Hi Motie >--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Sorry, Motie, but trust an American to see the whole complicated > > Swiss set-up in terms of guns, first and foremost. The Swiss > > certainly don't see it that way. I believe most Swiss would see >your > > comment on their democratic set-up as bizarre. I've spent time >there > > and never heard anyone even mentioning guns. > > Different perspectives entirely. How to explain? >How about if I told that the issue about guns, is not really about >guns, but about whether or not our Constitution really means >anything? It's just a piece of paper unless you have the means to >back it up.
Yes. That's the core issue, and it's a general issue, not just confined to the US. How do you defend democracy? And rights? But how much of the gun discussion in the US even touches on that anymore? (Don't answer! <g>) > > Same in Sweden, same in > > Holland, etc etc - they just don't talk about it, no big secret, of > > course defence is important but it's no big deal. The US gun issue > > doesn't exist there. But for you it's an issue. In fact the Swiss > > comparison is a most pertinent one in this discussion, if POC >hadn't > > made that point I would have. I'll make another one - the Swiss >have > > the oldest democracy in the world, and they modelled their modern > > constitution 150 years ago on that of the United States of America. > > So much of your guns debate has to do with the Constitution, >doesn't > > it? > > You have an amazing insight! It's ALL about the Constitution, and >the people who ignore it. The Bill of Rights in particular is being >ignored, with less pretense about it every day. From election fraud >to illegal searches of our homes and false arrests on bogus >violations, to Judges and Attorneys committing perjury in Court. We >are living in a Police State, and the world doesn't seem to know. >From Bill Clinton being aquitted for lying under Oath to a Judge, to >the extremely bold decision to allow the Democrats to put Trafficant >on the ballot in direct opposition to Election Law. Now the Homeland >Security Bill basically suspends our Constitution under Color of Law, >on top of the Patriot Act. How will guns help you there? > When the Nazis rounded up the Jews for their trip to the showers, >they were unable to resist. Another American who feels somewhat the same just told me he feels like he's living in Germany in the 1930s. >Some of us have decided that we won't >give up our defensive tools until we are out of ammo. Didn't the Taliban, for instance, also feel that way? No, not trying to stir it up at all, just trying to indicate that it might not help you much more than it helped them, should it ever come to that. > So, yes, it's about our Constitution! Well, have a look at what the Swiss have done with it - same bit of paper basically. > > Now, instead of looking at them through a US lens, try standing > > halfway between and making a less one-sided comparison. > >The Swiss leaders are abiding by their Constitution, so they haven't >a pressing concern about a need to defend themselves? Who's the president of Switzerland? The name doesn't spring immediately to mind, does it? Or maybe, does Switzerland have a president or a prime minister, or a chancellor, or what? No, I don't know either. I said this here recently: ""Switzerland, by the way, modelled its current federal constitution on the US, in 1848. Government there is a very local business, strictly bottom-up, the federal government is tiny and hardly seems to matter. There's no clear division between the governing party and the opposition." Local. It would seem the leaders, if that's quite the word (I think it isn't quite the word), don't have much choice but to abide by the consitution, and anyway nobody seems to take very much notice of them. I think one aspect of the teledemocracy James is proposing is that is could be local local local. > > PLEASE, this is NOT an invitation to dive head-first into a row, >nor > > even a discussion, about guns and America! Guns are a distraction > > from this issue, not relevant, and, whatever Americans might feel > > about it, believe me, the rest of us do not want such a discussion > > here. Please mark my words, I'll kill any guns thread immediately, > > moderator's action. > >I didn't really want to go there on this list, but felt obligated to >respond. This is my last mention of the topic. I was aware of that, it was a general warning rather than directed specifically at you. Anyway, Motie, you see teledemocracy = Direct Democracy = Mob Rule, the preferred alternative being the Rule of Law, and, what, the status quo? Somehow I don't think you're that happy with either of those. The bit above ending with the Patriot Act is either the Rule of Law at work or shows that it's a weakling, easily purloined. It also looks more than somewhat like what you have now is Mob Rule. Law and justice are not the same. That allegedly virginal and unraped lady in the white dress has a set of scales and a sword, usually a two-edged one that seems to cut a lot more with one edge than the other, and no wonder, since she's blindfold. Blind justice? I think what they meant, or should have meant, was impartial justice. Now how much of that do you find in the Rule of Law? And how does all this have a bearing on what's going on and not going on in your local forest? If not, why not? It's deadlocked. How to break the deadlock? What's befallen your own project looks to me like a good example of Mob Rule and the Rule of Law being available to the highest bidder. You might succeed in tipping those scales your way (not that the blind lady will even notice), but it shouldn't be happening in the first place. So much for business-as-usual when it comes to democracy. What democracy? What's better, to go on and on flogging a dead horse, or try something new? > > Keith > >Respectfully, Mutual. Regards Keith >Motie Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
