or perhaps they invented democracy just for this purpose.
A good government should take into account the opinions of dissidents. Supreme court rulings are full of dissents and are equally quoted along with the verdicts. It is just a matter that a choice must be made by society, and society by large chooses majority rule with provision for dissenting voices to be heard.
I am surprised how some people in this forum whine so much whenever they read posts that do not conform with their closed minds.
You deserve the country you have, honestly.
I take having a “closed mind” to mean affirming the existence of objective ethics and denying the relevance of subjective ones.
At any rate, you completely ignored Juan’s challenge; how can a government legitimately make decisions for people who do not consent to their ruling?
Ruben, you just keep on refusing to give a honest and straight answer. Only 60 millions voted for obama. Why should the 240 millions who didn’t vote for him be bounded by whatever deranged decisions he comes up with ?
Let me remind you about your clever political philosophy : everybody is entitled to have ‘opinions’ and there are no right or wrong opinions.
Why is that politicians have the right to give orders to their subjects ? Is it a fact that politicians give orders and jail dissidents ? Or is just an opinion ?
You told me I shouldn’t judge people, while judging me. By definition, that action is hypocritical; please note, I said action, not you as a person, as i know nothing about you other than your words & actions on this forum.
That you continue to make an argument out of something which ,essentially, amounts to me not agreeing with you, is only reinforcing my opinion of you being a bit childish as not unjustified (note: not necessarily correct, but not an unreasonable perception, either).
Essentially, while you think my passing observation is wrong, in my perception, your continued actions, to me, say otherwise. I believe this falls under the category of constructive criticism, not libel.
I do not apologize for having an opinion. I still think you are over-reacting.
1.) “Yelling” was an exageration, similar to your call of “what’s with all the name calling?” is an exaggeration.
2.) I’m not threatened at all by you, nor do I have some type of comfort zone on this forum. Your attempt to paint me as some unreasonable, older use talking down to a newer user is odd & unwarrented.
3.) I do not have a “college edumacation” either (incomplete one, actually).
Is it that bad or wrong to stick up for myself? People disagree all the time.
“The gun” was referrence to a phrase “the gun in the room”. I essentially said, nothing sort of physical force would stop me judging you or others, & if said physical force did not infact kill me, I would continue to judge. Basically: “make me stop judging you, or anyone else.”
Odd; in all of this pointless argument that you desire to continue, I’ve never once said “stop judging me”. Why is that?
I will judge whomever I want and/or need to. If I didn’t judge anything at all in life, I would not be here, let alone anywhere else.
Additionally, if you desire to continue this, I suggest you message me instead, because the argument is fragmenting the thread itself. There is no guarantee I will respond, however, as I view this argument as largely a personal one, on your part, that has run it’s course.
Bingo.
This can’t be answered objectively by a statist. They can only answer it with subjectivity and obfuscation.
I am extremely proud of my country. I am proud of its history, I am proud of its culture of inclusion (until recently), I am proud of our sense of humor. I am proud of its climate and its natural scenary.
Of course I deserve the country I have. I have lived abroad many times and I have always returned to my beloved homeland.
I have disagreements with the system of government exactly as all of you have with your own countries and governments.
I am also against jailing dissidents. It is an obvious and unfortunate fact.
Is being intellectually honest that difficult? Why do you even bother posting?
For our sakes please remove yourself from these forums.
“Intellectally honest” sounds very vague to me. I bother posting for the same reason than you do, because I want to.
I am not to be coerced by you to remove myself. That is an attempt against my own freedom.
Then you’re a fool. A country is nothing more than lines on a map, decided by for the good of our masters.
No you don’t. The vast majority of us are sincere anti - statists, you simple are not anti state in the slightest. You say you detest Chaves and yet you are hysterical about the American version of him. What I meant when I said you deserve the country you have is that you deserve the state you have, and you deserve any burdens your leaders put on you.
Well, it’s easy. Juan made a post which you were unable to answer it and rather than admit the flaws in your ideology you dodged it.
I’m not coercion you, I’m advising you.
You don’t have freedom here, just as much as you don’t have freedom in the owner of this sites house.
I’d guess that he’d simply like to see a straightforward answer to one of the many unambiguous questions which have been put forth in this thread.
For example: Why do politicians, or state employees in general, have powers that we may not have? How is this justified?
Well, Obama and Chávez are not the same at all. Chávez promtes exclusion, Obama promotes inclusion.
Do you have any suggestions on how to remove countries from existence and removing lines from maps, practically. I read here lots of theory and an utter failure to propose any viable solutions whatsoever.
If there is anything I learned from anglo-saxon culture while I lived abroad, was to concentrate on practical issues instead of theoretical theses than often lead nowhere in the real world.
Of course I have freedom here. I have been able to post anything I have wanted so far. The owner of this site gave me permission to do so when I first enrolled.
Society decided through its cultural exchanges to grant such powers.
Society is a collective. It can’t act to grant anyone powers. Only people can act. Most people decide to grant government those powers and the others are coerced into being ruled by them.
Who is society? What gives another group of people, either my ancestors or other citizens, the right to decide to grant powers over me, if I do not agree? Am I not sovereign?
Okay, so how does my society get them back?