Forum Post: What if America democraticly decided to kill all OWS protesters?
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 22, 2011, 2:18 p.m. EST by Infowar
(295)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Would that be representative of Democracy?
That's the danger a pure democracy. Our country wasn't set up as a democracy but a democrat republic. In a democracy the majority can do whatever they want to a minority population. Like the South during the civil rights era. Democratic republics if designed well protect the minority i.e. the individual against the whims of the majority while simultaneously allowing for gradual democratic reforms.
The slaves outnumbered the white people. The were hardly a minority.
I said the Civil Rights Era during which there were no slaves so your argument is invalid. Secondly African Americans are a minority and have always been a minority in every southern state even during slavery. A very small percentage of whites were plantation owners contrary to popular cultures understanding of the South's history. My point is that the idea of pure democracy being rule by the majority to change the laws to whatever they want them to be has to potential for very bad things as evidenced by history. A Republic protects the minority by standing up for the ultimate minority, the individual. You packed a lot of false information into such a short post. That's impressive.
It's kind of funny to see who the 'cotton-pickers' are nowadays...every time we open a brand new bottle of our prescription or OTC medications...
What the hell does that have to do with anything
Its called smoke and mirrors. The trolls do it in every post. Its like opening the door to the nut house.......the all come running in and post. Gets us off topic.
Well, I just thought I'd throw that out there, while we're on the topic of slavery...
We're not so much physically slaves anymore as we are mentally and emotionally.
How can I mentally be a slave to anyone?
by believing what others say.. you become a mental slave. like believing you must submit to being questioned by police for no reason.. not true.. they have to have a reason or you do not have to answer. but many believe they must respond just because its the police. this is mental slavery
By being brainwashed
What am I a dog?
Our precious democratic, republic suffered a coup in 1913, with the fraudulent passage of the Federal Reserve Act. Management of our national credit and currency is conducted in secret by private bankers and is now above the law and answers to no one. This has been admitted by Allan Greenspan, former Governor of the Board of Directors, of the Federal Reserve System.
The Federal Reserve Act was written by Paul Warburg, a banker, and the purpose is enrichment of the bankers.
Take away the incredible advantage of the one thousandth of one percent. Take away the enormous privilege of creating money out of thin air and collecting interest payments on the newly created money. Take away fractional reserve lending by private institutions.
Return our country to the rule of law . . The second greatest document on this planet, the U.S. Constitution, states Congress SHALL coin and regulate the currency.
It wasn't the Fed... it was the apportionment of taxes as Constitutional. After all, if it wasn't for that, we would not be paying taxes on the debt.
The Federal Reserve Act was fraudulently passed as law in 1913. The United States Constitution, Art. I Sec. 8 Cl. 5 "[Congress shall have Power ... ] To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, ...; a bill cannot modify the Constitution.
The Federal Income tax was initiated in 1913. Most of the money collected is spent to pay interest on the national debt before one good or service is provided to the American people,
Tariffs on imported goods and taxes on corporate profits funded the federal government prior to that.
I suggest you read this.
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
Pay special attention to sections 7&8.
First, a quote from Hamilton:
"If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare… The powers of Congress would subvert the very foundation, the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America."
You are right in regard to the 16th Amendment BUT...
Congress already has the means, and in fact, a Constitutional mandate to impose a direct emergency tax apportioned amongst the states should a deficit arise. There should be NO indefinite or perpetual debt, let alone a deficit.
The Fed, as the lender, is not at fault here - it's the corruption of Congress and their ridiculous spending on highly discriminatory special interests, the majority of which would never pass a test of consensus.
Republics are shit.
We need Direct Digital Democracy NOW!
governments are shit.
So are corporations.
We could let the on line casinos run the system.
Wall St. / Casinos - What's the diff.?
Great idea, we could let Wall Street run the digital voting system
Why would you even say such a thing?
If you're joking... It ain't funny.
Well they have all that computerized stock tracking software.
If we want digital democracy like the first posts says, Wall Street would be great at creating the software.
Why?
So they can game it and install the kind of government that THEY want (like they are doing now)?
I don't think so.
Non-Commercial, Open Source Software all the way.
Ooops I forgot the sarcasm warning.
BINGO
Actually America was setup as a democratically elected constitutional republic.
if all americans participated in a direct democratic vote with no leaders... i'd be mother fucking impressed.
But since some americans are OWS the likelihood that they would come to a consensus to kill all OWS members seems impossible. Because consensus means all participants agree.
So... not going to happen.
Some Americans are also the "1%", also if 20 million American's support the "99%" their will be over 300 million that don't. Not exactly consent!!
Also all it would take is the MSM hyping to kill someone for the greater good.
In case you have not paid attention, consensus is reached by those who are in attendance at the GA. There might be only 100 people there and they can decide, through consensus, what the 10,000 will do.
Thats not democracy or representative. This is what makes OWS such a joke. You have a small group of people making decisions about the movement without the consent of the other people. Completely defeating the purpose. Did you ever wonder how the people in New York get to make the decisions about how donations are spent, when the movement is nationwide? And that is an even smaller group. Do you think the national movement would have agreed to send 8 people to Egypt? Hell no. its insanity.
Pay no attention to 'ronjj', 'Jimboiam', '99thpercentile', 'Screwyl' or the others who dis "Direct Democracy"...
These guys are known corporate trolls and paid to try and make "Democracy" look bad.
They do this by trying to confuse it with "Mob Rule" (aka: Ochlocracy)...
Which it ain't.
They are just fascists that want to continue and perpetuate the elitist, imperialist, jingoistic, nationalistic programme of capitalism and oppression through the 1%'s control of public discourse.
Burroughs called them the "Nova Mob" and they will be deposed.
[Removed]
And this is not a govermental type where the representatives are simply SELF appointed rather than elected?? I would not trust 100 out of 10,000 who are self appointed to represent me in anything even though they reach a consensus. I would at least have the right to vote on a self-appointed candidate to be a representative. Maybe elected representative government is not such a bad idea after all. At least you know where each stands, how they voted, and have a target of who to keep and who to get rid of in the next go-round.
No it means the "moral" majority rule.
well technically it means all members consent. the point remains, people would not consent to their own demise.
No it does not mean the "moral" majority rule.
[Removed]
How many political decisions have you seen everyone agree on?
Yeah, this use of the term "consensus" bugs me too. Unanimous -- has a meaning, "consensus" is must softer than unanimous, yet they repeatedly ascribe unanimity to consensus.
However, I very much dobt that any decision has been unanimous, unless it was "decided" at precisely the right moment of the HANDSUP!...HANDSDOWN!...HANDSUPHANDSDOWN! game
But if the majority of people (non-OWS) voted for it,bye bye.Direct Democracy in action.
no that is not direct democracy. that is just democracy.
Lol semantics,it's still bye bye.
America is OWS.
Your head is too big for the room.
which room? America vs Amerika
Well, most countries are governed by the theory of the rule of law, which means, the supreme authority is not any person or even the democratic government, the supreme authority is the law, and no one is above it - not even the government. In theory anyway, it sure doesn't look like it's working very well right now. The elites seem to think they are totally above the law.
As far as it goes, pure democracy has never existed and it would probably be undesirable. That's not to say we should all support fascism or autocracy. We can be democratic without being a pure democracy, and this seems to work pretty good most of the time, when we actually are being democratic anyway.
We need to actually demand or storm corrupt politicians offices and citizens arrest them. Then hold trials that are transparent but until more people get involved that won't happen. Democracies are to slow to do the every day decisions.. the Constitution is supposed to be the law and politicians are basically supposed to to do city planning and paper pushing with very little power or influence. Every system has its flaws, we need to fix ours as forming something new would be starting off breaking the laws and would lead to a civil war.
I think that's a little unrealistic, the arresters would just be painted as a violent mob, and they've packed the courts anyway. You'd need a parallel government with its own courts, its own constitution and legal system. Basically a proper revolution, and I don't think the public would back it or legitimize it at this stage (nor does the level of consensus or organization to form one exist yet). Most people (ie the 99%) aren't quite ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater just yet. And we shouldn't be leading the public around by a nose-ring. The public should determine what it wants. When it wants revolution, it will let us know.
Go around asking people if they believe in free speech or the right to bare arms. Then ask them if we should change that document those rights are on. Do you not think some people perceive OWS as a violent mob?
Now I'm not in the States, so we're not as polarized here, we still have a moderate centre. The right in the US isn't like the right elsewhere - they view things in terms of brands. If there is a political group in the streets they don't like, they are automatically a "violent mob" or really any other negative connotation they can imagine (Nazis, commies, rapists, wife-beaters, anything), regardless of the facts. But moderates in the US - and just about everyone everywhere outside the US - who look at things in terms of facts, don't see OWS as a violent mob at all, even the ones who don't like OWS at all. Even our mainstream media notes that there have been relatively few incidences of window-smashing and whatnot that were typically associated with things like the anti-WTO protests. So this perception does exist, but it would exist no matter what. It would probably exist even if there were no crowds at all, because the facts are simply irrelevant to the formation of that opinion. That being said. It does not reflect the view of the majority even in the US, it only reflects the third or quarter or so who are of the sort I've mentioned. Who happen to be very vocal and like to pretend they are the majority.
Yes the same could be said about citizens arresting politicians, as under our Constitution we are allowed to do that. Also if you don't live in the U.S it is really hard to understand the political para-dime the media controls perception, as with your country. I bet you most people can agree on most basic freedoms. Then i believe we must get everyone to understand the philosophy of liberty. It is the only way to guarantee lasting freedom.
Well, you're not just allowed to go willy-nilly making citizens arrest just because you feel like it (and citizen's arrest is not actually in the Constitution at all, its part of the criminal code).
The laws that allow a citizen's arrest are pretty specific about how and when a citizen's arrest can be made. Read up on them and you'll see it's not that simple.
On the other hand the US is possibly the only nation in the world where you could have a legal revolution. The Declaration of Independence is not the Constitution, but it is a constitutional document and it does charge the public with not only the right but the duty to revolution under certain conditions, and one could appeal to its constitutional authority. But I don't think there is any broad-based support for a revolution just yet.
guess not.
Karl Rove, George Bush, Dick Chenny, David Rockefeller Henry Kissinger and the list goes on and on of politicians that have committed proven war crimes. You are right it does not say that directly it just gives us the power to remove the government if it stops serving the people.
I like the right to bare arms, especially on hot days.
You would look good as a draw string lamp, no?
I like using a dimmer myself.
A lamp with a dimmer?
sure. You haven't seen one before?
It's from a song.
Why would you ask such a stupid question?
You could have just as easily asked:
"What if America democratically decided to kill all Wall Street Bankers?"
...But you didn't.
Because you suck.
Because you are a reactionary fool!!
You're the one that started talking about killing people and now I'M reactionary?!
Nice try, but I don't think so.
Say hi to the Nova Mob for us.
Tell them their days are numbered.
But don't worry, unlike you guys - we don't kill people.
We just hold them accountable.
That was not the point of the question, the point was towards the flaws of some forms of democracy. The reason i used that example was to get people to react but unlike other reactionaries, you instantly thought i was talking about actually killing people.
Well then perhaps you should choose your words more wisely next time.
No perhaps you should boost your reading comprehension.
I had college level reading aptitude when I was 10 years old. I can build linguistic structures around your piteously-stunted, cognitive debility that would leave you confused and reeling. I have more semantic prowess in the fingernail of my right index digit than you have hubris in your poorly formulated posts.
I believe it was Ice Cube that first suggested:
"You betta check yo'self before you wreck yo'self"
So how are you the only one that did not get it? Did you get a special education that makes you see things as others don't?
I "got it" just fine.
You want to kill Occupiers and you don't believe in Democracy.
Therefore, you will be humiliated in this forum by myself and others who see through your BS.
Nice try, though.
I believe in a democratically elected constitutional republic and I have not and would never call for anyone's death except a proven murderer. I am sorry you feel butt hurt about the question but that does not make me a fascist or the next ad hominem.
A "republic" requires elected representatives.
This sets the stage for corruption and government/corporate collusion.
This leads to fascism.
The same way that a democracy leads to genocide. Two wolves and a sheep voting on whats for dinner.
Oh Bullshit.
You can't commit "genocide" under true democracy.
No one but a small group of extremists and nut-jobs would ever vote for such a measure and you would really make yourself look bad if you tried to drum up democratic support for that kind of thing.
Once again, we find our forum heavily populated with paid fascists trolls that want to continue and perpetuate the elitist, imperialist, jingoistic, nationalistic programme of capitalism and oppression through the 1%'s control of public discourse. Trying to make politicians and "representatives" (republic) look good while trying make "Democracy" look bad. They do this by trying to confuse it with "Mob Rule" (aka: Ochlocracy)...
Which it ain't.
Burroughs called them the "Nova Mob" and they will be deposed.
Nice try troll... but FAIL.
You really think i am a paid troll? So what happened on 911 we were "attacked" and they used the images to get us to want to go to war. The same thing will happen in Democracy we will have problem reaction solution. They say we are being attacked they show us the boogy man and the solution and then we vote. Sorry buddy no system can stop a gullible citizenry except a republic but only when "awake".
Democracy is not just about majority rule (or even consensus) it's also about minority rights. Murder is a clear violation of the rights of the individual.
No because the OWS protestors would be part of the democracy. If not then it would not really be a democracy.
But unless you truly have a majority OWS could be slaughtered. Do you really believe a majority of the population supports OWS. Just because you call yourself the 99% does not make it so.
I believe that the majority of the population supports what OWS stands for. Maybe they do not support the movement itself. But I think they would defiinitly support the issues that the movement stands for at the core. Most people have moral principle and would not be for corporate involvement and corruption in our current system. Maybe I am wrong. But I believe most people are caring of others even if at times it does not seem so.
Use 911 as en example of something that could drive a population to to horrid things!!
What if America democratically decided to kill the trolls?
Well that is the danger of direct unrestrained Democracy!!
No, just the opposite!!
Edumacation much?
Edumacation much???
Yes you heard me. tell me what would prevent it?
Democracy without Equality is a fantasy. Equality requires common ownership (i.e., abolishing all forms of ownership including money / governments / hierarchical organizations such as political parties / etc.). Short of that "democracy" is nothing but an empty word, thrown around by capitalist pigs and their trolls for consumption by the sheeple nitwits as they graze to be milked and butchered.
Study YOUR history, it has already happened,
When the bonus-boyz marched on DC in 1932 during the last depression they were slaughtered by US troops.
It took the US public over a year to find out the truth, the first impression was they deserved to die, because they were living in tents in filthy conditions. Then as now NOTHING has changed.
If you know history then you know that KILLING US citizens comes easy for the US government.
Illegal matters, such as this you propose, would not come up for a vote.
the problem with democracy is that the minority intelligent are painfully bootstrapped to the mediocre and average majority
Very true Democracy does nothing to protect minority rights.
Crimes against Humanity is never Democratic but certain factions do believe the ends justify the means.
Hanging Chad and vote rigging etc is a way for the minority to make the majority "think" the process was democratic.
it would not be representative of our Constitution
Ok you watched a John Birch video. It would be a violation of many laws to democratically vote to kill OWS so it can't be done. I get your point. it's a very old pro republican propaganda analogy. Truth be told it's not applicable to a constitutional Republic but they keep hammering away these rediculous scare tactics to keep us divided.
If you have not noticed many here are calling for direct democracy and a doing away with the republic. I have heard of the Birch society but have not watched any of their videos.
In that case I agree. Voting away freedom in the name of safety would happen almost immediately.
The answer isn't democracy, but true equality. Equality is reached only when every human has decided they are no better or worse than any other. How do you feel?
How do i feel about what your philosophy? I feel that humans are created equal then they grow up and become who they are. All life is precious but am i as smart as Einstein, am i as strong as Tyson or as gifted as Bobby Fischer no i don't think so.
What if America democraticly decided to kill all OWS protesters?
Look at things - really.
How?
Wouldnt happen. There are laws to protect people. By the way that is one major big what if. That's like saying what if tomorrow the US had no diversity.
So you are saying we are a republic? What about property laws could we vote them away?
We can change anything we want. It only takes 51% of the votes from the 99%. It's a matter of whether the proposed change would benefit us as a nation or not.
No you can't, the people of this country believe in the Constitution. You try and take that away the 49% will destroy you. I love this use of the 99% brand, it make you feel more powerful then you are. I am waiting to call myself an OWSer till they have a unified message. Talking about the blind leading the blind.
Another asshole poster
What is wrong with the question? Don't you think considering the circumstance it is a valid question?
Look how much energy was spent responding to the obvious. Does it really need explanation ? And now I am doing it. This isn't rocket science, if someone is shooting at me I will kill the son of a bitch...is that plain enough?
It is using a democratic situation that illustrates some flaws. If you think it is obvious then consider it for younger peoples educative process.
I am not afraid.
– Bloodshed in Freedom Square – ? . . . . Nov. 21, 2011
http://occupywallst.org/forum/bloodshed-in-freedom-square/
.
z
Let's be serious. We don't have time for this. We need a better way to fight back. Protesting is a good start but it won't solve our huge problems.
FIGHT THE CAUSE - NOT THE SYMPTOM Read “Common Sense 3.1” at ( www.revolution2.osixs.org )
Great book also the federalist papers.
Do you seriously believe so many people would accept mass murder? I doubt it.
IDK 911+ US citizens = WW3 ... So yes, how many country's are we at war with how many more on the table? Ever heard of Anwar al-Awlaki?
American Citizen Anwar al-Awlaki Assassinated in Yemen link here: http://www.salon.com/2011/09/30/awlaki_6/
That just proves that representative democratie allows for it.
.... any system or peoples not bound by LAWS can do horrid things. Remember the Nazis governed by consent.
I forgot that Nazis made it "legal" to do what they did. I guess when peoples morals go so do just laws.
but they had to break their original laws to do it.
Yes, that is why America is supposed to be a democratically elected constitutional republic. Where as our representatives are bound by LAW ... see they scraped the constitution so they could break the law!!!
You know what i meant. Arguing about words isn't changing the fact that also America did and does a lot of harmful things. The current system isn't at all preventing invasion of foreign countries, killing of innocent people, or hate mongering against a certain race/religion. But the sad part is, now most people don't agree with that. But those in power can do it anyways.
Yes and we have not been following our Constitution for quite some time. That is the thing about breaking rules once you do it there is not much going back. Once you give up your rights as a collective you usually have to fight to get them back.
[Removed]
Oh how soon you forget our recent history where blacks could be killed without a worry to many whites. Society has not advanced that far to where it is not unheard of. I have seen liberals claim to want to hang all Tea Partiers on multiple occasions. Radicals are radicals.
Claiming to want to hang all Tea Partiers while qvetching amongst friends or acting the blowhard in online discussion, and supporting it as a viable option in real life are completely different things.
Radicals are people with fringe political agendas on both sides of the spectrum. Radical is not a synonym for Genocidal or murderous, neither is liberal. Radical is not a synonym for liberal.
You did get one thing right though: Radicals are radicals. Duh is duh.
People love using their labels.
Yes radicals exist, but how many. In that 'recent' history you mentioned, people had a lot less options to get themselves informed. Times did change dramatically in that regard. Even though propaganda tries to make us hate certain Islamic countries, the majority of people seem to clearly agree we should not wage war against them. Because we know better now.
And lets face it, in representative democratie a lot of harmful decisions are made as well. Causing a lot of death and suffering. And often those are decisions that most people do NOT agree with. So if it were up to the people, those things wouldn't happen.
So the real question would be, "which system would be better?"
That's the danger a pure democracy. Our country wasn't set up as a democracy but a democrat republic. In a democracy the majority can do whatever they want to a minority population. Like the South during the civil rights era. Democratic republics if designed well protect the minority i.e. the individual against the whims of the majority while simultaneously allowing for gradual democratic reforms.
what kind is it then when the minority do whatever they want to the majority? Is that socialism or capitalism? They seem the same to me. A representative government represents those who put them in office? Oh, They are put in office by OTHER representatives, so the people are not involved at all, & there is no obligation towards the people? So they are not accountable because they are not appointed by the people then?Any holder of office can then be accountable under common law because they don't represent the people, they are not under oath as officers, then they are not officers, & are imposters... Politics is new to me, I didn't know there was pure democracy. It's odd to be a democratic republic that doesn't mean democratic, isn't it?
American Government is not a democracy. It is socialist Government. Socialism play /ˈsoʊʃəlɪzəm/ is an economic system in which the means of production are commonly owned and controlled cooperatively; or a political philosophy advocating such a system.. The people think its a democracy. Europe is the same... So it cannot play the democracy card when it suits, if you can't play the constitution card, & that is almost repealed. How they have done that, is let you think you are party to it, as in a contract. All law IS contract law, (we ignorantly agree to it, but its actually company policy, & doesn't apply to people) but nobody alive today IS party to it because NONE of YOU signed it.. Smooth & under-handed. You could admire their tenacity if it wasn't such a flagrant disregard for human rights... If they try it, call an election. If they want to play democratic, you can too. Good luck American people. We can't help because what's happening to you is happening to us to, just not so much yet, but "the people" is all of us, & we are all in it together.
they were freeing them from an oppressive dictator
During the Classical era of Ancient Greece many city-states had forms of government based on democracy, in which the free (non-slave), native (non-foreigner) adult males citizens of the city took a major and direct part in the management of the affairs of state, such as declaring war, voting supplies, dispatching diplomatic missions and ratifying treaties. These activities were often handled by a form of direct democracy, based on a popular assembly. Others, of judicial nature, were often handled by large juries, drawn from the citizen body... not my words
Are you suggesting in a democracy you don't vote? Or are you suggesting that it be restrained by law?
Rule of law is all but gone now...If the State owns the police force & they can break the laws & assault/attack people, there is no law. A democracy to me suggests that a person chosen by the people can rule with the welfare of the people as paramount, & they must be 'A people' Not a 'president or a King'. (That seems to exhalt them inn their own estimation & tyranny results)... & they must be accountable to the people.... & Not that the people can choose 1 of 3 or 4 people selected by a body that has not been elected. We may elect individuals, but together those individuals become something more. Nobody elected a tyrannical government? I also think that people representing a legal body are still accountable under common law for individual crimes.. The people have the right to redress, complain & LAWFULLY rebel in the face of oppression & criminal activity by government.. Especially the theft that has been committed to make these people wealthy. FEDERAL government is not lawful. US is a sovereign nation, like England. Nobody can give a sovereign nation to a foreign power. Nobody has the authority.. It is unlawful. individuals have no treaty with the government. Its meant to take care of you & pay YOUR bills because the governments 'promised to pay' after FDR tool the gold. It was on UK bank notes, but it was quietly removed. They gave us fiat currency the world over, but that only signifies the debt of the gov... Not the people....
Greek Democracy was by chance, not by voting. Same for Germanic and Nordic "Things" (assembly).
Voting leads to oligarchy. Dicing leads to perfect representation.
It's not chance then.
So D&D players are the real democrats? :p
Not really.
Representatives are selected by chance. You register as a candidate, and win your parlament seat in the national lottery.
That leads to statistically perfect representation, the parlament composition as an approximation of the general population.
Voting leads to aristocracy and oligarchy.
In Germanic things many issues like leadership in the war were decided by chance.
The chance that the son of a former President is the most qualified person to run the nation is pretty low.
Hi there. Don't you think it's blindingly wrong that although they are a representative government, they are not representing those they are paid by, & for, to represent? I think that is fundamental to how you are going to beat this...If we reject their representation, we can PRESENT ourselves as a higher authority because WE are Human, with a creator that is not them... They, on the other hand, were created BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE. If that is not the position they now hold, it makes sense that WE can REJECT their governance & interference if human affairs, because "THE GOVERNMENT" is NOT human...? Sorry about the 'WE' & 'YOU' interchange, I am no longer sure where 'WE' ends, & 'YOU' begins because US policies are extending to my house in Europe in a big way. It is bigger than just US fed gov though. There is also EU & UN on their side...
I am speaking of legislature, not executive. In Greek democracy citizens were selected by chance to become part of the public agora. The whole public shouldn't vote and discuss, but representatives of the public.
The best method to ensure that 300 people are representative of 300 Mio citizens is to select representatives randomly. As a lottery.
Voting leads to oligarchy/aristocracy like in ancient Rome. The "politicians" as a social class vs. the "citizens"
To the executive branch roughly applies the same. It can't be chance that we find dynasties in the US. You also have to be rich to become a presidential candidate. Plutocratic elements.
You are such a total Nut Job!
For all you right wingers out there, your obsession with the Greeks, coupled with your complete lack of understanding of history is insane!
I notice the same right wing nut jobs that spout all this stuff about Republics being somehow "better" than Democracies, all this homophobic "god hates fags" bullshit and all this stuff about the "evil Muslims" who supposedly "hate our freedoms" are the same ones who start talking about Thermopylae and Xerxes as a narrative pretext for racist, nationalistic and utterly fascist ideas.
All this jive about the glory and wonder of a bunch of ancient Greek cultures that have long-since died-out... Really just a jingoistic excuse for racist ideas about Muslims and various other "people-of-color" throughout the world. Which of course, always tends to serve as a pretext for building weapons, bombing the shit out of these people and then installing US corporations to govern the stealing of their resources.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/hollywood-has-turned-cryptofascist/#comment-430879
I always want to remind these people that the Ancient Greeks were NOTORIOUS for having a culture that openly acknowledged and accepted homosexuality. Also, the idea that Greeks were a Republic and Romans were a Democracy is patently absurd, completely false and literally backwards. "Republic" is a LATIN term and "Democracy" comes to us from the Greek. Also - contrary to popular belief - Plato's tome on government was not actually called "Republic", it was called "Politeia" - as in: "politic" - as in "the body politic" - as in: "The People".
Capitalists have been successfully conflating "Republics" and "Democracies" in the public discourse for hundreds of years. Let's put an end to it once and for all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Republic_%28Plato%29
Put that in your pipe and smoke it!
"Conservatism" is a plague upon this earth.
[Removed]
Alex we know thats you.
You think i am Alex Jones?
Welcome my friend, welcome to the machine.
A Democracy bound by law is a Democratic Republic?
now look what the politicians in Washington are proposing ! ha ha ha I guess nothing should surprise us these days?..... How much more proof do people need to understand the significance of what is going on? Senators Demand the Military Lock Up American Citizens in a “Battlefield” They Define as Being Right Outside Your Window " The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world " http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/senators-demand-military-lock-american-citizens-battlefield-they-define-being
[Removed]
I don't care if it was representative, I would be thoroughly entertained to see the OWS movement face actual oppression, instead of the perceived oppression they act as if it exists.
I think you should ask yourself why you would like to see that. There lies a secret fascist in all of us that is just waiting to escape.
Secret? watching the OWS movement be massacred would be the most entertaining thing I could imagine, I would probably bring the older kids and would sell popcorn and make a huge profit. Wouldn't that be great making profits from OWS supporters death, if that could propel me to the 1% wouldn't that be awesome.
Shortly after that the monster you created would turn and come for you and your kids with the same sick smile, laughing sardonically.
Not if I gave him some popcorn and shared the wealth, then we would both be laughing sardonically together. Then we can make a movie about it and make even more money.
You are one of the reason's why we Americans have the second amendment. Trust me you blood thirsty psychos are in the minority, get help.
What's an amendmant?
I have argued with a 3yr old, I feel proud. lol Kid study the Constitution, Deceleration of Independence, Bill of Rights and the reasons they came to be.
I maybe three, but I still have never heard of the Decelaration of Indepenance, I may have heard of the Acceleration of indepenance, but not that one
what country are you from?
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
No. Consensus democracy is based on the idea that you have power on matters only to the degree to which they affect you.
And every political decision has the power to affect you, so?
Think of it this way: a neighborhood comitte imposing that you don't grow veggies on your lawn might be a tiny bit of a power grab over things people shouldn't really deal with, so long as it doesn't affect, say, the community's health. Some landlord deciding that because a river passes over "his property" means he can shut it from everyone else downriver is very much abusing things and does affect everyone else in direct ways.
Get over the garden thing. That nighbor with the "mint" lawn and the goats is driving me crazy - you ever been around a "mint" farm. So, he decides to plant his lawn to onions and hires a bunch of workers to pick them in the fall - I got a little problem with that too. Evev spent any time around an onion farm at harvest time. Is planting wheat OK - not really a veggie but a source of food anyhow. Ever see a wildfire in a dry field next door to your house.
I don't know who shut your "river" off but I bet he had a pretty BIG permit posted somewhere. I live near one of those rivers you talk about - the ligitation continues to this day about who gets this allottment, and that one, and we are not talking about anyone's little dam. Welcome to the Colorado
[Removed]