Political philosophy - Page 7

BeardofPants · 06-25-2002, 08:03 PM

You forgot founders effect. We'll breed each other silly, and eventually some new nasty will come along and obliterate us. Of course, I DO happen to have this nice little sample of small pox here....

Cirdan · 06-25-2002, 09:11 PM

*checks Internet for wha...*

So, an army of horny defects... I wouldn't be 4-F for that one!

BeardofPants · 06-25-2002, 09:18 PM

Well, that's one way of putting it...

Andúril · 06-26-2002, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Bop:
Does this mean that I should wave around my right to not have spades on me for 50 years?

No. If you are not buried 6 feet under in worm-infested mud, you can be spaded relentlesly. And you can't do anything about it. In your face.

Btw, who would want to spade a dead person, anyway? That's just sick, dude.

[cough]necrophiliacs[/cough]

BeardofPants · 06-26-2002, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Anduril
And you can't do anything about it. In your face.

I believe that's the point....

Quote:

Btw, who would want to spade a dead person, anyway? That's just sick, dude.

[cough]necrophiliacs[/cough]

Funny you should mention that...

Yesterday a couple of goths were arrested for digging up someone's body in Christchurch yesterday.

Starr Polish · 06-26-2002, 11:49 AM

Republicans are to democrats as fascists are to communists, or whatever order you wish to put that in.

Eruviel Greenleaf · 06-26-2002, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Starr Polish
Republicans are to democrats as fascists are to communists, or whatever order you wish to put that in.

Except that fascists are extreme right and communists extreme left, and republicans are more right (but not correct...in my opinion

) and democrats more center...
but I'm being nit-picky, eh?

Yes. Anyway.

Cirdan · 06-26-2002, 12:44 PM

Example - The Everglades Recovery Project in Floroda. Sounds like a nice environmental project. Bill Clinton got it approved. Should be liberal and Democratic. Not completely.

The project funds the strip mining of 21,000 acres of the everglades.

The project is run by the Army Corps of Engineers, who have never denied a land development proposal.

The Wildlife Management bureau questioned the development of the habitat of an endangered species, the panther. Their objetions were quashed by the Senators from Florida; one Democrat and one Republican. Both received large campain funds from land developers in Florida (a multi-billion dollar business).

The US government will be buying land from the sugar cane growers who receive subsdies to grow sugar cane and whose surplusses are bought by... the US government. The growers coerced a violation of the Lake Occachobee water levels during the drought of 2000, a yar in with they produced... more surplusses.

In the end contractors, consultants, and bureaucrats will spend $7.8 billion dollars to turn the Everglades into suburbs and golf courses. A joint effort by republicans and democrats.

Starr Polish · 06-27-2002, 12:33 PM

I meant that in a different sense, I guess.

If you set communists and fascists on a straight spectrum, yes, they'd be on opposite ends, but the spectrum isn't straight, it comes around in a circle, thus, even though they are on opposite ends, they are right next to each other.

Does that make any sense to you?

Sometimes my words don't come out right.

Cirdan · 06-27-2002, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Starr Polish
I meant that in a different sense, I guess.

If you set communists and fascists on a straight spectrum, yes, they'd be on opposite ends, but the spectrum isn't straight, it comes around in a circle, thus, even though they are on opposite ends, they are right next to each other.

Does that make any sense to you? Sometimes my words don't come out right.

Yes, I think that makes sense. The continuum on that plane is that the constant factor is the existance and the power of the state over the rights if the individual.

On another axis would be the individual and nation as a peoples and not as the governemnt were revolution, rebellion, and anarchy meet on one side of the continuum, and subjegation and passification on the other.

Now I wonder if my words came out right.

Why has no one objected to my absurd proposal? Was not absurd enough or just too long to care.

BeardofPants · 06-27-2002, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cirdan
Why has no one objected to my absurd proposal? Was not absurd enough or just too long to care.

I think people are secretly looking forwards to having a good excuse for stinking.

Cirdan · 06-27-2002, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BeardofPants

I think people are secretly looking forwards to having a good excuse for stinking.

I see... I didn't realize 'cause I have a reason...

I'm thinking gas stations would be a good start... nice explosions.

What do wet sheep smell like, anyway? Dogs are bad, but then wool sweaters don't smell when wet.

Elvellon · 06-27-2002, 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cirdan

What do wet sheep smell like, anyway? Dogs are bad, but then wool sweaters don't smell when wet.

Aham

Cirdan, trust me, you DON’T want to know that….

Eruviel Greenleaf · 06-28-2002, 03:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Starr Polish
I meant that in a different sense, I guess.

If you set communists and fascists on a straight spectrum, yes, they'd be on opposite ends, but the spectrum isn't straight, it comes around in a circle, thus, even though they are on opposite ends, they are right next to each other.

Does that make any sense to you? Sometimes my words don't come out right.

Of course it makes sense...sorry, I forgot to mention that bit

Did someone mention explosions?

***azalea*** · 06-28-2002, 10:04 PM

Hey, Cirdan, you're absolutely right about the Dem and Reps. They're both just tools of big biz.
So how did you vote in the last election? I can honestly say I did my part to throw a wrench into their machine, how about you? It really needs to change. Voting for a third party is not throwing your vote away, IMO, giving in and voting for a candidate you don't believe in is. And it's much less smelly and scary than anarchy! Hey, I'd be all for no gov if I had a guarantee that everyone would behave.

Cirdan · 06-28-2002, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by azalea
So how did you vote in the last election?

Holding my nose. I wish I had voted 3rd party.

I can honestly say I did my part to throw a wrench into their machine, how about you? It really needs to change.
[/B][/QUOTE]

Good for you! At first I was frustrated that the third party helped the corporate raiders take the government. I was clining to false hope. The recent corporate scandals should make a third party much more viable. The media is controlled pretty well compared to 20+ years ago, so the difficult part is to get serious recognition.

It would be necessary to get some defections from the current parties to make it work. Just getting a presidential candidate would do it. They would never be able to work around the congress. The first goal would be to get enough third parties to agree to and independent umbrella coalition. Then the power to be a swing vote block in congress would make everyone take notice.

Quote:

Voting for a third party is not throwing your vote away, IMO, giving in and voting for a candidate you don't believe in is. And it's much less smelly and scary than anarchy! Hey, I'd be all for no gov if I had a guarantee that everyone would behave.

Everyone would behave... in some way

keep the faith, azalea!

Elvellon · 06-29-2002, 07:14 AM

It’s the same everywhere in the west; the major parties became more and more indistinguishable from one another. The result is usually a steady increase of the popularity of small, fringe parties (is this also the case in the USA?). How will the large traditional parties react to this change is still to be known.

***azalea*** · 06-30-2002, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elvellon
It’s the same everywhere in the west; the major parties became more and more indistinguishable from one another.

It's like I said to my friends, "They looked from one to the other and back again and it became harder and harder to tell which was the man and which was the pig." Okay so that's not the exact quote, but you know the one I mean.

Lief Erikson · 04-01-2006, 02:21 AM

Gwaimir, here are some of my thoughts on the differences between monarchy and democracy. I'd be interested in hearing your responses, since I now know you're more in favor of monarchy. It's very interesting to me that you have that view, and I'd like to explore it a bit by arguing against it.

I disagree with your view that monarchy is better than democracy, Gwaimir, and will present my reasons why

.

Monarchy suffers from what is described by the old but fairly true statement, "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." This isn't always true to my thinking, but it's true an awfully large percentage of the time. Democracy, on the other hand, includes checks and balances.

Furthermore, as Nurvi pointed out, extremely incompetent or unpopular leaders can be voted out of office. President Clinton was impeached, though he wasn't discharged. Our leaders can be removed. Monarchs can't be, except by assassination or revolt. And if they have all the power of the secret service on their side and the military under their command, they can be awfully hard to either rebel against or to assassinate.

You only get a bad democracy if you get a bad majority and bad laws, but then you still have laws protecting the minorities. With monarchies, the monarchs are not bound to protect their minorities.

Also, taking a very cursory look at history, you'll see a lot more incompetent monarchs than competent ones. Having a succession of those as head of state is a freaky concept.

So I can't see why you like monarchies better, myself

.

***Earniel*** · 04-01-2006, 04:14 AM

Lief, you're thinking purely of a totalitarian monarchy. There are different types of monarchies. Ours for example is a constitutional monarchy. Even the King is bound to the constitution. Always.

In reality the main duty of our King and royal family is mostly public relations with other countries, and they usually pop up in places of disasters in our own country to show their support to the people.

The only task our King has in legislation is signing the laws that the parlement puts before him. (Of course one King once refused to sign a law, the abortion law. The King in question couldn't have children and he just couldn't get himself to sign that law. They had to pull a few stunts to get that problem solved by having the King abdicate for one day so the Prime Minister could sign it. Sort of hilarious, typically Belgium. It was a once-in-a-lifetime occasion, though.)

But in the end it's the prime minister that stears the country.

The last time the King made a careful statement about how he wants his country to be run, people made some grumbling protests that he was wiser to stay out of that particular touchy debate and there was much talks, even in parlement, about whether it isn't about time we moved to a purely ceremonial Kingship.

But a monarchy, even a ceremonial monarchy, is often said to have more stability than for instance a republic. I'm not saying it is always so, I can give several instances (especially in Africa) where it isn't. But at least I think I prefer my monarchy to any republic.

06-25-2002, 08:03 PM	#121
BeardofPants the Shrike Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA <3 Posts: 10,647	You forgot founders effect. We'll breed each other silly, and eventually some new nasty will come along and obliterate us. Of course, I DO happen to have this nice little sample of small pox here.... __________________ "Binary solo! 0000001! 00000011! 0000001! 00000011!" ~ The Humans are Dead, Flight of the Conchords

06-25-2002, 09:11 PM	#122
Cirdan Elf Lord of the Grey Havens Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: somewhere else Posts: 2,381	checks Internet for wha... So, an army of horny defects... I wouldn't be 4-F for that one! __________________ There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary

06-25-2002, 09:18 PM	#123
BeardofPants the Shrike Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA <3 Posts: 10,647	Well, that's one way of putting it... __________________ "Binary solo! 0000001! 00000011! 0000001! 00000011!" ~ The Humans are Dead, Flight of the Conchords

06-26-2002, 11:49 AM	#126
Starr Polish Elf Lord Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Slow down and I sail on the river, slow down and I walk to the hill Posts: 2,389	Republicans are to democrats as fascists are to communists, or whatever order you wish to put that in. __________________ “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.” –Bertrand Russell

06-26-2002, 12:44 PM	#128
Cirdan Elf Lord of the Grey Havens Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: somewhere else Posts: 2,381	Example - The Everglades Recovery Project in Floroda. Sounds like a nice environmental project. Bill Clinton got it approved. Should be liberal and Democratic. Not completely. The project funds the strip mining of 21,000 acres of the everglades. The project is run by the Army Corps of Engineers, who have never denied a land development proposal. The Wildlife Management bureau questioned the development of the habitat of an endangered species, the panther. Their objetions were quashed by the Senators from Florida; one Democrat and one Republican. Both received large campain funds from land developers in Florida (a multi-billion dollar business). The US government will be buying land from the sugar cane growers who receive subsdies to grow sugar cane and whose surplusses are bought by... the US government. The growers coerced a violation of the Lake Occachobee water levels during the drought of 2000, a yar in with they produced... more surplusses. In the end contractors, consultants, and bureaucrats will spend $7.8 billion dollars to turn the Everglades into suburbs and golf courses. A joint effort by republicans and democrats. __________________ There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary Last edited by Cirdan : 06-26-2002 at 12:48 PM.

06-27-2002, 12:33 PM	#129
Starr Polish Elf Lord Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Slow down and I sail on the river, slow down and I walk to the hill Posts: 2,389	I meant that in a different sense, I guess. If you set communists and fascists on a straight spectrum, yes, they'd be on opposite ends, but the spectrum isn't straight, it comes around in a circle, thus, even though they are on opposite ends, they are right next to each other. Does that make any sense to you? Sometimes my words don't come out right. __________________ “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.” –Bertrand Russell

06-28-2002, 10:04 PM	#135
*azalea* Long lost mooter Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Florida Posts: 3,342	Hey, Cirdan, you're absolutely right about the Dem and Reps. They're both just tools of big biz. So how did you vote in the last election? I can honestly say I did my part to throw a wrench into their machine, how about you? It really needs to change. Voting for a third party is not throwing your vote away, IMO, giving in and voting for a candidate you don't believe in is. And it's much less smelly and scary than anarchy! Hey, I'd be all for no gov if I had a guarantee that everyone would behave.

06-29-2002, 07:14 AM	#137
Elvellon Elf Lord Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Lindon Posts: 637	It’s the same everywhere in the west; the major parties became more and more indistinguishable from one another. The result is usually a steady increase of the popularity of small, fringe parties (is this also the case in the USA?). How will the large traditional parties react to this change is still to be known. __________________ **************************************** "None are more hoplessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe Reality is just an illusion, albeit a very persistent one - Albert Einstein The Caffeine Mantra It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the juice of Brazil that the thoughts aquire speed, The hands aquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion... Elvellon Erelion

04-01-2006, 02:21 AM	#139
Lief Erikson Elf Lord Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Fountain Valley, CA Posts: 6,343	Gwaimir, here are some of my thoughts on the differences between monarchy and democracy. I'd be interested in hearing your responses, since I now know you're more in favor of monarchy. It's very interesting to me that you have that view, and I'd like to explore it a bit by arguing against it. I disagree with your view that monarchy is better than democracy, Gwaimir, and will present my reasons why . Monarchy suffers from what is described by the old but fairly true statement, "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." This isn't always true to my thinking, but it's true an awfully large percentage of the time. Democracy, on the other hand, includes checks and balances. Furthermore, as Nurvi pointed out, extremely incompetent or unpopular leaders can be voted out of office. President Clinton was impeached, though he wasn't discharged. Our leaders can be removed. Monarchs can't be, except by assassination or revolt. And if they have all the power of the secret service on their side and the military under their command, they can be awfully hard to either rebel against or to assassinate. You only get a bad democracy if you get a bad majority and bad laws, but then you still have laws protecting the minorities. With monarchies, the monarchs are not bound to protect their minorities. Also, taking a very cursory look at history, you'll see a lot more incompetent monarchs than competent ones. Having a succession of those as head of state is a freaky concept. So I can't see why you like monarchies better, myself . __________________ If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." Last edited by Lief Erikson : 04-01-2006 at 02:39 AM.

04-01-2006, 04:14 AM	#140
*Earniel* The Chocoholic Sea Elf Administrator Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: N?n in Eilph (Belgium) Posts: 14,363	Lief, you're thinking purely of a totalitarian monarchy. There are different types of monarchies. Ours for example is a constitutional monarchy. Even the King is bound to the constitution. Always. In reality the main duty of our King and royal family is mostly public relations with other countries, and they usually pop up in places of disasters in our own country to show their support to the people. The only task our King has in legislation is signing the laws that the parlement puts before him. (Of course one King once refused to sign a law, the abortion law. The King in question couldn't have children and he just couldn't get himself to sign that law. They had to pull a few stunts to get that problem solved by having the King abdicate for one day so the Prime Minister could sign it. Sort of hilarious, typically Belgium. It was a once-in-a-lifetime occasion, though.) But in the end it's the prime minister that stears the country. The last time the King made a careful statement about how he wants his country to be run, people made some grumbling protests that he was wiser to stay out of that particular touchy debate and there was much talks, even in parlement, about whether it isn't about time we moved to a purely ceremonial Kingship. But a monarchy, even a ceremonial monarchy, is often said to have more stability than for instance a republic. I'm not saying it is always so, I can give several instances (especially in Africa) where it isn't. But at least I think I prefer my monarchy to any republic. __________________ We are not things.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
State Funding of Political Parties	The Gaffer	General Messages	15	09-06-2006 10:49 AM
Philosophy	Millane	General Messages	321	05-07-2006 05:29 PM
Polictical Correctness	afro-elf	General Messages	392	12-23-2004 12:15 PM
Nation States - The Great Continent of Entmoot	jerseydevil	Entmoot Archive	323	06-17-2004 11:27 AM
The ban on political discussion is lifted	Sister Golden Hair	General Messages	0	06-16-2004 03:26 PM