Democracy Can Be Totalitarianist?

[cassanovafrankenstein]

Iconoclast wrote:

And, unlike you, I am in college.

Gosh. I'm impressed. How'd you manage that? Govt grants?

The best you can do is to call me a moron and an idiot. Ever hear of transference? Like I said, don't blame me for your shortcomings, I'm just pointing them out. With satisfaction.
So you're a physics genius huh? You do seem to be full of yourself. But I'll bet you got the question wrong about the grand unified theory.

I guess I will "debate" with you a little bit so nobody reads your post and gets confused.

Oh yeah, we sure don't want people here getting "confused".

You say the schools in the past were more exclusive and that was better because the great unwashed, lower-genetic, phrenetically-challenged masses just dragged everyone down? Sounds like a crapitalist to me. A selfish, greedy, piglet. I'll bet you ain't in a fraternity, you'd get your ass beat every night.
Here you are............


And here with the only ppl that'll hang with you......


You need to stop acting like you know American history. You know shit.
You're a poseur. Yeah, the founding fathers weren't "homogeneous" in belief, that's why their signatures appear at the bottom of America's beliefs.
They didn't BELIEVE in that stuff right? They just wanted to piss off the asshole, inbred, loopy King. Right.
All the city-states in the ancient world were constantly at each others throats, they were conquered numerous times all through history, and had no security or infrastructure, no set, fair legal system and no ability to advance the masses by widespread education beyond simple apprenticeships. There wasn't enough leisure time for the arts to develop, music and theater were pastimes of the rich...exclusively. Italy never amounted to shit until it became a country with a central govt.. Before that the vacuum was filled by the Church, and we all know how that worked out.
You're cool hand Luke out in the prison yard at 2am, digging that hole and fillin' it back in. You should quit while you're still able to generate pity.

This is where you are .......


Demockery wrote:

democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on whats for lunch.


liberty is a well armed sheep contesting the vote.

It seems like anarchy is much worse, and let's face it, America has advanced over the last hundred and 60 years, we have the capacity under a democracy to self-correct. It takes some time, it's slower than most of us would like, but eventually we throw off slavery, we increase tolerance, condemn bigotry and racism, regulate business, install safety nets for the less fortunate, improve working conditions. Sometimes the pendulum swings backward, like with this administration, but IMO we tend to take one step back and then 2 steps ahead. It's slow, but it beats any alternative. Socialist-democracy, like Europe. They've tried it for a long time and it works.
If I read you right, you're also saying as long as we remain armed we remain in ultimate control, but I don't agree.
That may have been true in the before-times, but with the modern military we have, the night-vision, non-lethal weapons, armor, choppers, drones, electronic surveillance, communications/sattellites, and sheer firepower, a populace with grenades, IED's and rifles isn't going to do more than be a major irritant. Of course, you could say that is a victory in itself, just surviving and continuing resistance, but ultimately the control and power will be with the govt as long as it controls the generals and troops. I don't think our military and officers would go along with total, brutal martial law. I could be wrong, but having been in the military for alot of years I don't see it as likely.

[Ry]

The form of government really doesn"t matter its the culture that matters. Democracies can be evil like the US and Israel or they can be peaceful like Northern Europe.

Its the corporatism and their ownership over the press that damn us all.

[Iconoclast]

You need to stop acting like you know American history. You know shit.
You're a poseur. Yeah, the founding fathers weren't "homogeneous" in belief, that's why their signatures appear at the bottom of America's beliefs.
They didn't BELIEVE in that stuff right? They just wanted to piss off the asshole, inbred, loopy King. Right.

"Compromise."

All the city-states in the ancient world were constantly at each others throats, they were conquered numerous times all through history, and had no security or infrastructure, no set, fair legal system and no ability to advance the masses by widespread education beyond simple apprenticeships.

You're right, minus the "no security". part. Nothing lasts forever, and who cares if there were constant scuffles? There were legal systems, though nothing moronically egalitarian. Widespread education for the masses is the last thing needed, when members of the slave caste such as yourself start using words to make yourself sound articulate when discussing "democracy" and "equality".

There wasn't enough leisure time for the arts to develop, music and theater were pastimes of the rich...exclusively.

The arts didn't develop? Are you fucking insane?

http://library.thinkquest.org/J002388/a ... onder.html

Also, for example, music was popular in ancient Sumer.

Italy never amounted to shit until it became a country with a central govt.. Before that the vacuum was filled by the Church, and we all know how that worked out.

You mean when the slaves started revolting and talking about "equality" and "their fair share"?

[Iconoclast]

It seems like anarchy is much worse, and let's face it, America has advanced over the last hundred and 60 years, we have the capacity under a democracy to self-correct. It takes some time, it's slower than most of us would like, but eventually we throw off slavery, we increase tolerance, condemn bigotry and racism, regulate business, install safety nets for the less fortunate, improve working conditions. Sometimes the pendulum swings backward, like with this administration, but IMO we tend to take one step back and then 2 steps ahead. It's slow, but it beats any alternative. Socialist-democracy, like Europe. They've tried it for a long time and it works.
If I read you right, you're also saying as long as we remain armed we remain in ultimate control, but I don't agree.
That may have been true in the before-times, but with the modern military we have, the night-vision, non-lethal weapons, armor, choppers, drones, electronic surveillance, communications/sattellites, and sheer firepower, a populace with grenades, IED's and rifles isn't going to do more than be a major irritant. Of course, you could say that is a victory in itself, just surviving and continuing resistance, but ultimately the control and power will be with the govt as long as it controls the generals and troops. I don't think our military and officers would go along with total, brutal martial law. I could be wrong, but having been in the military for alot of years I don't see it as likely.

Does anyone else get the impression that this sounds like neoconservative talk?

[cassanovafrankenstein]

I agree with Ry's statement.

iconoclast wrote:

Widespread education for the masses is the last thing needed, when members of the slave caste such as yourself start using words to make yourself sound articulate when discussing "democracy" and "equality".

Zeig heil.

The arts didn't develop? Are you fucking insane?

http://library.thinkquest.org/J002388/a ... onder.html

Also, for example, music was popular in ancient Sumer.

The arts didn't develop. Are you totally fucking ignorant? Who do you think the artists worked for?
Your link doesn't have any relevance to the issue. What are you smoking?
As for Sumer, your little tidbit doesn't have any relevance either. Making rebuttals with points that have no relevance seems to be a common tactic of the rubbernecks.

You mean when the slaves started revolting and talking about "equality" and "their fair share"?

Yup. Happened in France too. Russia, America...."demand" is a better word for it than "talked". Jimmy Hoffa said "If you want anything in this country you have to take it". He was right of course. Unions were the best thing to have happened to this country, and meeting force with force was the only way for them to have made headway in a rigged game. The worker has no advocate in dealing with management, only strength in numbers.

Does anyone else get the impression that this sounds like neoconservative talk?

No answer huh?
You truly are stoned.

[Iconoclast]

The arts didn't develop. Are you totally fucking ignorant? Who do you think the artists worked for?
Your link doesn't have any relevance to the issue. What are you smoking?
As for Sumer, your little tidbit doesn't have any relevance either. Making rebuttals with points that have no relevance seems to be a common tactic of the rubbernecks.

You're delusional.

You're of the parastic element of society. A correct governing structure would have killed you already for your slave mentality.

I'm going on a tangent to guess that you find abstract art enlightening?

[Iconoclast]

I think your myspace profile is hilarious, by the way.... http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:ad6 ... ient=opera

Fucking hilarious. What a loser.

[Demockery101]

Demockery wrote:

democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on whats for lunch.


liberty is a well armed sheep contesting the vote.

It seems like anarchy is much worse, and let's face it, America has advanced over the last hundred and 60 years, we have the capacity under a democracy to self-correct. It takes some time, it's slower than most of us would like, but eventually we throw off slavery, we increase tolerance, condemn bigotry and racism, regulate business, install safety nets for the less fortunate, improve working conditions. Sometimes the pendulum swings backward, like with this administration, but IMO we tend to take one step back and then 2 steps ahead. It's slow, but it beats any alternative. Socialist-democracy, like Europe. They've tried it for a long time and it works.
If I read you right, you're also saying as long as we remain armed we remain in ultimate control, but I don't agree.
That may have been true in the before-times, but with the modern military we have, the night-vision, non-lethal weapons, armor, choppers, drones, electronic surveillance, communications/sattellites, and sheer firepower, a populace with grenades, IED's and rifles isn't going to do more than be a major irritant. Of course, you could say that is a victory in itself, just surviving and continuing resistance, but ultimately the control and power will be with the govt as long as it controls the generals and troops. I don't think our military and officers would go along with total, brutal martial law. I could be wrong, but having been in the military for alot of years I don't see it as likely.

Your fallacious belief in the infalliablity of; and that all control therefore must be vested in a strong central government, is laughable in the least.

For starters, we live in a constitutional republic, not this mobocracy you speak of. Democracy is mob rule, thats the point of the franklin quote, you don't even seem to have a basic grasp of what he meant by that. Your structuralist mentality immediately told you to react to anything that is self-deterimed as "anarchy".

The most hilarious part about your entire rant is that you are seeking a socialist democracy, but are worried about the rampant firepower of our central governments military.

Look at britian and their precious socialist paradise, they are more surveillanced more controlled by horrible orwellian laws, they have a military that is only second to ours, and too boot, none of them can own any weapons to defend themselves.

It seems to me that you know shit about history in general.

Every population in a mondern country that have given up their right to have weapons, has eventually through the course of that country ended up being slaughtered like stupid fucking sheeple, either by outside forces, but more often from within.

[Iconoclast]

Also notice how she says that America has come a long way and has progressed but then points to the Founding Fathers as a great example of her "philosophy".

[cassanovafrankenstein]

Demockery wrote:

Your fallacious belief in the infalliablity of; and that all control therefore must be vested in a strong central government, is laughable in the least.

For starters, we live in a constitutional republic, not this mobocracy you speak of. Democracy is mob rule, thats the point of the franklin quote, you don't even seem to have a basic grasp of what he meant by that. Your structuralist mentality immediately told you to react to anything that is self-deterimed as "anarchy".

The most hilarious part about your entire rant is that you are seeking a socialist democracy, but are worried about the rampant firepower of our central governments military.

Look at britian and their precious socialist paradise, they are more surveillanced more controlled by horrible orwellian laws, they have a military that is only second to ours, and too boot, none of them can own any weapons to defend themselves.

It seems to me that you know shit about history in general.

Every population in a mondern country that have given up their right to have weapons, has eventually through the course of that country ended up being slaughtered like stupid fucking sheeple, either by outside forces, but more often from within.

Holy crap did you actually post that? Pull your head out of your ass, and wipe the shit out of your eyes, pissant. Every point you made about my posts and what they meant show that you're living in some theater-of-the-mind, like iconoclast. If you're gonna talk about what kind of govt we have, try sobering up, because when you shoot yer mouth off you make yourself look like a major dumbshit. Also, it helps to have a rudimentary knowlege of history and politics. Without that yer just a big, lip-flapping dildo. A wore out dildo, with scrape marks and bramble-stickers.
Here's some advice: Don't jump into a discussion while you're stoned and stupid. I realize that it's nigh impossible to embarrass a true loser, but you're wasting bandwidth, asshat.

Ummmmm.......Icoooooonooooclast.......

You're of the parastic element of society. A correct governing structure would have killed you already for your slave mentality.

I'm going on a tangent to guess that you find abstract art enlightening?

Just when I thought your posts couldn't possibly get more cretinous...you go and prove me wrong. But that's the only time you'll ever prove me wrong, when I underestimate your weirdness & jerkiness.
You've really overused the terms "slave" and "parasite"..mkay? They're meaningless in this context (as is everything you've posted) but it only adds to the comedy when you get stuck in metaphor-purgatory and convulse in paroxysms of mental-blocked prose-puking. Particularly when they suffer from "non-sequitor disease."
As a matter of fact, judging by your posts up to this point, if I were drunk and doing a 4-way hit of purple sunshine LSD it would make no difference in the context of this exchange, since I'd only be tuned to your mental frequency. Got it...Kenneth?
And BTW, I think it's cute that you're so infatuated with me that you'd go looking on MySpace (of all places) for a profile, but so-solly puppy dog, that ain't me. Didn't you notice the different name? If you want to see my profile, look up the film "Mystery Men" on IMDB.
Gawd, you are a dingbat.