RE: End of Democracy?

RE: End of Democracy? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

meatcleaver -> RE: End of Democracy? (8/12/2008 1:40:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RealityLicks There are useful, if limited, comparisons between today's America (and other western countries) and a fascist state. For example, Berlusconi's current coalition is doing some monstrous things to the gypsies and immigrants and there is a large enough popular support, it appears, for this to continue. Italy is not the only country which is why most Roma are trying to get to north European countries. Ironically Germany being one of them.

RealityLicks -> RE: End of Democracy? (8/12/2008 1:46:08 PM)
The Roma and the Sintti never seem to get a break from this crap.

asyouwish72 -> RE: End of Democracy? (8/12/2008 1:53:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: While I agree with you celticlord on Guantanamo not being anywhere as bad as the concentration camps or the gulag, I can't help but wonder....how many people said the same thing about those institutions when they were first started? A better question would be to ask whether Stalin, Mussolini, or Hitler ever had the vocal opposition Bush has today. Americans are none too pleased with government (with reason), and there are countless news reports and op-ed pieces articulating this discontent. There is always a danger of moving from democracy to despotism. However, the danger lies not in the machinations of individual politicians, but in the quiet acquiescence of the people. Frankly, I do not see where the American electorate is either quiet or acquiescing. I'd say this pretty much nails it. The fact that we can publicly question the wisdom, and even the legality, of things like Guantanamo Bay and the Patriot Act without fear of reprisal from the government suggests that most of our fundamental rights and protections are still intact. It's not the same thing as saying our current situation is good. By almost any measure, there has been a continuous assault on privacy and individual liberty since Sept 11th, but that is bound to happen any time the public is fearful- McCarthyism (previously mentioned here) being the most obvious parallel. We survived that, and will survive this as well- so long as people are capable of paying attention, and maintain the will to block some of the goverment's worse impulses. Free societies generally don't have their freedoms usurped from them- they typically give them away willingly. So long as we don't do that, history suggests things will ultimately take care of themselves.

Politesub53 -> RE: End of Democracy? (8/12/2008 3:56:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RealityLicks PS, you know that I don't agree with your usual thesis that totalitarianism and fascism are interchangeable. I see it as a throwback to the neurotic desire of the right wing to have a demon of the left, just as Hitler (or Mussolini, Franco, Salazar etc) was a demon of the right. It's sloppy thinking and beneath you. The examples in ABD's link are good ones but its not possible to produce clinching arguments in every case. Although I do think no.7, "Dissent equals Treason" is pretty good. I have definitely come across people, on this site and others, who believe that because they don't wholeheartedly support the war, they must therefore not be very loyal to their country. The assumption is that the state's current leadership is the embodiment of the nation and the state. There are useful, if limited, comparisons between today's America (and other western countries) and a fascist state. For example, Berlusconi's current coalition is doing some monstrous things to the gypsies and immigrants and there is a large enough popular support, it appears, for this to continue. Reality, was this aimed at me or did you mean PS as in post script ? If it was aimed at me you need to read the question i was replying to.

hizgeorgiapeach -> RE: End of Democracy? (8/12/2008 4:11:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: asyouwish72 I'd say this pretty much nails it. The fact that we can publicly question the wisdom, and even the legality, of things like Guantanamo Bay and the Patriot Act without fear of reprisal from the government suggests that most of our fundamental rights and protections are still intact. Who fooled you into believing that none of us fear reprisal of some sort for voicing opposition? I'm a self admitted rabid Constitionalist - and I have no doubt that somewhere within various government files my name (yep, my real one, along with various cross referenced screen names that I've used over the years) is to be found. I know my name is linked to certain ideals, simply because I've had background checks run on various levels for things ranging from my flight status to owning firearms to having a concealed carry permit. Do I consider myself somehow "important" in the scheme of things? Nope - completely the opposite - easily dismissed, and without any political weight, or even a large group of friends to influence in their views. In the long run, my name being on such a list means little to anyone but myself. quote: It's not the same thing as saying our current situation is good. By almost any measure, there has been a continuous assault on privacy and individual liberty since Sept 11th, but that is bound to happen any time the public is fearful- McCarthyism (previously mentioned here) being the most obvious parallel. We survived that, and will survive this as well- so long as people are capable of paying attention, and maintain the will to block some of the goverment's worse impulses. I can't remember who, or which specific recent thread it was, but someone recently mentioned the fact that Privacy is NOT a constitutionally guarenteed right. And she was correct in stating such. It's Implied. It's frequently taken for granted. But it is by no means guarenteed, which is truely a shame - since the Lack of a Guarentee makes it that much easier for such a "right" to be trampled into the dirt and disregarded. Taking it as a Given that we have survived ugliness somehow guarentees that we Will survive any Present or Future ugliness is folly. The same logic says that since you've never been in a car wreck that killed you, you can't be killed in a future car wreck - or since your parachute has Always opened that it Will Always open. People - in general - aren't paying attention, aren't capable of paying attention, and completely lack the will to maintain vigilance in blocking governmental excesses. If that were not the case, laws such as the Patriot Act would have seen a huge outcry and voter movement to get the folks out of office immediately who allowed it to pass onto the books. quote: Free societies generally don't have their freedoms usurped from them- they typically give them away willingly. So long as we don't do that, history suggests things will ultimately take care of themselves. News Flash - we ARE giving our freedoms away willingly, when speaking of the public as a whole rather than individuals within that whole! As a whole we have a Bad tendency towards unthinking following - because it's Easier than taking a stand, maintaining that stand, being a Leader rather than one of the mindless Sheeple. We've been encouraged for a couple of generations now to follow a philosophy of "go along to get along" - and it is us and our children who will ultimately pay for such thinking.

Alumbrado -> RE: End of Democracy? (8/12/2008 5:42:42 PM)
Attacking the messenger is usually grounds for criticism... but Naomi Wolf may be the exception...

Termyn8or -> RE: End of Democracy? (8/12/2008 5:51:30 PM)
Welcome to the third rock from the Sun. Power is a drug, and there is no cure for those addicted, except a bullet in the head. They will never stop, and we can't beat them. Disarming the People ? Doesn't matter. If you knew what kind of weapons the government has you would see that even if all three hundred million of us revolted, they would be able to quell it, unless the military broke off. Even then, we would be under their rule. Being so addicted to power, the threat of losing it would evoke some nasty actions on their part. Possibly even using WMD against the US populace. If you think it can't happen you must have forgotten Waco and Ruby Ridge. I never heard of Lon Horiuchi being brought up on any charges have you ? But that is not my point. It is an addiction, if you are addicted to a drug you make sure to maintain confidentiality with your dealer, and make sure he gets paid on time. If you are addicted to power, you similarly think ahead, and you take steps to maintain that power. It's not democrats or republicans, it is the whole lot of them, along with those coming in the back door to pay them off in one way or another. The President is nothing but a figurehead. McCain says he doesn't care if the war lasts a hundred years, but he can't deliver on that because we will be broke way before then. Obama touts change, but once he gets there and finds out what it takes for real change he will also not be able to deliver. And last but not least, this country is supposed to be a republic. What happened, did the dictionary lie again ? Enjoy the ride folks. I, for one, am going to get some beer. I can accept the things I cannot change now. Of course I really didn't have much choice did I ? There are two options for change, and change comes whether we like it or not. We can sit on our hands and watch the system collapse under it's own weight. It is going to happen, but I am not so sure it will happen within our lifetimes. The other option entails quite a bit, I think by enlisting somewhere between 70 and 90 million people we can do it, actually change things. But we have no access to the major media, and most of us, even if we are doing well, simply don't have the funds to finance such a campaign. Even if we could finance a mass mailing of like a hundred million units, realize that half of them will be thrown in the trash. I think the best idea is to carve yourself a good life in these times and hopefully succeed. Action ? Hell there ain't even a plan right now. T

TheHeretic -> RE: End of Democracy? (8/12/2008 6:40:26 PM)
Welcome to the wonderful world of drawing comparisons from a foundation of almost abject ignorance. This is where a dust devil is a tornado, and a sorority girl changing her mind in the morning is a rape. I want the minute of my life I spent reading this, back.

slvemike4u -> RE: End of Democracy? (8/12/2008 8:02:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Welcome to the wonderful world of drawing comparisons from a foundation of almost abject ignorance. This is where a dust devil is a tornado, and a sorority girl changing her mind in the morning is a rape. I want the minute of my life I spent reading this, back. You and me both....sheeesh

Termyn8or -> RE: End of Democracy? (8/13/2008 5:55:54 PM)
I am going to have to differ with you peach. An excerpt from the fourth amendment : "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause," Perhaps my misunderstanding is based on the definition of unreasonable. It is starting to look like nothing is unreasonable. T

hizgeorgiapeach -> RE: End of Democracy? (8/13/2008 6:08:48 PM)
That is the root of the problem where Privacy is concerned, Termy - who defines what is and is not reasonable? The general public? Hardly. That definition is determined by those who are in authority, and is maleable to a large extent. While the 4th guarentees our protection against unreasonable search and seisure, it does nothing to describe what is and isn't considered "reasonable" - and in today's climate politically, it's become the case that Anonymous Accusation is considered "reasonable grounds" to investigate someone. Don't believe that's true? Take a look at all it takes to be Investigated and potentially charged for "abuse" or "neglect" of the elderly or minors. A single anonymous phonecall sets things in motion, and once an investigation is underway based on that - you never come out from under the ever watchful eye of the government - for the good of Others, of course. Such investigations abrogate a person's constitutional right to face their accuser - though legally this is gotten away with because the investigating agency is your "legal" accuser. Such investigations abrogate the constitutional right to a jury by trial of peers - because the vast majority of such cases never come to trial - and those that do, the accused has frequently been publically vilefied to the point where a fair and impartial jury completely unfamiliar with the case is impossible to achieve. Since the means are already in use for such "reasonable" investigations, it's not a far leap to see the same methods being applied elsewhere. Take a look at all the various cities - some of them Major cities - that have things like Crime Hotlines, or Anonymous hotlines to report suspected drug related incidents. From there it becomes almost inevitable that further abuse of such anonyminity become commonplace and justification for the invasion of what we think of as the right to privacy.

Termyn8or -> RE: End of Democracy? (8/13/2008 9:29:44 PM)
That is a valid point. What is the proper balance between public safety and privacy ? I've read about a guy who raised a daughter in the basement, her whole life, and then sired his own grandchild with her. The problem with freedom is that nobody knows how to use it in moderation. Their wanton desires are the object of their ambition, their curiousity, and their greed. Desire is the most important thing, and the rest of the world be dammned. And there are way too many of them. T

DaddyKeeper -> RE: End of Democracy? (8/14/2008 3:09:53 AM)
I have barely scanned thru' the article, the tears of laughter were just too much to concentrate properly. The first word that springs to mind is hypocrisy. The Guardian is well known in the UK for being somewhat left of centre, and yet our nominally left wing government has done all of the 10 bullet points mentioned, plus the wonderful idea of "thought crime". Our government has created more laws (mainly redunant) in the last decade than in the history of out legislature. Perhaps there is a journalist who needs to look somewhat closer to home before complaining about neighbours. Our "patriot" act was enacted into statute law long before 9/11 and can even be used by the local council to define which school your child attends.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.1409912