Big Government?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fbones24

Just for informational purposes, America has fallen into a democracy. This country was founded as a republic and the founding fathers were smart enough to know that democracies had failed previous civilizations. Unfortunately, America has become a democracy and the result is that 51% of the people can maintain power over the remaining 49%.

---

But with a two party system it's more like 3-5% of the people who tip the balance to one side or the other.

As far as republic vs. democracy goes I thought the elections couple of weeks ago were all about 'we the people' voting against all these democrats who were out of touch with us. Now we can finally move full throttle to the great national goal to enforce 1-term limit on the current president.

See one problem is that many people are quote easily manipulated. They don't really care about one ideology or another, so when the next incompetent/corrupt politician tells them to vote out the current one, they don't really care whether their new choice is actually a downgrade.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fbones24

Just for informational purposes, America has fallen into a democracy. This country was founded as a republic and the founding fathers were smart enough to know that democracies had failed previous civilizations. Unfortunately, America has become a democracy and the result is that 51% of the people can maintain power over the remaining 49%.

---

We still are, and have always been, a republic. It's not a democracy now and even if those numbers were correct, they only represent voters and not the population.

Government has long since shifted to be a security force over its citizens rather than a force for, by or to the citizenry. Growing government serves purpose to so many: recipients of government aid, politicians, government employees, government contract recipients and those that are able to use government on a grand scale as a force to control the populace.

According to the U.N. humans are a resource, one strand on a "web" of nature and no greater or more important than other strands of that web such as flora or fauna (check out the U.N.'s own Agenda 21, a blueprint for reallocating resources on a global level). Agenda 21 calls for relegating humans to "urban centers" and thus making it possible in the future to return much of the globe to a wild and natural state. An Eden for those with enough wealth or power in the future to be able to utilize it while others very well may not even be allowed access. Privately owned property is not compatible with plans in Agenda 21. Conspiracy talk? What power does the U.N. really have over the U.S.? "Smart Growth", "Sustainable Development" are terms/plans widely implemented on a worldwide level and have been for years. They're plans described in and implemented from Agenda 21.

That may seem off topic, but how could such a plan be accomplished without bigger and bigger government? Who, other than duped environmentalist radicals, would advocate such a change?

I absolutely laugh at pro-Marxist socialists who advocate power to the people and point to the oppression of a class system. I would challenge anyone who would disagree with what I believe to be fact that since the beginning of time, humans have always been divided between a ruling class and a class ruled. Always. Socialism, Communism, Fascism, etc are shams because they simply replace a wealthy ruling class with an historically vicious and genocidal ruling class within government. "Power to the people"? Give me a break. "Power to the people in power/government".


Chris L

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChrisL

Socialism, Communism, Fascism, etc are shams because they simply replace a wealthy ruling class with an historically vicious and genocidal ruling class within government. "Power to the people"? Give me a break. "Power to the people in power/government".

---

Ideals are not shams. The theory of communism is one thing, implementing it is another. The latter will always fail because of human nature, but that doesn't make the ideal any less interesting.

It's the power BEHIND the government that scares me.

The Brandenburg group and their power. They are working now to create a World Federal Reserve. Just to protect you of course!!! ha!

Land of OZ is good read.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by commiecat

Ideals are not shams. The theory of communism is one thing, implementing it is another. The latter will always fail because of human nature, but that doesn't make the ideal any less interesting.

---

+1, same with the ideal of democracy. :boohoo:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jeffegg2

The Brandenburg group

---

These people? Home*|*Home*-*Brandenburg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by commiecat

Ideals are not shams. The theory of communism is one thing, implementing it is another. The latter will always fail because of human nature, but that doesn't make the ideal any less interesting.

---

"com·mu·nism   
[kom-yuh-niz-uhm] Show IPA
–noun
1.
a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.
2.
( often initial capital letter ) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.
3.
( initial capital letter ) the principles and practices of the Communist party."

I would like to continue to own my property privately.
I also don't want "social activity controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party".
Therefore, for those reasons and the ones I've mentioned previously, I believe and stand by the ideal of communism as being a sham.

Chris L

I think communism is great. Everything is shared so all of you send me all your razors so I can share them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChrisL

"com·mu·nism   
[kom-yuh-niz-uhm] Show IPA
–noun
1.
a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.
2.
( often initial capital letter ) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.
3.
( initial capital letter ) the principles and practices of the Communist party."

I would like to continue to own my property privately.
I also don't want "social activity controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party".
Therefore, for those reasons and the ones I've mentioned previously, I believe and stand by the ideal of communism as being a sham.

Chris L

---

I don't think you're using the word 'sham' correctly:

Quote:

---

1sham noun \ˈsham\
Definition of SHAM

1: a trick that deludes : hoax <feared that the deal was a sham>
2: cheap falseness : hypocrisy <saw through the hollowness, the sham, the silliness of the empty pageant — Oscar Wilde>
3: an ornamental covering for a pillow
4: an imitation or counterfeit purporting to be genuine
5: a person who shams

---