It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Where does you heart truely lie?

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 10:22 PM
a reply to: feldercarb

No, you are not crazy. There is a common thread of common sense that, sans some speculative big government solution, a real and lasting understanding could be reached between left and right ideologues.

After all, the only obstacle betwixt the two is the reliance on a plan by an expert in official control.

posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 10:28 PM
a reply to: Vroomfondel

The two party system itself is a tyrant. It wont let third fourth fifth parties even play the same game on the same field. I think at one time there was a difference between the two, but each still represented a threat of its own.

At one point in early American history, the two dominant parties actually cared about America. The disconnect was only how best to protect and entrench it's core values to last the test of time. To say this now with our political parties is nothing more than a punch line.

Our politicians are bought and sold each election with lobbying from corporations who for both their parts care nothing about the people, our Constitution nor the ideals that both were born from. Personal liberty, freedom and justice, true justice are the birthrights of our country yet.... Year after year, we are unable to celebrate them because of draconian legislation from both sides of the aisle.

No current party is serving America well. No party is upholding American values, liberty and freedom. The only laws upheld currently are self serving, greed based laws that unilaterally favor those in power and money. The "good" of the American people has been lost on our "law makers".
edit on 22-3-2015 by Helious because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 10:59 PM

originally posted by: feldercarb
Laws should be written to protect us from ourselves and others.

I really dislike laws that are made to protect me from myself, I would disagree and suggest the government should only worry about protecting us from each other and not from ourselves.

edit on 22-3-2015 by Elton because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 11:13 PM
a reply to: feldercarb

And Corp execs should be paid no more than 10 times the annualized salary of the lowest paid employee .

posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 11:53 PM
The Republicans caved on every single issue since taking control so something is very suspect and no one should lose attention on this and vote accordingly...third party.

posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 03:16 AM

originally posted by: Granite
The Republicans caved on every single issue since taking control so something is very suspect and no one should lose attention on this and vote accordingly...third party.

I wouldn't say caved, but what were you expecting? People were put in charge who have reputations as being back channel deal makers. Congress couldn't get anything done for years, and now McConnell is trying his way with a bunch of compromise and quiet deals.

That's not a bad thing.

posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 03:46 AM
a reply to: Helious

You are aware that large demonstrations have been going on in DC and other places? The msm isn't covering them so more won't join them.That is their way of dealing with protests now.They just pretty much refuse to cover them so nobody knows they are going on.

Disagree or not,they are going on. people are trying to be heard.

posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 04:20 AM

originally posted by: Helious

America is not a product of the government. America is an ideal.

This is what I consider to be essential. Our political and economic systems all arise from the bedrock of ideals, values and morals we have as a collective, they are a manifestation of them. Rather than consider what "they" -the politicians, the government- should change or do differently, it seems more reasonable to look at our selves- what "I" should change or do differently.

Changing leadership doesn't change our basic philosophy about the nature of reality.

That bedrock is so deeply inscribed in us, any possible change couldn't happen over night, so it is more realistic to look at long term- what we lay down in the minds of children when they are very young. Because that is what will determine the future manifestations of government, politics, and economics.

Our nation was founded upon Protestant (or sometimes called Puritan) values and philosophy, in which material abundance and success is evidence of ethical and moral character.

It operates with the values upon independence, and individual power, and rejection of dependance, or collective power.

These end up with some self contradicting effects. In order to experience being "individual" and independent, there has to be evidence of friction, or opposition with the collective.
The collective thought being "individualism is good", you have to be opposing individualism in order to be individualist.

Truly, if one wants to experience being an individualist? They would have to be in the midst of a collective which has the opposing values- of dependence and collectivism! Nietzsche, Rand, Sartre, .... they could experience and be individualist because they were breaking out from that bedrock of their society laid values. Pearls come from irritation and friction with the surroundings.

In this sense, those that take a collectivist stance are being individualist, they are refusing to follow the herd and opposing it. Those who are speaking out for individualism are actually being herd members, because this herd values and rewards that, and they are submitting to the deeply instilled traditional American values.

All we get from this is a self contradicting dual acted out on the stage of our political and economic systems as a nation. It threatens extreme swings from one extreme to the other.

In my mind, only a balance and recognition of both interdependence and independence, of individuality and collectivism, could possible bring us any closer to solidarity as a nation. The idea that everything, everything, has it's place and time in which it is appropriate! That all is process and cycles; that a society is most efficient if it has different layers for living and experiencing.

But my personal view on what might be "ideal" for future is irrelevant (as some will no doubt say, I am an ex-pat, so my opinion is null and void). However, sometimes it is in distancing oneself that one often gains a larger perspective of what is already.
I see a nation that is like a serpent devoring itself up from the tail. The strong loyalty to "what our fathers founded this nation on" is admirable, but on the other hand, it is also contradictory.

If your father wanted you to be your own man, and you simply strived to emulate him, would that necessarily make him proud of you? Would it be any indication that you have actually freed your mind and formed yourself?
The truth about Paternalism is that ultimately, for it to be successful, the child must revolt against the Father and reject him- to become a father himself, but in his own form.

posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 09:20 AM
a reply to: Helious



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 12:05 PM
a reply to: Elton

Actually the laws that protect us from ourselves are in society's best interest and actually end up protecting others.

Example: Speeding. Although you may end up driving without an incident, you may also cause problems for fellow drivers and pedestrians. Realize not everyone has your reflexes and road knowledge. All it would take is someone unfamiliar with the area and your speeding to cause a major traffic accident. This could cause loss of life, major traffic tie-up or expensive repairs to the road that will be paid by the community. Thus, by limiting your driving speed society is safeguarding others.

Example: Smoking. Although you may see this as a right, there can be consequences for others. A child who lives with a smoker may develop breathing issues. A accidental touch could lead to a fire that may need public assistance to be put out. Also resources were invested to cultivate the tobacco plant. Nothing is ever free in this world and we need to make choice that are more helpful than harmful. Although we are now using tobacco plants in a new way to create vaccines and useful drugs (ebola Mzapp).

Likewise the use of drugs can end up being harmful for society or just an added expense for society. When we write laws to protect ourselves from our selves we are doing that for the benefit of the entire community and not for an altruistic reason.

posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 12:07 PM
a reply to: Ultralight

I've gone with 30 times the lowest based wage in the past. Not that much of a difference from 10 to 30 times in the grand scheme of things.

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in