Snowden Situation
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-08-2013, 04:55 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(07-08-2013 01:51 PM)cjlr Wrote:  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.

Like George Carlin said, "garbage in, garbage out".

You would have to assume the people who don't vote are not garbage and that those who they would subsequently choose would not be garbage.

Plus, separately, you have to look at the system/government(state), civil society and political activism and participation in its entirety.

Also, the idea that politicians are supposed to cater to voters is offensive. They are supposed to do what is in the interest of the people they represent and for whom they make decisions, regardless.

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, 05:47 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(07-08-2013 04:55 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  Like George Carlin said, "garbage in, garbage out".

You would have to assume the people who don't vote are not garbage and that those who they would subsequently choose would not be garbage.

Plus, separately, you have to look at the system/government(state), civil society and political activism and participation in its entirety.

Inertia counts for a hell of a lot. You can't make people care. It's stupid, but then - people are stupid, a lot of the time. Look at us here: our parliamentary majority government was voted for by ~40% of voters at about ~60% turnout. That's 25% of eligible voters casting a ballot for the guys in charge (and 36% for other guys...). People think "I don't particularly like any of them, and what does one vote matter anyway?". Sure. But when thousands of people think that... Bizarro tragedy of the commons. You can say elected officials don't do what the public wants, but that's because the public doesn't make them accountable.

(07-08-2013 04:55 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  Also, the idea that politicians are supposed to cater to voters is offensive. They are supposed to do what is in the interest of the people they represent and for whom they make decisions, regardless.

Hey, I didn't make the rules.

It's an inevitability; so long as part of being a politician is wanting to be elected, one must win elections. My system and yours, that involves convincing a plurality of voters within an electoral district (I think districting is flawed anyway, but that's another topic) that one is the best candidate. A district representative nominally represents the whole district but they're more beholden to their partisan constituency, to obvious consequences.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-08-2013, 03:04 AM
RE: Snowden Situation
(07-08-2013 04:53 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  Given what you just posted, it's worse than what I thought.

No, I see your point. I am simply calling bullshit on it.

(07-08-2013 04:53 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  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.

No, I provided evidence disproving your previous claim. You are the one who continued on with the debate despite evidence contrary to your beliefs.

(07-08-2013 04:53 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  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.

Oh really?

(05-08-2013 07:50 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  The "my right to vote"/"working within the system" bullshit, you know that is naive as fuck. I hope you know that is a naive view. It's wishful thinking.

I don't see any other implication when you insult me and my worldview by saying that working the system is "wishful thinking" and naive and later imply that you think I am willfully ignorant and obtuse.

(07-08-2013 04:53 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  I don't think I intended to imply that you said massive movements were necessary, but that really doesn't matter.

No, you stated that large populist movements is all that we get.

(07-08-2013 01:16 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  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.

I said otherwise.

(07-08-2013 04:53 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  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.

Ah, so you were inquiring about my view by insulting my beliefs and not asking tactful questions? I see.

(07-08-2013 04:53 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  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.

American's have weighed the benefits against the costs and have given up their freedom to absolute privacy. I accept that it is part of the social contract, even though I might disagree with the actions of the NSA and the special allowances garnered in the Patriot Act. I have said multiple times, however, that if we want change we must work the system. Apparently the past results are simply too "naive" for you and, despite your critical views, massive reform has been made in the past as a result of populist movements.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-08-2013, 12:14 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(07-08-2013 05:47 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(07-08-2013 04:55 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  Like George Carlin said, "garbage in, garbage out".

You would have to assume the people who don't vote are not garbage and that those who they would subsequently choose would not be garbage.

Plus, separately, you have to look at the system/government(state), civil society and political activism and participation in its entirety.

Inertia counts for a hell of a lot. You can't make people care. It's stupid, but then - people are stupid, a lot of the time. Look at us here: our parliamentary majority government was voted for by ~40% of voters at about ~60% turnout. That's 25% of eligible voters casting a ballot for the guys in charge (and 36% for other guys...). People think "I don't particularly like any of them, and what does one vote matter anyway?". Sure. But when thousands of people think that... Bizarro tragedy of the commons. You can say elected officials don't do what the public wants, but that's because the public doesn't make them accountable.

(07-08-2013 04:55 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  Also, the idea that politicians are supposed to cater to voters is offensive. They are supposed to do what is in the interest of the people they represent and for whom they make decisions, regardless.

Hey, I didn't make the rules.

It's an inevitability; so long as part of being a politician is wanting to be elected, one must win elections. My system and yours, that involves convincing a plurality of voters within an electoral district (I think districting is flawed anyway, but that's another topic) that one is the best candidate. A district representative nominally represents the whole district but they're more beholden to their partisan constituency, to obvious consequences.

Conservative (n.) A statesman who is enamoured of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.

Problem is that our statesmen are liberals and conservatives, none of whom are responsible and/or intellectual, as they are supposed to be in principle.

We have an accepted system of tyranny that still manages to create an illusion of democracy; one in which a portion actively engages in an act of lending credibility and validation to tyranny, oppression and other immorality, as opposed to actively denouncing and dismantling it.

At some point, someone might be compelled to ask if that is because the liberty in question is not what is desired? Or is it because the circumstances of the tyranny and oppression are too complex, dynamic and difficult to properly overcome?

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
08-08-2013, 12:17 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(08-08-2013 03:04 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(07-08-2013 04:53 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  Given what you just posted, it's worse than what I thought.

No, I see your point. I am simply calling bullshit on it.

(07-08-2013 04:53 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  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.

No, I provided evidence disproving your previous claim. You are the one who continued on with the debate despite evidence contrary to your beliefs.

(07-08-2013 04:53 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  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.

Oh really?

(05-08-2013 07:50 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  The "my right to vote"/"working within the system" bullshit, you know that is naive as fuck. I hope you know that is a naive view. It's wishful thinking.

I don't see any other implication when you insult me and my worldview by saying that working the system is "wishful thinking" and naive and later imply that you think I am willfully ignorant and obtuse.

(07-08-2013 04:53 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  I don't think I intended to imply that you said massive movements were necessary, but that really doesn't matter.

No, you stated that large populist movements is all that we get.

(07-08-2013 01:16 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  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.

I said otherwise.

(07-08-2013 04:53 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  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.

Ah, so you were inquiring about my view by insulting my beliefs and not asking tactful questions? I see.

(07-08-2013 04:53 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  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.

American's have weighed the benefits against the costs and have given up their freedom to absolute privacy. I accept that it is part of the social contract, even though I might disagree with the actions of the NSA and the special allowances garnered in the Patriot Act. I have said multiple times, however, that if we want change we must work the system. Apparently the past results are simply too "naive" for you and, despite your critical views, massive reform has been made in the past as a result of populist movements.

To the point I was addressing originally, throughout and now, I specifically wrote: "Unless you have more. Do you have more?". Your contention has been that populism, voting or whatever else, can work and has worked and can be used to work within the system. It would be nice if you would please provide further explanation and information on and in support of your views, as to why and how you see this working now or in the future, or how it has worked in the past, and why you see it as being a viable solution, which would take it past being wishful thinking and ignorance.

That was my main point and concern for which I don't think you have provided beyond stating it as fact, and I'm simply questioning, not disagreeing. Any other comments that I made, that you may have misunderstood or viewed as implying something that they were not implying and/or that you thought you were properly and relevantly responding to, can be ignored.

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
08-08-2013, 12:29 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(08-08-2013 12:14 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  Conservative (n.) A statesman who is enamoured of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.

Problem is that our statesmen are liberals and conservatives, none of whom are responsible and/or intellectual, as they are supposed to be in principle.

Really? None of them? Not even a little?

(08-08-2013 12:14 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  We have an accepted system of tyranny that still manages to create an illusion of democracy; one in which a portion actively engages in an act of lending credibility and validation to tyranny, oppression and other immorality, as opposed to actively denouncing and dismantling it.

Right, except for the part where it's an illusion. Or tyranny. Or oppression.

Most people are lazy and conservative, but what, you think if they voted for change it somehow wouldn't happen?

(08-08-2013 12:14 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  At some point, someone might be compelled to ask if that is because the liberty in question is not what is desired? Or is it because the circumstances of the tyranny and oppression are too complex, dynamic and difficult to properly overcome?

Jesus, man, I thought I was cynical.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-08-2013, 02:11 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(08-08-2013 12:17 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  To the point I was addressing originally, throughout and now, I specifically wrote: "Unless you have more. Do you have more?". Your contention has been that populism, voting or whatever else, can work and has worked and can be used to work within the system. It would be nice if you would please provide further explanation and information on and in support of your views, as to why and how you see this working now or in the future, or how it has worked in the past, and why you see it as being a viable solution, which would take it past being wishful thinking and ignorance.

The current homosexual movement is a prime example.

(08-08-2013 12:17 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  That was my main point and concern for which I don't think you have provided beyond stating it as fact, and I'm simply questioning, not disagreeing. Any other comments that I made, that you may have misunderstood or viewed as implying something that they were not implying and/or that you thought you were properly and relevantly responding to, can be ignored.

You blatantly said that I am being ignorant and naive, there is nothing to misunderstand about your attack on my position.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-08-2013, 08:27 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(08-08-2013 02:11 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(08-08-2013 12:17 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  To the point I was addressing originally, throughout and now, I specifically wrote: "Unless you have more. Do you have more?". Your contention has been that populism, voting or whatever else, can work and has worked and can be used to work within the system. It would be nice if you would please provide further explanation and information on and in support of your views, as to why and how you see this working now or in the future, or how it has worked in the past, and why you see it as being a viable solution, which would take it past being wishful thinking and ignorance.

The current homosexual movement is a prime example.

(08-08-2013 12:17 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  That was my main point and concern for which I don't think you have provided beyond stating it as fact, and I'm simply questioning, not disagreeing. Any other comments that I made, that you may have misunderstood or viewed as implying something that they were not implying and/or that you thought you were properly and relevantly responding to, can be ignored.

You blatantly said that I am being ignorant and naive, there is nothing to misunderstand about your attack on my position.

Im really actually disappointed because I thought I would find at least semi rational people that could give rational ideas about things rational topics, but all I found were stupid bigots that constantly made themselves into victims(with a few exceptions).

Now I understand the kinds of people that come on these forums and continuously spout their bullshit behind the safety of a computer screen, and Logica is a prime example.

Logica, get a life and actually do something productive with it please, because I want to see the day when you crash and burn because of your ridiculous arguments and professional victimhood complex. Not to mention all the ad hominems you love to employ so much whilst simultaneously condemning them. Your attacks on people, solely for arguing on the opposite side of you in an argument, is childish and simpleminded. When you publish something using your amazing intellect you seem to think you have, please message me, though I doubt that day will ever come, because you are an idiot.

[Image: g-HitchensThinkSelf.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-08-2013, 08:50 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(08-08-2013 08:27 PM)elegant_atheist Wrote:  
(08-08-2013 02:11 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  The current homosexual movement is a prime example.


You blatantly said that I am being ignorant and naive, there is nothing to misunderstand about your attack on my position.

Im really actually disappointed because I thought I would find at least semi rational people that could give rational ideas about things rational topics, but all I found were stupid bigots that constantly made themselves into victims(with a few exceptions).

Now I understand the kinds of people that come on these forums and continuously spout their bullshit behind the safety of a computer screen, and Logica is a prime example.

Logica, get a life and actually do something productive with it please, because I want to see the day when you crash and burn because of your ridiculous arguments and professional victimhood complex. Not to mention all the ad hominems you love to employ so much whilst simultaneously condemning them. Your attacks on people, solely for arguing on the opposite side of you in an argument, is childish and simpleminded. When you publish something using your amazing intellect you seem to think you have, please message me, though I doubt that day will ever come, because you are an idiot.

Is the weather nice in delusional land?

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-08-2013, 09:01 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(08-08-2013 08:50 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(08-08-2013 08:27 PM)elegant_atheist Wrote:  Im really actually disappointed because I thought I would find at least semi rational people that could give rational ideas about things rational topics, but all I found were stupid bigots that constantly made themselves into victims(with a few exceptions).

Now I understand the kinds of people that come on these forums and continuously spout their bullshit behind the safety of a computer screen, and Logica is a prime example.

Logica, get a life and actually do something productive with it please, because I want to see the day when you crash and burn because of your ridiculous arguments and professional victimhood complex. Not to mention all the ad hominems you love to employ so much whilst simultaneously condemning them. Your attacks on people, solely for arguing on the opposite side of you in an argument, is childish and simpleminded. When you publish something using your amazing intellect you seem to think you have, please message me, though I doubt that day will ever come, because you are an idiot.

Is the weather nice in delusional land?

You should know.

[Image: g-HitchensThinkSelf.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: