I don’t think the problems from the last election were caused by democracy, but rather the inadequecies and the short comings of the electoral college.
I don’t believe in democracy anymore because people are evil. Or stupid. Or both. 9 million of argentinians were probably one of those two.
I don’t know what you’re talking about. I know nothing of Argentina’s politics.
Sorc, someone can say what think about what someone can do. And it appears that this has happened. Now, it may not be an accurate assessment of what they actually would have done, but that does not mean it cannot be said.
And NeOKaEsAr, congratulations on your epiphany.
I meant that you can’t say that in the sense that you can’t say such a blind statement considering that there isn’t and proof or anything to back that up. I just pointed out the inaccuracy of the statement and the invalidity of it based on a lack of evidence.
>Marxism, like everyone else has said, doesn’t work because it’s too idealistic.
Marxism isn’t dead. Communism is dead, but communism was just one form of real life marxism. Think of it like this: people like Locke and Rousseau came up with the theory of democracy, but it was Jefferson and Madison(the U.S. presidents) who invented a working form of democracy in the Consitution of the United States. If you were to take what Locke and Rousseau said, you would think that too was too idealistic. But the fact is that we’re now living in a workable democracy; actually, U.S. democracy was designed assuming the worst of people, but I won’t go into that now. My point is that you shouldn’t equate the failure of the Soviet Union with the failure of Marxism; Marxism as a philosophy is still alive and well, waiting for someone new to figure out how to make it into a real government.
I think that any kind of successful marxism would be a combination between communism and democracy. You see, the problem with what Lenin came up with is that it doesn’t have a good system for selecting leaders. Lenin thought that ‘the people’ would be too stupid to see the genius of communism, so he believed that a group of elite intellectuals, known as ‘the Vanguard’, should seize power and then educate the people. The problem is that Lenin always assumed that the most elightened, just human beings would rise to the top. Obviously this is false; the shrewdest, most ruthless human beings were the ones who rose to the top of the Vanguard, and they totally fucked up the system, because they didn’t give a shit about Lenin’s ideals, they only cared about their own power. Take Joseph Stalin, for example. So basically what I’m saying is that communism could work if they adopted a democratic election system.
Curt, was is Lenin or Stalin that killed over 20 million unarmed men, women and children who wouldnt support Communism ?
My views on bush are simple. He isnt the best president, and he isnt the worst. I think Anarchy is the best policy! pops in Welcome to the Jungle IT does seem that things like Communism and Facism that corruption manifests itself easier int he government, while things like Capitalism the corruption is on a more individual basis. Like that line from the movie The Patriot about trading 1 tyrant 4000 miles away for 4000 tyrans 1 mile away… War does promote growth, but to temper steel it must pass through the fire. This is outside my subject, so i am gonna phrase it in a question… Wasnt the Great Depression caused by WW2 ?
People always seem to forget that the French were in Vietnam 10 years before we got involved, and we bailed their asses out of that too. Korea, we are still in that today, and the south koreans like us less and less. Imagine how well they would like us if we pulled out and let their northern “brothers” take over for us… I do think that the USA should stop policing the world, and become a little bit sepertists for all the garbage we are getting. A little sepertists, not saying we should wall up all the boarders and kill all outside influence.
Hell even some of my friends stationed in Quait see a lot of shit they cant help, child molestation and women being bitchslapped in public for not looking low enough at the ground. homosexuality is openly embraced in Quait too, he talks about seeing two strange guys just walk up to eachother and start kissing then walk off together, just things you wouldnt normal expect to see in the USA. Theres a lot wrong with the world, a lot diffrent too(but not neccessarily wrong). Why should we be the only ones to try and fix things ?
Despite how many peopel who don’t want a government, government is a nessecary evil. We cannot live without government, and if Anarchy ensues, someone will use it to gain power, thus ending anarchy.
Chaos breeds order, remember that.
Why should we be the only ones to try and fix things? Because we’re the only ones who can. I believe that the U.S. has a responsiblity, as the world’s most wealthy, powerful, and socially advanced nation, to use its economic and military power to improve other countries.
The strong aiding the weak. Of course.
However, it is also our responsibility to know when they don’t want help. But pllanting the seeds of such ideas are acceptable…
But then, as it is said, perhaps some do not know what they truly want until it is suggested.
I see I must clear out some things again. If any of you have read Marx, you’ll see that the Revolution that he proposed should have been done in an industriallized society–such as United Kingdom. When Russia came up with their own version of the Revolution, they forgot something: they weren’t an industriallized society. They were little far from feudalism. That’s why people like Stalin could rose and do what they did. You can’t look for an example of Marxism in the Soviet Union.
I believe that the U.S. has a responsiblity, as the world’s most wealthy, powerful, and socially advanced nation, to use its economic and military power to improve other countries.
Wake up, Curtis.
The problem remains, from a feudal or industrial society: humans are humans. Humans will seek power. Galloway put it best. That’s why I don’t think Marxism, in a pure form, will work. Just as a true democracy can’t be used in America (simply too many people).
Heh, i liked michael’s new movie, bowling for columbine…that was good…
Chaos breeds order, remember that.
As much as I hate the statement, I have to believe it to be true… but one thing is that there will never be such a thing as true order.
This is the one time videogames actually make sense to me. At the end of Warsong when you defeat Chaos, Chaos says that as long as man fights with each other, he (being chaos) will always be around.
This is a really stupid thread.
I don’t like bush. He has a weird nose.
It’s easy to say “Bush is an idiot, I hate him he’s doing his job liek toly wrong” but I want to see -you- in his position The US would probably turn into a second hell. Or worse, a second France.
a second France.
Well, we’ve already got Napoleon for a president.
Originally posted by Orakio
[b]As much as I hate the statement, I have to believe it to be true… but one thing is that there will never be such a thing as true order.
This is the one time videogames actually make sense to me. At the end of Warsong when you defeat Chaos, Chaos says that as long as man fights with each other, he (being chaos) will always be around. [/b]
Heh, don’t nessecarily have to like it, but as you said, it remains true.
If anything, I’m a dualist: Chaos breeds order, and order degenerates into chaos. That’s why there will never be true order. The laws of themodynamics can apply to quite a few situations… Can’t remember the exact one though. Bweh.
No one read my post. sniff
It believe it is possible to live without a government, but not the way we live today. First we have to learn to care about people who don’t know.
Marxism isn’t dead, but it’s outlook is very grim. Marx unfortunatly forgot that most humans put themselves, and their own interests, before everyone else. A part of human nature that sadly renders the excellent idea impossible to pull through: Unless you should succesfully change the way we are, of course.
And the system of electoral college is barbaric, and probably hails from the darkest parts of the dark ages. But alas they hail from the era we like to call the Enlightened Age.
I would begin to explain what the electoral college is to those who don’t know, but it took me ages to me ages to press it into the heads of my class mates. Suppose it is because you have to shatter a part of the idea that America is among the most democratic nations in the world.
Did I get carried away again?