for Tim's
post!!!!
Low aptitude recruits are best
suited to REMF (Rear Echelon Mother F#*$ers,for you civilians) type positions.Under fire,I would hate to the think
that the guy with the M-16 and a bunch of frag grenades behind me has a tough time remembering left from right.Low
aptitude recruits also tend to be the anti scocial,dropped out of highschool to persue drugs,abused by thier step
father types.You dont need someone with anger management issues running around with an M-240 machinegun and an
attitude problem in an environment where the folks around you are often hostile but still non-combatants.
A
friend of mine just got back from Iraq and there have been a few issues with guys having a hard time not wanting to
mow down a bunch of people who pissed them off.Granted,if you piss off a guy with a gun your taking your
chances...but still...as Americans,we are supposed to be "better than that."
for Tim's
post!!!!
There is a cure for electile dysfuntion!!!!
Fair enough. But your generation vs. my generation. Do the memories ofOriginally Posted by koolking1
Vietnam make my generation overall more resistant to mandatory service, thereby reducing their effectiveness as
soldiers? Possibly.
Either way, draftees or category IV soldiers, it's not ideal.
Memories of Viet Nam have had an
enormous impact on how this current generation views warfare in general.Thier parents were raised durring the war
and those men and women raised thier children to be...no offense intended...whimps.Mothers and fathers actively
discourage thier children from entering the selctive service program as a direct result of the lies and
misinformation and controversy surrounding the Viet Nam debacle.Parents protest the presence of Army recruiters in
the public high schools for fear that thier little sons and daughters may be shipped off to fight in yet another
meaningless war.
This is the generation of pacifists and pussies,raised by hand-wringing liberal women with an
agenda.Now dont get me wrong...Viet Nam was a disgrace...the current confligration...same thing...pure stupidity.But
the fault for that lies not with the millitary or the politicians or even President Bush.The blame for ALL of or
governments problems,from the war to scocial security to welfare to health care to the price of eggs and cheese lays
squarely on the shoulders of the voters and ONLY the voters!It is the civic duty of every red blooded American to
not only vote,but to be INTIMATELY INVOLVED in the public process at every level of government.Local,county,state
and federal policies are OUR resposability.It is the responsability of everyone to make sure that if a congressman
farts,we know what he ate that gave him gas! If a congressman is in the process of helping to make a decision,its
our responsability to make sure that nobody is hiding a bunch of pork in the deal to pay off his friends with.And
when these people get caught doing something wrong,its our responsability to make sure they are tarred and feathered
for thier offenses instead of re-elected.
The American people have spent so much time watching reruns of
Sinefeld and Friends and so little time paying attention to what might actualy be important that or elected
officials can quite literaly get away with murder and we do nothing about it.Our education system cranks out people
who are perfectly suited to thier place as burger flippers for a large national corperate chain.Our colleges crank
out perfectly moulded mid-level managers well suited to quoting company policy and not asking too many questions.And
as long as we have reruns and pizza delivery,everything is fine.
The nice,well meaning folks who gather in the
town square with the nice little home made signs with cute little slogans painted on them have NO IDEA that the
people in the whitehouse couldnt care less about them.More over,the nice folks at these cute little rallies arent
even being heard by the people in the party that they belong to.They are routeenly held up as an example by the
media and the politicians but the agenda the politicians end up making policies that not only dont accomplish the
intended goal,but also provide massive amounts of pork for things that thier supporters will never know about
because they are to distracted in the noise and confusion.
All very true. Thanks Tim.
I've been saying the same things for a long time. Until we crawl out of our holes, stand up and make it clear the
the status quo is unacceptable, it is going to continue to get worse. Every one of us has an obligation to be a part
of the system and make our voices heard. That doesn't mean we all have to agree on any issue, only that we are
watching and holding those representing us responsible fopr representing us, not themselves or their corporate
clients.
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson
That's all true. One person
can make a difference. If I can wax optimistic, it's probably heading more toward involvement, as people are
becoming aware of the consequences of not doing so, along with the internet's influence. Hopefully we will see
greater accountability as the public mind becomes more aware of everything our leadership does.
DrSmellThis (creator of P H E R O S)
But, does it not require a
significant amount of intelligence and dedication to understand politics? I mean, half the country doesn't even
know how to use a computer. Those of us who make it on the net follow the news, do our own research, discuss these
issues almost on a daily basis with peers, and therefore we can make informed decisions. Many such "well-read"
people completely agree with the Iraq war, others don't. I seem to detect some inferences here that if more
citizens paid attention to politics that we wouldn't be in Iraq now and/or many of our domestic problems would be
solved with a perfect solution. I don't follow.
My folks are just regular blue-collared people who work
40-50 hour weeks. They have almost no concept of politics and don't have the time to learn it. That's the
practical reality of it. I think it's unrealistic to expect EVERYONE to understand the system as much as each one
of us does.
I didn't mean to infer that we
wouldn't be in Iraq if more people followed politics. My statement was intended at face value, that we would be in
better shape politically if a greater percentage participated in the system. Personally, I think more people are not
involved out of a feeling of being disenfranchised and plain apathy than not having the time. Not only that, I think
the feeling of apathy is encouraged to some degree. My opinion is that we would still be in Iraq regardless of the
percentage of the population that participates.
You probably didn't mean it that way but your remarks sounded
elitist, that the majority are not capable of understanding politics and should not be allowed to participate. I
think that is part of the problem in the capitol today, a belief that the people aren't smart enough to figure out
what is going on. Maybe they aren't but that doesn't entitled us to determine that or take the right to make those
decisions away from them. They work in this economy, they pay taxes into the system and their children are sent to
die in other countries, certainly they have the right to a say in the matter regardless of whether their
comprehension is the same as ours. Keep in mind that in some countries voluntary participation exceeds 90% of the
eligible voters. In other countries participation is mandatory. It seems to work for them and I'd bet that the bell
curve applies to their intelligence levels about the same as it does ours.
All that said, I have another thought
on the matter. In almost every country in the world and likely in all time periods, some portion of the population
has believed that they had the best possible form of government. Many of the Iraqi people believed that about their
country before we invaded and many of the people in China believe that about their own country as well. What
independent measure do we have that really proves we have the best country or form of government? I'm not saying we
do or don't, I'm asking how we know this to be a fact and how that gives us the right too impose our forms of
government and political beliefs on others who may or may not feel it is the right form of government for them.
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson
You said a mouthful when you said that your folks workOriginaly posted by
Biohazard
But, does it not require a significant amount of intelligence and dedication to understand
politics? I mean, half the country doesn't even know how to use a computer. Those of us who make it on the net
follow the news, do our own research, discuss these issues almost on a daily basis with peers, and therefore we can
make informed decisions. Many such "well-read" people completely agree with the Iraq war, others don't. I seem to
detect some inferences here that if more citizens paid attention to politics that we wouldn't be in Iraq now and/or
many of our domestic problems would be solved with a perfect solution. I don't follow.
My folks are just
regular blue-collared people who work 40-50 hour weeks. They have almost no concept of politics and don't have the
time to learn it. That's the practical reality of it. I think it's unrealistic to expect EVERYONE to understand
the system as much as each one of us does.
forty to fifty hours per week.Part of the process of desolving the American family has been and ever shrinking
standard of living created by lower and lower wages requiring more and more hours of work to stay ahead of the
game.One of the side bennefits of that for our masters is that if people are working themselves into the ground.They
havent got the time to spend learning about what is going on on Mount Olympus.By the time the average working stiff
gets home,he or she has just enough energy to park the kids in front of the TV,scarf down a microwave meal and veg
out to the latest reality TV show or sit-com.The intelectual numbing of America is not only destructive to our way
of life,it is...in my rather carefuly considered and researched oppinion,INTENTIONAL!
In Rome,the emperors
had a policy that was called "bread and circuses."Keep the people fed well enough that they dont complain and
entertained well enoguh that they are distracted,and senators can go on about thier marry way of
lying,cheating,stealing,manipulating and generaly undermining everything for thier own personal gain without getting
any real opposition from the dweebs they rule over.
In Nazi Germany,Joseph Goebbles (yes,I spelled it right...I
checked ) figured out the ultimate version of that technique and the Nazi government implimented it with
brutal efficency.The Nazi's dumped HUGE amounts of money into the German equivelent to Hollywood and Adolph Hitlers
own personal contingent of SS Grenadiers would often star as extras in movies,stage plays and musicals.One
particularly good German vocalist had problems because she was a very tall and stocky woman and her extras on stage
always ended up lokking like little girls around her.Enter the SS Grenadiers...these men appeared in her stage show
IN DRAG(!!) because they made her look smaller and the propoganda machine wanted her to be successful and be able to
put on a good show.Fifty of Germanys toughest and best trained soldiers in dresses and wigs.
We now have an
industry that rakes in many hundreds of billions of dollars every year for providing the invaluable service of
keeping everybody from using thier brains for anything other than a door stop.They even know this in the highest
echelons of Hollywood and they laugh all the way to the bank.Oh...lest we forget...the music industry is,in my
estimation just a part of Hollywood and not its own seperate entity...they work very closely together on many
projects.I know people who can quote...line by line every episode of Sinfeld or Friends,and know exactly who is
going to get voted off the island and so forth,who dont even have a clue who they voted for for CONGRESS FOR GOD'S
SAKE !!!! (Sorry...my meds need to be adjusted.)
The Europeans laugh at us when they hear how many hours we work
and how little vacation time we get each year and how few of us take the time to bother to vote.The average European
knows beyond a shadow of doubt that the average American is a complete idiot regarding anything beyond sit-coms and
Hollywood divorces.And,while they laugh...they also resent the hell out of us because our stupidity comes with a
price that the rest of the world has to pay.All this will eventualy come back to bite us in the ass,and it wont be
pretty.
As long as Im railing against all this neat stuff...have I taken the time to mention our
wonderful consumer goods industry?The people who use the mind numbing qualities of television to convince us that we
need to buy lots more of the latest electronic crap and shiny things that we dont realy have a legitimate use for so
that they can rake in hundreds of billions more of our hard earned money?And that way we can all spend that much
more time at work,sacraficing our children and our health for the bennefit of the captains of industry and the folks
whos policies ruin life for so many other people around the world.My friend who just got back from Iraq spent some
time in Kuwait and one of the locals that he befriended there told him this...
"We dont hate Americans.Americans
are realy nice people.We hate the fact that you bring with you things that threaten our way of life and our
families.Like Britney Spears and pornography."
Okay...the meds have finaly kicked in...I feel much
better....
Kind of reeks of entitlement here, no offense. Everyone isOriginally Posted by tim929
entitled to a comfy job with flexible hours? Please. My folks don't have an education, which is why they have the
careers they have. They admit it, and have taught me to do better. They don't feel cheated by the system, they
own a house valued at $650,000 minimum, have full health benefits, and actually have quite a bit of discretionary
money to the point they're always offering me money. You can live fairly well in America even on relatively low
wages, my folks raised me on it.
Now, the downside is that many people don't have time to pay attention to
politics due to the way our economy works. But personally, I think it's unrealistic to expect every single person
to be actively engaged in our society anyway. Pragmatism vs. idealism.
No one is suggesting taking away voting rights.Originally Posted by belgareth
I know it sounds elitist, even before you
mentioned it. But honestly, having someone show up to the polls without really researching anything wouldn't
impact our politics or society significantly. All you will have are extra people who are flipping a coin before
deciding how to vote. That's all I'm saying. The only tangible impact would be if they really learned about the
system enough to know what actions are necessary to affect it. That takes serious effort.
Personally, I
would like to see more people pay attention to the goings on of the world. But realistically, that's a lot to
expect of people on a large scale.
That's a wild statement.Originally Posted by Biohazard
It's hard to believe that you're living well when your neighbor is trashtalking the fact that he owns three cars
and you own one.
On top of the obvious, greed turns people against each other. Either burn yourself out on long
hours/low pay, or do as Dick and Jane do. THAT's the American way.
ItOriginally Posted by Biohazard
works in other coutries. Why not here? I admit it would take a huge change in outlook but wouldn't it be worth
it?
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson
WhyOriginally Posted by Netghost56
are you equating "living well" with how many luxury items one owns? Living well means not struggling to obtain
basic necessities. This can be done even on low wages, I personally can attest to that. I should have cleared that
up, sorry.
Face value, I agree we'd be better off. But in terms of tangible effects? I don't see itOriginally Posted by belgareth
happening.
I call that "getting by". For
three generations my family has been getting by, but now because of me we're sliding.
"living well" to me is the
same as "well off". That means you can afford luxuries.
I am not talking about an
entitlement so much as simply a reversion back to common sense.I cant believe I am going to write this again but
here goes...
In 1938 Congress passed the Federal minimum wage act.They determined that .25 cents per
hour over a forty hour work week was the MINIMUM REASONABLE LIVING WAGE.That would keep clothes on your back,food on
your table,pay your baisic living expenses such as power and so forth and provide you with a baisic roof to keep it
all under.Adjusted for cost of living and inflation over the last 67 years,would put the Federal Minimum Wage at
nearly $16.00 an hour.Its interesting that "prevailing wage" is calculated in exactly that fasion.Companies that
perform contract work for the government are required by law to pay "prevailing wages."The hard numbers fluctuate up
and down slightly,but in point of fact,federal jobs and contract jobs typicly start in that neck of the woods.
The usual method of calculating wages has been a very simple formula for years.Unskilled labor starts at...minimum
wage.Semi-skilled labor typicaly gets minimum wage plus 50% and works its way up to skilled labor,which begins
around minimum wage x 2 and goes up from there...to max out around 4x minimum wage.The government contractors get
around paying more that double by putting people on salery and calling it good.But with a minimum wage that isnt
even half of what it should be,whats a family to do?
The big seperation began in the mid 1960's.All at once it
was being discovered that there were alot of very expensive Government programs that were going to need
funding.There was a nice little war going on in South East Asia and a whole pile of expensive toys being purchased
to ward off the Soviet menace.The war on poverty began in earnest.And that is a war that we are now,ultimatly
loosing because jobs dont pay living wages anymore.All of these neat things cost alot of money.And there are only
two people in the United States who pay taxes.Consumers pay it in higher prices and emloyees pay it in lower
wages.After that its just a question of who writes the actual check.
Couple all this with consumerism and a
general malaise regarding political involvement and, voila...you have what amounts to slavery.Dont be fooled by what
looks like a decent standard of living.The people you see day to day with a decent standard of living are working
far more for less than thier parents or grandparents did.What makes the whole thing so insidious is the fact that
these changes have been so gradual that nobody has realy noticed it.But Labor Department statistics from our own
government bear out the truth,and have been tracking the decline since I graduated high school in the mid 80's.
As for politics being too "complicated" for the average "Joe Sixpack"...rubbish! Politics realy arent any more
than ninety percent smoke,mirrors and slight of hand and ten percent substance.I used to think that it was all too
complex.But the reality is that much the same way lawyers unnecessarily complicate simple things to confuse the
layman,lawmakers spin things into a frenzy and use parlor tricks to throw the hounds off the scent.Politicians
are,after all is said and done...just elected lawyers.They arent called "lawmakers" for no apperant reason.
The
only people that cant follow politics are the folks that either have no real interest and just dont care,or people
who have been fooled by the smoke screen into thinking that things are "too complex." I have had the dubious honor
of meeting and shaking hands with two state lawmakers and a congressman in my life.These men are,for all intents and
purposes,about as smart as the average used car salesman.I used to sell used cars so I can dis them all I want
These guys arent something special that only years of intense training can produce.They arent doctors or surgeons or
rocket making dudes,they are just realy charismatic salesmen.They are realy good at bullshitting people into buying
thier line of crap.
There is no entitlement involved in what I have said...I only want to see a return to common
sense wages and working/living standards so that families can actualy start acting like families again instead of
strangers that share a house.Once that is accomplished things will settle down quite a bit and people can start
focusing on the realy important things in life.
By the way...if you find yourself strapped for time and cant
seem to get everything in your life done...try turning off the television...it worked for me. I have more time than
I know what to do with.
Okay...my doctors are here and they say I have had enough excitement for one day.Time
for me to lay down now...
Of course it won'tOriginally Posted by Biohazard
happen if nobody tries. Nobody knows what might happen were people to become more involved. Tangible effect?
Impossible to guess.
But that wasn't the question. Other countries manage a huge participation, why wouldn't
it work here?
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson
Probably because of our entertainment culture. It's good and bad, but muchOriginally Posted by belgareth
more the former than latter, IMO. I like how rich American culture is, from movies to sports to electronic
technology. The cynic may see it as an "empty culture," because most American citizens are pre-occupied with short
term happiness above most things. That's just a product of how much our society has to offer in the social arena,
and I see little wrong with it. Give these other countries everything our culture offers, and you'll probably see
less people paying attention to politics as well.
To get involved in politics where you're not just
showing up to the poll and thinking "eenie, meenie, mynie, mo... this is how I'll vote," takes some effort. It
takes a bit of time and research to arrive at a decision that you can intelligently defend. It's this type of
involvement that will make a significant change in our country, not the type of involvement where you decide at the
last minute in the polling booth how you'll vote -- I think a surprisingly large percentage of voters actually do
this.
If you want to change all this, you have to make a fundamental change to our culture as you said.
You also have to ask, how practical is this goal?
Has your family felt "exploited" because they don't own a Mercedes like their employersOriginally Posted by Netghost56
do? Or are they like my folks, who realize that people deserve what they get, and that even a modest living in
America is way, way better than living in a mud hut half way around the world? Put things in perspective, and you
can be happy and comfortable while living modestly.
Lotta rambling in your post, so I'll just respond to what I think is most relevant to myOriginally Posted by tim929
recent posts.
You just contradicted yourself. You say politics isn't complex, yet each citizen must
wade through all the "smoke an mirrors" to get to the facts. When you buy a used car, you have to do some legwork
to find out the true history of that car. Seeing through politicians and not just simply regurgitating their
cliches and campaign slogans requires independent research.
I have an old college buddy who failed out.
When I asked him for specific reasons why he was voting for Kerry last year, he told me nothing but catch phrases.
"Bush is a screw-up." "Democrats are the party of the average Joe Lunch Bucket." "Iraq is vietnam." etc etc.
Nothing specific about how Kerry's plans would benefit the country or him personally -- because he's never taken
the time to learn about how the system works. You see, anyone can have an opinion. Not everyone has an opinion
that is well thought out. An opinion without a rational defense is kind of worthless.
Japan hasOriginally Posted by Biohazard
an entertanment culture at least equal to our own yet regularly has a 90% or better showing at the polls. The same
applies to Australia. Obviously that is not the reason for the low showing at the polls in this country.
To get
involved by your standards or by the majority's ability? Under law and within reason, voter pamphlets are written
to be understood by a person with a basic high school education. While arguably not as complete an understanding of
issues as I would like to see, it is sufficient to the purpose of allowing a person to make moderately informed
decisions. The point of voting is not whether or not you can defend your decision, intelligently or otherwise.
Ballots would not be secret if that were the case. The point is your right under the consitution to participate and
voice your opinion as you see fit. That is, IMHO, both a right and an obligation under our representative
government.
Under the constitution we have a representative government, that's the way our government is
legally structured. Practicality arguments are irrelevent even if true which I do not concede since other nations
seem able to accomplish it under similar conditions. I also do not claim that it is the best or preferred form of
government, only the naked fact that it is the legal structure we have to work within. We have few choices here if
we are to claim to be part of that structure. We can either support it or change it. If we claim to support it then
say that the system is too complicated for the average person to participate we are making a mockery of the basic
concept of representative government and hypocrites of ourselves. If your intent is to change it, as seems to be
implied by your argument then I'd like to know what form of government is best and how you intend to justify it.
I'm certanly not convinced that what we call our government is the best and so am willing to listen to any rational
suggestion.
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson
Wading through the smoke and mirrors is a product of people not being terribly interested inYou just contradicted
yourself. You say politics isn't complex, yet each citizen must wade through all the "smoke an mirrors" to get to
the facts.
hearing anything more than the slogans spewed out by politicians.The Romans had...funny thing...forums! Much like
this one.These forums could be found in almost every town with a population.The forum was a gathering place for
locals and travelers alike to gather and discuss relavent issues and through the sharing of information and view
points develope a better understanding of the world of politics in Rome.The lamps burned constantly in the forums.It
was the only place to hear news of the world outside the city gates.It was one of the several venues for scocial
interaction among peers.It was a place of learning,not only for the elders of the community but for anyone who chose
to participate.And almost anyones voice could be heard.
Building a forum in towns was considered to be of the
utmost importance by local governors because it gave people a place to discuss important issues publicly and the
oppinions that were developed within the forum would eventualy find thier way to the govenors palace for his
consideration.Not building a forum in a town or city was a great way to end up with extremely costly riots on your
hands.The forums were powerful enough that govenors ignored these oppinions at thier own grave risk,and many times
they had a very profound impact uppon the political climate of the province.
People who could be seen at the forum
ranged from every possible walk of life and aged from barely old enough to talk to barely young enough to be
alive.Doctors and carpenters and farmers and bakers and stone masons and politicians and teachers and
lawyers...everyone was welcome.In many provinces there were special days every month where even slaves were allowed
to voice thier various grievences and concerns publicly.Involvement was not leagaly mandatory,but non-participation
was scocialy devistating.
As the senate and the emperors ignored the rumblings comming from the provincial
forums,the condition of Rome declined.As arrogance seperated politicians from the people,Rome suffered.But the fact
that there was a venue that was available to almost everyone where they could be heard and...just as importantly
where they could hear,left a huge mark on what government did and how the people viewed it.In this country,the
internet is the closest thing we have to those forums.Various political groups of every bent and persuation can make
thier oppinions known.Unfortunately,this lacks the personal touch that is realy necessary to not only have a serious
impact on real world politics,but to teach people new to politics the ropes so that they too can be informed and
involved.
For the smoke and mirrors of politics,you only realy have to wade through them once...after that,the
rest is easy.But where does one go to learn to do that?There is no communal forum.Nobody attends town hall meetings
anymore.No one attends city counsel meetings...and the council chambers are REQUIRED BY LAW to have a certain amount
of seating available for the public.But...ya know...The Apprentice is on tonight...and want to see what Donnald is
going to say to that smart ass kid...And Im tired after a long days work...
.
Those numbers from Japan and Aus are astounding. But from our earlierOriginally Posted by belgareth
discussions about citizens' obligations to our country, you rattled off a list of things you inferred would happen
if more people were involved in the political process. Correct me if I'm wrong. Things like ending all foreign
wars, holding politicians accountable for their secret misdeeds, among other things. I agree with you that more
voter participation is generally a good thing. I just don't see how simply having more [generally undecided]
people show up to polls in and of itself does anything more than simply uphold the status quo. 50% vote one way,
the other 50% goes the other way. Net effect? Nothing.
I have no idea what you just said!Originally Posted by tim929
But I'll say this. If you want to change the status quo, it takes more than just showing up to the poll booth
and randomly punching up your ballot.
Your absolutly right! it does
take more than simply showing up and punching a ballot. We are blessed in this day and age with a wealth of
information comming at us from a variety of sources.We are also blessed with a variety of different organizations
who seek to pour over all that data and find the hidden truth.And many of them do an excelent job.Our news media
used to be a good watch dog over politics,but comercialism has kinda ruined that over the last three decades.But
watchdog groups do still exist and they are a very effective way of staying informed on various issues.Most produce
monthly news letters,free of all the hype and noise created by the politicians,and these news letters can help
people to make informed decisions regarding almost any issue.
But first comes the process of learning what
America is all about.The concept of its system of government,system of laws,cultural and moral leanings and so
forth.In other words...what exactly does it take to be an ACTUAL citizen as opposed to just having been born
here?Alot of people have been born in the United States.But does that realy make them citizens?In high schools they
used to have classes called civics.Im sure we all had a class that went by that name.But in bygone years,those
civics classes were intended to teach young men and women about the price of being an American.They were taught
about the constitution and its meanings,taught about our system of goverment,the responsibilities of the citizen and
so forth.In my civics class,our teacher was a died in the wool dungeon master who expected nothing less than
perfection from his students in regards to the study of civics.And without his magic "OK" you didnt graduate high
school...PERIOD.
He regarded...and rightly so,civics to be the single most important class in the history of the
world.It was his class that was designed to prepair young people to handle thier dutys and responsabilities as
citizens and voters.The emphasis in todays public school system however has shifted considerably,and the
requirements of the typical civics class have had to be dumbed down to a point where students in most schools have a
tough time remembering the difference between the executive branch of government and the judicial branch.The
constitution is...and should always be held up as the second most sacred document in the world by American
citizens.Second only to whatever religious documents you subscribe to.
Training a citizen is hard work,and in
many ways our education system falls tragicly short of producing effective citizens.I suspect that this shortfall
isnt as much a matter of people getting dumber,as it is the powers that be not wanting too many people knowing what
they can do to make a diference.
Im gonna go eat cheetoes and watch South Park now....
Actually the vote usually goes about 40/40/20 with the 20% being independents, small parties andOriginally Posted by Biohazard
such. Those voting in the 40/40 groups usually vote right along party lines. Over the years both major parties have
lost huge portions of their membership through disenchantment with party policies. As a result of that and other
factors, the non-voting majority tends to be closer to 25/25/50 with a large percentage of the 25'ers likely to
vote their mind rather than any party line. Of the 50%'ers, most are completely disgusted with the way the
government operates but feel they cannot do anything about it so don't bother. The error is obvious. That
'inbalance' is one of the reasons that both major parties try so hard to register new voters to their party. They
hope that by getting them signed up themselves they will have some influence in how they vote.
What would
actually happen if participation went up to 90% is anybody's guess, you have your opinion and I have mine. But
right now many in politics seem to feel they can rest on their laurals because nobody's watching them very closely.
Consider the potential of 40 percent or more of the voting population unalianged to any particular party. It
doesn't take much imagination to see that there would be numerous changes within our country. Exactly what they
would be is anybody's guess but at the least I think it would result in greater accountability.
Additionally, I
think Tim has it right that participation is discouraged, that the government would really prefer our opinions be
suppressed.
Last edited by belgareth; 12-22-2005 at 03:51 PM.
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson
Glad you finally agree with me that it takes some serious dedication to learn about theOriginally Posted by tim929
system in order to make a difference in one's country. Are you going back on your claim now that everything is
"simple" to understand?
Okay, so you'reOriginally Posted by belgareth
talking about the classical "swing" group. I classify this group as moderates who's votes can be bought, more or
less, with catch phrases, punch lines, and commercial bombardment. They have no strong identity. You buy that
group, you win, basically. They go one of two ways for the most part, right or left depending on the weather.
I felt that you and Tim were trivializing how difficult it is to impose real change. It's not as simple as
just getting 90% of the people to take 1 hour out of their day every election cycle (say every 2 years) to punch a
card. Would that automatically mean that foreign wars would stop, that government would shrink, that politicians
would suddenly become transparent, that somehow utopia is otherwise achieved? Unfortunately, I think more voters
just means more voters, that's it. It might make us feel better about our "representative" government, but I
don't go on feelings.
It takes organization to effect change. Let's look at the NRA, as an example.
I don't know if this is still true, but Fortune mag ranked the NRA as the #1 most powerful lobbying group in
Washington a few years ago. We're talking a group of 4 million citizens, or little more than 1% of the population,
who have had a big hand in re-shaping congress over the past decade. Why? Because they're active, they understand
the mathematics of the political system and the nuances of law, they have sharp lawyers, and they know how to
communicate effectively. This takes skill and intelligence to put it all together into a winning package.
Basically, you need a plan. Just speaking idealistically like "go rock the vote" a la MTV ain't gonna cut it.
Sorry.
The smart man invests his time and energy into things that are likely going to net a return. Not
things he hopes and prays will net a return.
No, I don't think in the sense
you mean swing group that is what I am talking about. Most swing voters are not bought but are buying a bill of
goods themselves. In point they are buying the person rather than anything else. The average swing voter is trying
to do what they believe is right. I think you are over-simplifying those dynamics.
I figured that's what you
thought but you misunderstand the issues if you see it that way. The dynamics are a lot more complicated. You are
assuming there's an agenda other than creating involvement which is a goal in itself. Agreed about organizations
like the NRA, who lose battles often enough. I am not trying to shape policy, only trying to get the engine working.
Shaping policy is for the voters to do of their own free will. With as many different motives as are out there and
the general level of disgust with both political parties existing in the non-voting majority, change would occur if
you could get them involved. What change in particular is anybody's guess.
How a smart man invests is entirely
dependent on what his end goals are, nothing more. Your view of a return and mine are entirely different. By
definition, we have a representative government. That means participation by the people being represented. If you
want to change the type of gevernment we have I'm all ears as to where you'd like to take it. But until then, the
goal is to have the people, all the people voicing their opinions.
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks