I'd say the political system makes it difficult for a lot of Americans to even relate, let alone get good representation..... for example....
George W. and his cabinet.... (This was from Adbusters...) Question: There are nineteen members of the Bush Administration cabinet. How many are millionaires? a) 5 b)10 c) 18 Answer: c) 18. And seven members of the cabinet are worth more than $10 Million. (I wonder if these people have a hard time relating to societies disadvantaged...) Benjamin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Will Swain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 4:02 AM Subject: RE: jihad for kids .. wheeee > Fair point that we are talking about apples and pears maybe, but how is > alienation a choice on the part of the alienated? > > The political system is failing poeple if they feel alienated from it. As > for your comment about not wanting everyone to vote, particularly less > educated poeple, I think that is a very very dangerous precedent to set for > obvious reasons. > > will > > by the way, I am thoroughly enjoying this debate. Thanks. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 18 February 2002 16:57 > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: jihad for kids .. wheeee > > > Will Mugabe be elected in a free electoral system where every person > qualified (based on a neutral qualification standard, such as age) is > allowed to vote, to vote secretly, and choose between candidates of > different opinions/stances/agendas? > > If we're going to compare elections, let's be sure we're comparing apples to > apples. > > As for America or Britain, alienation is a choice. A free choice. If people > choose not to vote, that has no bearing on the legitimacy of the election. > Hell, it enhances it. > > H. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Will Swain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 8:33 AM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: jihad for kids .. wheeee > > > I'm questioning the democractic nature of the US political system, and the > British one while I'm at it. I didn't think democracy was the voice of those > who don't feel so alienated by politics that they vote? Winning is the > mandate to rule you say? So when Mugabe wins that will be enough, he will > have a mandate to rule? > > will > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 18 February 2002 16:26 > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: jihad for kids .. wheeee > > > Winning is the mandate to rule. In a representative government, that's all > you need. > > Getting a majority of the votes (in a three-way election) is irrelevant. > Getting a majority of all registered voters is even more irrelevant. > > I don't really get you're point, however. What does this have to do with > democracies being careful? There is no democratic code that says all people > must vote. In fact, not voting is a form of voting. Furthermore, I don't > want all people to vote. Too many people who are ill-informed vote already > any way. Of course, that's their choice, but I don't believe democracy > suffers when people choose not to vote. The nice thing about a free society > is that you can choose not to participate in the civic process if that's > what floats your boat. People should be free to choose that option without > being made out to be cretins. > > H. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Will Swain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 2:25 AM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: jihad for kids .. wheeee > > > I see what you are saying but I do worry that there is a dangerous > undercurrent lurking in the background there. Like maybe we could just ask > them what they think about it? Otherwise it is simply a case of a dominant > culture imposing it's values on everyone else. Yes, it might be from the > best motivations, but I think you could see the arrogance there. > Furthermore, I think you are on very dangerous ground with your assertion > that "A government that is formed from a mandate from the masses (and not > from some farcical aquatic ceremony) is the only way to go." Again, imposing > a morality and world view on others. Who is to say that a benevolent > dictatorship is not a better way to live? > > Also, I think we who live in 'democratic' countries should be very careful. > After all, is it not true that less than half the population of the US voted > in the last election, and arguably less than half of those who did actually > voted for Bush? Hardly a mandate to rule? > > will > > -----Original Message----- > From: Lon Lentz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 15 February 2002 23:32 > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: jihad for kids .. wheeee > > > > I will never accept the premise that "correct" and "right" are > subjective. They are not. > > Killing is not necessarily wrong. Murder is wrong. Completely > different. If killing is "wrong", then why do we hire "cops", give them > badges and guns, and allow them to "kill" in our name? Why do we let the > state "kill" in our name? Why do we let the US military "kill" in our > name? There is no subjectiveness here. There is only absolute. > > I am not in anyway trying to suggest that we shove our western ideals > down their throats. A government that is formed from a mandate from the > masses (and not from some farcical aquatic ceremony) is the only way to > go. That is absolute. However they choose to do it. > > Proper human behavior is right and just. No matter where you live. No > matter what religion you follow. No matter your ethnic background. > > Would you suggest that the female castrations that go on in Africa, > could in some way, be "right" or "correct" for those people? I don't > care what kind of society they have, that is wrong. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: chris.alvarado [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 5:01 PM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: Re: jihad for kids .. wheeee > > > > > > no I'm suggesting exactly what I stated. > > > > Absolutes are absolutely wrong. > > > > case in point: > > > > Killing is wrong. > > > > Killing in self defense, is that wrong? > > > > most people would tend to say no, if the choice is kill or be killed, > and > > that is the only way, then killing in self defense is not "wrong", > which > > completely contradicts the first statement: 'killing is wrong'. > Killing is > > killing no matter how pretty you try to paint it. > > > > "right" and "wrong" is all a matter of perception. > > > > believing that something is right or wrong does not make it so. > > > > I believe that the events that occurred on 9/11 and some of the events > > thereafter were "wrong" but that does not make it universally so. > > > > Who put you, or me for that matter in charge of dictating what is > right or > > wrong? > > > > Freedom is not just about living the way you want to live, it is > > about being > > able to also acknowledge the way others choose to live whether you > agree > > with it or not. > > > > Unconventional thought? perhaps, but this country's ideals were > founded on > > what was considered to be unconventional / 'unpopular' thinking. > > > > in short, what is right for you, may not be right for others, I'm > > not saying > > that about freedom or any one thing in particular. I'm saying, in > general. > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
