airclay said:

elax420 said:

I'm actually with WAN on this.


The working man always gets fucked for things they played little to no part in causing. Perfect example our financial crisis in the US. The fines the banks that caused it just winding up writing it off as a tax deduction. Man I wish I could get away with a 10th the shit a bank gets away with

---

So you're willing to protect the little man of your own subjective lens, by compartmentalizing them away from national actions done by, the state they fund and consent to, by voting, at the cost of other little men that you don't view as equal, through a subjective lens of your own, who are as well being fucked for things they played little part in but was partially, if not wholly, caused by the aforementioned state?

edit some grammar in there

---

That's not the most clear post but I'll take a stab at it.
Bro Hillary is about to become president I now certainly do not consent to that. I fuckint hate paying taxes like everyone else but it isn't worth going to jail over. It's great to think my voice is super important in the political realm but it really isn't. I'm 1 person of 300 million. There's an old saying about democracy being the tyranny of the majority, it's most certainly true, look at 2000 election (not even a mathematic majority) and then us Bernie supporters are quite fucking sour about all the bullshit in the democratic primary. I've heard the same thing from trump supporters. we don't even live in a true democratic state. It's representative, and then in the presidential most of us get fucjed by the electoral college.


I hope that kinda answers your questioning. Your post was super interesting and thought provoking it just needs a little more clarity. That's one hell of a run on sentence




I read online that Harvard and Princeton call the American system of governance a Plutarchy, which I can't verify the truth of the statement but it's an interesting thought none the less

Bubbles85 said:

Tipote said:

Blair's New Labour in the UK hijacked the support of the left and sold out.

---

What about Labour under Corbyn? They've just had to suspend a Muslim MP for Anti Semitic comments on social media and another for defending her comments

Ken Livingstone suspended by Labour after saying Hitler was a Zionist

---

elax420 said:

airclay said:

elax420 said:

I'm actually with WAN on this.


The working man always gets fucked for things they played little to no part in causing. Perfect example our financial crisis in the US. The fines the banks that caused it just winding up writing it off as a tax deduction. Man I wish I could get away with a 10th the shit a bank gets away with

---

So you're willing to protect the little man of your own subjective lens, by compartmentalizing them away from national actions done by, the state they fund and consent to, by voting, at the cost of other little men that you don't view as equal, through a subjective lens of your own, who are as well being fucked for things they played little part in but was partially, if not wholly, caused by the aforementioned state?

edit some grammar in there

---

That's not the most clear post but I'll take a stab at it.
Bro Hillary is about to become president I now certainly do not consent to that. I fuckint hate paying taxes like everyone else but it isn't worth going to jail over. It's great to think my voice is super important in the political realm but it really isn't. I'm 1 person of 300 million. There's an old saying about democracy being the tyranny of the majority, it's most certainly true, look at 2000 election (not even a mathematic majority) and then us Bernie supporters are quite fucking sour about all the bullshit in the democratic primary. I've heard the same thing from trump supporters. we don't even live in a true democratic state. It's representative, and then in the presidential most of us get fucjed by the electoral college.


I hope that kinda answers your questioning. Your post was super interesting and thought provoking it just needs a little more clarity. That's one hell of a run on sentence




I read online that Harvard and Princeton call the American system of governance a Plutarchy, which I can't verify the truth of the statement but it's an interesting thought none the less

---

Tipote said:

Yes there is a failure of representation, but there is a failure of the electorate too in their apathy to rein in their governments which are launching illegal wars etc.

I'm not sure who it was who previous said this.. maybe Ecstatic, but it seems the people who are against taking any refugees are often the same people who were ok with the Iraq war.

regardless of responsibility, though there is plenty, there is still a moral obligation to help. That help doesn't necessarily have to be JUST to accept refugees but I think its fair that Europe does its fair share. The denial by the UK government to accept 3000 unaccompanied children is disgusting and it is the electorate that has let our government know that this is not acceptable so this has been overturned. We took 10,000 lone Jewish children during the Kindertransport and that was the right thing to do. There are 100,000 lone child refugees LOST in Europe, often resorting to survival sex and exploitation by gangs to get by. There is a moral responsibility to help the vulnerable and voiceless.

---

qman said:

Tipote said:

Yes there is a failure of representation, but there is a failure of the electorate too in their apathy to rein in their governments which are launching illegal wars etc.

I'm not sure who it was who previous said this.. maybe Ecstatic, but it seems the people who are against taking any refugees are often the same people who were ok with the Iraq war.

regardless of responsibility, though there is plenty, there is still a moral obligation to help. That help doesn't necessarily have to be JUST to accept refugees but I think its fair that Europe does its fair share. The denial by the UK government to accept 3000 unaccompanied children is disgusting and it is the electorate that has let our government know that this is not acceptable so this has been overturned. We took 10,000 lone Jewish children during the Kindertransport and that was the right thing to do. There are 100,000 lone child refugees LOST in Europe, often resorting to survival sex and exploitation by gangs to get by. There is a moral responsibility to help the vulnerable and voiceless.

---

"rein in their governments which are launching illegal wars"

When the US wants to engage in military action, there is NOTHING US citizens can do about it. Remember Vietnam? 

"people who are against taking any refugees are often the same people who were ok with the Iraq war"

If you remember correctly, the vast majority of French and German citizens were against the Iraq War. Either way, they are two COMPLETELY different issues.

---

The Ecstatic said:

qman said:

Tipote said:

Yes there is a failure of representation, but there is a failure of the electorate too in their apathy to rein in their governments which are launching illegal wars etc.

I'm not sure who it was who previous said this.. maybe Ecstatic, but it seems the people who are against taking any refugees are often the same people who were ok with the Iraq war.

regardless of responsibility, though there is plenty, there is still a moral obligation to help. That help doesn't necessarily have to be JUST to accept refugees but I think its fair that Europe does its fair share. The denial by the UK government to accept 3000 unaccompanied children is disgusting and it is the electorate that has let our government know that this is not acceptable so this has been overturned. We took 10,000 lone Jewish children during the Kindertransport and that was the right thing to do. There are 100,000 lone child refugees LOST in Europe, often resorting to survival sex and exploitation by gangs to get by. There is a moral responsibility to help the vulnerable and voiceless.

---

"rein in their governments which are launching illegal wars"

When the US wants to engage in military action, there is NOTHING US citizens can do about it. Remember Vietnam? 

"people who are against taking any refugees are often the same people who were ok with the Iraq war"

If you remember correctly, the vast majority of French and German citizens were against the Iraq War. Either way, they are two COMPLETELY different issues.

---

how do you figure they are completely different issues?


Theres a special flavor of hypocrisy in advocating military action and then writing off the consequences of that action, or going even further and blaming the victims.

---

Tipote said:

---

Shins said:

That picture doesn't make sense either, he takes a couple anecdotal examples and acts like that reprisent the majority of Muslim's.


That's called an anecdotal fallacy, and it's a failure at logic.

---

elax420 said:

interesting thought

I still dont know how much of an active participant in the political system i am. My one vote doesn’t mean shit. Am i supposed to throw away my life and families lives for political idealism?

Its one thing to talk about radical politics and political idealism on the internet, its entirely another thing to practice them in the streets. Lets just say the best thing the U.S government will do to you is send you to Guantanamo. There are police agencies here that have tanks, just journey into the conspiracy thread and hear what our brothers have to say about the governments ability to enforce law.

I feel like your statement that either you support the government or are an active revolutionary is a false dichotomy. Obama can lick my ballsack. doesn’t mean I’m about to throw away my life for idealism. i mean i would much rather feel like things are undemocratic and shitty in the USA, than be in an african state where the police kill you for saying what i just said.


and you can hardly blame me for the banking crisis, syrian criss, etc. the koch’s pay more than i will make in my lifetime to buy that influence, there is no way the common man can compete with that.

---

airclay said:

elax420 said:

interesting thought

I still dont know how much of an active participant in the political system i am. My one vote doesn’t mean shit. Am i supposed to throw away my life and families lives for political idealism?

Its one thing to talk about radical politics and political idealism on the internet, its entirely another thing to practice them in the streets. Lets just say the best thing the U.S government will do to you is send you to Guantanamo. There are police agencies here that have tanks, just journey into the conspiracy thread and hear what our brothers have to say about the governments ability to enforce law.

I feel like your statement that either you support the government or are an active revolutionary is a false dichotomy. Obama can lick my ballsack. doesn’t mean I’m about to throw away my life for idealism. i mean i would much rather feel like things are undemocratic and shitty in the USA, than be in an african state where the police kill you for saying what i just said.


and you can hardly blame me for the banking crisis, syrian criss, etc. the koch’s pay more than i will make in my lifetime to buy that influence, there is no way the common man can compete with that.

---

I don't believe I went that far. But to say that you support not dealing with the consequences of military action perpetrated by your representatives in the best interest of supporting the global consumerism you enjoy because it affects your personal consumerism is selfish at best.

I don't think your presentation of being politically active is based in reality.

---