Thread: Mans Intelligence

You have a good point. However, as long as we have the power to vote, we have the power to change what's happening.
What our government does is pretty transparent, as well as the powers it assumes.

As long as there are people like me watching the government, we are safe.
A key point here is that unlike the US system, we do not have a president whom everybody has to listen to. There is no highly centralized point of power that everybody aspires to, and there are more than 2 relevant parties.

I watch my government, and so far it has not assumed powers that it was not entitled to.

I was not going to write this because it might be considered provocative, but
A year ago, Turkey wanted Belgium to extradite a woman they said was a terrorist. No proof or evidence was supplied, and she had broken no Belgian laws. She had a shady past, but nothing to warrant an extradition so Belgium did the only thing it could legally do: keep an eye on her but refused to extradite.

Sometime later she fled the detail assigned to her and the government was criticised, but I was glad that Belgium had stood by its principles and by the constitution. Americans are fond of saying something like 'people who choose security over freedom deserved neither'.
Belgium made the right choice IMO.
Our government may make stupid decisions from time to time, but the constitution is still respected.

I fundamentally trust my government not to be evil because it has not given me any cause to.

I doubt the USA would have done the same thing. Despite the fact that you as an individual respect the constitution does not mean your government does.
Habeas corpus is suspended if you are a suspected terrorist. Recently the Us government assumed the right to freeze your assets indefinitely if you are a suspected terrorist, or if you deal with suspected terrorists. For all practical purposes a violation of the 5th amendement.
There is no right to a fair trial anymore. Instead you get a one-way ticket to some godforsaken country to be interrogated. And if those suspected terrorists are in another country, you can always charter a CIA plane to collect them despite the fact that such is in violation of international treaties.

You have cause not to trust your government. Every time the US administration takes away another of your fundamental freedoms, I wonder when the americans as a people will finally say 'enough' and take back those rights that are theirs by nature.

So no offense, but the fact that your government has proven to be untrustworthy does not mean that all governments are.

Originally Posted by Bruno

So no offense, but the fact that your government has proven to be untrustworthy does not mean that all governments are.

I never said that there were not governments that are trustworthy, but all governments bear watching.
My dog listens to everything I tell him. I say don't eat the food on the table and he doesn't, but once I'm not present the food and the dog mysteriously disappear!

Get my point?

Originally Posted by JMS

I never said that there were not governments that are trustworthy, but all governments bear watching.
My dog listens to everything I tell him. I say don't eat the food on the table and he doesn't, but once I'm not present the food and the dog mysteriously disappear!

Get my point?

I understand you perfectly.
My ancestors fought and died to get to vote and influence the government, and make it serve the people instead of the other way around.

I'll be dead in my grave before I let go of my responsibility to watch.
But I am willing to concede that it currently plays by the rules that were lined out in the beginning. And the only way to keep it like that is to be involved, as you say.

To extend you metaphor, my dog is currently leaving the food alone, while you have to start chasing yours if you want to have any chance of catching it before you lose all hope of recovering your dinner

sorry.

Originally Posted by Bruno

I understand you perfectly.
My ancestors fought and died to get to vote and influence the government, and make it serve the people instead of the other way around.

I'll be dead in my grave before I let go of my responsibility to watch.
But I am willing to concede that it currently plays by the rules that were lined out in the beginning. And the only way to keep it like that is to be involved, as you say.

To extend you metaphor, my dog is currently leaving the food alone, while you have to start chasing yours if you want to have any chance of catching it before you lose all hope of recovering your dinner

sorry.

Touche!

I agree that one dodgy government does not a dodgy country make. But sometimes it can be difficult to either (1) Get that Govt. out of power in a system like Australia's (two - term limit in the US?) and/or (2) Realise the govt. is dodgy.

I'm going to come right out and say that I LOATHE the Howard govt. in Australia. They've proven difficult to get out of power (11-12 years now, I think). One reason is an ineffective opposition party; the other is that this govt. has a knack of playing on the fears of Australians (interest rates, immigration, refugees etc.)

They've also, IMHO, whittled away at our civil liberites and social systems slowly and unobtrusively, to the point where I believe we are no longer the "lucky country", at least not in the sense we once were. The public, as a general mass, have not seemed to notice

It's lead me to think that, given the "right" (or should that be "wrong") circumstances, a democratic system can break down and allow insidious erosion of freedoms and rights. Social commentators can point these things out, but if you're more worried about your mortgage, who are you going to listen to: the guy that says "freedom of speach is being seriously threatened with this new legislation" or the guy that says "under my government interest rates will stay low"? Australia, at least, has already given its answer, several times, at the polls

Here endeth the rant.

James.

Originally Posted by Jimbo

I agree that one dodgy government does not a dodgy country make. But sometimes it can be difficult to either (1) Get that Govt. out of power in a system like Australia's (two - term limit in the US?) and/or (2) Realise the govt. is dodgy.

I think that this is where we have more power than most countries.
We have a true multiparty system with several large players, and several smaller players that can make a difference as well.

If a party is caught doing naughty things, they get hurt come next election. As a result, they will not be part of the next coalition, because other parties will be bigger players.

So parties can be hurt for a long time.
With only 2 parties, there is not much you can do. either it's one or the other, and there is no hope for newcomers to win any significance.

Originally Posted by Jimbo

I'm going to come right out and say that I LOATHE the Howard govt. in Australia. They've proven difficult to get out of power (11-12 years now, I think). One reason is an ineffective opposition party; the other is that this govt. has a knack of playing on the fears of Australians (interest rates, immigration, refugees etc.)



James.

I think I've read that Australia has fairly strict immigration policies --- is this true James? Does Australia have a history of isolation and traditionaly fears anything that can change that? Just some questions

Justin

Originally Posted by jaegerhund

I think I've read that Australia has fairly strict immigration policies --- is this true James? Does Australia have a history of isolation and traditionaly fears anything that can change that? Just some questions

Justin

Yes, fairly strict. In the early days we had an open door policy, particularly for european immigrants like Brits, Italians etc. and that IMO has made our country what it is today.

Nowadays the worry is not so much immigration as refugees aka "illegal immigrants" (OK, that's a little inaccurate, but appears to be the government's definition)- we have several "holding facilities" (e.g. Naru) where captured refugees can be held while they are processed.

But I'd say, in light of contemporary events around terrorism and so on, we've retreated into a shell, probably like most places.

James.

Originally Posted by Jimbo

Yes, fairly strict. In the early days we had an open door policy, particularly for european immigrants like Brits, Italians etc. and that IMO has made our country what it is today.

Nowadays the worry is not so much immigration as refugees aka "illegal immigrants" (OK, that's a little inaccurate, but appears to be the government's definition)- we have several "holding facilities" (e.g. Naru) where captured refugees can be held while they are processed.

But I'd say, in light of contemporary events around terrorism and so on, we've retreated into a shell, probably like most places.

James.

Yeah it's understandable --- thanks

Justin

Originally Posted by Bruno

I fundamentally trust my government not to be evil because it has not given me any cause to.

I doubt the USA would have done the same thing. Despite the fact that you as an individual respect the constitution does not mean your government does.
Habeas corpus is suspended if you are a suspected terrorist. Recently the Us government assumed the right to freeze your assets indefinitely if you are a suspected terrorist, or if you deal with suspected terrorists. For all practical purposes a violation of the 5th amendement.
There is no right to a fair trial anymore. Instead you get a one-way ticket to some godforsaken country to be interrogated. And if those suspected terrorists are in another country, you can always charter a CIA plane to collect them despite the fact that such is in violation of international treaties.

You have cause not to trust your government. Every time the US administration takes away another of your fundamental freedoms, I wonder when the americans as a people will finally say 'enough' and take back those rights that are theirs by nature.

So no offense, but the fact that your government has proven to be untrustworthy does not mean that all governments are.

Americans don't distrust our government because it has some history of abusing its power, but because it is a fundamental American thing --- a reaction to the abuses of European governments of the time. The men who wrote our constitution tried to create a small government of the people and created a bill of rights to keep it that way ---- to distrust government is American --- the proverbial hillbilly sitting on his porch, holding a shotgun, and saying mind your own business , with a distrust of others and the government is American ---- maybe a trust of government is European? Maybe because Europeans have a limited living space and limited resources (some resources) that the collective, support the group, let's get along at all costs, mentality developed. Our distrust of government has little to do with modern times and post 911 regulations ---it's in our blood.

When I go see my sister in central Texas --- she has 20 acres of land ---I like to sit on a chair and look out for miles and miles with no one around -- no one to bother me - and I get a surge of independence --- that's American to me --- can you do that in Belgium? ---- can you live where no one is around? --- you don't want that feeling of independence to be taken away ---- and an imposing government is such a thing that can take it away. Well, if you can understand that then you understand the origins of an Americans distrust for government --- I think it's really that simple: mind your business, leave me alone, get off my land, get out of my way, ---- of course that is a traditional American view, there are plenty of Americans who would like to change the U.S. into Europe and/or Canada -- they think it's just so primitive to keep behaving like a bunch of individualistic, land hoarding, government hating hillbillies --


Justin