The Big Bad Politics Thread Returns

The Hunter

The Hunter

Border Hopping Taco Bender
Retired Staff
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Discuss all things generally political. Talk about political alignments, political concerns, etc.

I've spent a lot more time than I needed to observing politics from both ends of the spectrum (well, both ends that really get any votes in the end). These days, I lean more towards the Democratic side, but I wouldn't mind voting for a Republican if they stopped being awful (it'll take a while, but I'm sure someone will come along on a Republican platform and manage to not be a piece of crap). Some of the more important political topics for me include the legalization of gay marriage, awareness of global warming, 2nd amendment rights (that topic being too thorough for me to explain right now), and environmental conservation.

I think the whole federalism thing is working out for the US. Unitary system and confederate are flawed IMO and would have more negative consequences than positive should they be implemented in the US. Although both of those sound like they could work on a smaller scale. As diverse as the states are, I don't think they should be run differently from other states nor should they have more power than the federal government. With that said, the federal government shouldn't have more power over the states. It's been working for over 200 years. Why change it?

That's all that's really on my mind right now. What about you guys?
 
Ha ha ha, what a story Sassy. I vote for candidate who loves others. If a lot of people love each other, the waruld would be a better place to live.
 
The Hunter said:
Discuss all things generally political. Talk about political alignments, political concerns, etc.

I've spent a lot more time than I needed to observing politics from both ends of the spectrum (well, both ends that really get any votes in the end). These days, I lean more towards the Democratic side, but I wouldn't mind voting for a Republican if they stopped being awful (it'll take a while, but I'm sure someone will come along on a Republican platform and manage to not be a piece of crap). Some of the more important political topics for me include the legalization of gay marriage, awareness of global warming, 2nd amendment rights (that topic being too thorough for me to explain right now), and environmental conservation.

I think the whole federalism thing is working out for the US. Unitary system and confederate are flawed IMO and would have more negative consequences than positive should they be implemented in the US. Although both of those sound like they could work on a smaller scale. As diverse as the states are, I don't think they should be run differently from other states nor should they have more power than the federal government. With that said, the federal government shouldn't have more power over the states. It's been working for over 200 years. Why change it?

That's all that's really on my mind right now. What about you guys?
Click to expand...

As someone who has given much of a fuck about politics for far too long, I can say this:

Quit caring, because nothing that you or I say or do is going to matter for fuck all to the people who actually make the decisions to which the rest of us are subject.

Additionally, and perhaps fortunately, the status quo vis-a-vis American politics is here to stay, because the Republicans are absolutely intransigent, and simply won't act as honest brokers in any process of compromise. I have a firm belief that the 2nd amendment is one of the most fundamental rights afforded to the citizenry, and the reactionary bullshit from Democrats (WHARRGARBL! BAN ALL GUNS!) every time some crazy dickhead goes on a killing spree makes me quite glad that there is political opposition to that particular pet issue of the Left.

OK, enough pontificating, for now. More to come, later.
 
I believe the system in general is broken. It's more about politicking and running campaigns as opposed to actually contributing.
 
Sometimes I wonder what it would be like if we didn't have capitalism.. Would the US be better off with a more communist economic system?

And don't go saying that communism brings dictators and oppression.. Even in Capitalist America, life is still pretty bad. You have dirty dealing politicians, corrupt corporations who manipulate the government to their advantage to get their own way, and of course, endless greed. People in a capitalist nation don't learn to appreciate what they have, instead always whining and craving more and MORE, even when they already live pretty nice lives.

I'm not saying I'm a mega communist. I'm just saying that I think a system where people don't have to worry about starving or dying of sickness, as well as having everything they need to live a happy life without having too much so they learn to appreciate what they have (After all, do you really need to have 50 pairs of shoes or a sports car?) to be a nice idea.

It's a shame it's too late to implement it now, though. It would take a long time to refine it till it was just right, and with the nature of humans, It would fall apart before it would even be set up.
 
renomakicwc said:
It's a shame it's too late to implement it now, though. It would take a long time to refine it till it was just right, and with the nature of humans, It would fall apart before it would even be set up.
Click to expand...

Pretty much. The thing about communism is is that it would involve having a really, really strong government before it reaches the communist ideal...and it never gets past that initial stage.
 
Niachu said:
renomakicwc said:
It's a shame it's too late to implement it now, though. It would take a long time to refine it till it was just right, and with the nature of humans, It would fall apart before it would even be set up.
Click to expand...

Pretty much. The thing about communism is is that it would involve having a really, really strong government before it reaches the communist ideal...and it never gets past that initial stage.
Click to expand...
True communism's a weak system and about as flawed as capitalism. Politicians are just as easy to corrupt in communism, if not easier. Socialism, on the other hand, works, as does a mixed economy, in my opinion, anyways. Actually, my brother actually made a really cute comic about dogs and calculus and in the process showed how complete and total equality (in terms of salary and what not) doesn't really work. In the end, I'd rather stick with what we have going right now. Total reform is a hard task to achieve in less than 8 years, which is why only two parties can really be taken into account in American politics. In case you didn't know, the reason why people object to having Greens or Libertarians in office is because the current American laws are practically made for the Republicans and Democrats. If a Libertarian was to take office, they'd have to spend more time trying to implement new laws than actually doing anything in office. Hell, look at how long it took to get the PPACA (Obamacare) approved.
 
It's a shame most people hate socialism. If it weren't for the negative past it had, I bet the common man wouldn't be as against it.

But no, like communism, everyone views it like it's fascism.
 
renomakicwc said:
It's a shame most people hate socialism. If it weren't for the negative past it had, I bet the common man wouldn't be as against it.

But no, like communism, everyone views it like it's fascism.
Click to expand...
Socialism isn't a bad system at all. Sure, it's interchangeable with communism, but they're not the exact same thing. For example, Canada has a lot of socialist influence, but doesn't take it to an extreme, and as a result, the country manages to have a stable economy, allowing for things such as universal healthcare (its population also contributes to that). North Korea, on the other hand (a country with a lower population than Canada) has extreme socialist policies, taking it as close to true communism as possible. They have a malevolent dictator who brainwashes his people to not question their system, and a huge number of people are starving over there. However, I think we can all say that North Korea is just fucking nuts. If you'd like a better example of communism's flaws, look at Cuba. Go ahead, ask any Cuban what they think of Castro. And you should probably know that Che Guevara isn't exactly revered over there...

But yeah, socialism is a good system for small countries. With a smaller population, it is easier to achieve direct democracy, and with a larger, a republic works better.
 
The Hunter said:
renomakicwc said:
It's a shame most people hate socialism. If it weren't for the negative past it had, I bet the common man wouldn't be as against it.

But no, like communism, everyone views it like it's fascism.
Click to expand...
Socialism isn't a bad system at all. Sure, it's interchangeable with communism, but they're not the exact same thing. For example, Canada has a lot of socialist influence, but doesn't take it to an extreme, and as a result, the country manages to have a stable economy, allowing for things such as universal healthcare (its population also contributes to that). North Korea, on the other hand (a country with a lower population than Canada) has extreme socialist policies, taking it as close to true communism as possible. They have a malevolent dictator who brainwashes his people to not question their system, and a huge number of people are starving over there. However, I think we can all say that North Korea is just fucking nuts. If you'd like a better example of communism's flaws, look at Cuba. Go ahead, ask any Cuban what they think of Castro. And you should probably know that Che Guevara isn't exactly revered over there...

But yeah, socialism is a good system for small countries. With a smaller population, it is easier to achieve direct democracy, and with a larger, a republic works better.
Click to expand...

Wait, does that mean I'm part socialist?

Wow, I never knew that. And I do like the system too. Nothing like knowing you can get the care you need without having to hack off an arm and a leg. But at the same time... It's barely noticeable.

I guess Canada does it right, I suppose.
 
Socialism isn't a bad system at all. Sure, it's interchangeable with communism, but they're not the exact same thing.
Click to expand...
As for communism, many people using this term indetify it with political system of the countries of Soviet bloc. But regardless of ideological matters, it wasn't a communism at all- you could say it was some bad kind of socialism, but not communism. One of characteristics of communist society is that there's no money and state- and these things surely remained in all these countries.

For example, Canada has a lot of socialist influence
Click to expand...
It depends on what do you mean by socialism.

I have a firm belief that the 2nd amendment is one of the most fundamental rights afforded to the citizenry, and the reactionary bullshit from Democrats (WHARRGARBL! BAN ALL GUNS!) every time some crazy dickhead goes on a killing spree makes me quite glad that there is political opposition to that particular pet issue of the Left.
Click to expand...
The people who just want to ban all the guns away are naive ones, believing that state has some magical power- it will just cast some spell and a trouble (in this case- shootings) will disappear. Not that those who genuinely want to shoot people will always find ways to get firearms...
Also, they certainly haven't read some Macchiavelli. New prince never disarms his people, because it would show that he distrusts them, and even gives arms to those who weren't armed before.
 
The societies that have thrived have been the ones with mixed economies.

Any that have tried to do Karl Marx have failed. It's pretty much not a serious debate as of 1991.
 
It's rather the Leninist branch of Marxism that failed, and everything which spawned from it . Marx himself would disapprove of militarist state in which working classes are still exploited but this time by caste of bureaucrats. If you speak of mixed economy, social democrats who are in favour of such also have Marxists influences (it depends on what do you mean by Marxism, because one can agree with Marx's philosophy and analysis of capitalism but disagree with political doctrine- like Bakunin, who admitted Marx's superiority in the former but fiercely fought with him over the necessity of transitory period between capitalism and stateless egalitarian society).
 
Hasharin said:
It's rather the Leninist branch of Marxism that failed, and everything which spawned from it . Marx himself would disapprove of militarist state in which working classes are still exploited but this time by caste of bureaucrats. If you speak of mixed economy, social democrats who are in favour of such also have Marxists influences (it depends on what do you mean by Marxism, because one can agree with Marx's philosophy and analysis of capitalism but disagree with political doctrine- like Bakunin, who admitted Marx's superiority in the former but fiercely fought with him over the necessity of transitory period between capitalism and stateless egalitarian society).
Click to expand...

Well, okay, I mean any country that has tried a command economy as outlined by Marx has failed. His economic views just didn't work. I thought this was old news?
 
trombonista said:
Hugo Chavez died.

I guess Maduro will become the new president.
Click to expand...

He will. For 30 days, at least, then we'll see. If I had to guess, I would say he gets elected in his own right due to the sympathy factor. Then six years from now Caprilles wins.

Just a guess though! :)
 
Holdek said:
Hasharin said:
It's rather the Leninist branch of Marxism that failed, and everything which spawned from it . Marx himself would disapprove of militarist state in which working classes are still exploited but this time by caste of bureaucrats. If you speak of mixed economy, social democrats who are in favour of such also have Marxists influences (it depends on what do you mean by Marxism, because one can agree with Marx's philosophy and analysis of capitalism but disagree with political doctrine- like Bakunin, who admitted Marx's superiority in the former but fiercely fought with him over the necessity of transitory period between capitalism and stateless egalitarian society).
Click to expand...

Well, okay, I mean any country that has tried a command economy as outlined by Marx has failed. His economic views just didn't work. I thought this was old news?
Click to expand...
Last time i checked Laissez-faire capitalism, the free market, consumerism and globalization weren't doing so well at the moment either. ;)
 
Last time i checked Laissez-faire capitalism, the free market, consumerism and globalization weren't doing so well at the moment either.
Click to expand...
Well, apparently that Holdek believes in mixed economy, not the old school unrestrained capitalism.

Also, going back to the former discussion, I'm not expert on Marx but I highly doubt he would ever approve of Soviet-style centrally planned economy (and not because he'd want to be not associated with such failure ;)). Not in the later period of his life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back