[quote]vroom wrote:
It just seems all very…Un- American I guess. Certain founding fathers would have a serious problem with random ID checks I think.
Back to the first post…
This is a great way to get in the face of the law abiding public and remind them how scared they need to be of terrorism.[/quote]
I am far more afraid of the government and the powers that they have had. More and more comes out everyday…but for those who’s heads remain in the sand, it is still hard to hear it.
[quote]vroom wrote:
It just seems all very…Un- American I guess. Certain founding fathers would have a serious problem with random ID checks I think.
Back to the first post…
This is a great way to get in the face of the law abiding public and remind them how scared they need to be of terrorism.[/quote]
The scary part is that if our country is ever going to descend into totolitarianism, this is exactly how it’s going to happen. People become scared and over time they hand more and more power to the government. And regardless of what is being feared (terrorism, crime, poverty, ect.) and however justified that fear may be, at some point, a “point of no return” is reached. And at that point, in my opinion, nothing short of revolution will get that power back.
I dont pretend to know what the “point of no return” is, but I sure as hell hope people realize that it is better to accept a little danger in the present than it is to risk losing everything in the future. No one ever said freedom is easy…but I’ll gladly take the guaranty of an imperfect freedom over some paternalistic/maternalistic dictatorship, any day of the week.
[quote]LBRTRN wrote:
vroom wrote:
It just seems all very…Un- American I guess. Certain founding fathers would have a serious problem with random ID checks I think.
Back to the first post…
This is a great way to get in the face of the law abiding public and remind them how scared they need to be of terrorism.
The scary part is that if our country is ever going to descend into totolitarianism, this is exactly how it’s going to happen. People become scared and over time they hand more and more power to the government. And regardless of what is being feared (terrorism, crime, poverty, ect.) and however justified that fear may be, at some point, a “point of no return” is reached. And at that point, in my opinion, nothing short of revolution will get that power back.
I dont pretend to know what the “point of no return” is, but I sure as hell hope people realize that it is better to accept a little danger in the present than it is to risk losing everything in the future. No one ever said freedom is easy…but I’ll gladly take the guaranty of an imperfect freedom over some paternalistic/maternalistic dictatorship, any day of the week.
[/quote]
Amen!
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
In my eyes, voting either Democrat or Republican is a waste, as they are both powerful political machines, controlled by the corporations they receive donations from.
So what is the solution for the proletariat to take back his rights?
You know what I’m thinking, I’m sure. But that is sometime off before that can be realized. What are your solutions?[/quote]
Be careful Irish, you’re starting to go a little bit to far off the left end. Seriously. Extremes are extremes and equally silly. I know you’re not there yet, but here are some words for you to think about.
I won’t pretend to like the Democratic party, and to disagree that they are as taken over by lobbies as the Republicans. But it is our duty, as American citizens, to vote, and, even, to get involved in the political process. If that means voting for and possibly be associated with the lesser of two evils, so be it; but letting others decide for you, because you don’t like the options, is asinine.
So be careful with what you say, or people might start thinking that you’re suggesting that they shouldn’t vote as things stand now.
My long term solution? Pick a party and change it from within. If your ideas are good and you persevere, you’ll have an effect. Maybe have others that think like you join, and amplify that effect… And even if things don’t change right away, you’ll be surprised at the effect just one person may have – mostly because most other people really don’t care.
It can take a lifetime, but at least you can die thinking that you did something with your ideas – even a small one – and had an effect on people, and fought for what you believed in, rather than just whining about it, or trying the “Revolution” approach, which, quite frankly, in today’s technocratic world would not have the positive results you expect it to… but would definitely have a lot of negative ones.
It’s much like losing weight: you need to find a diet that it is not too agressive that you will just lose water AND screw up your metabolism and gain everything back even faster, but not too conservative that you lose your patience more than your weight. There’s a balance in between, and finding it is the tricky part – and requires a lot of work and patience, but it is worth it.
Am I making any sense here?
[quote]hspder wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
In my eyes, voting either Democrat or Republican is a waste, as they are both powerful political machines, controlled by the corporations they receive donations from.
So what is the solution for the proletariat to take back his rights?
You know what I’m thinking, I’m sure. But that is sometime off before that can be realized. What are your solutions?
Be careful Irish, you’re starting to go a little bit to far off the left end. Seriously. Extremes are extremes and equally silly. I know you’re not there yet, but here are some words for you to think about.
I won’t pretend to like the Democratic party, and to disagree that they are as taken over by lobbies as the Republicans. But it is our duty, as American citizens, to vote, and, even, to get involved in the political process. If that means voting for and possibly be associated with the lesser of two evils, so be it; but letting others decide for you, because you don’t like the options, is asinine.
So be careful with what you say, or people might start thinking that you’re suggesting that they shouldn’t vote as things stand now.
My long term solution? Pick a party and change it from within. If your ideas are good and you persevere, you’ll have an effect. Maybe have others that think like you join, and amplify that effect… And even if things don’t change right away, you’ll be surprised at the effect just one person may have – mostly because most other people really don’t care.
It can take a lifetime, but at least you can die thinking that you did something with your ideas – even a small one – and had an effect on people, and fought for what you believed in, rather than just whining about it, or trying the “Revolution” approach, which, quite frankly, in today’s technocratic world would not have the positive results you expect it to… but would definitely have a lot of negative ones.
It’s much like losing weight: you need to find a diet that it is not too agressive that you will just lose water AND screw up your metabolism and gain everything back even faster, but not too conservative that you lose your patience more than your weight. There’s a balance in between, and finding it is the tricky part – and requires a lot of work and patience, but it is worth it.
Am I making any sense here?
[/quote]
This is a brilliant post, and I am not using the word lightly – especially the part of how one person CAN change things.
Did you realize when you wrote this that much of it is in agreement with the philosophy of Ayn Rand? If not, you may want to look into it. (I probably don’t need to tell you this but form your own opinion of Miss Rand’s work; read her for yourself.).
Every thing great in the world was one man’s idea first. From the loaf of bread on your table to the precise surgical instruments a surgeon uses to save your child’s life, it was the single human mind that thought of it. It was not the collective, the tribe, the Politburo, or the Congress. It was not the looters who had the energy to loot an electronics store, but saw no reason to run from a hurricane.
It was a single, human mind.
Great, great post Hspder!!
How many cops does it take to surround a bank? question and Get id from all entering and leaving? Wouldnt you think those cops would be better spent responding to any of the crime problems through out america?
Besides, the well known terrer suspects never do actual surveillence? they just do the planning. Usually they get idealistic kids to do all the footwork. “What are you doing here?” “ive come to withdraw money? enquire about a loan? get info” yep… wonderfull. I doubt they are doing enough of the these raids on enough people to pick up patterns anyway.
You want em to hand out pamphlets? id be pissed the day a trained cop was told to spend his time handing out propaganda then say stopping drunk drivers?
Backing something stupid, illogical and detrimental to society as a whole for thinly vield political reasons should be considered treason (for whatever country)
[quote]thabigdon24 wrote:
Dorso wrote:
Definately agree with Irish and Zeb. Small steps like this are dangerous because they raise little opposition. But as these accumulate the overall chage can be drastic and in 50 yrs people may not even remember how we got their.
The other thing that occurs to me is that this is a really stupid way to fight terrorism. Are the terrorists going to stop an attack on the off chance that the Miami police might randomly show up? These cells are small and flexible with their plans. They can simply find another target or go to a different city. In fact, reports I’ve read about terrorist casing techniques suggests that they often have back up targets planned.
I think intelligence and surveillance should be the priorities, not a random show of force. We already have a large military and police force in this nation. That is not our weakness.
thabigdon24wrote:
True. But on the other side of the coin, small steps accumulate and overlap to protect us. I would rather go visit a miami club or two and still not have to worry about breathing. [/quote]
the “small steps” he was referring to were not the accumulation of protections, but rather the stripping of protections, ie, our civil rights.
[quote]snipeout wrote:
Boo Hoo, give me a break. If you have nothing to hide don’t worry. It’s just like being stopped at a DUI checkpoint. Did you do anything wrong? Nope. Is it illegal to refuse to render your state ID? Yep. If your asked for ID you have to surrender it, as shitty as it sounds you do.
All that cop has to do is say he has a reason to believe you resemble so and so who has a warrant for his arrest. I mean c’mon, you actually feel threatened at a PROACTIVE response to terrorsim as opposed to a REACTIVE?[/quote]
the reason it is wrong is because it intimidates and annoys the citizens. i lived in south america for a time and the same kind of shit happened there, and the people hated the police/military because of it.
nobody wanted to cooperate with the authorities, not because they were corrupt, but because they were such dicks.
and what the fuck is checking id’s gonna do to prevent crime anyway, especially if the authorities are expecting an organized terrorist attack?
i’d also like to add that the terrorists are winning. you know why? its not because they’ve taken out so many important strategic targets. its because people are afraid. running around like a bunch of headless chickens.
that’s the goal. to scare people into letting the erosion of freedoms occur.
i’m not saying that there aren’t legitimate threats out there. what i am saying is that we can’t let the terrorists make us so fucking afraid that we turn into a bunch of cowering idiots on the inside, and in turn a bunch of asshole bullies on the outside.
read some history people! the best example is Nazi Germany. they transformed, little by little, from a free state into a totalitarian regime. don’t think that can’t happen here!
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
This is a brilliant post, and I am not using the word lightly – especially the part of how one person CAN change things.[/quote]
Thank you. I appreciate the compliment.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Did you realize when you wrote this that much of it is in agreement with the philosophy of Ayn Rand? If not, you may want to look into it. (I probably don’t need to tell you this but form your own opinion of Miss Rand’s work; read her for yourself.).[/quote]
Yes, I am familiar with her work, and I understand that much of what I wrote above is in agreement with part of her work. I even almost buy into how her definition of selfishness (as a self-respecting, self-supporting human being who neither sacrifices others to himself nor sacrifices himself to others) can be positive – assuming people realize that within the limits of your disposable income, paying taxes or giving to charity is far from being a sacrifice.
However, I do have a fundamental problem with most other parts of her philosophy, and its consequences; Namely, I fundamentally reject her advocacy of laissez-faire capitalism, and her over-the-top optimism. One of the things I learnt as an Economist is that laissez-faire capitalism is a time-bomb which has never survived for too long in any of the feeble attempts to implement it, fundamentally because it self-destructs under the weight of people’s uncontrolled greed and laziness.
It is my opinion that Objectivism, much like its polar opposite, Marxism, while having some fundamentally good ideas that I definitely feel can be an inspiration for excepcional, intelligent, educated, hard-working individuals, it provides some very bad ones for governing a population that is comprised of an overwhelming majority of greedy idiots and slackers that will want to sacrifice others to themselves – as much as they can get away with.
[quote]hspder wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
In my eyes, voting either Democrat or Republican is a waste, as they are both powerful political machines, controlled by the corporations they receive donations from.
So what is the solution for the proletariat to take back his rights?
You know what I’m thinking, I’m sure. But that is sometime off before that can be realized. What are your solutions?
Be careful Irish, you’re starting to go a little bit to far off the left end. Seriously. Extremes are extremes and equally silly. I know you’re not there yet, but here are some words for you to think about.
I won’t pretend to like the Democratic party, and to disagree that they are as taken over by lobbies as the Republicans. But it is our duty, as American citizens, to vote, and, even, to get involved in the political process. If that means voting for and possibly be associated with the lesser of two evils, so be it; but letting others decide for you, because you don’t like the options, is asinine.
So be careful with what you say, or people might start thinking that you’re suggesting that they shouldn’t vote as things stand now.
My long term solution? Pick a party and change it from within. If your ideas are good and you persevere, you’ll have an effect. Maybe have others that think like you join, and amplify that effect… And even if things don’t change right away, you’ll be surprised at the effect just one person may have – mostly because most other people really don’t care.
It can take a lifetime, but at least you can die thinking that you did something with your ideas – even a small one – and had an effect on people, and fought for what you believed in, rather than just whining about it, or trying the “Revolution” approach, which, quite frankly, in today’s technocratic world would not have the positive results you expect it to… but would definitely have a lot of negative ones.
It’s much like losing weight: you need to find a diet that it is not too agressive that you will just lose water AND screw up your metabolism and gain everything back even faster, but not too conservative that you lose your patience more than your weight. There’s a balance in between, and finding it is the tricky part – and requires a lot of work and patience, but it is worth it.
Am I making any sense here?
[/quote]
I understand what you mean, and I respect it. But I do not agree at all. The message of both parties is dominated by massive corporations who have no social responsibilty whatsoever. They both love free trade, and they both espouse the same bullshit that the other does, all the while making some retarded social issue like “The war on Christmas” or abortion a polarizing issue in order to make themselves seem different. There is no way to convince me that either is worth voting for anymore.
And I have said it before, I am an extremist. I don’t believe there is any hope for this country as long as it remains in the hands of Republicrats- the Green Party is the only hope as far as I am concerned. And no one will vote for them, because they’re too damn busy voting for THE LESSER OF THE TWO EVILS!
When you look at things through my perspective, you see the history of the world as a struggle between the rich men who profit from the wars that poor men fight, and have tried to crush every worker’s movement and civil rights movement. This country made some great strides in social issues, and is now descending back into a pit of bullshit and corporate capitalism.
No, I have had it. The people who are breaking down the doors of the WTO have had it. The Zapatistas in Mexico, the socialists in France, and the antiglobalists who hurled molotov cocktails at the FTAA protests last month, we have all had it.
These issues will not go away, and they certainly will not be solved by the damn Democrats. There is no changing it from within when both parties are the same. In my eyes, it is either a third party or a revolution that will change things. Nothing else.
No disrespect meant to your post, Hspder- it was a good one, and it makes sense. But I don’t think it can be done.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
In my eyes, it is either a third party or a revolution that will change things.[/quote]
How can it? I mean, you can’t really believe that it is easier to change the mind of the majority of the US population enough that they would elect a third party – much less support a revolution – than it would be to change the Democratic party from within…
Or are you really implying that you would support a Revolution that would not be supported by the majority of the population, i.e., a non-Democratic Revolution? Do you really believe that would be stable? Do you understand that due to the current Economic situation of the US and the world as whole, that would cause a complete and utter Economic catastrophe that would transform the US into a third world economy literally overnight, and with it drag possibly dozens of other countries?
As much as you might hate globalization, it HAS happened. Like it or not, World economies are now completely interdependent. You can blame Nixon, you can blame Reagan, you can blame Clinton, you can blame the “Corporate World”, you can blame greed, you can blame stupidity… It doesn’t matter who or what you blame: it HAS happened, and a revolution is not going to fix the problem: it will, however, throw us back 250 years. And you don’t want that, I’m sure.
Of course, I also believe that if things progress in the direction they are going right now, an economic catastrophe will happen anyway – maybe in two or three generations, but it will happen unless there?s a fundamental shift in policy of the US Government. So, in a sense, the consequences of what you are proposing are not much worse than where we’re headed now; but they’re not better either; is that a solution then?
As much as you hate greedy and stupid people, you can’t work against them. They are the majority of the world’s population. You can’t fight them… You need to understand how they think, and manipulate them… Make their own best interest the best interest of the whole country – but still give them CHOICE (even while working to make sure it’s the right one).
And that’s what Social-Democracy is all about, and why it succeeds where Socialism and Communism fail miserably – Democracy being the key word here.
Democracy is fundamentally and truly the only system of government that is sustainable, and any system of government that doesn’t have Democracy at its core, its foundation, and the protection of people’s liberties as its first and foremost rule, will eventually fail miserably.
People need to feel they are free, that they have a choice. Even if you don’t like it, you need to give them that. That doesn’t mean you allow them to do anything (that would be the polar opposite, and equally a bad idea), but you need to give them choices and a sense of controlling their own future.
Trust me, it is in your best interest to do so.
[quote]snipeout wrote:
If you have nothing to hide don’t worry.[/quote]
I think I heard that line in a war movie once. Let’s see, who said it?..
Oh, that’s right. The Gestapo.
[quote]hspder wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
This is a brilliant post, and I am not using the word lightly – especially the part of how one person CAN change things.
Thank you. I appreciate the compliment.
Headhunter wrote:
Did you realize when you wrote this that much of it is in agreement with the philosophy of Ayn Rand? If not, you may want to look into it. (I probably don’t need to tell you this but form your own opinion of Miss Rand’s work; read her for yourself.).
Yes, I am familiar with her work, and I understand that much of what I wrote above is in agreement with part of her work. I even almost buy into how her definition of selfishness (as a self-respecting, self-supporting human being who neither sacrifices others to himself nor sacrifices himself to others) can be positive – assuming people realize that within the limits of your disposable income, paying taxes or giving to charity is far from being a sacrifice.
However, I do have a fundamental problem with most other parts of her philosophy, and its consequences; Namely, I fundamentally reject her advocacy of laissez-faire capitalism, and her over-the-top optimism. One of the things I learnt as an Economist is that laissez-faire capitalism is a time-bomb which has never survived for too long in any of the feeble attempts to implement it, fundamentally because it self-destructs under the weight of people’s uncontrolled greed and laziness.
It is my opinion that Objectivism, much like its polar opposite, Marxism, while having some fundamentally good ideas that I definitely feel can be an inspiration for excepcional, intelligent, educated, hard-working individuals, it provides some very bad ones for governing a population that is comprised of an overwhelming majority of greedy idiots and slackers that will want to sacrifice others to themselves – as much as they can get away with.
[/quote]
Another excellent post! Anyway…I need to think more about it but my first reaction is: that’s why we need laissez-faire, with a very minimal government. A powerful government, even a democratic one, gives the ‘overwhelming majority of greedy idiots and slackers’ a TOOL, to sacrifice others to themselves. A government with strict ‘hands-off’ laws and rules prevents the very abomination you despise.
I will think about it, while I read London’s IRON HEEL (at FightinIrish’s suggestion). 
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
hspder wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
In my eyes, voting either Democrat or Republican is a waste, as they are both powerful political machines, controlled by the corporations they receive donations from.
So what is the solution for the proletariat to take back his rights?
You know what I’m thinking, I’m sure. But that is sometime off before that can be realized. What are your solutions?
Be careful Irish, you’re starting to go a little bit to far off the left end. Seriously. Extremes are extremes and equally silly. I know you’re not there yet, but here are some words for you to think about.
I won’t pretend to like the Democratic party, and to disagree that they are as taken over by lobbies as the Republicans. But it is our duty, as American citizens, to vote, and, even, to get involved in the political process. If that means voting for and possibly be associated with the lesser of two evils, so be it; but letting others decide for you, because you don’t like the options, is asinine.
So be careful with what you say, or people might start thinking that you’re suggesting that they shouldn’t vote as things stand now.
My long term solution? Pick a party and change it from within. If your ideas are good and you persevere, you’ll have an effect. Maybe have others that think like you join, and amplify that effect… And even if things don’t change right away, you’ll be surprised at the effect just one person may have – mostly because most other people really don’t care.
It can take a lifetime, but at least you can die thinking that you did something with your ideas – even a small one – and had an effect on people, and fought for what you believed in, rather than just whining about it, or trying the “Revolution” approach, which, quite frankly, in today’s technocratic world would not have the positive results you expect it to… but would definitely have a lot of negative ones.
It’s much like losing weight: you need to find a diet that it is not too agressive that you will just lose water AND screw up your metabolism and gain everything back even faster, but not too conservative that you lose your patience more than your weight. There’s a balance in between, and finding it is the tricky part – and requires a lot of work and patience, but it is worth it.
Am I making any sense here?
I understand what you mean, and I respect it. But I do not agree at all. The message of both parties is dominated by massive corporations who have no social responsibilty whatsoever. They both love free trade, and they both espouse the same bullshit that the other does, all the while making some retarded social issue like “The war on Christmas” or abortion a polarizing issue in order to make themselves seem different. There is no way to convince me that either is worth voting for anymore.
And I have said it before, I am an extremist. I don’t believe there is any hope for this country as long as it remains in the hands of Republicrats- the Green Party is the only hope as far as I am concerned. And no one will vote for them, because they’re too damn busy voting for THE LESSER OF THE TWO EVILS!
When you look at things through my perspective, you see the history of the world as a struggle between the rich men who profit from the wars that poor men fight, and have tried to crush every worker’s movement and civil rights movement. This country made some great strides in social issues, and is now descending back into a pit of bullshit and corporate capitalism.
No, I have had it. The people who are breaking down the doors of the WTO have had it. The Zapatistas in Mexico, the socialists in France, and the antiglobalists who hurled molotov cocktails at the FTAA protests last month, we have all had it.
These issues will not go away, and they certainly will not be solved by the damn Democrats. There is no changing it from within when both parties are the same. In my eyes, it is either a third party or a revolution that will change things. Nothing else.
No disrespect meant to your post, Hspder- it was a good one, and it makes sense. But I don’t think it can be done.[/quote]
Irish
I’ve said to you before I admire your passion and I can’t believe I am saying this but I agree with Hspder’s post.
If you really want to effect change you need to lead, not destroy. The US is the foundation of freedom in the world and if it descends into hell it will take a large part of the the world with it.
You think things are bad, see what anarchy will bring. A revolution will bring anarchy. A popular uprising…never happen. Not for the reasons you think either.
Things are not as bad as you say. Your perspective may seem different but prosperity and opportunity in the US are enormous. That is why people will give their left nut to get to the US. A smart bright kid in the Sudan has limited prospects…that same kid in the US will go places. Why would you destroy that?
Take it from me, if the righties and the lefties are giving you the same advice and we have age on our side, and hopefully wisdom…take it to heart.
Revolutions don’t HAVE to be violent and destructive.
Sometimes change happens because it is time for it to happen. Canada didn’t fight a war with Britain to become a free democratic country.
And yes, all jokes aside, while the flavor is slightly different, we too get to yank our own chains and vote for the set of clods we’d like to steal from us, err, tax us.
Damn, I’m going to have my phones tapped from both ends aren’t I? Auuugh, it’s the phone police!!! Anybody old enough to remember that episode of WKRP?