Volconvo Debate Forums - View Single Post

christibe · Jul 17, 2007, 03:13 am

Praxius I wish that were possible here. Unfortunately though, the people no longer choose our government (see the 2000 election where the courts decided on the president, the majority of whom were themselves appointed by Republican Presidents). (I read some of your old post on direct-democracy btw, very much enjoyed) We do not have a way of affecting much through a national referendum. I've thought long on how this would/could work, and realized that it really couldn't. Additionally, the people gave the bigwigs a pretty strong message last November, if one believes what they tell us, when we put the President's opposition party in the majority of not only the Congress but also the states. But, since there is no real difference between the '2-parties,' nothing at all has changed. The biggest reflection on American social memory is that not only are the 'two parties' the 'only choice', but also that they actually feel that it has always been that way. Most people also do not realize what these "two" parties were principally founded upon, and further still that our founding fathers warned the country to not get stuck on this train, as it were, only the wreck ends in totalitarianism. So, my words are a bit vague and not making much sense, but it's late and this is the only free time I get as I worked from 8am-915pm.

In addition to the relinquishing of our national principles as stated in the Constitution, there is also a military industrial complex that while it sits in domestic peace, if we did revolt, there would be no way for us to win, as it were. I am unsure that the originator here knows the nature of American 'Libertarians.' Mostly, they want a very small to as close to nonexistent federal government as possible, with a slightly more powerful provincial government. There is no reason to have a federal govt., except to keep the states together as a nation, and some various administrative roles therein. It is perhaps the closest to original intent, if you will, behind the formation of the United States as an entity. It is natural and expected that the Libertarian would feel that their very life be threatened by the government if it were to directly take any action against them, which follows that they would and should take up arms. We were, in fact, told to do so by the fathers in the case that we allow the government to become fascist. To not fight to retain our rights is the same as asking for it to happen. It is our duty as Americans to vigilantly defend the Constitution and to police the government, as it is the thing to not be trusted in a democracy. We were founded on revolution, after all.

So, though I consider myself a person who personally believes that the government should be responsible for providing the essentials of life, via health-care, education and so on, I have my heart set on Ron Paul (Libertarian) in 2008. He would at least get us back into some kind of semblance of a balance in power, and of course, intelligently get us out of Iraq as soon as possible. Then, with the masses outside the box of the fake two-party system, they could see how bogus it really is. And then, America could be a place I would be proud of being a citizen of again.

Unfortunately, though, the construct we put ourselves in through our complacency gives us no alternative to what we have. At least, that is what I have come up with after 7 years of thinking, listening and seeing this debacle... Please, please someone prove me wrong. :)

Jul 17, 2007, 03:13 am	#11 (permalink) (top)
christibe Igneous Magma Posts: 322	Praxius I wish that were possible here. Unfortunately though, the people no longer choose our government (see the 2000 election where the courts decided on the president, the majority of whom were themselves appointed by Republican Presidents). (I read some of your old post on direct-democracy btw, very much enjoyed) We do not have a way of affecting much through a national referendum. I've thought long on how this would/could work, and realized that it really couldn't. Additionally, the people gave the bigwigs a pretty strong message last November, if one believes what they tell us, when we put the President's opposition party in the majority of not only the Congress but also the states. But, since there is no real difference between the '2-parties,' nothing at all has changed. The biggest reflection on American social memory is that not only are the 'two parties' the 'only choice', but also that they actually feel that it has always been that way. Most people also do not realize what these "two" parties were principally founded upon, and further still that our founding fathers warned the country to not get stuck on this train, as it were, only the wreck ends in totalitarianism. So, my words are a bit vague and not making much sense, but it's late and this is the only free time I get as I worked from 8am-915pm. In addition to the relinquishing of our national principles as stated in the Constitution, there is also a military industrial complex that while it sits in domestic peace, if we did revolt, there would be no way for us to win, as it were. I am unsure that the originator here knows the nature of American 'Libertarians.' Mostly, they want a very small to as close to nonexistent federal government as possible, with a slightly more powerful provincial government. There is no reason to have a federal govt., except to keep the states together as a nation, and some various administrative roles therein. It is perhaps the closest to original intent, if you will, behind the formation of the United States as an entity. It is natural and expected that the Libertarian would feel that their very life be threatened by the government if it were to directly take any action against them, which follows that they would and should take up arms. We were, in fact, told to do so by the fathers in the case that we allow the government to become fascist. To not fight to retain our rights is the same as asking for it to happen. It is our duty as Americans to vigilantly defend the Constitution and to police the government, as it is the thing to not be trusted in a democracy. We were founded on revolution, after all. So, though I consider myself a person who personally believes that the government should be responsible for providing the essentials of life, via health-care, education and so on, I have my heart set on Ron Paul (Libertarian) in 2008. He would at least get us back into some kind of semblance of a balance in power, and of course, intelligently get us out of Iraq as soon as possible. Then, with the masses outside the box of the fake two-party system, they could see how bogus it really is. And then, America could be a place I would be proud of being a citizen of again. Unfortunately, though, the construct we put ourselves in through our complacency gives us no alternative to what we have. At least, that is what I have come up with after 7 years of thinking, listening and seeing this debacle... Please, please someone prove me wrong. :)