First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
Post Reply Monarchy, should we have a king?
20254 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Maryland
Offline
Posted 2/2/13

-Vega- wrote:


The subjugation and lowering of woman as something sub-human in anime is a Satanic concept.





What does social class have to do with a christian concept of evil? Simply call it stratification...blame it on capitalism not the devil lol.
Banned
31571 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / The Void.
Offline
Posted 2/2/13 , edited 2/2/13

infamybrian wrote:


-Vega- wrote:


The subjugation and lowering of woman as something sub-human in anime is a Satanic concept.





What does social class have to do with a christian concept of evil? Simply call it stratification...blame it on capitalism not the devil lol.


What Christian Concept? Yes, it is stratification. Did you know that Earth has been ruled by Satanist/Draconians for thousand of years? You should know that by now, my indigenous friend. Good and evil is an illusion to me.

30425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Hughesville, Penn...
Online
Posted 2/2/13

-Vega- wrote:



I agree.

You have a much higher level of awareness than Lim. His mind is so small. You are beyond his comprehension. Lim is a controlling insecure man that lives in fear. Arguing with him is just like arguing with someone with a half a brain.


Hopefully I can show him the way to happiness by attempting to communicate with him.
Banned
31571 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / The Void.
Offline
Posted 2/2/13


I wish you good luck.

25210 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
44 / M / Memphis, TN
Offline
Posted 2/2/13

infamybrian wrote:


longfenglim wrote:


Why would anyone want the Mass to have anything at all to do with government, when the Mass, and especially the American Mass, are a most unreasonable group of cretins, idiots, and madmen??


Longfenglim I respectfully disagree your claims that the mass public should not have a say so in there own lives. So your suggesting that only a certain group should be able to have a say so in there lives. The government is a organized agency that exercises power over the people. A true democracy simply put would be a "direct democracy"; A system where everyone has a say so. With out the people/mass who would the government have control over(or oppress i should say)? O that's right without the mass there wouldn't be a government fenglim


Putting aside the question of cretinism, the United States is a republic, as stated in the Constitution. A republic is specifically NOT a democracy, but an oligarchy, and an oligarchy is defined by the rule of a select few over the masses. So the statement above--meant, I believe, to be sarcastic--is merely an observation of the true status quo. I personally believe that most US citizens manage to fool themselves into thinking that they live in a democracy because the more localized the government--devolving from Federal to state to county/parish to municipality, etc.--the more democratic the participation process becomes. And since more people have more direct contact with their local governing bodies, they as individuals eventually imagine themselves as living in a democracy. It's a form of self-delusion, something of a political optical illusion. But not a self-fulfilling prophecy.

As to the original question of a monarchy, and as stated in earlier comments, I support the idea. A single person can only mess up so much so badly, as opposed to what a group can accomplish. I'd feel safer following one madman than many.
30425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Hughesville, Penn...
Online
Posted 2/2/13

ZenZaku wrote:



You can offer education, but how many will enthusiastically participate? I can take someone to a source of water but I can't make them drink. How do you define "proper education?"


We need to convince them that it is for the best.

I define proper education as instilling the correct ethics into the psyche of a person.
3489 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Dreamscape
Offline
Posted 2/2/13

lordseth23 wrote:


ZenZaku wrote:



Who chooses the morals though? Is it a church, the government, parents, or do we just look at the trends that we deem just and good and make sure the children know them?


We collaborate amongst ourselves and develop the best moral code we can think of.


And then how do we convince them to accept and follow these morals all of their lives? And how will having these morals help raise the level of intelligence in a society?
28256 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / NJ
Offline
Posted 2/2/13 , edited 2/2/13
I just want to step in for a moment.

I look for the good in people. However, when you begin to create a moral code the problem is there will be people who will disagree with it...and ultimately, the one in power is the one who dictates the morals - whether the religious authority, state, media...which ever is in control of the message.

It would be wonderful if all human beings could simply co-exist, however, the problem that sometimes arises is the fact that we are human...and in humanity there will be those who seek power...that can lead to abuse, manipulation, and control while silencing those in dissent.
30425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Hughesville, Penn...
Online
Posted 2/2/13

ZenZaku wrote:



And the ones who are mentally unwell? Or those who literally cannot empathize with others? The ones who can justify doing anything for their own goals? And also how do you intend to remove the adult culture of the double standard?


The culture of the double standard can easily be removed with this education, that is not a problem. Those with permanent mental deficiencies can be taken care of by their families or in a mental hospital, they are not a problem either. Every person who does not have a permanent mental deficiency has the ability to empathize with others and the capacity to learn that their goals should not come at the expense of others.
22561 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M / Northern California
Offline
Posted 2/2/13 , edited 2/2/13
Education keeps getting brought up as a solution here, but availability of consistent education itself is a problem right now. Then again, the state of education in the US is a huge problem, on many levels. Right now, there are school boards with revisionist and/or religious motives trying to rewrite the history books (adding in jingoistic concepts like American exceptionalism, trying to attribute religious beliefs to atheist Founding Fathers, or completely removing any references to slavery as one of the factors leading to the American Civil War, which is both factually and historically dishonest.)

There are standardized testing and textbook companies colluding with legislators so they can make a quick buck off students (school funding is based on these test scores, and the companies get major kickbacks.) Then legislators push for more private school vouchers, and more of the kids get pulled from the public schools, further hindering performance on standardized tests, and spreading the available public funding even less fairly. Then people point to the public schools as failing, and wonder why... A vicious cycle, indeed.

Meanwhile, you have teachers that are only able to teach kids memorization for taking tests, rather than teach them critical thinking skills. In effect, they're being only taught the facts, but not the "big picture" reasons why those facts are relevant - there is a famous quote by Santayana regarding this problem. And of course, the students themselves, who are more than willing to forget the information they just memorized, after the tests are over. What point is there in knowing the facts, if the significance of those facts aren't taught with the same level of importance? Considering the Texas GOP actually wrote in their 2012 education platform that they are against the teaching of critical thinking, this whole problem should be dealt with first, before we start worrying about getting everyone educated by the same system. (It should be noted that Texas is the largest purchaser of textbooks in the country, and the curriculum they adopt often gets adopted by districts nationwide.)

I should state that I am not against education as a solution to some of the issues listed in this thread; hell, we'd do very well to first get rid of our competition-based system altogether. We should use a model that's based on getting everyone an education, regardless of background or financial status. Also, we should stop blaming the teachers for the above problems, instead of cutting out the people trying to monetize and monopolize the money in the system. Those people are not the teachers, I can tell you that much.

When you treat kids as sources of funding, you've stopped caring about the point of education. Let's fix that first.
28256 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / NJ
Offline
Posted 2/2/13
Education is such an anomaly it would take a tremendous amount of effort to fix it. You mention sides of the spectrum trying to rewrite history...which is something that has been in practice for years and countries for ages, but that is just history! We have not even touched standardized tests, the cost of education, lack of apprenticeships, actual critical thinking in the mind about ones future goals and how to present education as more than a stress preparation.
2106 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Guess
Offline
Posted 2/2/13

infamybrian wrote:


longfenglim wrote:


Why would anyone want the Mass to have anything at all to do with government, when the Mass, and especially the American Mass, are a most unreasonable group of cretins, idiots, and madmen??


Longfenglim I respectfully disagree your claims that the mass public should not have a say so in there own lives. So your suggesting that only a certain group should be able to have a say so in there lives. The government is a organized agency that exercises power over the people. A true democracy simply put would be a "direct democracy"; A system where everyone has a say so. With out the people/mass who would the government have control over(or oppress i should say)? O that's right without the mass there wouldn't be a government fenglim


That is, unfortunately, bad political philosophy, because the people, unfortunately, are, by and large, ignorant, and should have no business running the government- they are free to live their lives in whatever why they please so long as it is bounded by the law, but they should have no business deciding what is contained within those laws. Robert Paul Wolff, in his 'Defence of Anarchism' rightfully noted that the only true government, so far as my autonomy is concern, that can exercise power over me is one where I, and everyone else, unanimously agree to every single law, that is, rather than be ruled by what Rousseau called 'The General Will', I should accept a law as binding on me if I agree to have that law binding on me, because, if, as Rousseau argues, that the General Will is always right, that would mean someone who is in a perpetual minority is always wrong, it is wrong to be Chinese- say-, it is wrong to believe in this, or believe in that, being a Jew is wrong, etc. There is no reason why I should have the will of the many overrule my own will, and there is no reason why I should have a law binding so long as I consented to that law, and agree with the law. From a philosophical standpoint, and observing democracy in its own term, it is incomprehensible and does not work.

In a monarchy, we reject the idea that people should have autonomy, or even be autonomous agents, for reason that giving the business of running the nation goes beyond their expertise, that is, beyond their skill set. For example, suppose there is a tailor, a cobbler, and a doctor, I would obviously choose the tailor to mend my clothes, the cobbler my shoes, and the doctor my heath, because those fall within their range of expertise. I would not, however, want any of them to be statesman and make and pass laws, for the simple reason that it falls beyond their range. Thus, regardless of how popular he is, I would not want a showman-aviator to pass laws, as his professionalism does not include drafting and composing law, I would much prefer that left in the hands of professionals.

Since a Monarch and his ministers can be thought of as 'professional statesmen', and being unbeholden to those whose expertise lie outside the field of governing, it follows that I would rather a monarch, having been brought up and trained for the job, rule.
2106 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Guess
Offline
Posted 2/2/13 , edited 2/2/13

lordseth23 wrote:


Why can't we educate the cretins, idiots, and madmen? If it weren't for your upbringing and life circumstances, you wouldn't be any different from them, so why don't you believe that they can be just as intelligent as you? Once proper education is instilled upon the masses, there won't be any significant differences between any form of government that we choose to live under.


There is a myth that goes around in democracies, that people are all created equal in every respect, that blood, genes, and biology has nothing to do with their particular characteristics. That is to say, that no child is born in this way or that way, and, as comforting as it may be, however much is validates the premise of democracy, it simply isn't true.

This is aptly demonstrated by Lordseth23 and Vega, both of whom, we can imagine, do receive the same education that I have, assuming they went through the American Education System, from Public Schools and, possibly, beyond. It is very evident from their post that they are the most idiotic creatures ever to crawled from out the sea, or, indeed, even gestate in the ocean.

Or, rather, if we observe a classroom, we see particular inequality in the same situation, that is, with the same education, etc. Some take to the lesson faster than others, some hear and immediately understands, others go off to libraries, to dedicated themselves to mastering it, some, hard as they might try, never master it at all, and it all shows in their grades- intelligence is something measurable- there are more intelligent people, there are less intelligent people, and there are people of less natural wit, and who can never hope to match wits with their betters.

The hope of ever instilling within the mass an education that overcome their natural deficiencies is laughable at best, a waste of money at worse- we will never make fools, cretins, and idiots, like Lordseth23 and Vega, reach a level of genius which matches someone like, say, me, the Superior man foretold by the great Persian Prophet Zoroaster, the embodiment of what the Latins called 'Virtus' and the Greeks 'Arete', that, when compared to current man, is like unto a God, who shall lead man to a new era of Wisdom, Reason, and Rationality. There shall always be some who, when given the fruits of learning, will still be left, stuttering like an idiot.

To even think that we can train people to someday reach a competency that deserves civic participation is absurd- even in most industrial countries, where education is most excellently meted out, where state law requires of every child to attend some form of schooling, we still have functional illiteracy rates ranging between ten to twenty percent- is it even possible to expect the entirety of the population to masters the artes liberales thus justifying their ability to participate in Government?
20254 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Maryland
Offline
Posted 2/2/13 , edited 2/2/13

longfenglim wrote:


-Vega- wrote:

Oh, look, the guy that only uses his left brain is back. I bet he doesn't even use his heart intelligence. Lim, you are a pathetic fool.


A prime example of why we shouldn't involve the mass in matters of politics- if this fellow can't get basic anatomy correct (the heart is not an organ which actually possesses any cognitive powers, and therefore, intelligence), how can we expect him to get things pertaining to the good of the state correct? Therefore, it is evident that the only sensible system of governance is a monarchy.


First its important to understand that a governments purpose is to exercise control over the people. Most governments incorporate a representative democracy(or so people are taught to think). Of course fortunately where all different and have several theory's on how the world should work. This is why there are always conflicts involving policy change. one candidate or even a million candidates controlling a government couldn't possibly please everyone. Things aren't that black and white. Regardless of his expertise someone will always be on the opposing side of your ideal belief, Therefor a Monarchy government or authoritarian government would not be advised because no group of people; not even "professional statesmen" you love so much could please the nation without policies that enforce indoctrination and brainwashing(Ex. North Korea). In the world of Longfenglim this is a more effective government guys.

When it comes to dealing with the mistreatment of the minority votes in a direct democracy. Lets say a 10,000 national socialist vote for a law banning interracial marriage. The Majority votes in favor of any race getting married. Thats just how the cookie crumbles and if your view does oppose the majority than IT IS WRONG(social change can make it right, and thats up to the people).

"I should accept a law as binding on me if I agree to have that law binding on me, because, if, as Rousseau argues, that the General Will is always right, that would mean someone who is in a perpetual minority is always wrong, it is wrong to be Chinese- say-, it is wrong to believe in this, or believe in that, being a Jew is wrong, etc. There is no reason why I should have the will of the many overrule my own will" Longfenglim

Longfenglim..when it comes to being a minority(I'm Native American btw) it has nothing to do your view on things. Thats basically saying all "chinese" people think alike. Everyone is different and everyone has different opinions. Ethnicity is a social creation(not to confuse ethnicity with race.

"There is a myth that goes around in democracies, that people are all created equal in every respect, that blood, genes, and biology has nothing to do with their particular characteristics"


most people who think genetics is the deciding factor on how a individual will act believe in eugenics. If you want to believe in the same people who experimented on Jews in WWII..its a free country(unlike what you want). I don't know what school you went to but I was taught that were all different but regardless we can achieve the same success or more. I'm sure you stuck on your own opinions I feel no need to change them. I just don't want the filth you wrote to spread to young minds, we don't need to go back to the 1300s.
Posted 2/2/13
Power within anything is bad.
2743 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
14 / F / California
Offline
Posted 2/2/13
No, we will be in the most major debt EVER
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.