|
Post by Magatsu Taito on Jan 13, 2008 10:28:53 GMT -5
Maybe I didn't get what you where trying to say at first Padre, I thought you were giving your opinion, but now I'm not too sure.
Either way, I don't believe that armed forces of any kind will be necessary in the future, but as the world looks today, that is a very distant future.
And your right about my idea about moving power would cause more corruption. Maybe with a few more political parties having something to say that wouldn't be the case? But then again, such changes would probably change a lot of things, and unless the system is so badly corrupted that a change must take place, it might be better to leave it.
What is true is that the general knowledge is below our current level of technology. People aren't intrested in politics, technology, and so forth. How many of us know how a computer works, or even electricity for that matter? People need to understand that it's our brains that makes us special, that has helped us evolve to what we are today. If we stop using our brains, what good are we as a species? We might as well go back to climbing trees in that case. At least we're stubborn bastards, so I guess that maybe we're not so bad of as I sometimes think.
|
|
|
Post by Padre Romero on Jan 13, 2008 10:39:35 GMT -5
What i dont understand is why people vote in the caucas polls or whatever they are called even though it doesnt mean anything "caucuses" and "primaries" can probably best be seen as "elections to get into the election". As many of you overseas are aware, we have a two-party system in this country. At present, both sides are fielding 6 candidates apiece, all of which have very staunch supporters. There's also (at this stage of the game), generally 4-5 independent candidates, one or two socialists, a KKK nutjob, and someone who thinks the south should cede from the union...or wants to reinstate the gold standard...anyway...if we held the election now, no one would snatch more than 20% of the vote, and then the president would exactly have the "mandate from the masses" necessary to give his office any credibility (weather it actually HAS any is up to you...I'm not sure at this point) when you vote in a primary, you help determine which of the numerous candidates is represented by a particular party. It forces the parties to run like little democracies, you get to pick the presidential contender in each one. They also select which names are actually going to go on the ballot. Technically, you can vote for anyone, but to actually have your name printed on a voting ballot, you need to score a certain number of votes (it's actually pretty small), in one of these elections.
|
|
|
Post by ian on Jan 14, 2008 12:06:27 GMT -5
i understand. In our country the party leaders are elected by a vote of their peers (the other MPs in their party) to lead. This is supposed to be as we vote the MP to represent us and it works a little fairer than it would in america as an MP only leads a relatively small area so his views are likely to represent theirs vaguely.
Which is fine except when a prime minister (like your president) steps down in the middle of a term - the party then elects a new leader, there is a not a general election. This is probably quite open to tampering by media and the candidates but luckily it rarely happens.
Your system would not need the primaries if you had more senators covering smaller areas but then would cost money, which we all know governments hate to waste.
EDIT: To taito - how many people knew how a steam engine worked, or a rifle? to go back even further how many people knew how a forge worked, or how a pen worked? no-one can know everything so therefore we specialise we necessitates exchange; that was how trading was born, initially bartering but then moved onto promisery notes then money. I dont know where im going with this but i saw a man with a gun today.
|
|
|
Post by Padre Romero on Jan 14, 2008 14:02:09 GMT -5
i understand. In our country the party leaders are elected by a vote of their peers (the other MPs in their party) to lead. This is supposed to be as we vote the MP to represent us and it works a little fairer than it would in america as an MP only leads a relatively small area so his views are likely to represent theirs vaguely. Which is fine except when a prime minister (like your president) steps down in the middle of a term - the party then elects a new leader, there is a not a general election. This is probably quite open to tampering by media and the candidates but luckily it rarely happens. Your system would not need the primaries if you had more senators covering smaller areas but then would cost money, which we all know governments hate to waste. EDIT: To taito - how many people knew how a steam engine worked, or a rifle? to go back even further how many people knew how a forge worked, or how a pen worked? no-one can know everything so therefore we specialise we necessitates exchange; that was how trading was born, initially bartering but then moved onto promisery notes then money. I dont know where im going with this but i saw a man with a gun today. Ian hit on the heart of politics. Societies without the ability to mass-produce food rarely develop social stratification: everyone does everything, and everyone is equal. With an abundance of food naturally comes people who don't need to make their own food. In every single society that has division of labor and a food surplus, there IS an elite ruling class that's loaded, powerful, and laid-back. We like our president to be selected by the majority vote of the people themselves, probably only because it makes us feel better
|
|
|
Post by Definitely Not Axe Hack on Jan 14, 2008 15:25:28 GMT -5
Heh...Democracy in the US. Now that's a good one. There is no democracy because of Bush. Let's hope the next President is better. By the way...Many Americans see 3 branches of government. I only see firewood.
|
|
|
Post by Padre Romero on Jan 14, 2008 17:00:01 GMT -5
I'm interested... how exactly did Bush make the US not a democracy?
If anything, I'd blame the "moral majority", but that's been in place since Regan. If anything, Bush has helped the US return to it's democratic roots by showing people exactly how much one guy can mess up if put into power for the wrong reasons
|
|
|
Post by asshole doctor™ on Jan 14, 2008 17:20:05 GMT -5
oh they are just getting more hype because of the writer's strike. they still mean nothing.
|
|
|
Post by Definitely Not Axe Hack on Jan 14, 2008 17:25:54 GMT -5
Illegal search and seizure, Padre. Ever heard of the Patriot Act?
|
|
|
Post by Padre Romero on Jan 14, 2008 18:44:45 GMT -5
oh sure, actually I took a course at SLU specifically about it... it's important to be specific in this case, the searches and seizures of the patriot act are not illegal, it specifically makes them legal. The law may be unjust, but it's not illegal until someone overturns it.
Also, that might be contrary to the dream of our founding fathers (might be), but it by no means abolishes "democracy". Numerous democratic societies throughout the world that have banned religious headgear in schools, outlawed certain parties based on their political views (nazism, usually), and even had multiple classes of people (the ancient romans). Our own democracy outlawed socialism for much of it's modern history, and made contrary speech illegal in WW's I and II.
The patriot act is frightening, and (in my opinion) unjust, but it's weak tea compared to the legislation passed during other wars.
|
|
|
Post by Definitely Not Axe Hack on Jan 14, 2008 19:02:50 GMT -5
The US is like a pendulum. On one end, we have Democracy, and on the other, we have Dictatorship. Right now, the pendulum is more on the Dictatorship side.
|
|
|
Post by Padre Romero on Jan 14, 2008 19:51:36 GMT -5
as opposed to exactly what period of history? African Americans have only had the right to vote for 140 years, Women have only had the right to vote for the past 80. The civil rights movement is only about 50-60 years old, and the gulf war was really the first time in my nation's history where you could openly protest a war without getting dismissed, tear-gassed, or shot at. heck, most unions have only been okay for 50 years or so. All these seem like much more egregious violations of civil liberties than the patriot act (not that this by any means exonerates it)
Twenty years ago, you couldn't be an elementary school teacher if you were even suspected of being a communist. Nowadays, you can openly declare that you're a gay wiccan communist and they won't give you the axe (actually, even better, they CAN'T give you the axe, by law...how cool is that?). If anything, we're on the upswing of the justice arc.
|
|
|
Post by Angel on Jan 14, 2008 20:02:05 GMT -5
Just because your (our) government can't axe you for being homosexual, doesn't mean your peers won't. I had a friend that was almost beaten to death over it. It saddens me sometimes when I think of how far we've come in some aspects, yet how little we've developed in others.
|
|
|
Post by Definitely Not Axe Hack on Jan 14, 2008 20:16:07 GMT -5
Aren't you in Germany, SA? So the proper term for you is "your".
Anyway...the Patriot Act is an invasion of privacy. What ever happened to our right to privacy?
|
|
|
Post by Angel on Jan 14, 2008 20:30:20 GMT -5
Aren't you in Germany, SA? So the proper term for you is "your". Germany? Where'd you get that idea? I've said I live in the U.S. many times, and I even say I'm a silly American on the wiki! Shows how much you guys pay attention to me...
|
|
|
Post by Padre Romero on Jan 14, 2008 20:35:49 GMT -5
Just because your (our) government can't axe you for being homosexual, doesn't mean your peers won't. I had a friend that was almost beaten to death over it. It saddens me sometimes when I think of how far we've come in some aspects, yet how little we've developed in others. This is sadly true, however, angry mobs are just as (perhaps more) endemic of a democracy as a fascist state. If this was a pure democracy, where the majority got their say on all issues, all the time, I can' t imagine what nightmarish fates would befall wiccans, communists, homosexuals, minorities, the homeless, and people with below-average IQ's. Anyone read "Snow Crash?"
|
|