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.

 

Political apathy? No, just tired of the rigged game.

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
You can take aspects of many other political parties, to form your own however it doesn't make you that party and they do not represent what Robert Owen or Saint-Simon said.

Your right, it does not make them the Socialist Party. How about this: NOTICE TO ALL: cavscout neither thinks that the demopublican or republicratic parties represent the Socialist Party or what Owen or Saint-Simon said, even if they both embrace socialist ideas and the common person (odium and other socialism scholars excluded) would be hard pressed to differentiate between many statements made by the socialist party shortly after the turn of the century and the platform of the big 2 today.



You used the term to fit an alterior motive of yours which these forums have yet to see.

Sure did! and you and everyone else reading it was aware of that, and therefore this conversation is not necessary. If you really thought that I was that either party is the Socialist Party, then maybe you should spend more time in school and less time eon ATS.


You are still here to "Deny Ignorance" even if you are on PTS so do it. Do not call something, something that it is not.

Exactly, so stop pretending to be ignorant of the meaning of "socialist party A or B."


BTW - Thank you for contributing to the quality of PTS by ruining this thread, Councilor.





[edit on 22-12-2005 by cavscout]




posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by cavscout
BTW - Thank you for contributing to the quality of PTS by ruining this thread, Councilor.



Odd...Ambient Sound, RANT and Saphronia, are all able to contribute to this thread while are discussion is on going. Maybe, people are able to debate their own aspects of threads cavscout.

In fact, more members have posted since I did than have have not so your arguement is mute and more a shot at me. However you can keep them coming.



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odium

Originally posted by cavscout
BTW - Thank you for contributing to the quality of PTS by ruining this thread, Councilor.



Odd...Ambient Sound, RANT and Saphronia, are all able to contribute to this thread while are discussion is on going. Maybe, people are able to debate their own aspects of threads cavscout.

In fact, more members have posted since I did than have have not so your arguement is mute and more a shot at me.


You are right. Not kidding, I mean it.


However you can keep them coming.

Just remember I have your blessing. I will take some more shots at you later, time to sleep.



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
You used the term to fit an alterior motive of yours which these forums have yet to see.



Wow, just noticed the "these forums have yet to see" part. What did you mean by that? In actuality, the phrase "socialist party A and B" has been used in these forums in reference to the big 2.

[edit on 22-12-2005 by cavscout]



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
You make one large mistake though.

You think all of those things and it is clear a large sum of the poplation [50million] were fine with the War, Government spending, Patriot Act and so on and so fourth.

Just because you disagree with what that party has done, is because you assumed the route they would take when you voted for them and hoped they would fulfill what you desired.

This is the problem with "Party Politics" people assume what will be done on their behalf, rather than push to have more involvement in the process.


What am I supposed to say to that? I can only speak to what I think and what I desire. It sounds like you are trying to backdoor what I posted into some kind of condemnation of the system itself. Forget it. Just because I am disgusted with those who are abusing the system doesn't mean I don't believe in the basic structure and ideals established by our Founding Fathers, whom I hold in extremely high regard.

Please go pedal your socialism, communism, marxism or whatever-ism elsewhere. I'll work long and hard to fix what we have rather than adopt what you seem to advocate.

If I'm mistaken about the way I've interpeted what I think you are saying, I apologize in advance.



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 10:17 AM
link   
Ambient Sound, my point was that many people will also be happy with how things go.

I used to support the Labour Party in the United Kingdom and what they stood for and now I look at the direction they have headed in and it disguists me, but to many people they are taking the Nation in the direction that is wanted and this is the same for the parties in the United States.

Although, you dislike them [and to be honest, there are about two Political Parties I like in the World and neither of them are Socialist Parties], a majority of the voting population agrees with how they are taking the Country until a better alternative comes fourth.

This is the problem with the system on the basis as it is now, although in over half the State's in the U.S. there is a system where the population can vote on laws, to pass them or void them it is no longer used - the people either have no clue that it exists or do not wish to be involved in such a process.

[And I was speaking of the Swiss style of Government in my previous post, far from Socialism since there system is based on the Greek System which existed well over 2000 years ago.]



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 07:29 AM
link   
Dang, I'm trying to keep up yall.

I guess my main opinion on the topic of this thread is that having a two party system aint as bad as some folk think. If we had some true bipartisanship I think even moderates and liberterians would be happy with what we've got. But, for the past five years we've had a real bullheaded, stubborn president, and a congress that supports or denounces policies strickly on the basis of nana-nah-na-nah.

At the end of the day the majority rules in a democracy. Either we want it or we don't. I can't say the majority is stupid because they support this or that or that the system is broken because the majority doesn't believe the way I do. The majority gets the last say...and that's the way it should be.

Ambient, you are right to be a disappointed republican. I'm a disappointed democrat, but I have to agree with Odium, just because your faith is shaken in the current leadership doesn't mean your party and the people that voted for Bush don't still have those core principles and values that made yall vote republican. Yall just trusted the wrong man, and his power seems unstoppable, but believe me, he's gotta start to sway toward public opinion--he already has in some ways--thing is, the country hasn't made him feel it yet so he thinks he can just pay lipservice to the issues and they'll go away just like everything else that he's faced. The only way to stifle him is to get out there and vote in 06. Change is in the vote, cousin. Let him and the rest of our representatives know that this crap is O-V.

Some want us to believe the problem is too big to be solved at the polls--this isn't the first time this has happened. If they wanna keep living on our dime in Washington, they'll get the message if we send it, they always do. Change is coming. Peace.



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Saphronia
The majority gets the last say...and that's the way it should be.


I probably said this 10 times on ATS, but democracy is 3 wolves and a sheep deciding what is for diner. You really think that is the way it should be?


Fortunately, we are not a democracy; we are a constitutional republic with a Bill of Rights to protect the sheep from the wolves.

Unfortunately, the wolves have voted time and again that the bill of rights doesn’t mater and that they are picking wool from their teeth tonight.


Just tell me where were the big 2 when I was paying the wolves my taxes last year? Supporting it? well, I don’t think armed robbery is OK, so I support a third party and just wish the game wasn’t rigged against my party (see: ballot access, publicized debate shut-out, media bias.)



posted on Dec, 24 2005 @ 06:22 AM
link   
Cavs...I'm not saying that 3rd party candidates haven't been shut out of political participation on the national level because we all know that they have...my thoughts, however flawed in your opinion, is that 3rd parties whether they be Greens or Libertarians or something else aren't in the mainstream, and it isn't because they have less exposure, it's because their views are on the fringe end of the current ideologies already in place within the two parties that we have. That is why the big two fight to keep them off the ballots.

I'm not against 3rd parties. The people have a right to vote for and support whomever they wish, but I don't think the 3rd parties that exist today are good for America because I have yet to see one that wasn't too extreme in their thinking. Their views will never be mainstream enough to win a national election even if they had the kind of exposure that republicans and democrats get. Again, if there was a 3rd party that sat somewhere in the middle of the road instead of too far right or left of it, then that party might have some success, but those people usually work within the two party system running as either democrat or republican.

As for this being a republic--mmhmm--it is that to some, but some of us still believe in democracy.



posted on Dec, 25 2005 @ 12:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
Socialist Party?

Why spread such lies, when you are speaking out against the "rigged game"? Neither of the main candidates were a socialist party in fact, they are far from it. Instead of helping you shout out aboust "Socialist" this and that and cause more harm than good.


Hey, here you go, would love to hear you chime in on this: Demopublisocialist



posted on Dec, 29 2005 @ 04:54 AM
link   
I was going to reply to the rest of your post, but then I was this

Originally posted by Saphronia
As for this being a republic--mmhmm--it is that to some, but some of us still believe in democracy.
and realized that you probably just don’t know what you are talking about. We have never been a real democracy.

You say about us being a republic that "it is that way to some" however we have been that way from the beginning. Unless, of course, the constitution has been officially declared void and everything is now up for a vote.

You really want democracy? You don’t enjoy the Bill of Rights? Well, funny thing is that without it, ATS membership in America would probably not be allowed at the rate we are going.

No, we did it right in the first place with a constitutional democratic republic.

Just noticed a topic that may help you out. politics.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 29-12-2005 by cavscout]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join