Adamski said, Writer - this list of countries. US INTERVENTION OR NOT? Hoe about a list of foreign aid to countries who have experienced pandemics or earthquake, or Tsunami disasters. Who is first on the scene?Writer. You are a shocker First, I would appreciate to be addressed properly. It's a sign of sloppy reading or disrespect on your part. No, I am a realist. There is no perfect world and as long as we are adding 100 million people to the world's population every year the need and competition for resources will increase at an exponential rate. It's a mathematical certainty. But I wonder if you are familiar with the Exponential Function. I doubt it.
Adamski said, Writer - this list of countries. US INTERVENTION OR NOT? Hoe about a list of foreign aid to countries who have experienced pandemics or earthquake, or Tsunami disasters. Who is first on the scene?Writer. You are a shocker First, I would appreciate to be addressed properly. It's a sign of sloppy reading or disrespect on your part. No, I am a realist. There is no perfect world and as long as we are adding 100 million people to the world's population every year the need and competition for resources will increase at an exponential rate. It's a mathematical certainty. But I wonder if you are familiar with the Exponential Function. I doubt it. Why would there by war under socialism realist??
Adamski said, Writer - this list of countries. US INTERVENTION OR NOT? Hoe about a list of foreign aid to countries who have experienced pandemics or earthquake, or Tsunami disasters. Who is first on the scene?Writer. You are a shocker First, I would appreciate to be addressed properly. It's a sign of sloppy reading or disrespect on your part. No, I am a realist. There is no perfect world and as long as we are adding 100 million people to the world's population every year the need and competition for resources will increase at an exponential rate. It's a mathematical certainty. But I wonder if you are familiar with the Exponential Function. I doubt it. Why would there by war under socialism realist?? As far as I know, there has never been any form of government that has not been at war, at some time, for various reasons. As humanist I personally abhor war or violence for any reason. But in large societies which have freedom of expression there are always some people who for various reason believe they have the right to try and impose their power by violence to obtain their desired goals. And the more power or wealth they wield the greater their confidence that they can impose their will by force. This is a problem in any society. It seems part of the human condition. You yourself are calling for a worker's uprising and I am sure you believe in your cause and would like to see that be a peaceful effort. But can you guarantee that such an uprising would not result in violence among factions who have opposite views ? The beauty of our system is that the population has the right to vote at regular intervals for those they want to represent them, either at the local, county, state, or federal level. And it is important to know that since the civil war which in part was to enforce the principle that "all persons are created equal", our change in government has always been through a peaceful transition, through the voting system. No coups, no armed insurrections. OTOH, there have been some assassinations or attempted assassinations by criminally deranged individuals. But this is not the fault of the system of government or the principles on which this nation is founded. The system has inherent checks and balances to prevent the unrestricted imposition of power on the population. IMO, the single change I would like to see is the modification of the unrestricted accumulation of wealth, which can be accomplished by peaceful means. If I were to advocate for change, I would propose a limit on the unrestricted accumulation of wealth, which is an undesired side-effect of the very freedoms that are granted to individual entrepreneurs. It tends to allow for an unbalanced distribution of the nation's common resources. But that can be remedied through legislation and by the selection of honorable representatives, and history has shown that both of the two main parties have been in power, from Liberal Democrats to Conservative Republicans, including some Independent voices such as Bernie Sanders, who is a declared Socialist, but always within the limits of the Constitution. There is nothing wrong with the system, but there will always be individuals or corporations and even some representatives who have taken advantage of the system's freedoms....difference. Those problems can be addressed through voting-in the right representatives by an "informed public". There is no need for an "uprising", except in the form peaceful protest and selection of the right persons to represent the "wishes" of the general public in congress. You only need to look at the variety of cultures and races living peacefully together. As far I know the US is the country with the most diverse population and cultural freedoms on earth. This is a good thing. I believe one of the crowning moments in our history is our election of an African American as President and the profound statement by Michelle Obama that she now lived in the House her slave ancestors built. That is a clear example of true social progress which was and is made possible by the fundamental principles of our form of government. And one example of our beneficial international interference in the cause of justice was our involvement in the democratization of South Africa. Sure, no government is free from crime or corruption, but that is not a reflection of the system itself. Inequities are slowly disappearing. For some this beneficial change may seem too slow, but an orderly society of hundreds of millions of people is never achieved by violent revolution. It requires careful deliberation and assurance that any change applies equally to all citizens. That was the vision of the founding fathers, and it is still a work in progress. This the beauty of our system of government. It allows for peaceful change, even as this change may come slowly. There is nothing wrong with the Constitution and Bill of Rights. It is individuals or greed of large corporation that try to pervert our freedoms. But as long as we are afforded the opportunity to bring about change through an honest voting system, this country is on the right path, IMO. Freedom is a double edged sword and a freedom of expression and a free press to inform the citizenry is a crucial part of using this freedom for dissemination of factual information instead of government controlled propaganda.
Adamski said, Writer - this list of countries. US INTERVENTION OR NOT? Hoe about a list of foreign aid to countries who have experienced pandemics or earthquake, or Tsunami disasters. Who is first on the scene?Writer. You are a shocker First, I would appreciate to be addressed properly. It's a sign of sloppy reading or disrespect on your part. No, I am a realist. There is no perfect world and as long as we are adding 100 million people to the world's population every year the need and competition for resources will increase at an exponential rate. It's a mathematical certainty. But I wonder if you are familiar with the Exponential Function. I doubt it. Why would there by war under socialism realist?? As far as I know, there has never been any form of government that has not been at war, at some time, for various reasons. As humanist I personally abhor war or violence for any reason. But in large societies which have freedom of expression there are always some people who for various reason believe they have the right to try and impose their power by violence to obtain their desired goals. And the more power or wealth they wield the greater their confidence that they can impose their will by force. This is a problem in any society. It seems part of the human condition. You yourself are calling for a worker's uprising and I am sure you believe in your cause and would like to see that be a peaceful effort. But can you guarantee that such an uprising would not result in violence among factions who have opposite views ? The beauty of our system is that the population has the right to vote at regular intervals for those they want to represent them, either at the local, county, state, or federal level. And it is important to know that since the civil war which in part was to enforce the principle that "all persons are created equal", our change in government has always been through a peaceful transition, through the voting system. No coups, no armed insurrections. OTOH, there have been some assassinations or attempted assassinations by criminally deranged individuals. But this is not the fault of the system of government or the principles on which this nation is founded. The system has inherent checks and balances to prevent the unrestricted imposition of power on the population. IMO, the single change I would like to see is the modification of the unrestricted accumulation of wealth, which can be accomplished by peaceful means. If I were to advocate for change, I would propose a limit on the unrestricted accumulation of wealth, which is an undesired side-effect of the very freedoms that are granted to individual entrepreneurs. It tends to allow for an unbalanced distribution of the nation's common resources. But that can be remedied through legislation and by the selection of honorable representatives, and history has shown that both of the two main parties have been in power, from Liberal Democrats to Conservative Republicans, including some Independent voices such as Bernie Sanders, who is a declared Socialist, but always within the limits of the Constitution. There is nothing wrong with the system, but there will always be individuals or corporations and even some representatives who have taken advantage of the system's freedoms....difference. Those problems can be addressed through voting-in the right representatives by an "informed public". There is no need for an "uprising", except in the form peaceful protest and selection of the right persons to represent the "wishes" of the general public in congress. You only need to look at the variety of cultures and races living peacefully together. As far I know the US is the country with the most diverse population and cultural freedoms on earth. This is a good thing. I believe one of the crowning moments in our history is our election of an African American as President and the profound statement by Michelle Obama that she now lived in the House her slave ancestors built. That is a clear example of true social progress which was and is made possible by the fundamental principles of our form of government. And one example of our beneficial international interference in the cause of justice was our involvement in the democratization of South Africa. Sure, no government is free from crime or corruption, but that is not a reflection of the system itself. Inequities are slowly disappearing. For some this beneficial change may seem too slow, but an orderly society of hundreds of millions of people is never achieved by violent revolution. It requires careful deliberation and assurance that any change applies equally to all citizens. That was the vision of the founding fathers, and it is still a work in progress. This the beauty of our system of government. It allows for peaceful change, even as this change may come slowly. There is nothing wrong with the Constitution and Bill of Rights. It is individuals or greed of large corporation that try to pervert our freedoms. But as long as we are afforded the opportunity to bring about change through an honest voting system, this country is on the right path, IMO. Freedom is a double edged sword and a freedom of expression and a free press to inform the citizenry is a crucial part of using this freedom for dissemination of factual information instead of government controlled propaganda. You and live in a Bourgeois democracy. It must be overthrown
Adanski: You and live in a Bourgeois democracy. It must be overthrown
Ok, you start.
Adanski: You and live in a Bourgeois democracy. It must be overthrown Ok, you start.You're not a player?
Adanski: You and live in a Bourgeois democracy. It must be overthrown Ok, you start.You're not a player? I hope your are just a propagandist. If you are an actual player, you are dangerous to the principles on which this Democratic Republic is founded. If you want to be a good player, play by the rules and vote!
Why is it that it’s always the fault of western powers that there is so much unrest and terrorism abroad? The various factions in the Middle-East have always been at each other’s throat and the terrible crimes that went on and still go on under Eastern despots is rarely mentioned. I think there are simply too many inadequate people who take every opportunity to ‘knock the establishment’ in the mistaken belief they are ‘doing good’. Such people need to take a long, cool look at themselves.
Why is it that it's always the fault of western powers that there is so much unrest and terrorism abroad? The various factions in the Middle-East have always been at each other's throat and the terrible crimes that went on and still go on under Eastern despots is rarely mentioned. I think there are simply too many inadequate people who take every opportunity to 'knock the establishment' in the mistaken belief they are 'doing good'. Such people need to take a long, cool look at themselves.It's not "always" anything. That's just your bubble. It's obfuscation of the problem. You touch on the underlying problems, but you scramble them in your search for someone to blame. The lack of history education is a fundamental problem. Leaving the teaching of morality to the churches is another. Both of those lead to moral relativism and confusion about when Western powers are interfering in the affairs of others and when they should be speaking to their values. We are a global species, separated by centuries of culture, but we've come back together. The old system of accepting one or two new members into the tribe has to be expanded to include the whole tribe. Making 'doing good' a bad thing is the exact opposite of that.
Why is it that it's always the fault of western powers that there is so much unrest and terrorism abroad? The various factions in the Middle-East have always been at each other's throat and the terrible crimes that went on and still go on under Eastern despots is rarely mentioned. I think there are simply too many inadequate people who take every opportunity to 'knock the establishment' in the mistaken belief they are 'doing good'. Such people need to take a long, cool look at themselves.It's not "always" anything. That's just your bubble. It's obfuscation of the problem. You touch on the underlying problems, but you scramble them in your search for someone to blame. The lack of history education is a fundamental problem. Leaving the teaching of morality to the churches is another. Both of those lead to moral relativism and confusion about when Western powers are interfering in the affairs of others and when they should be speaking to their values. We are a global species, separated by centuries of culture, but we've come back together. The old system of accepting one or two new members into the tribe has to be expanded to include the whole tribe. Making 'doing good' a bad thing is the exact opposite of that. What values are western powers speaking?
Why is it that it's always the fault of western powers that there is so much unrest and terrorism abroad? The various factions in the Middle-East have always been at each other's throat and the terrible crimes that went on and still go on under Eastern despots is rarely mentioned. I think there are simply too many inadequate people who take every opportunity to 'knock the establishment' in the mistaken belief they are 'doing good'. Such people need to take a long, cool look at themselves.I see . They are savages we are civilised.
Why is it that it's always the fault of western powers that there is so much unrest and terrorism abroad? The various factions in the Middle-East have always been at each other's throat and the terrible crimes that went on and still go on under Eastern despots is rarely mentioned. I think there are simply too many inadequate people who take every opportunity to 'knock the establishment' in the mistaken belief they are 'doing good'. Such people need to take a long, cool look at themselves.I see . They are savages we are civilised. Well, if you consider open democratic countries as civilised, yes. How can you compare what happens in the Middle East with our way of life? I think we do come out of it as being civilised. Would you like to live in one of these countries as an average citizen? I kind of doubt it.
Why is it that it's always the fault of western powers that there is so much unrest and terrorism abroad? The various factions in the Middle-East have always been at each other's throat and the terrible crimes that went on and still go on under Eastern despots is rarely mentioned. I think there are simply too many inadequate people who take every opportunity to 'knock the establishment' in the mistaken belief they are 'doing good'. Such people need to take a long, cool look at themselves.I see . They are savages we are civilised. Well, if you consider open democratic countries as civilised, yes. How can you compare what happens in the Middle East with our way of life? I think we do come out of it as being civilised. Would you like to live in one of these countries as an average citizen? I kind of doubt it. No because you keep bombing them
Why is it that it's always the fault of western powers that there is so much unrest and terrorism abroad? The various factions in the Middle-East have always been at each other's throat and the terrible crimes that went on and still go on under Eastern despots is rarely mentioned. I think there are simply too many inadequate people who take every opportunity to 'knock the establishment' in the mistaken belief they are 'doing good'. Such people need to take a long, cool look at themselves.I see . They are savages we are civilised. Well, if you consider open democratic countries as civilised, yes. How can you compare what happens in the Middle East with our way of life? I think we do come out of it as being civilised. Would you like to live in one of these countries as an average citizen? I kind of doubt it. No because you keep bombing them Don't you mean bombing the murdering terrorists? Tell me, do you admire Assad?
Why is it that it's always the fault of western powers that there is so much unrest and terrorism abroad? The various factions in the Middle-East have always been at each other's throat and the terrible crimes that went on and still go on under Eastern despots is rarely mentioned. I think there are simply too many inadequate people who take every opportunity to 'knock the establishment' in the mistaken belief they are 'doing good'. Such people need to take a long, cool look at themselves.I see . They are savages we are civilised. Well, if you consider open democratic countries as civilised, yes. How can you compare what happens in the Middle East with our way of life? I think we do come out of it as being civilised. Would you like to live in one of these countries as an average citizen? I kind of doubt it. No because you keep bombing them Don't you mean bombing the murdering terrorists? Tell me, do you admire Assad? Tell me do you admire ISIS?
Why is it that it's always the fault of western powers that there is so much unrest and terrorism abroad? The various factions in the Middle-East have always been at each other's throat and the terrible crimes that went on and still go on under Eastern despots is rarely mentioned. I think there are simply too many inadequate people who take every opportunity to 'knock the establishment' in the mistaken belief they are 'doing good'. Such people need to take a long, cool look at themselves.It's not "always" anything. That's just your bubble. It's obfuscation of the problem. You touch on the underlying problems, but you scramble them in your search for someone to blame. The lack of history education is a fundamental problem. Leaving the teaching of morality to the churches is another. Both of those lead to moral relativism and confusion about when Western powers are interfering in the affairs of others and when they should be speaking to their values. We are a global species, separated by centuries of culture, but we've come back together. The old system of accepting one or two new members into the tribe has to be expanded to include the whole tribe. Making 'doing good' a bad thing is the exact opposite of that. What values are western powers speaking? I find you rather obtuse Adamski, so I'm not going to assemble a list for you. Try looking up Obama's last speech to the press as President. I think he covered Western values pretty well. Or any democratic constitution will do as a start. Or civil rights laws.
Why is it that it's always the fault of western powers that there is so much unrest and terrorism abroad? The various factions in the Middle-East have always been at each other's throat and the terrible crimes that went on and still go on under Eastern despots is rarely mentioned. I think there are simply too many inadequate people who take every opportunity to 'knock the establishment' in the mistaken belief they are 'doing good'. Such people need to take a long, cool look at themselves.I see . They are savages we are civilised. Well, if you consider open democratic countries as civilised, yes. How can you compare what happens in the Middle East with our way of life? I think we do come out of it as being civilised. Would you like to live in one of these countries as an average citizen? I kind of doubt it. You have a narrow view of the world webplodder. Sure, it's peaceful in your neighborhood, because you live well within a border of a nation that sends people out all over the world to kill people in the middle of the night. We've been doing it as long as we've been a country. We're either enslaving the indigenous or colonizing the poor or extracting their resources. Then we use their land to fight wars. Why are two world wars okay but tribalism in the desert is not?
Why is it that it's always the fault of western powers that there is so much unrest and terrorism abroad? The various factions in the Middle-East have always been at each other's throat and the terrible crimes that went on and still go on under Eastern despots is rarely mentioned. I think there are simply too many inadequate people who take every opportunity to 'knock the establishment' in the mistaken belief they are 'doing good'. Such people need to take a long, cool look at themselves.I see . They are savages we are civilised. Well, if you consider open democratic countries as civilised, yes. How can you compare what happens in the Middle East with our way of life? I think we do come out of it as being civilised. Would you like to live in one of these countries as an average citizen? I kind of doubt it.Its a bad idea to apply our standards of "civilization" to the rest of the world. Democracy isn't inherently civilized and the clan based society of much of the Middle East isn't inherently uncivilized. In some ways ME is much stronger......there's no doubt they will outlive us.
Why is it that it's always the fault of western powers that there is so much unrest and terrorism abroad? The various factions in the Middle-East have always been at each other's throat and the terrible crimes that went on and still go on under Eastern despots is rarely mentioned. I think there are simply too many inadequate people who take every opportunity to 'knock the establishment' in the mistaken belief they are 'doing good'. Such people need to take a long, cool look at themselves.It's not "always" anything. That's just your bubble. It's obfuscation of the problem. You touch on the underlying problems, but you scramble them in your search for someone to blame. The lack of history education is a fundamental problem. Leaving the teaching of morality to the churches is another. Both of those lead to moral relativism and confusion about when Western powers are interfering in the affairs of others and when they should be speaking to their values. We are a global species, separated by centuries of culture, but we've come back together. The old system of accepting one or two new members into the tribe has to be expanded to include the whole tribe. Making 'doing good' a bad thing is the exact opposite of that. What values are western powers speaking? I find you rather obtuse Adamski, so I'm not going to assemble a list for you. Try looking up Obama's last speech to the press as President. I think he covered Western values pretty well. Or any democratic constitution will do as a start. Or civil rights laws. Civil rights and democratic institutions are being eroded as socio economic conditions deteriorate for the working class in this current crisis that capitalism is going through. Some great value you have there tat can simply be done away with whenever it suits those in power