Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I find all governments to not only be illegitimate, but I also find them by their nature to be despotic, abusive, and destructive.
The problem is that there is no such thing as "no government"
Without government, you get "might makes right," and I think we can quickly see how bad that gets really fast... unless one is to consider Somalia a haven of freedom and independence.
Don't get me wrong - government loves to abuse it's power, but people must consider two things: the alternative to no government is "rule by force," and, at least in theory WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT. We the people - perhaps instead trying to get rid of government we should simply vote ourselves - the people of this nation, not the moneyed interests - back into power.
Simple - I vote against the lunatics, as detailed in my post.
As for warping the nation, we all know what that means: it is when violent, bigoted minorities (in current events, those on the far right) decide that they have the right to tell the majority what to do and how to live. It is ironic, considering how many on the far right want a government too small to pave the roads, but large enough to monitor bedrooms, religion, etc.
I actually agree with what you're saying. IMO, neither side supports real freedom. I don't like liberals, and don't like conservatives either.
We need to escape this two party tyranny we are currently caught up in and get a party that truly represents freedom.
Simple - I vote against the lunatics, as detailed in my post.
As for warping the nation, we all know what that means: it is when violent, bigoted minorities (in current events, those on the far right) decide that they have the right to tell the majority what to do and how to live. It is ironic, considering how many on the far right want a government too small to pave the roads, but large enough to monitor bedrooms, religion, etc.
No, that isn't irony. That's intellectual dishonesty. That's taking one aspect of the religious right and pairing it with one aspect of the small government right to dishonestly produce a conflict that does not exist.
And if you don't like a bigoted minority trying to decide that they have the right to tell the majority what to do, then perhaps you should be out there trying to get Paula Dean's job back, that rodeo clown's job back, Donald Sterling's job back, and Brendan Eich his job back. Those were all instances of a minority group deciding they have the right to tell the public that people whose views they don't agree with should not have gainful employment. But of course you won't. Because when it's the left that tries to force their views, then it's okay. It's freedom of speech and social justice. It's only when the right does it that it's terrible and wrong.
No, that isn't irony. That's intellectual dishonesty. That's taking one aspect of the religious right and pairing it with one aspect of the small government right to dishonestly produce a conflict that does not exist.
And if you don't like a bigoted minority trying to decide that they have the right to tell the majority what to do, then perhaps you should be out there trying to get Paula Dean's job back, that rodeo clown's job back, Donald Sterling's job back, and Brendan Eich his job back. Those were all instances of a minority group deciding they have the right to tell the public that people whose views they don't agree with should not have gainful employment. But of course you won't. Because when it's the left that tries to force their views, then it's okay. It's freedom of speech and social justice. It's only when the right does it that it's terrible and wrong.
You can stow the personal attacks and quit trying to pretend that the conflict doesn't exist. The extremists on the right both want "smaller government" as well as one that monitors the bedroom, prohibits religions other than, theirs, and so on. To say otherwise is to simply deny reality.
Finally, I never said I support left-wing loons, either. But as long as the ONLY national level lunatic party is the Tea Party, I will vote against them. As long as the majority of Tea Party "true believers" I meet are ignorant, bigoted, and just itching for "that day, when the killing will begin," I will vote against them.
If you don't like it - tough. Maybe talk to the leaders in your party and tell them to stop listening to the fringe lunatics.
Simple - I vote against the lunatics, as detailed in my post.
As for warping the nation, we all know what that means: it is when violent, bigoted minorities (in current events, those on the far right) decide that they have the right to tell the majority what to do and how to live. It is ironic, considering how many on the far right want a government too small to pave the roads, but large enough to monitor bedrooms, religion, etc.
Don't you believe that conservatives think liberals are "warping this nation into their narrow, insane vision"?
You believe those on the political left don't want to tell us how to live? Those on the political left want to control what I eat, what I drive, where I live, who my doctor is. Liberals think they own my life and my property. It is effectively illegal for me to purchase anything without their approval. They are the politically-correct "thought police". They are statists, nationalists, and internationalists. United Nations one-world government types. And who want to strip away all ability for me to defend myself, while relying on the corrupt police bully control freaks who don't actually protect anyone.
I don't know how "bigoted minorities" would have the power to force their will on anyone. Since they are a minority. If you are arguing that they do so with violence. Then you must still recognize that they are a minority. How exactly is the minority using violence to control anything in this country? Do you have examples of such violence?
If you are arguing that "the Millers" used violence to control this country. Were they actually telling anyone how to live? Were they pushing the government to monitor bedrooms? Because it looked to me like they just didn't want the government to be doing anything. Basically they were saying "leave everyone alone".
Look, I am not saying that I agree with neo-conservatives/religious conservatives. I'm largely a "libertarian". But when you say things like "Freedom of speech aside, people may have the right to be crazy, but they do NOT have the right to warp this nation into their narrow, insane vision".... I have no clue what in the hell you are talking about. It sounds like you are saying people don't have a right to freedom of speech if they are using it to "warp the nation into their insane vision". Which to me sounds pretty damn insane.
I understand, you don't like conservatives. But you seem to be incapable of making a distinction between religious-conservatives, libertarians, neo-nazi's, and anarchists. For some reason, people have declared these groups to be on the "political right" and you are incapable of distinguishing between them.
While I hesitate to accuse specific people of specific criminal actions, there is no question that RWNJs foster the sickness in our society that leads to many terrible outcomes, and generally foster the kind of sordid ignorance among their adherents that leads to a tendency toward getting one's way with violence rather than accepting the realities associated with the fact that one lives in society with others.
There seems to be no doubt that the left in this country encourage and cheer on terrorist activities. You who paint such broad pictures know nothing......
They encourage that kind of action. When the crazies blather on about "second amendment solutions" how "we came unarmed, this time" or "if the ballot box doesn't work there's always the ammo box" When the crazies advocate armed rebellion and even state that armed rebellion is their constitutional right and then are told by people like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin et al that they're patriots and real Americans, that's giving them the go ahead for an armed uprising. Then when you add into that mix yammering and yapping about how Obama's a dictator and he's coming to take away all the guns and you have people like Hannity, Limbaugh, and Palin agreeing with that and saying yeah Obama is a dictator well now gee what was it those crazies were saying about dictators and tyranny and second amendment solutions? Yeah that's right, sooner or later some of those crazies are going to do exactly what they said they would do, exactly what Fox News and the other right wingers encouraged them to do, and people, most likely government officials, are going to be shot and killed
Can we also blame the Reverend Wright, Ayres and the Weather Underground for some dead cops? How about blaming Faracon? YOu have your own "chickens" to worry about.
Who said I wanted a dictator? I said that the stupid and voluntarily ignorant deserve a king. I think that the people who play politics, and complain about something when the other party is doing it, then ignore it when their party is doing it, deserve to be ruled by a King.
I'm not ignorant, nor am I a hypocrite, nor do I wast my time complaining about things that don't matter. I don't deserve to be ruled by a king. In fact, I refuse to be ruled by a king. In fact, I would rather by ruled by no one. Why does anyone have the right to rule me? Whether it be one man or a group of men?
"Whenever the power that is put in any hands for the government of the people, and the protection of our properties, is applied to other ends, and made use of to impoverish, harass or subdue them to the arbitrary and irregular commands of those that have it; there it presently becomes tyranny, whether those that thus use it are one or many".
"The legislature acts against the trust reposed in them, when they endeavour to invade the property of the subject, and to make themselves, or any part of the community, masters, or arbitrary disposers of the lives, liberties or fortunes of the people".
"For in that state of perfect equality, where naturally there is no superiority or jurisdiction of one over another, what any may do in prosecution of that law, everyone must needs have a right to do".
"Constant frequent meetings of the legislative, and long continuations of their assemblies, without necessary occasion, could not but be burdensome to the people, and must necessarily in time produce more dangerous inconveniences".
"And thus the community perpetually retains a supreme power of saving themselves from the attempts and designs of anybody, even of their legislators, whenever they shall be so foolish, or so wicked, as to lay and carry on designs against the liberties and properties of the subject".
"For there are no examples so frequent in history, both sacred and profane, as those of men withdrawing themselves, and their obedience, from the jurisdiction they were born under, and the family or community they were bred up in, and setting up new governments in other places".
If you don't think we should have our current form of government, and you posted a quote that the country should be ruled by a group of men smarter than everyone else, what are you talking about? I'm confused. You haven't really said what kind of government you want, only what you don't want.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
