It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

The Conservative "Meritocracy" Paradise As It Recently Existed

page: 2
74
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 22 2015 @ 11:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
I am not certain what alternative you are suggesting. How do you deal with people like myself that only want to have voluntary interactions with human beings? I don't want to be part of a larger society, but perhaps a community. When I help someone by sharing the fruits of my labor I want it to be on my terms and not legislated by some government. I want to share what I have with my neighbors not some entity.

Any government that exists enslaves its people. Can a person be born without having to swear fealty to a government or nation? I just want to be free to provide for myself, my family and community. I don't have any interest in foreign goods, wars or other petty concerns of governments or international agreements.

I just want to be free from Government and the inevitible tyranny that they inflict.

Where is there a place to live as a free man?


You can't be born into the world and not be a part of the human society that exists prior to your birth. Humans are, by nature, social creatures. We wouldn't procreate unless we involved ourselves with members of the opposite sex for example.

Despite what you personally might wish, your interaction (or non-interaction) does effect others in some way or another. It is because of this that we all have some level of societal responsibility. Part of becoming a mature society and perhaps advancing to a greater civilization is caring for those whom you don't necessarily know.

"Freedom" is such a high abstraction. What do you mean "free"? Do you mean free to sit alone in a cave for your whole life, free from the interactions with other human beings? Free to satisfy the whims of your ego? In order to do whatever you please you have to interact with the society in which you are embedded.

Paint a picture to me of life as a "free man". Can you honestly believe that all 6+ billion people could all live like that forever and ever on Earth?




posted on May, 22 2015 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

Ironically what you just described would be commonly referred to as a "commune".

Assuming, however, that you don't wish to wander out into deep wilderness to avoid Uncle Sam, or his International counterparts, your goals are really a case of tunnel vision.

During the conversation that led to me authoring this thread the other party involved deeply berated those who receive any benefits from "the system" and my reply was, frankly, to point out the hypocrisy of a person who hates food stamp recipients even as they use public roads, infrastructure, the security of emergency services and all of the other tax funded blessings that modern society has to offer.

This is a huge part of the problem in my earnest opinion. We are quick to judge others without realizing that we all benefit from the very system certain powers are currently seeking to destroy.

An example that I can speak to from recent first hand experience. The roads where I live ( the Atlanta suburbs ) are an absolute travesty. A bumpy and shoddy mess of endlessly filled and refilled potholes with no sidewalks to speak of ( except for in front of two schools, for the length of the school, and in front of a few private businesses that paid to install them ). BUT the upscale community about four miles away? Sidewalks everywhere. Not a pothole in sight. Streets paved with whatever the old fashioned gray concoction is, rather than the black, grainy substance that we get here.

All tax funded. It's just that the people with more money seem to have drawn the better lot regarding zoning and spending. Something I am painfully certain few of those wealthier people has ever pondered or been thankful for.



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Heff...

The same thing happens here in Alaska...

In the winter time when we get hit with a lot of snow, many of the poorer neighborhoods don't get plowed very quickly. But you'll be hard pressed to find an upscale part of town or neighborhood that isn't immediately plowed. Oftentimes, a city councilman lives close by and has their neighborhood as a higher priority.

What's in infuriating at times is that areas of my city that EVERYONE uses are neglected, meanwhile neighborhoods and individual homes way, WAY up on the side of a mountain are plowed by the city. Those rich people chose to live up a gazillion steep switchbacks. There may be 1-3 families at the end of that road -- by damned if it isn't plowed first!

And it's all paid for by property taxes. My street never gets plowed and I pay the same mill rate as the millionaires a few blocks over, even though I live in a tiny 2 bedroom condo. How is that fair? I can't afford a 60k Landrover like they have to get to work in the morning, or hire my own private plow (like they do sometimes).



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Sara Palin represented in her own words the Good Americans, she represented the Evangelical Christian American. We are taught that you must be a Christian and live by there morals and values or you are considered a lesser citizen. Drug tests for jobs, sin taxes, anti gay and lesbian legislation, anti immigrant really goes along way to alienate and brings a whole new level of class ism into play. Drug tests are now being used to determine if you get to see your doctor, get the wrong test results back and your doctor will drop you like a hot rock. My wife had this happen to her back in 2006 so you can't blame it on Obamacare. Any reason to drop a person is the current law of the land, or to tax without representation targeting the poor is standard operating procedure.

We need more funds for the defense budget so were gonna take from the food stamp program is sick and this happened under Obama.

Preachers around the nation are teaching the congregation to be sheep, I have witnessed this myself in multiple churches. Drug tests, background tests, financial tests for a job all favor the Christian right, and target or weeds out the liberal or progressive making it harder for basically half the population to get a good job and to pursue that happiness touted in the constitution.

The right often claims its under attack, like the lgbt agenda wishing for equal right is somehow a agenda of wanting special treatment, its not like there asking to not pay taxes like the churches. Our view of special privileges are warped, because some are clearly more privileged than others.

The fact that so many are blind followers of Ayn Rand and also claim to be christian just shows how deep this indoctrination really is. Rand's ideology goes against the teaching of Christ so for the millions of Christians who have been deceived, it just boggles the mind. Humans are pack hunters, so Rands rantings also goes against human nature and natural law.

The current religious freedom laws are just another attempt to give special treatment to a class of people who already have special treatment.

The current republican party claims to want smaller government and less taxes unless it comes to the military spending, NSA and patriot act, the prison industrial complex, law enforcement, and kicking taxes back to corporations.

The most eaten meat in the country is the chicken, did you know the majority of contract chicken farmers in this country barely make over the poverty level, and the contracts signed forbids them to speak out about it?

The corporation has more rights and privilege than us citizens, and it is obvious to see as this is the life we live and they are paying for more and more everyday.

The 5th estate has failed us so completely that most real news is reported on comedy shows:



edit on 22-5-2015 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide

From everything that I've read about her, Ayn Rand was a completely unpleasant person. I noticed that one thing that these people who parrot her world views fail to mention is that she was on Social Security and Medicare when she died. Yes, she was taking advantage of the very things that she supposedly despised and wanted to get rid of.



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 11:50 AM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

I've seen that in many places where I've lived, as well. The richer neighborhoods always got plowed first. The roads there were also better.



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 11:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Skid Mark
a reply to: Hefficide

From everything that I've read about her, Ayn Rand was a completely unpleasant person. I noticed that one thing that these people who parrot her world views fail to mention is that she was on Social Security and Medicare when she died. Yes, she was taking advantage of the very things that she supposedly despised and wanted to get rid of.


She actually denied the science that smoking causes cancer and after she got cancer she signed up for both social security and medicare.

If your a Christian it clearly states in the bible in the end time many will be deceived and IMO this is a prime example of this.
edit on 22-5-2015 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-5-2015 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: LDragonFire

Yes, I read that she thought the idea that smoking causes cancer was a hoax.



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 12:00 PM
link   
a reply to: LDragonFire

The more I read into Eastern philosophy, the more I wonder if Jesus was influenced by it.



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: LDragonFire

I absolutely hate taking drug tests for a job. It's invasive and I don't see how what I may or may not do in my free time would affect my work performance. Now, people are also pushing for drug tests for people receiving government assistance. My objection to that is this: Some people that need assistance and are unable to work also need certain substances (like cannabis) for medical reasons; such as chronic pain, nausea from cancer treatments, along with various other things that it helps to alleviate. So in effect, if they're using it to self medicate and they don't pass a test, they're screwed.



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Skid Mark

I think there's numbers now that drug testing for public assistance hasn't really paid off. The people that "fail" the drug tests are lower than expected:



According to state data gathered by ThinkProgress, the seven states with existing programs — Arizona, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Utah — are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to ferret out very few drug users. The statistics show that applicants actually test positive at a lower rate than the drug use of the general population. The national drug use rate is 9.4 percent. In these states, however, the rate of positive drug tests to total welfare applicants ranges from 0.002 percent to 8.3 percent, but all except one have a rate below 1 percent. Meanwhile, they’ve collectively spent nearly $1 million on the effort, and millions more may have to be spent in coming years.

Think Progress



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 12:22 PM
link   
I'll have to find a source, but one major company, a couple of years back, stopped their policy of pre-employment based drug testing because their actuarial team determined that they were spending something on the magnitude of $10k for every positive result.

This does also table the related topic of the "war on drugs" which has been an abysmal social failure... Well unless you happen to be one of the companies that either owns or administers our private prison system - in which case your bottom line has been soaring.

Most ATS'ers know that the US incarcerates a larger portion of it's population than any other nation in HISTORY. Even Stalin and Hitler were minor league players, in this regard, when compared to our current governance. The lions share of those incarcerated are there due to drug or drug related charges.

THIS is a prime example of Conservative priorities working against themselves and accomplishing the exact opposite of what is claimed. Recidivism rates are astronomical and will continue to be so until we, as a society, address the underlying and primary issue of addiction, often accompanied by mental illnesses. Jailing the diseased might keep them off of the streets for a few months - but does nothing to solve the problem.

In the historical period discussed in the OP people were sent off to asylums and stripped of their rights if they had such issues. Since asylums are know universally recognized as having been barbaric and ineffective solutions - prisons have become their replacements. Equally as barbaric and ineffective.

And that doesn't even scratch the surface of the subject that sentencing tends to be racially disparate AND the "drug of choice" being prosecuted is also an issue. For example, sentences for powdered coc aine ( the expensive version often used by the wealthier ) tends to carry a much lighter sentence than the rock version of coc aine most often used by the poor.

Realizing this tangent goes a bit astray - it all still does link together to demonstrate the double standard and disparity that exists and that is an ever widening gap, growing at an exponential rate. Class warfare is undeniably being practiced - quite openly... and those in the middle are being forced to choose sides.

I find it disheartening that so many in the middle find it more dignified to side with the masters, hoping to catch a crumb or two from the table - rather than seeing that they're scurrying around on the same floor as the poor are - and that they have no seat at the table either.



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 12:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Skid Mark

I think there's numbers now that drug testing for public assistance hasn't really paid off. The people that "fail" the drug tests are lower than expected:



According to state data gathered by ThinkProgress, the seven states with existing programs — Arizona, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Utah — are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to ferret out very few drug users. The statistics show that applicants actually test positive at a lower rate than the drug use of the general population. The national drug use rate is 9.4 percent. In these states, however, the rate of positive drug tests to total welfare applicants ranges from 0.002 percent to 8.3 percent, but all except one have a rate below 1 percent. Meanwhile, they’ve collectively spent nearly $1 million on the effort, and millions more may have to be spent in coming years.

Think Progress


Seems like a waste of money. I think it could be spent elsewhere where it could help people.



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 12:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hefficide

I find it disheartening that so many in the middle find it more dignified to side with the masters, hoping to catch a crumb or two from the table - rather than seeing that they're scurrying around on the same floor as the poor are - and that they have no seat at the table either.



It's as if they are addicted to the lottery. These defenders of the elite honestly think that if they support them, they too might have a slice of "the good life" -- just as if they may win the lottery one day.

"You can't win if you don't play" is often said by people spending their entire income on lottery tickets. Reasonable people know that the chances of winning the lottery are infinitesimally small -- practically non-existent. The same is becoming one of the elite wealthy people of this country.

The wealthy even peddle this illusion that if you just work hard enough, you too can own a private jet and live in a huge mansion. Look at how we glorify fame, wealth and success in our media.

I don't play the lottery, and I don't have any illusions about my chances of being part of the ruling class of this country.



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 01:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: Metallicus

Ironically what you just described would be commonly referred to as a "commune".

Assuming, however, that you don't wish to wander out into deep wilderness to avoid Uncle Sam, or his International counterparts, your goals are really a case of tunnel vision.

During the conversation that led to me authoring this thread the other party involved deeply berated those who receive any benefits from "the system" and my reply was, frankly, to point out the hypocrisy of a person who hates food stamp recipients even as they use public roads, infrastructure, the security of emergency services and all of the other tax funded blessings that modern society has to offer.

This is a huge part of the problem in my earnest opinion. We are quick to judge others without realizing that we all benefit from the very system certain powers are currently seeking to destroy.

An example that I can speak to from recent first hand experience. The roads where I live ( the Atlanta suburbs ) are an absolute travesty. A bumpy and shoddy mess of endlessly filled and refilled potholes with no sidewalks to speak of ( except for in front of two schools, for the length of the school, and in front of a few private businesses that paid to install them ). BUT the upscale community about four miles away? Sidewalks everywhere. Not a pothole in sight. Streets paved with whatever the old fashioned gray concoction is, rather than the black, grainy substance that we get here.

All tax funded. It's just that the people with more money seem to have drawn the better lot regarding zoning and spending. Something I am painfully certain few of those wealthier people has ever pondered or been thankful for.



Not really. A commune is a place where no one owns anything. I can't help my fellow there because I have nothing of my own to help with. It all belongs to the commune and he gets a share of it no matter what.

In the type of society we want, if my neighbor is a lazy idiot who would be perfectly happy to not ever lift a finger to do his own work and live off the crumbs we send his way, then why should we continue to feel obligated to send crumbs his way when times get tough and we have to look to our own?

In a commune, our lazy neighbor gets his share of what we produce no matter how much he drags us all down and we will all suffer no matter what when times get tough. It's the equal sharing of the misery he inflicts on us.



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 03:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

In the type of society we want, if my neighbor is a lazy idiot who would be perfectly happy to not ever lift a finger to do his own work and live off the crumbs we send his way, then why should we continue to feel obligated to send crumbs his way when times get tough and we have to look to our own?

In a commune, our lazy neighbor gets his share of what we produce no matter how much he drags us all down and we will all suffer no matter what when times get tough. It's the equal sharing of the misery he inflicts on us.


Gross oversimplifications aside - in the society you want, who decides who is worthy and who is not? Is that person you? Do infants, orphaned children, the elderly, infirm, or tragically sick qualify as "lazy" idiots? If so, is the implication that Darwinism should apply and the weak should perish if they are incapable of self-sufficiency? Or are you of a mind to think that others will take it upon themselves to carry that load voluntarily - while you opt out on "moral" grounds?

As has already been pointed out, it is my opinion that those who wish for the world you wish for are terribly selective about the realities inherent in a society. You enjoy the fruits of the system but then whine and moan when somebody else gets a bit of it that you didn't. What if I say that it pisses me off to no end that you're allowed to drive on public roads - being that I disagree with you? After all they are MY roads, you know. MY taxes paid for them. Shouldn't I be the ultimate arbiter of who uses them? I'm applying Conservative logic here. Right? I paid so, by God, I should be able to mandate who gets what and how it's all used.

Or course the above was sarcasm. But it is the same message that the people who want what you want send daily about other facets of being part of a society. You want your cake and to eat it too and it simply does not work that way.

As for the "when times get tough and we have to look to our own". Well that tribalism in it's exact definition and is antithetical to the very concept of society. Not to mention that the programs you seem to dislike are actually there for you and yours as well, should you need them.

You'll bark and say you'd never... But I have yet to meet a single Conservative who didn't make sure that Social Security check showed up on day ONE of eligibility.



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 03:29 PM
link   
I was very interested in this thread, but I genuinely don't see how the government killing people for striking is in any way a demonstration of an absolutely free market society...



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 03:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheJourney
I was very interested in this thread, but I genuinely don't see how the government killing people for striking is in any way a demonstration of an absolutely free market society...


The conservative ideology about deregulation and a free market society go hand in hand with opposing worker rights and environmental protections. These people died at the hand of industry fighting for the common worker rights we all enjoy today. Back then if a worker suffered a injury or death, the company wasn't required to offer any compensation, and the government didn't offer any support. You could literally lop your arm off at work and not only lose your job if you were living in company housing and couldn't pay rent because of your injury you would be thrown out on the street.

Don't you think its a good idea for death and injuries suffered on the job to be compensated for said injury by the company?

Since injury and death do happen on the job and with a percentage of these injuries resulting in disability, isn't it a good idea for government to tax industry and to provide a long term benefit for those people injured/disabled, or killed?

These are just some of the issues Americans were fighting and dieing for.



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 03:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: LDragonFire

originally posted by: TheJourney
I was very interested in this thread, but I genuinely don't see how the government killing people for striking is in any way a demonstration of an absolutely free market society...


The conservative ideology about deregulation and a free market society go hand in hand with opposing worker rights and environmental protections. These people died at the hand of industry fighting for the common worker rights we all enjoy today. Back then if a worker suffered a injury or death, the company wasn't required to offer any compensation, and the government didn't offer any support. You could literally lop your arm off at work and not only lose your job if you were living in company housing and couldn't pay rent because of your injury you would be thrown out on the street.

Don't you think its a good idea for death and injuries suffered on the job to be compensated for said injury by the company?

Since injury and death do happen on the job and with a percentage of these injuries resulting in disability, isn't it a good idea for government to tax industry and to provide a long term benefit for those people injured/disabled, or killed?

These are just some of the issues Americans were fighting and dieing for.



Well I mean, if the government sent people to do this, that was government regulation, therefore de facto not an example of a deregulated utopia.



posted on May, 22 2015 @ 04:11 PM
link   
a reply to: TheJourney

So your going to deny industry used private armies to kill striking workers?



new topics

top topics



 
74
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join