or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › I Don't Recognize My Country Anymore
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

I Don't Recognize My Country Anymore - Page 5

post #161 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

That's the great thing about this country. Everyone's entitled to their opinion.

 

As long as it conforms to government-approved standards and doesn't land you on any watch lists.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #162 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

But most tiny seeds die.

 

Should none ever be planted then?

 

No, of course not, but I was just observing that the existence of the seed is a poor indicator of whether it will ever flourish.

post #163 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

And he went on to make a great beer. 1wink.gif

 

(And a great country.) 1wink.gif

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #164 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

Self-determination is a pretty basic right, and if a significant majority exists to support it, then I see no moral grounds on which to deny it.

 

Well good. What about: Would you also oppose the use of violence by the federal government of the US in attempting to prevent it?

 

Absolutely. I would not support intervention of any kind provided that the process were defensible and the majority established.

 

Does that not follow from my previous answer?

post #165 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

That's the great thing about this country. Everyone's entitled to their opinion.

 

True.

 

Setting aside motives and probabilities: Do you believe people are entitled to secede? Would you support people peacefully acting on their opinions and values in this way? Would oppose anyone's use of violence to stop them?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #166 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

 

No, of course not, but I was just observing that the existence of the seed is a poor indicator of whether it will ever flourish.

 

I'm not sure I'd say that. The existence alone? Yes. The existence of the seed actually suggests the possibility of something bigger, later, further down the road.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #167 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

Absolutely. I would not support intervention of any kind provided that the process were defensible and the majority established.

 

Good.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

Does that not follow from my previous answer?

 

I didn't want to assume anything.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #168 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

 

No, of course not, but I was just observing that the existence of the seed is a poor indicator of whether it will ever flourish.

 

I'm not sure I'd say that. The existence alone? Yes. The existence of the seed actually suggests the possibility of something bigger, later, further down the road.

 

Admits the possibility, but does not indicate likelihood.

post #169 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

Admits the possibility, but does not indicate likelihood.

 

Sure. I never made such a claim. But, in point of fact, it certainly can't grow if there's no seed at all.


Edited by MJ1970 - 11/13/12 at 12:33pm

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #170 of 455

What's up with all these unpatriotic idiots threatening secession? Just because they're against one tiny little tax they want to kick the central government out! If they don't like this country, they can leave. I, for one, am a patriotic supporter of the central government, and I have no problem with the new tax. I firmly support the troops, and I firmly support King George.

 

(Borrowed from here.)

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #171 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

That's the great thing about this country. Everyone's entitled to their opinion.

 

True.

 

Setting aside motives and probabilities: Do you believe people are entitled to secede? Would you support people peacefully acting on their opinions and values in this way? Would oppose anyone's use of violence to stop them?

 

Quote:

Do you believe people are entitled to secede?

Sure given just cause. This really isn't otherwise they've have more supporters almost immediately. This is more the nature of a football game and the other team won.

 

 

Quote:

Would you support people peacefully acting on their opinions and values in this way?

Everyone's entitled to their opinion.

 

 

Quote:
 Would oppose anyone's use of violence to stop them?

 

It really depends on the nature of the situation. If it's say a small band trying to seize power by force no.

 

However this will never go anywhere. Even in Texas. They've have too much to lose.

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #172 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

 

Sure given just cause. This really isn't otherwise they've have more supporters almost immediately. This is more the nature of a football game and the other team won.

 

Are you saying the justness of a cause is indicated by how many people support it?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #173 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Sure given just cause.

 

Who would determine what "just cause" is?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

This really isn't otherwise they've have more supporters almost immediately.

 

I understand that it only currently appears to have a couple hundred thousand supporters (there may be more silent supporters of course).

 

But that side, you're determining how just the cause is by the number of people that support it? That sound fallacious to me.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #174 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Sure given just cause.

 

Who would determine what "just cause" is?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

This really isn't otherwise they've have more supporters almost immediately.

 

I understand that it only currently appears to have a couple hundred thousand supporters (there may be more silent supporters of course).

 

But that side, you're determining how just the cause is by the number of people that support it? That sound fallacious to me.

 

Quote:

Who would determine what "just cause" is?

The voting majority. This is a country run by voting after all. It prevents a small band of malcontents from trying to seize power and force their values on the whole. Now if you could prove that someone's rigging all of the voting that's another issue because it would misrepresent the values of the whole. You'd have to prove that however.

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #175 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

 

The voting majority. This a country run by voting after all. It prevents a small band of malcontents from trying to seize power and force their values on the whole. Now if you could prove that someone's rigging all of the voting that's another issue because it would represent the values of the whole. You'd have to prove that however.

 

So, for example, if the voting majority believe it's okay to have race segregation laws, then that cause is just?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #176 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

The voting majority.

 

Interesting. So, according to you, a "just cause" is determined by majority vote?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #177 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

The voting majority.

 

Interesting. So, according to you, a "just cause" is determined by majority vote?

In this country that's the way it's done. Yup! For the reasons I've already stated for you.

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #178 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

 

The voting majority. This a country run by voting after all. It prevents a small band of malcontents from trying to seize power and force their values on the whole. Now if you could prove that someone's rigging all of the voting that's another issue because it would represent the values of the whole. You'd have to prove that however.

 

So, for example, if the voting majority believe it's okay to have race segregation laws, then that cause is just?

Now you're getting into basic human rights values of what's right vs. wrong. and that's not really what we're talking about here and you know it. We used to have laws like that. They were changed through voting.

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #179 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Now you're getting into basic human rights values of what's right vs. wrong. and that's not really what we're talking about here and you know it. We used to have laws like that. They were changed through voting.

 

So there are exceptions to your "majority rule" doctrine?

 

Are you now saying that a cause can be just even if the majority don't support it?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #180 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

In this country that's the way it's done. Yup! For the reasons I've already stated for you.

 

Wow. That's actually a rather frightening viewpoint. What's more frightening is that you don't seem to see why.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #181 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Now you're getting into basic human rights values of what's right vs. wrong. and that's not really what we're talking about here and you know it. We used to have laws like that. They were changed through voting.

 

Interesting. So there are some things that are right or just whether the majority votes for it or not? And, presumably, there are things that are wrong or unjust even if the majority supports it?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #182 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Now you're getting into basic human rights values of what's right vs. wrong. and that's not really what we're talking about here and you know it. We used to have laws like that. They were changed through voting.

 

So there are exceptions to your "majority rule" doctrine?

 

Are you now saying that a cause can be just even if the majority don't support it?

There are exceptions to every rule.

 

Sure there can be a case of resisting majority rule being justified. That's not the case here. Otherwise they've have more on the bandwagon almost immediately ( as I've already stated ). This is a small group that didn't like the outcome ( how many times do I have to say this? ). When they get to 50% of the country wanting to do this let me know.

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #183 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Sure there can be a case of resisting majority rule being justified.

 

Okay. You seem to want it both ways here. Or you haven't thought through your worldview very carefully.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

That's not the case here. Otherwise they've have more on the bandwagon almost immediately ( as I'v e already stated ).

 

I see. So we're back to you claiming that this isn't a just cause because not enough people support it (yet). But that sometimes it is justified to resist a majority.

 

Quite interesting.

 

You may want to take some time to untangle yourself there.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #184 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Now you're getting into basic human rights values of what's right vs. wrong. and that's not really what we're talking about here and you know it. We used to have laws like that. They were changed through voting.

 

Interesting. So there are some things that are right or just whether the majority votes for it or not? And, presumably, there are things that are wrong or unjust even if the majority supports it?

It sounds like you're looking for absolutes. When you deal with people that's never the case. I'm guessing you haven't figured that out yet. Otherwise you would being trying to put it in such a simple framework. People aren't just black or white, on or off, absolutely right or absolutely wrong in all cases. It doesn't work that way ( thank God! ).

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #185 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

It sounds like you're looking for absolutes. When you deal with people that's never the case.

 

Fair enough. So there are no absolutes?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #186 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

It sounds like you're looking for absolutes. When you deal with people that's never the case.

 

Fair enough. So there are no absolutes?

I'm guessing you didn't get it the first time so let me restate :

 

 

Quote:

It sounds like you're looking for absolutes. When you deal with people that's never the case.

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #187 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I'm guessing you didn't get it the first time so let me restate :

 

 

 

I simply "no, there aren't any absolutes." would be fine. I was trying to make sure I understood your statement clearly.

 

Okay. So no absolutes. Got it.

 

So, if someone comes over to your house and steals your money, there's nothing to complain about?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #188 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

There are exceptions to every rule.

 

Sure there can be a case of resisting majority rule being justified. That's not the case here. Otherwise they've have more on the bandwagon almost immediately ( as I've already stated ). This is a small group that didn't like the outcome ( how many times do I have to say this? ). When they get to 50% of the country wanting to do this let me know.

 

It is estimated that, leading up to the Revolutionary War, only about one third of the New England colonists wanted independence from Great Britain. Some estimates put that number even lower.

 

Can you please explain what made their call for secession from Great Britain a just cause even though it contradicts your "majority rule" doctrine?

 

I'm assuming, of course, that you believe it was a just cause. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #189 of 455
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

You're saying that because the US$ is the reserve currency of the world, the US can get away with basically cheating its creditors by monetizing (inflating the money supply) away the debt.

 

You're damn right the crap storm will begin. Wait until the US isn't the biggest kid on the block anymore and others don't need to take its shit.

 

1.  Correct.    

 

2.  Also correct.  How long we remain the big kid is up for debate.  

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff View Post

 

decisions that made them feel confident?  how is that different than a strategy?

 

No, you misinterpreted.  They made decisions based on their confidence in their turnout predictions.  This is what caused them to focus like a laser on independents.  

 

 

 

 

 

Quote:
1) anyone who feels they can have one position running for governor, then another as governor, then another in the primaries and 'etch a sketch' a position for the general election is 'self serving'  It's all about getting elected.

 

That's an exaggeration.  Romney's positions were consistent for the most part.  The one issue he changed on was abortion.  The etch-a-sketch comment was taken out of context, and I think you know it.  

 

 

 

Quote:
2)  Then why is how he got rich a 'secret?'   I'd like to see 10 years of tax returns please.   Otherwise they are pandering to the 'club' of how wealth is acquired and retained.

 

I really don't see why you care about 10 years of tax returns.  In fact, I suspect you really don't.  Most candidates release a few years worth, so it's somewhat unprecedented to ask for that many years.  My real problem is that people who make this request never ask Obama for a similar level of documentation about his past.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff View Post

 

1.  Nor is trickle down.  I feel the taxes now are unfair, but not overly so.ont and center.  It wasn't, so it is very much questionable.

 

"Trickle-down" is a derisive term that Democrats rediscovered to oppose Reagan's tax policies.   It's a misused term, because those policies were not "trickle down" at all, nor were Bush's.  Under the latter, the rich paid a greater share of the total tax bill than they did before.  I'm not proposing trickle-down solutions, but I also think that cutting taxes means cutting them for the people who actually pay taxes.  This includes the upper brackets, business, etc.  

 

 

 

 


      

 

Quote:

The key issue is swearing your allegiance to Grover Norquist, to God, or to the American people... I pick the 3rd.  They have spoken.  

      If your household budget is underwater, you need to both raise revenue and cut spending.

 

Many have used that analogy, but it's flawed in one respect:  Your household budget is zero sum.  That is, "raising revenue" might cost you time and effort, but that's about all.  With taxes, "raising revenue" means higher rates, which means less growth.  Taxation affects behavior.  This is why we never get what we think we will when taxes are raised.  It causes people to try to avoid those taxes, even if those choices involve less productivity.  The answer is GROWTH, and that is not helped by higher taxes. 

 

 

 

Quote:
 Do you cut your health insurance (Medicaid)? Homeowners insurance (FEMA), and do you think if you give more to your relatives in gifts (tax breaks), they'll give more back to you... I don't think that works... I argue that you keep your safety net till the end... cut your gifts (tax breaks), get new add'l jobs  (taxes), and pay for education and training so the kids can get jobs so they can fend for themselves.  It's pretty simple math.

 

More poor analogies there.  I don't think comparing personal health insurance with Medicaid and Homeowners with FEMA is valid...unless you are calling them Constitutional necessities, which they are clearly not.  Secondly, I'd like to you know what you mean by "tax breaks."  People who favor higher taxes always seem to deride not raising taxes a  "tax break."  Which ones do you mean?  I'm also not sure where you are going with the education piece.  Is someone proposing cutting education spending?  Are you even aware of how much of a school district's budget the Feds contribute?  Hint:  It's not a lot.  

 

 

Quote:

2.  you are correct.  The key thing is the US has to be a 'partner' and not a 'taker' anymore.  We can't live in a world of economic colonialism.

 

 

I don't really understand what you mean by any of that.  How are we a "taker?  What is a world of economic colonialism?  

 

 

 

 

Quote:

3.  your opinion on who can correct the problem... If they were, their 'math' would have been front and center.  

 

 

Was Obama's math front and center?  He provided far fewer details than Romney/Ryan.  

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Oh my god!lol.gif

 

What do we have to expect next?  A threat on our president's life? It's pretty pathetic when people who are on the losing side ( and are in the minority ) try to force the issue. Sheesh!1rolleyes.gif

 

How do you get from a petition to a threat?  And why are you assuming it's all due to sour grapes over "their guy" losing?  

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

 

The results of a vote in a national election. They didn't like the results so a small minority is trying to show their dislike of the results. It won't go anywhere.

 

It's obviously not going to go anywhere.  But I don't think you can assume you know their motivation.  Many people are way beyond "dislike" of the results.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #190 of 455

It happens every cycle: people threatening to secede or leave the country.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/13/petition-to-secede-states_n_2120410.html

 

This one is a gem:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/08/kristen-neel-anti-obama-australia-tweet-backlash_n_2093160.html

 

"I'm moving to Australia, because their president is a Christian and actually supports what he says."

 

 

Problem: Australia has a prime minister, not a president.

Problem: Australia's PM is a woman.

Problem: Australia's PM is an atheist.

 

Problem: is this teen for real?

 

Brings back memories of that contestant from South Carolina or where was it?


Edited by Bergermeister - 11/13/12 at 3:30pm

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #191 of 455

What happened to formatting?

 

- - - - -

 

fixed it


Edited by Bergermeister - 11/13/12 at 3:30pm

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #192 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

It's obviously not going to go anywhere.

 

Why is that obvious?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #193 of 455
Quote:

There is only one state on that list that could possibly support itself as an independent country. New York, and that would never happen. The rest of the states on the list are net recipients of Federal funding, in other words they can't even support themselves now let alone if they seceded. They would have no armed forces for one. Where would they get the money to fund international diplomacy or would they just forego embassies around the world. Sure, they could secede but they would become a third world nation. Well, come to think of it, being a third world country would be the only way to survive as it would probably entitle them to receive generous financial aid from the US.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #194 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

There is only one state on that list that could possibly support itself as an independent country. New York, and that would never happen.

 

Actually, there are a couple: Texas and Florida.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

The rest of the states on the list are net recipients of Federal funding, in other words they can't even support themselves now let alone if they seceded.

 

Oh, delightful, we have a non sequitur fallacy right off the bat!

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

They would have no armed forces for one.

 

Most states have national guards. But you're right, they'd likely need an army to defend themselves against the aggression of the US federal government.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Where would they get the money to fund international diplomacy

 

The same place every other sovereign nation does?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

would they just forego embassies around the world.

 

Sure. Why not?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Sure, they could secede but they would become a third world nation.

 

Great! Another non sequitur. You're on a role!

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Well, come to think of it, being a third world country would be the only way to survive as it would probably entitle them to receive generous financial aid from the US.

 

There are 50,000 comedians out of work in this country and you're telling jokes. You should be ashamed.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #195 of 455

I've always thought that America is a very segregated country, socially, politically and idealogically, and that it would make sense and be more functional if it was at least two countries.  The differences were so great that even a war was fought over them, and though the military conflict ended, the cultural and idealogical divide lingered and appears to be as strong as ever.

 

The majority of US states are very stable in their support for one side of politics or the other so they're always going to be unhappy when the federal government has the opposing affiliation.  This contrasts to most other federal democracies like Canada or Australia, where the provinces and states are culturally very similar and all swing between two sides of politics.

 

Further, with the cultural and political divide being so great, the federal political system is unable to cater to or satisfy either side without becoming watered down and ineffective.  A Democratic president is unable to (or has great difficulty in) enacting the sorts of changes that stable Democratic states want for fear of losing support in key swing states, while the converse is true for a Republican federal government.

 

So it makes some sense that the Republican states should secede and form their own country and the Democratic states do likewise...or join Canada since they're culturally much closer, not that Canada would want them.  This doesn't really answer the question of what the swing states should do, however.

post #196 of 455

Rethinking the American Union for the Twenty-First Century

 

Maybe it's a discussion worth having. That is if those who have knee-jerk and un-constructive reactions can hold their tongues and have a civilized discussion on the topic.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #197 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Rethinking the American Union for the Twenty-First Century

 

Maybe it's a discussion worth having. That is if those who have knee-jerk and un-constructive reactions can hold their tongues and have a civilized discussion on the topic.

 

I don't really think, for that matter, that most of your one liners count as civilized discussion, but that aside, have you read it and, if so, is it worth reading?

post #198 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I'm guessing you didn't get it the first time so let me restate :

 

 

 

I simply "no, there aren't any absolutes." would be fine. I was trying to make sure I understood your statement clearly.

 

Okay. So no absolutes. Got it.

 

So, if someone comes over to your house and steals your money, there's nothing to complain about?

 

Quote:

Okay. So no absolutes

When dealing with people.

 

 

Quote:
Got it

 

Good.1wink.gif

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #199 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

When dealing with people.

 

So, if someone comes over to your house and steals your money, there's nothing to complain about?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #200 of 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

There are exceptions to every rule.

 

Sure there can be a case of resisting majority rule being justified. That's not the case here. Otherwise they've have more on the bandwagon almost immediately ( as I've already stated ). This is a small group that didn't like the outcome ( how many times do I have to say this? ). When they get to 50% of the country wanting to do this let me know.

 

It is estimated that, leading up to the Revolutionary War, only about one third of the New England colonists wanted independence from Great Britain. Some estimates put that number even lower.

 

Can you please explain what made their call for secession from Great Britain a just cause even though it contradicts your "majority rule" doctrine?

 

I'm assuming, of course, that you believe it was a just cause. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Well the differences here are for one thing they're on a different continent from the Government.

 

So now you're advocating that they leave yet another government on the same continent because they feel oppressed. Well when it even gets to a third of the country let me know. And hey if they're unhappy nothing's stopping this small band from leaving and setting up camp somewhere else just like those colonists did.1wink.gif

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › I Don't Recognize My Country Anymore