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.

 

Do we have capitalist or a centrally managed/ communist country?

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

Canucks don't really care about the Brits unless they are attacked. If it was the other way around causing war like British Empire. Canucks will just stay out this time. Canucks will not repeat all those wars wasting Canadian troops when they are needed to defend the land > Britain. Aussie though not sure who they are going to side. Canada has already separated from the Royal family. It is what keeps the Royal family from causing another major war since the British Empire.

If Canada ever decides to the Join UK in its war mongering state, everyone has an excuse to not befriends with Canada and invade Canada pushing White Canadians off the land/Canadian Civil War.
edit on 4-9-2018 by makemap because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: makemap
Lol, I didn't say Canada cares about Brits, why would you feel the need to assert that you don't?
My whole point was the better quality of life people in Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand have compared to the average US peasant.

If you wanna go down the road of criticising nations then back at ya, I piss my pants laughing that you have a foreign monarch as head of state, and represented by a governor general. Owned by the UK Crown, dress it up as much as you like being a separate legal 'Canadian Crown' but de facto UK Crown as leader of your nation PMSL.
If you had just stuck to my posted words eh? I'll enter a pissing match about the Crown and which nations are the funniest peasants anyday.



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
a reply to: makemap
Lol, I didn't say Canada cares about Brits, why would you feel the need to assert that you don't?
My whole point was the better quality of life people in Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand have compared to the average US peasant.

If you wanna go down the road of criticising nations then back at ya, I piss my pants laughing that you have a foreign monarch as head of state, and represented by a governor general. Owned by the UK Crown, dress it up as much as you like being a separate legal 'Canadian Crown' but de facto UK Crown as leader of your nation PMSL.
If you had just stuck to my posted words eh? I'll enter a pissing match about the Crown and which nations are the funniest peasants anyday.


US was pretty much dead for inviting the NAZI's over. Especially since the time that Mafia own the streets. All the bad guys ran to USA to make a living. In return all Americans got screwed because Americans was blinded by racial influence since KKK. That is Karma right there. What America deserved. Remember the 60's-80's after WW2 racism rose which caused racial division, this in return cause gang creation by different racial groups? Even US itself can't seem to end black gangs because they caused it themselves. Never compare African to Black Americans. They have a different mind set. Africans are actually much nicer than Black Americans who use the N word.

I'm not black, but every time I see Black Americans act gangster like and use N word all the time. It makes me angry and want to send them to Africa so they can relearn what "respect" really means. Some black Americans get their influence from media, gangs, etc. They don't even know what "respect" really means.

"Respect your way" or "respect my way"? That is not what Respect means. I've seen some blacks complain about respect and it is totally their way. Makes me want to slap them in their mouth. That is not respectful at all. Especially when people from other countries come over and not understand any of it.
edit on 4-9-2018 by makemap because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 03:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
All I really know for sure is that I have no idea what I actually have. And as long as I don't know anything else, I cannot say that I have any meaningful choice in the matter.


The actual nature of the "system" we live and breathe and exist within is designed from the ground up to be completely inscrutable from the average citizen's POV.

Our entire means of perceiving it is dominated by the MSM, who have a vested interest in presenting it to us the way they see fit.

IOW, there is absolutely no way for the average citizen to know everything there is to know about what kind of "system" we actually have. And even if you did know everything there is to know, you couldn't possibly be absolutely sure you knew everything there is to know.

So. The average person probably knows a fraction of 1 percent of everything they need to know in order to have any kind of informed opinion on anything. The only thing you can possibly know is that you don't know enough. But nobody wants to look like an idiot so most people just plain pretend they know everything they need to know and keep pressing buttons on election day like they have the slightest idea what they're doing.

And there is the big problem I have with any kind of government that purports to allow people to choose their rulers. It's completely impossible for the average person to make an informed choice about anything. We're all just guessing.

Whenever and wherever there is anything "they" would rather we not know, you can bet that issue will be deliberately thrown out of focus and some sort of mechanism will be introduced that will cause mass confusion (and probably a lot of arguing).

At the end of the day, this is just a great big ride and you either ride it to wherever it's going to take you or you die.

And so, my conclusion is that this system is whatever you think it is. Or you can ask someone who is supposed to know and believe whatever they tell you. Either way, you have no choice.
edit on 4-9-2018 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Authoritarian Capitalism, increasing in hyper-civilised techno-fascism



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 03:55 PM
link   
I'll have to go with corporate fascism.
They keep the fascist edge subtle but it's sharp when needed.
They try to keep up the illusion were a representative republic but most see through it.
Unfortunately most ignore it as well thinking there isn't a damn thing they can do about it.



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 04:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
I'll have to go with corporate fascism.
They keep the fascist edge subtle but it's sharp when needed.
They try to keep up the illusion were a representative republic but most see through it.
Unfortunately most ignore it as well thinking there isn't a damn thing they can do about it.


I like your user name. Obviously, we can't really ask the animals. But we can observe the animals. What are the animals doing right? They have many of the same limitations that we have but they live in harmony with nature (more or less). Unlike us.



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 04:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
Authoritarian Capitalism, increasing in hyper-civilised techno-fascism


This is a good answer. Not sure I entirely agree but whatever the economics are, it is definitely authoritarian. You kinda can't not notice when you live in an authoritarian country. Even if it's soft authoritarianism. The nature of it is such that you're definitely going to feel the coercion when you're on the receiving end of it.



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 04:44 PM
link   
a reply to: BrianFlanders




Not sure I entirely agree but whatever the economics are, it is definitely authoritarian.


How so?



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 04:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: BrianFlanders




Not sure I entirely agree but whatever the economics are, it is definitely authoritarian.


How so?


Like this.



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 04:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: BrianFlanders




Not sure I entirely agree but whatever the economics are, it is definitely authoritarian.


How so?


Like this.


Like what? How is the economics authoritarian?



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 04:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: BrianFlanders




Not sure I entirely agree but whatever the economics are, it is definitely authoritarian.


How so?


Like this.


Like what? How is the economics authoritarian?


1. Like this.

2. I said nothing about authoritarian economics. You wead it wong.



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 04:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: BrianFlanders




Not sure I entirely agree but whatever the economics are, it is definitely authoritarian.


How so?


Like this.


Like what? How is the economics authoritarian?


1. Like this.

2. I said nothing about authoritarian economics. You wead it wong.


"Not sure I entirely agree but whatever the economics are, it is definitely authoritarian. "

Was this not your statement?

If I "wead" it wrong, I apologize. So what, if not the economics, is "definitely authoritarian"?
edit on 4-9-2018 by NiNjABackflip because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 05:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: BrianFlanders




Not sure I entirely agree but whatever the economics are, it is definitely authoritarian.


How so?


Like this.


Like what? How is the economics authoritarian?


1. Like this.

2. I said nothing about authoritarian economics. You wead it wong.


"Not sure I entirely agree but whatever the economics are, it is definitely authoritarian. "

Was this not your statement?

If I "wead" it wrong, I apologize. So what, if not the economics, is "definitely authoritarian"?


Could you just keep reading it until you comprehend it and stop arguing with what I didn't say?

The basic nature of the American government (and indeed ALL government) is authoritarian. I did not necessarily mean the economics are authoritarian, but they are. Any kind of a system inherently forces you to comply with the rules of the game. And if there is a way to "cheat" (called cheating because you're not supposed to do it) they will modify the law to make cheating a crime.

And so, you can't have government without authoritarianism. You might possibly be able to have a sketchy economy without government but it would be a system of survival of the fittest and would still be tacitly authoritarian. The weak would either perish or be slaves.
edit on 4-9-2018 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 05:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: BrianFlanders




Not sure I entirely agree but whatever the economics are, it is definitely authoritarian.


How so?


Like this.


Like what? How is the economics authoritarian?


1. Like this.

2. I said nothing about authoritarian economics. You wead it wong.


"Not sure I entirely agree but whatever the economics are, it is definitely authoritarian. "

Was this not your statement?

If I "wead" it wrong, I apologize. So what, if not the economics, is "definitely authoritarian"?


Could you just keep reading it until you comprehend it and stop arguing with what I didn't say?



If it isn't "definitely authoritarian", or you didn't say that, why did you write it? I just want to know how you came to that conclusion. If you cannot comprehend your own statements, forget I asked.



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 05:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: BrianFlanders




Not sure I entirely agree but whatever the economics are, it is definitely authoritarian.


How so?


Like this.


Like what? How is the economics authoritarian?


1. Like this.

2. I said nothing about authoritarian economics. You wead it wong.


"Not sure I entirely agree but whatever the economics are, it is definitely authoritarian. "

Was this not your statement?

If I "wead" it wrong, I apologize. So what, if not the economics, is "definitely authoritarian"?


Could you just keep reading it until you comprehend it and stop arguing with what I didn't say?



If it isn't "definitely authoritarian", or you didn't say that, why did you write it? I just want to know how you came to that conclusion. If you cannot comprehend your own statements, forget I asked.


See above. I modified my post. The government is authoritarian. That's what I meant. I didn't think I needed to spell it out.



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 05:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: BrianFlanders




Not sure I entirely agree but whatever the economics are, it is definitely authoritarian.


How so?


Like this.


Like what? How is the economics authoritarian?


1. Like this.

2. I said nothing about authoritarian economics. You wead it wong.


"Not sure I entirely agree but whatever the economics are, it is definitely authoritarian. "

Was this not your statement?

If I "wead" it wrong, I apologize. So what, if not the economics, is "definitely authoritarian"?


Could you just keep reading it until you comprehend it and stop arguing with what I didn't say?



If it isn't "definitely authoritarian", or you didn't say that, why did you write it? I just want to know how you came to that conclusion. If you cannot comprehend your own statements, forget I asked.


See above. I modified my post. The government is authoritarian. That's what I meant. I didn't think I needed to spell it out.


My mistake. In my own defence, the grammar was snip.

How is the government authoritarian?



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 05:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

How is the government authoritarian?


This time I'm going to have to insist that you read what I wrote. Government is inherently authoritarian. ALL government. This is just self-evident, IMO.

I cannot state my opinion or my position more concisely than that. I'm not in the mood to endlessly elaborate on relatively simple statements of opinion.



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 06:03 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 06:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip


Forget it then. I don't think you know what you are talking about.


Duh! My first post in this thread basically says "I don't know". If you had read it, maybe you could have saved yourself several posts of back and forth nonsense.

That's all I know for sure and that's what I said. People don't have any meaningful choice because knowing what you're talking about is impossible. You don't know what you're talking about either and that's why politics always spins into an endless argument of half-baked opinions. If I knew what I was talking about (and knew for sure that I knew) I probably wouldn't be allowed to talk about it.
edit on 4-9-2018 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join