USA Bashing

Post Reply New Topic

That's unconstitutional and, therefore, illegal.

That has to be established by a court of law. Calling something illegal does not make it illegal unless the courts so decide.

ruveyn

The power of war was granted explicitly and EXCLUSIVELY to the congress alone by the constitution. To extend beyond that is, thereby, unconstitutional and for all intents and purposes, illegal. Though the justice department may not prosecute it, it still remains illegal...just merely not prosecuted. Which is something that's quite a concern to anyone with any sense about them and comprehend the necessity of the rule of law, especially for our "leaders".

Oh, it's illegal for more reasons than that. We violated enough international laws in the invasion and subsequent occupation, as well as a number of treaties to which we are a signatory.

Ah, so you see now why democracy is absurd?


"There is no sadder sight than a young pessimist, except an old optimist." -Mark Twain

@Orwell : Maybe you sould look on this page http://www.xs4all.nl/~monarchs/madmon.htm It show what happen when a king is insane. It's not pretty ...

The Quiet Revolution in Quebec is a good example of a democratic sucess. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiet_Revolution
A government lead by a corrupt and despotic party with a iron grip on the province with the support of the religion, had been defeated. And this beside them controling the polling places!! ! With the election of a new government much needed changes and a cleaning of the politic oof it's corruption had taken places. This is the democracy that allowed this change. Under monarchy there no way that could had happen without a bloody revolution.

BTW, Orwell how come you've got majors. You can get that while you're only nineteen? Unless you skip gardes, from you're part it's won't suprise me. (Sorry if my question is silly,... I've got diificulty knowing how things work "in real life"...)

Last edited by Tollorin on 12 Sep 2009, 11:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

LOL

This touches on something far more fundamental about absolutism and an open mind than mere pessimism vs optimism. It indicates rather obviously where someone places his/her faith. Religion places its faith on an assumed superbeing behind the scenes knowing well how to manipulate even the basic laws of physics to its own purposes which are assumed to be beneficent. The awakening of a significant section of humanity that we are on our own and there is no meaningful purposeful force percolating through the interstices of our ignorance to see to it that justice or even survival is guaranteed is significant. It has nothing to do with optimism, it has to do with emotional and intellectual maturity that our fate is in our own hands and we had better handle it well or be destroyed. Gods and kings and other hierarchical monsters have no rights to our trust and faith and basically, neither does the mere mass of humanity. It requires intelligence and sensitivity and a full awareness of the forces of reality that we must react correctly or cease to exist. The past is full of overblown egos and rapacious horrors and the struggle to divest ourselves of these nightmares is not a matter of optimism, it is a matter of grasping reality in capable hands and wresting survival from it and we are approaching a vital nexus of events that we had better realize this in a hurry and stop playing with childish things like faith and religion or we will all vanish as did the dinosaurs.

Whilst I do not agree with Orwell on the merits of a monarchy, I do agree with him that what we are witnessing in advanced economies is hardly democracy.

The idea that a civilisation is democratic suggests that the populace have made decisions based upon unbiased and truthful representations of the issues on which they are deciding. How anyone can be so naive to believe that this is what we have in our present societies is beyond me. Instead of which we have a heavily orchestrated media whose role is to manipulate the general population, the bureaucracy also either lies, distorts or leaks information to sway public opinion in the direction it wants. The same people who control the media along with all the other leaders of capitalism are allowed to donate anonymously to political parties, the members of which have no limitations on the employ they take up after leaving office.

Democracy is the mass population making informed decisions based upon the needs of the majority. What we have is a tiny minority of financial elites who are able to manipulate the masses via their control of government and the mass media to their own ends.

Cherry-picked examples, but yeah, monarchism has the potential to suck really badly if someone completely off their rocker assumes the throne. The Quiet Revolution is not at all representative of the results democracy gets. Well, actually, democracy has never been properly implemented- see Dent's complaints. I would maintain that a true democracy is probably impossible. Perhaps we can approximate one, though.


In the US at least, it is normal to graduate high school at 17 or 18 (depending on when your birthday is) and move on to university at that point. I will be 20 soon, and I'm in my second year of university, where I have declared several majors so far (I still have most of them!)

And just who is going to enforce International Law against the United States? We have over 10,000 nuclear warheads. International Law is a joke. Why? Because there is no International Government to enforce it. International Relations is anarchic. Push comes to shave and disputes are often settled by war.

Where does a 2000 lb grizzly bear sleep? Anywhere it damned well pleases.

ruveyn

In other words any outlaw government with sufficient military and economic power meets your approval whatever the aims or consequences (a policy very much in favor by Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, the Mafia, and a few other nasty organizations).

I'll quote you again.



Go to the highway and stand beside a car with a flat tire, then count the number of passing cars who don't gives a damn.
Let's view nazi germany. An entire nation looked the other way when millions of people where brutaly murdured.
Look at a begger, see how many who gives him anything.
Need I continue?


Let's seen now. If a monarch rules from he/she's 20 to 75. That means a period of 55 years. In that time a democracy will have had 14 (13,75) mandates if they have 4 years in office. As in, he has to be the smartest of atleast 15 people. He is 1/15, = 7%. In a democracy a person who proves to be expetionaly good can get re-elected.

Power corrupts. That's a universal law.


Really? Sweden have had 200 years of peace, longest period in our history. No thanks to any king I can tell you.
Everyone has a chance for power. If they want to take it.



Again! You did it again! You use the best examples from 10 000 years and compare it to a bad example from 200 years!
This is a lesson in swedish history, I'd suggest you pay attention.
Swedish Monarchs: 1523-1818.
Gustav Wasa: Two rebellions. War with Denmark.
Erik XIV: Insane, killed seveal nobles before fleeing into the woods.
Johan III: Posioned his brother.
Sigismund: Fought his uncle Karl IX.
Karl IX: Fought his nephew Sigismund. War with Denmark and Poland.
Gustav II Adolf: Fought in the 30 yeared war.
Kristina: Disfavoured by the nobles, abdicated to her cousin Karl X Gustav.
Karl X Gustav: Fought Denmark, Poland and Russia.
Karl XI: See previous.
Karl XII: See previous. Assassinated.
Ulrika Eleonora: 1 year on the thone.
Fredrik I: War with Russia
Adolf Fredrik: Attempted Revolution.
Gustav III: Revolution. War with Russia. Assassinated.
Gustav IV Adolf: War with Russia. Dismissed.
Karl XIII: Marionette.

Stable... right?
And yes, that was every single monach we had for 300 years, one of them managed to stay out of troubble. She ruled for a year.


And now you're paying for being stupid. It's all fair. What if Bush had been your king, what would you have said? And how would the world be?


Yes I do sound like a fascist, and it is true. Funny how thing can be. On the other hand I don't support that kind of government. That's why I don't support monarchys.
Confused?

Last edited by Silvervarg on 13 Sep 2009, 7:12 am, edited 2 times in total.

Same as in Canada.

I do NOT approve. I simply recognize the facts. I do not have to LIKE the facts to recognize them.

Just because I recognize the world is a cesspool of injustice and violence does not mean that I REJOICE in the fact.

I wish you would stop trying to read my mind (I don't have one, I have a working brain). Pay attention to what I write (that you can see) and not what I think (you have no idea, since you do not have the talent of mental telepathy).

ruveyn

OK. Good enough. I was misled by your stated general attitude that you have no concern for anybody else but your immediate family