Post #190,503
1/17/05 6:05:32 PM
1/17/05 6:06:09 PM
|
Hmmm -- Sound familiar?
From the linked article: Why would Hitler and his associates turn a blind eye to an impending terrorist attack on their national congressional building or actually assist with such a horrific deed? Because they knew what government officials have known throughout history \ufffd that during extreme national emergencies, people are most scared and thus much more willing to surrender their liberties in return for \ufffdsecurity.\ufffd And that\ufffds exactly what happened during the Reichstag terrorist crisis. And has happened here as well. That's why I'm not as sanguine as Simon_Jester. Here, we've already got over 50% of the sacks-of-hair wanting to sacrifice real liberty for "security", and that number is not getting smaller. (And just wait until "No Child Left StandingBehind becomes fully "effective"....) [edit: Correctly referenced previous poster] jb4
shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf. BULLSHIT
Edited by jb4
Jan. 17, 2005, 06:06:09 PM EST
|
Post #190,565
1/18/05 8:19:12 AM
|
You're right, of course.
And for all the hand-wringing over my posts of late, the point as you so accurately state is moot. Liberty in a democracy cannot long last when the majority don't want it to. And I find myself ever refining my question. Now it is akin to, "Must our democracy be curtailed in the interest of the continuation of liberty?"
bcnu,
Mikem
Eine Leute. Eine Welt. Ein F\ufffdhrer.
(Just trying to be accepted in the New America)
|
Post #190,567
1/18/05 8:53:43 AM
|
A much more civilized way of saying
should we burn the village in order to save it... *chuckle*
You assume that liberty and democracy are not related, though. How can one be free, if there is no self-determination? How can one have self-determination, if one is part of a class denied representation in government?
What you advocate, IMO, is a hierarchy of privelege, determined by 'right thinking'. By political correctness.
[link|http://forfree.sytes.net|
] Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #190,653
1/18/05 6:29:40 PM
|
Oh.. we *haven't* a 'hierarchy of privilege', then?
|
Post #190,658
1/18/05 6:43:07 PM
1/18/05 6:43:52 PM
|
Succinct. Love it.
bcnu,
Mikem
Eine Leute. Eine Welt. Ein F\ufffdhrer.
(Just trying to be accepted in the New America)
Edited by mmoffitt
Jan. 18, 2005, 06:43:52 PM EST
|
Post #190,660
1/18/05 6:45:34 PM
|
It's the "Dogma of Otherness" all over again...
|
Post #190,681
1/18/05 8:02:06 PM
|
Not legislated.
As you two evidently want.
[link|http://forfree.sytes.net|
] Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #190,752
1/19/05 9:45:55 AM
|
Sure it is
it's legislated by birth.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca] [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Post #190,761
1/19/05 10:27:07 AM
|
Care to elaborate?
--
- I was involuntarily self-promoted into management.
[link|http://kerneltrap.org/node/4484|Richard Stallman]
|
Post #190,779
1/19/05 11:49:45 AM
|
Yep
If you are born rich, you're likely to remain that way. If you're born poor, ditto.
Thems that has, gets, thems that don't, don't.
Individual success stories exist, but they are statistically irrelevant. Furthermore, the pattern of the last twenty or so years has the getting going more and more to thems that has, while the taking has been coming more and more from thems that don't.
If you don't believe me, go take a walk around a poor part of town sometime. I can see what's happened to mine over the last 25 years, and the differences are remarkable.
I understand that a GREAT way to see this in action in the US is to compare the schools in the low-rent districts to the schools in the high rent districts.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca] [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Post #190,780
1/19/05 11:55:03 AM
1/19/05 11:56:45 AM
|
How is that legislated?
Don't tell me how the legislature has failed to fix problems, tell me how a two-class system is written into law. Show me how that 2nd class of citizens have laws that explicitly limit thier rights; show me the laws that say they have fewer rights (especially re: participation in government) than the ruling class.
[link|http://forfree.sytes.net|
] Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
Edited by imric
Jan. 19, 2005, 11:56:45 AM EST
|
Post #190,789
1/19/05 12:05:33 PM
|
You're kidding, right?
All of our laws are written to support and defend the inequitable distribution of wealth because our laws are written by the plutocracy.
bcnu,
Mikem
Eine Leute. Eine Welt. Ein F\ufffdhrer.
(Just trying to be accepted in the New America)
|
Post #190,791
1/19/05 12:06:48 PM
|
Don't bother...
...it's like trying to explain to a fish he's swimming in water.
(No offense meant, Imric - I just couldn't pass up the opportunity to use that one)
"Here at Ortillery Command we have at our disposal hundred megawatt laser beams, mach 20 titanium rods and guided thermonuclear bombs. Some people say we think that we're God. We're not God. We just borrowed his 'SMITE' button for our fire control system."
|
Post #190,796
1/19/05 12:11:44 PM
|
Sure they are.
It should be EASY to cite one that legislates a second class with fewer rights than the 'elite', then, shouldn't it? (Especially one based on 'right thinking') SHOULDN'T IT?
Pretend I'm from Missouri.
SHOW ME.
[link|http://forfree.sytes.net|
] Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #190,799
1/19/05 12:22:27 PM
|
No, not easy
Look imric, there are many ways to enforce class, and not all of them need be active.
Answer this: is a rich person more likely to get away with murder than a poor person? Why?
This is not something that is "legislated" in the sense of their being a statute. However, it is legislated by the law that states that Only The Rich Can Afford Good Lawyers. If you want to find out about that, take a look at some of the recent events in Tucson wrt the prosecutor's office to see this in action.
Legislated \\= By Statute
unless you're a lawyer of course... and you have to think like a lawyer to justify the position you're trying to take.
Here's another question. Is there class in the US? If it's not legislated, why does it still exist?
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca] [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Post #190,800
1/19/05 12:33:39 PM
|
Bah.
We do NOT have a system that legislates an ELITE with more rights than the second class.
It has gotten better WRT classes based on economics since our founding.
Are we 'there' yet? Is everything perfect and hunky-dory WRT classes based on 'fame or fortune'? No. Of course not.
Will we get there by MANDATING such a system based on 'political correctness' (instead of 'fame and fortune') determined by an elite?
Feh.
[link|http://forfree.sytes.net|
] Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #191,113
1/21/05 6:03:21 PM
|
{sheesh} Take 2 aspirin and read Animal Farm again..
|
Post #191,378
1/24/05 1:39:16 PM
|
How can you say that...
We do NOT have a system that legislates an ELITE with more rights than the second class. I don't know how you can say that w/ a straignt face, whan all you have to do is look at the last set of tax "equalization" legislation, or the proposed legislation to "save" social security. It's all there, Skip....blackletter law that confirms jake123's point. jb4
shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf. BULLSHIT
|
Post #191,388
1/24/05 2:09:11 PM
|
And these things infringe on rights exactly how?
What does cash have to do with ANY of this? Money and privelege, OK. Yes, the monied have more priveleges.
Money and rights, where? Where do the wealthy have more rights than the poor under law?
WHERE?
They DON'T.
Look - I don't like the inequity in our society; I don't particularly like the fact that the middle class is being eaten alive. I don't like the social stigma we lavish on the poor. We can do better. I've been on the poor end of the 'stick'. Too many times in my life. The law never took away my rights because of that. I could still vote for whomever I wanted to; I could still complain about things to anybody I wanted. All my RIGHTS remained intact. I had a right to trial, and representation even if I couldn't afford it.
Where did I ever say that our society or people are perfect, above reproach? No. What I said was that there is NO legislation that mandates an elite and a second class, and there isn't any.
I'm right in this; you know it.
My problem was with the idea that an elite would be formed. That only those with politically correct thoughts should be allowed to participate in government. The idea is appling to me.
[link|http://forfree.sytes.net|
] Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #191,395
1/24/05 3:24:40 PM
|
Clue 1: According to the US Supreme Court, Money == Speech.
bcnu,
Mikem
Eine Leute. Eine Welt. Ein F\ufffdhrer.
(Just trying to be accepted in the New America)
|
Post #191,400
1/24/05 4:14:44 PM
|
Izzatso?
Show me the ruling that says that. Show me the ruling that says I can't speak my mind if I have no money.
DON'T show a ruling that says either: the wealthy can use thier money to make thier 'speech' louder, or a ruling that says the wealthy aren't required to use thier money to help the poor to 'speak'.
Don't give me some bs rationale that tells me that ANYBODY has a right to an audience.
'Clue', my ass. I think you guys are reaching, hard.
Here's a clue for you: not everybody has equal means; not everybody has equal power, not everybody has equal privilege. Everybody starts out with the same basic rights, however.
Or do you think that privilege=rights, rights=privilege?
Privileges are NOT protected under law the way that rights are.
[link|http://forfree.sytes.net|
] Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #190,801
1/19/05 12:39:44 PM
|
Rich and poor alike have the same prohibition.
Neither are allowed to sleep under a bridge.
-----------------------------------------
"In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for. As for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican."
-- H. L. Mencken
|
Post #190,806
1/19/05 1:26:02 PM
|
Well, that's not legislated
Imric got you to admit that it's more of "natural order of things" under our corrupt system than any specific legislation. Good
Now, since you seem to dislike "Thems that has, gets, thems that don't, don't", let's consider the alternative.
Let's see...
Thems that has, LOSES, thems that don't, GETS.
Do I get it right? As soon as I have something, it gets taken away from me and re-distributed to "have nots". Is this the idea?
The difference beween the rule you dislike and the rule I dislike is that the current rule does not prohibit the poor to own things, it is simply harder for them to get things - they don't get automatic benefits such as parent-sponsored college or dividents on inheritance, but they are not prohibited from going to college, if they value education more than food. The new rule prohibits rich people to own anything. As soon as you have excess, it gets redistributed.
Yes, I am using Reduction Ad Absurdum. I think it's justified, though, because all attempts to implement the new rule did end up in bloody absurd.
--
- I was involuntarily self-promoted into management.
[link|http://kerneltrap.org/node/4484|Richard Stallman]
|
