many people do understand that it doesn't make much difference who wins. Even when the occasional candidate is elected who distinguishes himself from the pack, like Jimmy Carter, the "system" just rolls right over him.
So you are giving up?We libertarians and Libertarians try to get the message across that government has just gotten too damn big, so no matter who wins, it will continue to be horribly meddlesome, horribly expensive, and horribly ineffective.
Again, look at Bush and get me back on that... LOL!When the government has effectively nationalized entire sectors like energy, charity, education, transportation and health care, it doesn't matter who's in charge and what his philosophy is: those sectors are guaranteed to sputter and fail.
Ever read sandy's posts?![]()
![]()
He has done nothing the other presidents haven't done before.
He has pushed the limit of those actions far beyond what has been seen in nearly a hundred years. The power that the Executive now hold is *way* out of line with the 1/3 balance that it's supposed to be. Refusing oversight, avoiding laws it doesn't care for, ignoring subpoenas. And the Congress let this happen, out of fear of being called Unpatriotic.
.
What if you could make people enjoy obeying you? Would that be considered cruel?
Would that be cruel or otherwise?
First, definining slaves. Do they need to be in chains? Do they need to be forced to work? What would consist this "force"? Does it need to be physical force? Can it be psychological? Maybe this "force" is simply power?
My answer is simple. Slaves don't need chains to be slaves. They only need to be stuck in a situation in which they need to work to barely survive. And the best way to keep them from rebelling is by tricking them into believing that they are free.
Yup. And systematically dumbening the population through the media and primetime!hum. But sex kinda works both ways, doesn't it? Seems different from the government. I just can't imagine government having that kind of appeal. Although to a lot of people I guess it has, all the patriots and soldiers... and it has those flashy, cool ribbons that you can wear if you're good... so there's an adequate rewarding system.
Keeping people slaves by tricking them into thinking they're free. Hm. Maybe by hiding anything they (we) could directly complain about? Make it so complicated, they don't really know WHAT they would rebel against. Or how. And then add some specific annoyances, direct targets (lousy TV, high prices) that people would complain about.
Who's givin' up?"So you are giving up?" - when the horse is dead, it may be best to give up kicking it.