Snowden Situation
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-08-2013, 06:36 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(05-08-2013 06:29 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  
(05-08-2013 11:57 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Civil rights movements have been and generally unite behind a handful of individual speakers. To get things done, one must convince the legislators that the most beneficial thing would be to legalize something or make it illegal. The most recent fight for gay marriage is a prime example.

Gay marriage, for example, is a fucking joke. It's a distraction issue, along with: abortion, gun rights, war on religion bullshit. They are used to get people to the polls to help with the real issues-- the economic issues.

You can tell how much politicians and the elite actually give a fuck about gay rights. As soon as the polls turned, there were politicians on that shit in seconds talking about how they magically changed their minds and gays were our equals, brothers and sisters, etc. Some are crazy religious assholes, but the so-called "moderates", "establishment", they weren't worried about whether or not gays were fucking with rings and adopting kids, they were worried about support for their parties.

If the let's vote and convince the legislators with a majority stuffed worked, we would have universal healthcare, we would be spending a lot more on education, the rich would be taxed at way higher rates, our infrastructure would be phenomenal, we would have been without war for a long time, we would have been without economic recession for a long time, people would be working less than 8 hour days with long vacations and etc.

People today are just lucky a lot of battles were already won. Most are happy with their McDonald's and Nike freedom or are apathetic. They just don't have that much of a sense of urgency. Global warming is too far removed, blacks are....well...black, enough people have healthcare already, you likely don't know you are uneducated unless you are educated...plus anti-intellectualism is strong, if you are a happy slave or a house nigger you don't care much, etc.

I was about to hit the like button and then you went all Alabama Man at the end there.

Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-08-2013, 06:26 AM
RE: Snowden Situation
(05-08-2013 06:29 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  Gay marriage, for example, is a fucking joke. It's a distraction issue, along with: abortion, gun rights, war on religion bullshit. They are used to get people to the polls to help with the real issues-- the economic issues.

You are preaching to the choir.

(05-08-2013 06:29 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  You can tell how much politicians and the elite actually give a fuck about gay rights. As soon as the polls turned, there were politicians on that shit in seconds talking about how they magically changed their minds and gays were our equals, brothers and sisters, etc. Some are crazy religious assholes, but the so-called "moderates", "establishment", they weren't worried about whether or not gays were fucking with rings and adopting kids, they were worried about support for their parties.

Yes, they changed their minds because they saw that they would not get reelected if they continued in their bigotry. This is the same with the civil rights movement of the 60s-70s.

(05-08-2013 06:29 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  If the let's vote and convince the legislators with a majority stuffed worked, we would have universal healthcare, we would be spending a lot more on education, the rich would be taxed at way higher rates, our infrastructure would be phenomenal, we would have been without war for a long time, we would have been without economic recession for a long time, people would be working less than 8 hour days with long vacations and etc.

Incorrect. Fifty percent of the popular voting block are Republicans, who staunchly oppose universal healthcare. When a large movement is made for universal healthcare, the general opinion will change overtime. The actual change is done by electing more moderate and progressive politicians while the movement is initiated. Simple populism.

(05-08-2013 06:29 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  People today are just lucky a lot of battles were already won. Most are happy with their McDonald's and Nike freedom or are apathetic. They just don't have that much of a sense of urgency. Global warming is too far removed, blacks are....well...black, enough people have healthcare already, you likely don't know you are uneducated unless you are educated...plus anti-intellectualism is strong, if you are a happy slave or a house nigger you don't care much, etc.

You are preaching to the choir.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-08-2013, 09:32 AM
RE: Snowden Situation
(05-08-2013 06:36 PM)ridethespiral Wrote:  I was about to hit the like button and then you went all Alabama Man at the end there.

I didn't go Alabama Man. LOL.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-08-2013, 10:31 AM
RE: Snowden Situation
(06-08-2013 06:26 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Yes, they changed their minds because they saw that they would not get reelected if they continued in their bigotry. This is the same with the civil rights movement of the 60s-70s.

Don't confuse what is happening in civil society, with what is happening with regard to the state.

Look at civil rights today. The people who were putting in work in the 60/70s, at least the way I see it, couldn't see the advancements, specifically on the policy side, as being much.

Politicians just ride the wave, until they have to find a new wave. Can't be openly racist and deny voting rights, go to voter ID cards, less voting time, etc.

It's really about the political activism, democratic forces and economic issues. Pressure in those areas control the repression, in size, scale and style.

Quote:Incorrect. Fifty percent of the popular voting block are Republicans, who staunchly oppose universal healthcare. When a large movement is made for universal healthcare, the general opinion will change overtime. The actual change is done by electing more moderate and progressive politicians while the movement is initiated. Simple populism.

That doesn't even make sense. Are Republicans even 50% of Americans? I highly doubt that they are.

Obama ran on a terrible healthcare plan twice and won easily, and the second time with a terrible economy. There was obviously a tremendous push for healthcare, because in 2008 that was one of the main issues.

Plus, a lot of the people who don't support Obamacare now, oppose it in favor of something to the left of it.

If there was a poll where universal healthcare was both presented and explained, I could not see anyway it would be under 60% of the population, if not over 80%.

You can go across the board on issues, which was my point, and on issue after issue there is a huge disconnect with what American's support and what policy is supported by politicians and/or discussed by the media.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2013, 06:02 AM
RE: Snowden Situation
(06-08-2013 10:31 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  Don't confuse what is happening in civil society, with what is happening with regard to the state.

Look at civil rights today. The people who were putting in work in the 60/70s, at least the way I see it, couldn't see the advancements, specifically on the policy side, as being much.

Politicians just ride the wave, until they have to find a new wave. Can't be openly racist and deny voting rights, go to voter ID cards, less voting time, etc.

It's really about the political activism, democratic forces and economic issues. Pressure in those areas control the repression, in size, scale and style.

You really do like preaching to the choir don't you? Did you not read what I said? Populist movement with an elected populist politician. It was done in the past, it can be done again.

(06-08-2013 10:31 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  That doesn't even make sense. Are Republicans even 50% of Americans? I highly doubt that they are.

Obama ran on a terrible healthcare plan twice and won easily, and the second time with a terrible economy. There was obviously a tremendous push for healthcare, because in 2008 that was one of the main issues.

The resulting popular vote from several previous elections disagree.

(06-08-2013 10:31 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  Plus, a lot of the people who don't support Obamacare now, oppose it in favor of something to the left of it.

If there was a poll where universal healthcare was both presented and explained, I could not see anyway it would be under 60% of the population, if not over 80%.

Actually, that is incorrect. Again.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/158966/majori...antee.aspx

(06-08-2013 10:31 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  You can go across the board on issues, which was my point, and on issue after issue there is a huge disconnect with what American's support and what policy is supported by politicians and/or discussed by the media.

And that is because the public has not initiated a substantial populist movement. Disapproval ratings for congress may be at a stagnant low, but no one is nearly vocal enough to persuade their representatives. People, for the most part, seem content with complaining but not forming a movement behind a populist.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2013, 01:16 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(07-08-2013 06:02 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(06-08-2013 10:31 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  Don't confuse what is happening in civil society, with what is happening with regard to the state.

Look at civil rights today. The people who were putting in work in the 60/70s, at least the way I see it, couldn't see the advancements, specifically on the policy side, as being much.

Politicians just ride the wave, until they have to find a new wave. Can't be openly racist and deny voting rights, go to voter ID cards, less voting time, etc.

It's really about the political activism, democratic forces and economic issues. Pressure in those areas control the repression, in size, scale and style.

You really do like preaching to the choir don't you? Did you not read what I said? Populist movement with an elected populist politician. It was done in the past, it can be done again.

(06-08-2013 10:31 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  That doesn't even make sense. Are Republicans even 50% of Americans? I highly doubt that they are.

Obama ran on a terrible healthcare plan twice and won easily, and the second time with a terrible economy. There was obviously a tremendous push for healthcare, because in 2008 that was one of the main issues.

The resulting popular vote from several previous elections disagree.

(06-08-2013 10:31 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  Plus, a lot of the people who don't support Obamacare now, oppose it in favor of something to the left of it.

If there was a poll where universal healthcare was both presented and explained, I could not see anyway it would be under 60% of the population, if not over 80%.

Actually, that is incorrect. Again.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/158966/majori...antee.aspx

(06-08-2013 10:31 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  You can go across the board on issues, which was my point, and on issue after issue there is a huge disconnect with what American's support and what policy is supported by politicians and/or discussed by the media.

And that is because the public has not initiated a substantial populist movement. Disapproval ratings for congress may be at a stagnant low, but no one is nearly vocal enough to persuade their representatives. People, for the most part, seem content with complaining but not forming a movement behind a populist.

You are missing the entire point.

To the more irrelevant stuff: nothing disagrees with the idea that Republicans are not 50%, and nothing disagrees with the fact that Obama won twice. The poll you showed, didn't involve healthcare being explained: they were just irrationally responding to a question based on bias sentiments. Even the numbers indicating that it clearly was above 60% prior to massive campaigns against healthcare don't matter, because that, along with the other stuff, wasn't even relevant to my point.

You started out with one issue and one idea about it coming down to you voting. Now that you seem to have realized something else is needed (after I brought it up), you are talking about popular movements. I pointed out, which is clear, that popular will doesn't match up with what elected officials do, i.e., what the mainstream public wants is not what those either nominated or elected represent. In the past all you have gotten, and all you will get now, from all of what was mentioned in voting, popularity and huge movements, including things you seem to be ignoring like long periods of time with significance social change, huge protests, huge movements and rallies, coupled with massive amounts of repression, gets you limited concessions by those in power. You say, "It was done in the past, it can be done again.", when what was done in the past wasn't significant and substantial progress relative, and with regard to, the entirety of the circumstances.

A lot more than you seem to be willing to imply, including significant social changes and changes in sentiments, along with massive movements for big changes to the system, all completely unlikely to happen, is what is necessary. I just want to make sure you are not ignoring that by continuing to be willfully ignorant, apologetic and having wishful thinking.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2013, 01:30 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(06-08-2013 10:31 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  That doesn't even make sense. Are Republicans even 50% of Americans? I highly doubt that they are.
They don't have to be. 40%-50% of Americans vote in presidential elections, after an 18 month advert campaign. The split is usually close to 55/45, or even smaller margin. That means Republicans can be as little as 18%-20% of the population, and still have a normal, reasonably strong showing at the polls.

Quote: on issue after issue there is a huge disconnect with what American's support and what policy is supported by politicians and/or discussed by the media.

Damn right. Our population is quite thoroughly surveyed and polled. We want health care, campaign finance reform, better prioritization of education, drug law reform, prison reform, etc., etc. Hardly any politicians at any level support these issues, because...

The Public Relations (read: Propaganda) professionals tell them not to take on these issues if they want to get elected.

I AM he who is called... cat furniture.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2013, 01:45 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(07-08-2013 01:16 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  You are missing the entire point.

No, I am not.

(07-08-2013 01:16 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  To the more irrelevant stuff: nothing disagrees with the idea that Republicans are not 50%, and nothing disagrees with the fact that Obama won twice. The poll you showed, didn't involve healthcare being explained: they were just irrationally responding to a question based on bias sentiments. Even the numbers indicating that it clearly was above 60% prior to massive campaigns against healthcare don't matter, because that, along with the other stuff, wasn't even relevant to my point.

No, what the poll showed was that Americans are dissatisfied with the current healthcare system but are too uneducated or unwilling to provide an alternative solution to Obamacare and are, generally, against the Affordable Care Act in favor of a more privatized system.

(07-08-2013 01:16 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  You started out with one issue and one idea about it coming down to you voting. Now that you seem to have realized something else is needed (after I brought it up), you are talking about popular movements. I pointed out, which is clear, that popular will doesn't match up with what elected officials do, i.e., what the mainstream public wants is not what those either nominated or elected represent. In the past all you have gotten, and all you will get now, from all of what was mentioned in voting, popularity and huge movements, including things you seem to be ignoring like long periods of time with significance social change, huge protests, huge movements and rallies, coupled with massive amounts of repression, gets you limited concessions by those in power. You say, "It was done in the past, it can be done again.", when what was done in the past wasn't significant and substantial progress relative, and with regard to, the entirety of the circumstances.

No, you made this an issue by saying we cannot work the system. Populists movements are the name of the game, and nowhere in my saying that I vote for politicians that I believe would be willing to make those chances contradict those sentiments. You made a large, generalized claim about my beliefs without knowing them. That is the issue. Instead of asking what I believe, you told me we cannot work the system. Yes we can.

(07-08-2013 01:16 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  A lot more than you seem to be willing to imply, including significant social changes and changes in sentiments, along with massive movements for big changes to the system, all completely unlikely to happen, is what is necessary. I just want to make sure you are not ignoring that by continuing to be willfully ignorant, apologetic and having wishful thinking.

I never said massive movements are necessary. I said a vocal ones are. I was never ignorant or apologetic about this subject. You asserted something that was grossly miscalculated.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2013, 01:51 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(07-08-2013 01:30 PM)I Am Wrote:  
(06-08-2013 10:31 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  That doesn't even make sense. Are Republicans even 50% of Americans? I highly doubt that they are.
They don't have to be. 40%-50% of Americans vote in presidential elections, after an 18 month advert campaign. The split is usually close to 55/45, or even smaller margin. That means Republicans can be as little as 18%-20% of the population, and still have a normal, reasonably strong showing at the polls.

Quote: on issue after issue there is a huge disconnect with what American's support and what policy is supported by politicians and/or discussed by the media.

Damn right. Our population is quite thoroughly surveyed and polled. We want health care, campaign finance reform, better prioritization of education, drug law reform, prison reform, etc., etc. Hardly any politicians at any level support these issues, because...

The Public Relations (read: Propaganda) professionals tell them not to take on these issues if they want to get elected.

A lot of it does go back to low turnout. There are plenty of people who are apathetic about politics even if they have plenty of political opinions (polls kind of illustrate this, if they're of the general population as opposed to intending voters). Politicians don't cater to non-voters because what the hell benefit would that have? And people see that no politicians are saying what they'd like to hear, so they don't vote...

It's not like people (let alone politicians) are going to change things when the status quo is what got them elected. Why take a 'courageous' (ah, Yes, Minister) position when you'll win anyways, with a 'decisive' 1-in-4-voters mandate?

I know lots of idiots who just say 'why bother they just give us two equivalents to choose from lol'; first, who the fuck's they? And second - no, you did that, by disengaging from the process and then whining like a petulant child about the result.

It's like a bizarro tragedy of the commons. That's a better pun here, trust me.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
07-08-2013, 04:53 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(07-08-2013 01:45 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  No, I am not.

Given what you just posted, it's worse than what I thought.

Quote:No, what the poll showed was that Americans are dissatisfied with the current healthcare system but are too uneducated or unwilling to provide an alternative solution to Obamacare and are, generally, against the Affordable Care Act in favor of a more privatized system.

And, like I said, none of that matters. It was all irrelevant to my point. It was a cherry picked issue for distraction, that didn't make a significant and relevant point.

Quote:No, you made this an issue by saying we cannot work the system. Populists movements are the name of the game, and nowhere in my saying that I vote for politicians that I believe would be willing to make those chances contradict those sentiments. You made a large, generalized claim about my beliefs without knowing them. That is the issue. Instead of asking what I believe, you told me we cannot work the system. Yes we can.
Quote:I never said massive movements are necessary. I said a vocal ones are. I was never ignorant or apologetic about this subject. You asserted something that was grossly miscalculated.


I never said, you couldn't work within the system (I never meant to imply that, even if I did say it), I was inquiring as to what you felt was working within the system, wanting elaboration. I specifically asked you about your views, and regardless of what you took from the discussion, that was my intention throughout.

I don't think I intended to imply that you said massive movements were necessary, but that really doesn't matter.

I just wanted to see your views being expressed. If you think that popular movements have been relatively successful, and you just have to be expressive and vote, that goes to you being naive. And if you think there just have been changes with popular movements, possibly comfortable with the results, but definitely okay with the reality of actually needing to have significant movements to get insignificant concessions, that's a problem. If you had something else in mind, I was inquiring as to your view.

I don't want to come off as being prejudice, as I'm seriously trying to get an understanding of your views. The type of society that people want to live in, which I think is likely something Americans have already decided, is the major, but mostly ignored, issue with regard to Snowden, and I was trying to get an idea of what you were expressing in this thread.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: