The End of democracy

[Youve Got To Be Kidding!]

Re: To Comrade

Sorry, I can't take anyone seriously who's signature is a quote from Krushev! That being said, as I gather from your rants that you are a communist, I suggest you take a look at who has exploited the proletariat more the capitalists or the communists. EG gullags of Soviet Russia and the Red Chinese. I love how you communists claim to be for the working man yet exploit him to the fullest extent that a gov't could exploit their workers!

So you agree America is an aspiring communist country under BUSH.

Its not the people of the government its the coorporations left unchecked.

 

[Youve Got To Be Kidding!]

Ahh Social Democracy a cleverly disguised codename for communism. The outcry of the evils of capitalism and those damn horrible corporations giving all those poor exploited workers jobs to feed their families, the nerve of them how dare they.(Strong sarcastic emphasis added) And the nerve of you sir or ma'am for having the absolute audacity to claim that the president of the U.S. actually had advanced knowledge of 911 yet failed to act on said knowledge for profit and corporate gain! You say this as if it is some undisputed fact which gives you the premise not to back this audacious, slanderous, and traitorous lie with any proof whatsoever! And you speak of privatization as if it's a bad thing I being a libertarian feel that the strength of the U.S. economy is built on the basis of the corporations being given a free hand (lez en fair) and that the gov't has no place in business. This is not mutually exclusive with liberty and democracy, and to the contrary this is the very nature of the capitalist democratic system which has made this the most powerful nation in the history of the world!

I do not see how you are a libertarian I am sorry.

 

[Youve Got To Be Kidding!]

I am sorry but you are not very well informed. social democracy has nothing in to with communism. Capitalism exists and is very strong in a social democracys like the ones in Canada, Britain, and Western. Europe. Now I lived briefly in Germany and Britain, and 75% of the a person's earnings don't go to taxes. It is only about 18%.The difference between a social democracy and our Corporatism, is that the people are taken care of and exploitation of workers is not allowed. Capitalism and the stock market thrive in Social Democracys. People who live in social democracies buy houses and cars, take vacations, go to concerts. Factorys are run by private interprises just like in the Good ole USA. Private interprise thrives in social Democracies.

You need to stop listening to Limbaugh and Larson. they talk good but they only spout the line of Right wing Domination and exploitation, and they call everything socialism even when it isn't. they are Huge Liars, but so are some Democrats. Everyone bad mouths clinton, but during the cliinton years , corporations made record profits, and was not untill Bush got in that Corporation profits went down. Under clinton the oil companies did not need to gauge, exploit and lie to the American people. They made great profits and my stocks paid well. Now us investors are way down from the clinton years in money earned. I can hardly afford to drive my car, and food and other essential are going way up because of transportation costs. Bush don't care about anything but profits for his Corporatism lovers.

I don't care if you want to spout BS Bushshit, LS Limbaughshiit, and HS HannityShit, Just do it somewhere else, go to school, study some history, study economics, Read some books, find out the truth before telling a pile of BS .

Well GODAMN SAID!!!! CAN THIS BE MOVED TO THE BASEMENT SO WE CAN REALLY LAY INTO THESE IGNORANT xXxX's!!! PREACH ON BROTHER

 

[ban.the.electoral.college]

Re: To Comrade

So you agree America is an aspiring communist country under BUSH.

Its not the people of the government its the coorporations left unchecked.

Oligarchy... Mediaocracy... Corporatocracy... these are some of the words I have heard describing our current government.

We are in dark times, indeed!

I think we can start to reclaim our nation, first by ousting Bush from the white house. There are rumors he is growing emotionally unstable. His rule is illegitimate. And he has manipulated the nation into going along with his unsaid agenda, consequently killing nearly 2000 of his own people and not to mention countless Afghanis and Iraqis. He has not even delivered what was promised... It's time for him to go!!

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/printer_7218.shtml

http://www.citizensforimpeachingbush.com/illegitimate.htm

 

[Youve Got To Be Kidding!]

Its time for him to go to prison.

 

[kal-el]

You want to talk DEMOCRACY? Though Saddam definetly tortured and killed many of his co-citizens and he has far less blood on his hands compared to the number murdered by the Americans, such as the 500,000 children who died because of economic sanctions or the over 100,000 Iraqi civilians killed by the invasion and illegal occupation and whose number has not finished swelling yet. The Iraqis will not forget those numbers in a hurry. The elections have already allowed the religious authorities to win the majority in the new Iraqi parliment. The US of course are doing all they can to "supervise" both the composition of the new "democratically elected" government and the revision of the Iraqi constitution. But, what is for sure, is that if the future Iraqi government is really democratically elected, if it really represents the peoples' opinion, as should a democratic government,it will be both anti-American and anti-Israeli. If 80% of the population is anti something, democracy cannot help but reveal this position. In that case, George Bush will find himself confronted with an anti-American and anti-Zionist feeling that is not just the whim of a dictator, but the democratic will of the people, which if one respects the principles of democracy, is non questionable.
The fact that the Palestinians elected a leader who is for peace and dialogue does not mean that 90% of the Palestinian people have become pro-zionist or pro-Israeli. The fact that tomorrow Egypt and other countries might adopt western style democracy dosen't mean that the Arab world will "magically" turn pro-American. Democracy, if it is true and free, will only show that what was previously thought to be the whims of a bloody dictator, are in fact the popular views held by the majority. This democracy might change the leaders, but not the popular feeling. There is no magic wand. These popular feelings are deeply rooted in the population and were concieved by a strong sense of justice, humiliation and anti-arabism of western powers, whose colonial past reinforces their negative image. A true democracy can only highlight what their previos dictators were expressing, and illustrate how the majority felt it too.
But that is exactly what George Bush dosen't want to happen, because it would mean his policies had completely failed. If a referendum held by the democratically elected governments of Iraq, the Palestinians, and other Arab countries were to confirm the anti-american feelings of the people, that would mean the American invasion had been useless, and aggravated the problem since the hostility can no longer be attributed to a "nasty dictator" but is a deep popular sentiment. The pro-islamic majority already surfacing in the Iraqi elections is bothering Bush. In fact what he would really like is not this democracy, which he boasts about so much, but really an "americanocracy" That is, a democratically elected regime which is pro-american. But since the vast majority of the Arab people are anti, Bush will have to betray his own so called democratic principles so as not to lose face by imposing regimes which give the illusion of being democratic through an unending fiddling of the electoral rules necessary to put pro-american elements into power, which are no more than "puppet regimes".
Bush's refusal to accept a true democracy and his replacement of it with an americanocracy is not limited to Arab countries. It has already been put in place in Chile, Grenada, Panama, Afghanistan and Nicaragua, and many other countries. Venezuela and North Korea are next on his list.
But the place where this americanocracy, is most obvios, is in the organism responsible for maintaining peace and avoiding conflict: the United Nations. If democracy really existed in the UN, then China would already be a majority in the decisions with almost 25% of the world population, where the US only represents a measly 5%. That was why they invented the "Security Council" which groups together 7 countries, not because they are the most populated, which already makes it non-democratic, but because they are the most powerful. So if one powerful country does not agree with the democratic decision of the majority, it can apply its veto and the democratic decision will not be applied.
It was in fact this that pushed the US to ivade Iraq unilaterally. France had promised to veto the UN resolution allowing for the invasion of Iraq. That was the first time Americanocracy showed its true face. The US decided to act alone. If this policy which functions in the UN were to exist in the US, then certain progressive and populated states such as California or New York would not have their say during the big elections; a national "security council" of red states would have the right to veto the majority decisions taken by the rest of the country. And if this right to veto were suddenly used by a so called "dissident" then the pro bush council would still be able to act solely and illegally with a coalition of the willing.

This is just a form of bullying, otherwise known as the rule of the strongest, which is another way of describing facism.

 

[cnredd]

Though Saddam definetly tortured and killed many of his co-citizens and he has far less blood on his hands compared to the number murdered by the Americans, such as the 500,000 children who died because of economic sanctions or the over 100,000 Iraqi civilians killed by the invasion and illegal occupation and whose number has not finished swelling yet.

a)The economic sanctions were not placed by the US; they were placed by the United Nations...redirect your blame elsewhere....

b)There has not been "over 100,000 Iraqi civilians killed". This was a report from a group called "Lancet"...This report has been proven false ad nauseum.

Accurate facts will only increase your credibility...to use numbers that aren't consistant with the truth decreases your argument.

 

[128shot]

I seem to agree.


I've been pushing for global "common sense" regulations for awhile now. It'd be a great dream of mine to do this so the playing field becomes a bit more level and can cope with globalization.

 

[kal-el]

a)The economic sanctions were not placed by the US; they were placed by the United Nations...redirect your blame elsewhere....

b)There has not been "over 100,000 Iraqi civilians killed". This was a report from a group called "Lancet"...This report has been proven false ad nauseum.

Accurate facts will only increase your credibility...to use numbers that aren't consistant with the truth decreases your argument.

Here is the link where economic sanctions are described. It seems I was generous when I quoted that nice round 500,000 number:

http://www.transfigpittsford.org/petition.htm

 

[kal-el]

a)The economic sanctions were not placed by the US; they were placed by the United Nations...redirect your blame elsewhere....

b)There has not been "over 100,000 Iraqi civilians killed". This was a report from a group called "Lancet"...This report has been proven false ad nauseum.

Accurate facts will only increase your credibility...to use numbers that aren't consistant with the truth decreases your argument.

And here is some info on that nice round 100,000 number:

http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/

 

[dragonslayer]

Re: To Comrade

Sorry, I can't take anyone seriously who's signature is a quote from Krushev! That being said, as I gather from your rants that you are a communist, I suggest you take a look at who has exploited the proletariat more the capitalists or the communists. EG gullags of Soviet Russia and the Red Chinese. I love how you communists claim to be for the working man yet exploit him to the fullest extent that a gov't could exploit their workers!

The more I read your posts,the more I realize yu are a very unhappy person.
communism was terrible. yet it was Capitalism that exploited Workers, that is what created the idea of communism in the first place. it was created in reponse to Capitalist exploitation in the 19th Century. I assume that you have read Karl Marx for no one argue against, when they don't know what they are talking about.

In the west the Workers resorted to Labor Unions to fight the capitalist exploitation. Labor unions is why we had good paying jobs and bennefits up until Bush started taking them away, because the Capitalists wanted cheap slave like labor where they control and exploit workers and society in general. Read the history of the Labor movement.

communism is the extreme left, and Fascism is the extreme right. they are not related.

For God's sake get some information. go to school. Are you a dropout?
Why are you writing in here if you don't know anything. And talk like a recording machine. think, Read, be creative . forget he Rightwing Bushshit.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Well GODAMN SAID!!!! CAN THIS BE MOVED TO THE BASEMENT SO WE CAN REALLY LAY INTO THESE IGNORANT xXxX's!!! PREACH ON BROTHER

That wasn't well said at all and here's why: The president does not effect the market as much as you might think and if he did then one could claim that Clinton left us with a recession, secondly the Clinton era boom in the economy could be said to have taken off due to the successful technological leaps and bounds that this country made due to the Reagan administrations heavy governmental investments in the tech industry, and it was this tech industry that spawned the Clinton's booming economy which when it crashed the economy crashed, not to mention, that the twin towers fell thus leaving the nation in a state of economic shock. The market determines the economy not the president. And whoever said that they don't understand why I'm a liberetarian I suggest they look into what a liberetarian actually is and believes in I believe the liberatarian party is the last bastion of true conservatism.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Re: To Comrade

The more I read your posts,the more I realize yu are a very unhappy person.
communism was terrible. yet it was Capitalism that exploited Workers, that is what created the idea of communism in the first place. it was created in reponse to Capitalist exploitation in the 19th Century. I assume that you have read Karl Marx for no one argue against, when they don't know what they are talking about.

In the west the Workers resorted to Labor Unions to fight the capitalist exploitation. Labor unions is why we had good paying jobs and bennefits up until Bush started taking them away, because the Capitalists wanted cheap slave like labor where they control and exploit workers and society in general. Read the history of the Labor movement.

communism is the extreme left, and Fascism is the extreme right. they are not related.

For God's sake get some information. go to school. Are you a dropout?
Why are you writing in here if you don't know anything. And talk like a recording machine. think, Read, be creative . forget he Rightwing Bushshit.

first of all fascism is a product of the left hence the socialism in National Socialism, secondly I'm not a dropout I'm a political science major obtaining my bachelors degree as we speak, thirdly yes I have read the communist manifesto and I've also read mein kompf and guess what they're both bull s**t I've also read Locke, Hobbes, Machiavelli, just for fun not to mention the scores of other mandatory readings I've had to endure while attending college.

 

[Martyr_Machine]

For the last time, america is not, nor has it ever been, a democracy. The founding fathers abhored democracy.

 

[ban.the.electoral.college]

That wasn't well said at all and here's why: The president does not effect the market as much as you might think and if he did then one could claim that Clinton left us with a recession, secondly the Clinton era boom in the economy could be said to have taken off due to the successful technological leaps and bounds that this country made due to the Reagan administrations heavy governmental investments in the tech industry, and it was this tech industry that spawned the Clinton's booming economy which when it crashed the economy crashed, not to mention, that the twin towers fell thus leaving the nation in a state of economic shock. The market determines the economy not the president. And whoever said that they don't understand why I'm a liberetarian I suggest they look into what a liberetarian actually is and believes in I believe the liberatarian party is the last bastion of true conservatism.

The boom had more to do with the rise of the internet and dot.com bubble that burst right before Bush came into office. It had nothing to with reaganomics, wich everyone knows is just a load of shyte!

"When Reagan took office, the national debt stood at $994 billion. When Bush left office, it had reached $4.3 trillion. In other words, the national debt had taken 200 years to reach $1 trillion. Reagan's Supply Side experiment quadrupled it in the next 12 years."

SOURCE

 

[ban.the.electoral.college]

Re: To Comrade

first of all fascism is a product of the left hence the socialism in National Socialism, secondly I'm not a dropout I'm a political science major obtaining my bachelors degree as we speak, thirdly yes I have read the communist manifesto and I've also read mein kompf and guess what they're both bull s**t I've also read Locke, Hobbes, Machiavelli, just for fun not to mention the scores of other mandatory readings I've had to endure while attending college.

"There are clearly elements of both left and right ideology in the development of Fascism." - that goes for National Socialism as well, AKA Nazi Party.

SOURCE

I am sick and tired of everyone's contempt for the left!! Just quit pointing fingers, unless you really know your S*H*I*T* O*K !!!!!!!!!

 

[Martyr_Machine]

Re: To Comrade

"There are clearly elements of both left and right ideology in the development of Fascism." - that goes for National Socialism as well, AKA Nazi Party.

SOURCE

I am sick and tired of everyone's contempt for the left!! Just quit pointing fingers, unless you really know your S*H*I*T* O*K !!!!!!!!!

The american left-right scale is a measure of economics. Fascism, like all totalitarianism, is extreme leftism. It advocates strict socio-economic control, and is therfor the antithesis of extreme rightism.

FYI: Wikipedia is not a valid source in a debate, its a blog, and as such its definitions can be changed by any idiot who happens to disagree.

 

[ban.the.electoral.college]

Re: To Comrade

The american left-right scale is a measure of economics. Fascism, like all totalitarianism, is extreme leftism. It advocates strict socio-economic control, and is therfor the antithesis of extreme rightism.

FYI: Wikipedia is not a valid source in a debate, its a blog, and as such its definitions can be changed by any idiot who happens to disagree.

"Fascism, which was not afraid to call itself reactionary... does not hesitate to call itself illiberal and anti-liberal."

_Benito Mussolini

 

[Martyr_Machine]

Re: To Comrade

"Fascism, which was not afraid to call itself reactionary... does not hesitate to call itself illiberal and anti-liberal."

_Benito Mussolini

Irrelevent for several reasons...

- Mussolini may have coined the term fascism, but he did not create the ideology. Fascism can be seen as far back as Napoleon.

- Liberalism does not have a monopoly on leftism. Historically, liberalism has been a right-wing extremist ideology. Only recently has it come to refer to left-wing moderates.

 

[ban.the.electoral.college]

Re: To Comrade

Irrelevent for several reasons...

- Mussolini may have coined the term fascism, but he did not create the ideology. Fascism can be seen as far back as Napoleon.

- Liberalism does not have a monopoly on leftism. Historically, liberalism has been a right-wing extremist ideology. Only recently has it come to refer to left-wing moderates.

Good. I am glad you are not an idiot like so many others. I feel like I am constantly trying to defend the word "liberal" which has been stigmatized by the right. It's really annyoing. Anyway, thank you for showing me the shortcomings of my argument.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

The boom had more to do with the rise of the internet and dot.com bubble that burst right before Bush came into office. It had nothing to with reaganomics, wich everyone knows is just a load of shyte!

"When Reagan took office, the national debt stood at $994 billion. When Bush left office, it had reached $4.3 trillion. In other words, the national debt had taken 200 years to reach $1 trillion. Reagan's Supply Side experiment quadrupled it in the next 12 years."

SOURCE

I didn't say it had to do with reagonomics but the dot.com bubble can be attributed to the heavy investment that the gov't made in said tech industry which happened under the Reagan administration, secondly my point is that the president doesn't effect the economy nearly as much as some people would have you believe other factors play signifigantly higher rolls e.g. collapse of the dot.coms and globe shaking events, such as , 911.

 

[ban.the.electoral.college]

.... my point is that the president doesn't effect the economy nearly as much as some people would have you believe other factors play signifigantly higher rolls e.g. collapse of the dot.coms and globe shaking events, such as , 911.

True. Heaven forbid! You forgot to mention Alan, good ole' Greenspan.

 

[SKILMATIC]

True. Heaven forbid! You forgot to mention Alan, good ole' Greenspan

I hate greenspan. I think hes a liberal too, lol. Sorry ban the electoral college, :lol:

I know you dont like people making fun of that term.

Just teasin ya

 

[ban.the.electoral.college]

I hate greenspan. I think hes a liberal too, lol. Sorry ban the electoral college, :lol:

I know you dont like people making fun of that term.

Just teasin ya

It's all good. Just don't be hate'n!

 

[Nezdragon]

:doh (I find myself doing this a lot lately...)

If anyone wants a stress reliever kit, here's one, b/c there seems to be 95% emotions and only 5% facts going around here. Leave your anti-American feelings out of debates. Feelings are crap in debates (usually), facts aren't.

I can say this: pretty much every system of government is pretty great, especially Communism. Just don't add people.
It is human nature to use and abuse power. Communism cannot work because of this. Someone has to prevent anarchy, and when you give one man power over another, it usually gets abused.

I disagree with a good number of the things that Bush has done. But Kerry was worse. Can anyone please tell me how we are supposed to fight a "more sensitive war" with people who have been indoctrinated and taught since birth by a militant sect of Islam that if they kill infidels by blowing themselves up in a crowd, they will go to heaven? I don't think so.
Kerry was too wishy-washy to be given the power to run this country. He went with what the polls would say, with what would make him popular with the American people.

I don't argue with people who rant on pure emotions. I don't argue with people who don't have facts. Why people hate an economical system that works well, I don't know. I hope I can be enlightened to this...