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.

 

An open letter to the democrats in the US Congress

page: 6
60
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 21 2010 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 

Capitalism is merely an economic system. It is up to a LEGITIMATE government to assure powerful economic interests do not trample on your rights to interact personally and in commerce with whomever you choose.
We don't have that, and haven't for some time.
So, we haven't had "capitalism", just corporatism and outright theft.
Among other crimes.




posted on May, 21 2010 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stewie
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 

Capitalism is merely an economic system. It is up to a LEGITIMATE government to assure powerful economic interests do not trample on your rights to interact personally and in commerce with whomever you choose.
We don't have that, and haven't for some time.
So, we haven't had "capitalism", just corporatism and outright theft.
Among other crimes.


It is hard to have a legitimate government when our constitution was altered to a business charter from *the act of 1871* and onwards. But even then one can argue corporatism is not only a branch of capitalism, in actuality it is the strongest branch of capitalism.

Regardless if we have a big or small government(actually a federal corporation)the government should go out of its way to honor the remainder of "that toilet paper" many take for granted.

Conservatives WHINE we need a smaller government and liberals WHINE we need a bigger government to create more rules and regulations, while at the same time IGNORING all the rules and regulations THAT DO EXIST!

People need to bust out of the matrix before a civil war gets sparked and millions die needlessly. Also demand government ends THE NATIONAL SECURITY DICTATORSHIP while simultaneously protecting america from domestic and foreign threats. The two are mutually exclusive and people with enough common sense should understand that.



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by xyankee
The total cost is a whopping $ 338.3 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR AND IF YOU'RE LIKE ME HAVING TROUBLE UNDERSTANDING THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY; IT IS $338,300,000,000.00 WHICH WOULD BE ENOUGH TO STIMULATE THE ECONOMY FOR THE CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTRY.




To put that into a better perspective....

That is 338 billion that the Mexican elites are saving by having American tax payers foot the bill for what should be their social infrastructure.

If the U.S. government had a spine, we should be billing Mexico for taking care of THEIR people. Those Mexican elites are very very rich.

Hmm maybe if the government doesn't want to take care of that, maybe American citizens should, en masse, start sending bills to the nearest Mexican consulate.



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Conservatives WHINE we need a smaller government and liberals WHINE we need a bigger government to create more rules and regulations, while at the same time IGNORING all the rules and regulations THAT DO EXIST!



Not the 16th amendment and other tax laws. The government enforces that with zeal on the average (key word) American.

Imagine if the government enforced immigration law with 25% of the effort it enforces tax laws.



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by wutone

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Conservatives WHINE we need a smaller government and liberals WHINE we need a bigger government to create more rules and regulations, while at the same time IGNORING all the rules and regulations THAT DO EXIST!



Not the 16th amendment and other tax laws. The government enforces that with zeal on the average (key word) American.

Imagine if the government enforced immigration law with 25% of the effort it enforces tax laws.


Exactly! They will make a martyr out of you if you don't pay your obligations, yet in turn they couldn't give a rats ass in fullfilling THEIR OBLIGATIONS!

Illegal immigration and unbalanced trading with "the peoples republic of china" are "non-issues" because the people would win and corporations would lose.

Its one-way traffic...and its illuminati traffic....all the way!

[edit on 21-5-2010 by EarthCitizen07]



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Oh well I guess all the democrats are going to be sh**ting their pants now! Give me a break.

I swear, sometimes I wonder why I laugh so hard and criticize my own country's people but then I see things like this and it all comes back to me.



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stewie
reply to post by NoHierarchy
 

You misunderstand "capitalism" and what it means.
We have CRONY capitalism and corporatism and absolute corruption.
Capitalism is not the enemy, in fact, it is the reason you are posting here today.
You may be an individualist as opposed to a collectivist, but probably not an anarchist because you are operating under the authority of others simply by posting here.
Anarchists are out torching "the man", not allowing...moderation.



No I don't misunderstand Capitalism, because IN-PRACTICE Capitalism is an oppressive failure just as Communism is, period.

Yes we do have crony capitalism, corporatism and corruption... but that cannot be eradicated. You act as if it's a defect in the system when it's an unavoidable and perhaps even NECESSARY byproduct of the system in order to sustain itself.

Your logic is severely skewed... I'm posting on a conspiracy website, therefore capitalism is not the enemy?? That makes absolutely no sense and fails to recognize my point. We live in a hyper-capitalist society and avoiding it while still surviving is VERY DIFFICULT especially for a poor 20-something.

I'm actually a collectivist more so than an individualist as far as Anarchism is concerned. I support the most pre-eminently human social organization that ever existed- tribes. Humans function best in groups of 20-150, any more than that and things either start to fall apart or you need to institute oppressive hierarchy to maintain control. We NEED community, family, belonging, and cooperation, but we don't NEED nation-states. A nation-state is a very perverse form of cooperation... it's coercion towards uniformity which is a different species from mutual/free egalitarian society. People will ALWAYS work together so long as more than one person exists in the same place... but a person should be able to go solo without much trouble either. Autonomy and freedom COUPLED with a strong family/community are what humans need.

You cannot say I'm not an Anarchist because I live within the system. Anarchism is a concept/philosophy and though I may not practice it 100% this by no means excludes me from being an Anarchist. I can ADVOCATE the concepts of Anarchism without being the 100% perfect exemplar of the end result of an Anarchist society. The whole purpose of discussing Anarchism is to EXPERIMENT with ideas on alternative forms of society, and plenty of people are already living them out. In fact... day to day most of our interactions are more/less Anarchic... arising from mutual/non-hierarchical decision-making without any rules/rulers telling us what to do. Also, for 90% of human history we lived in virtual Anarchy. Anarchy does NOT MEAN DISORDER, it simply means a lack of centralized government, rulers, institutionalized property/ownership, and hierarchies of wealth/power/coercion.

Do not make assumptions about what Anarchism is/isn't when you clearly don't know. Sure some Anarchists are out "torching the man", and so what? More power to them. There are also a vast number of Anarchists engaged in largely peaceful, constructive, and progressive activities which provide mature/scientific/holistic solutions to problems.



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by Stewie
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 

Capitalism is merely an economic system. It is up to a LEGITIMATE government to assure powerful economic interests do not trample on your rights to interact personally and in commerce with whomever you choose.
We don't have that, and haven't for some time.
So, we haven't had "capitalism", just corporatism and outright theft.
Among other crimes.


It is hard to have a legitimate government when our constitution was altered to a business charter from *the act of 1871* and onwards. But even then one can argue corporatism is not only a branch of capitalism, in actuality it is the strongest branch of capitalism.

Regardless if we have a big or small government(actually a federal corporation)the government should go out of its way to honor the remainder of "that toilet paper" many take for granted.

Conservatives WHINE we need a smaller government and liberals WHINE we need a bigger government to create more rules and regulations, while at the same time IGNORING all the rules and regulations THAT DO EXIST!

People need to bust out of the matrix before a civil war gets sparked and millions die needlessly. Also demand government ends THE NATIONAL SECURITY DICTATORSHIP while simultaneously protecting america from domestic and foreign threats. The two are mutually exclusive and people with enough common sense should understand that.


I agree for the most part however I differ on your generalization that conservatives whine for less government while liberals whine for more...

From everything I've followed over the years, Liberals seem to call for smaller government in some of the MOST IMPORTANT ways. Including- increased civil liberties/freedom of the press, crackdown on lobbyists/corporatism, reduction of the military/imperialism, reduction of police/surveillance state measures, etc. etc. Of course many liberals call for increased government for certain social programs and economic protections for underprivileged people. I've also seen conservatives support big government in an opposite manner- larger military, police, subsidies to big business, etc. etc. And personally, from where I'm standing, Liberals definitely have the nobler view on government/markets than conservatives. However, it's not always black and white and like you said both sides of the spectrum have brought a certain amount of oppression upon us. There are also many sensible people on both sides who DO want what's right. There are also those that want what's right but have an ass-backwards idea about how to get there. I simply view the "left"-wing of the mainstream as the lesser evil within the right/left-paradigm. However, we really need to start electing third parties and RESIST ANY INFILTRATION by the reigning parties or their backers.



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 03:46 PM
link   
remove the cursing, no one will take you seriously.



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 08:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Phedreus
 


A cognizant, well presented letter. I find myself in agreement with much of the letter.

Too bad that it will never be read by the intended audience. These are the people who are unable and unwilling to read their own health care bill, tax bills, bailout bills, an immigration bill by a state, and the constitution.



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by NoHierarchy
However, we really need to start electing third parties and RESIST ANY INFILTRATION by the reigning parties or their backers.


Exactly! There is something like six parties in the USA, including the two big parties, yet those four alternative parties(a pathetic necessary term in this context) COMBINED got less than 1% of americas' vote.

The unintenional ignorance portrayed by voters and INTENTIONAL IGNORACE portrayed by mainstream propaganda during the last century is truely mind-boggling unless you thoroughly analyse history from an unbiased perspective.

Why don't these third parties raise hell? The only logical conclusion derived is that they have been infiltrated by the international bankers and told to keep their mouths shut, except for several months during election time in those few states they are even allowed to register. Then mainstream propaganda kicks-in to give them THE BARE MINIMUM coverage.

"Hurray" for our capitalist dictatorship. If it was up to me I would NOT kill the parasitic bankers. No that is TOO EASY for them! I hope they live to 200 so I can torture them three times a day for the remainder of their lives.

Maybe flood a room with a few feet of water and drop an electrical line while slowely increasing the amperage, much like saddam hussein did to his enemies. They deserve nothing less!

[edit on 23-5-2010 by EarthCitizen07]



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


I'm trying.

Why the HELL are you NOT a Libertarian?

Trying to raise a little hell, raise a little hell, raise a little hell!




posted on May, 23 2010 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


Because I am a socialist, not a libertarian.

Do you vote for libertarians or do you represent them in any way?



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Not a member of any party, but have worked for several in the past trying to get them elected, have voted for them (Ron Paul included), have followed the basic tenet of their view on the freedom angle for almost my whole life, have pretty much equated the founders of the US to this belief, and in conclusion have determined in a Libertarian society, that any group of like minded individuals could set up their own system, as they saw fit-as long as they did not force their system on others.

It kind of has all the aspects of every possible society within it. It would just not enforce any one system over the other.



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


I can respect libertarianism because it is certainly better than the corporate dictatorship we have going now. The only problem I see with it and its quite big in my opinion, is that it leaves the door open for the banking cartels to reclaim government since its too democratic!

Some people would call chavez, castro and stalin mad butcherman but look how effective they were in preventing elite tyranny. That is precisely why all these countries have been boycotted, bad mouthed and/or otherwise castigated from every international organisation.

I don't want a communist dictatorship because that would limit freedom escessively, but on the other hand a socialist quasi-dictatorship could go a long way in making the world fair again. Rich people OWN THE WORLD regardless what people can see and they need to be held in check by force.



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


That is the part of Libertarianism that is the hardest to maintain. The populace HAS to assert it's authority. The court system has to be absolutely stalwart in its use. The jury decisions have to be enforced.

The removal of the citizen Grand Juries in the US was the beginning of the end of justice, IMO, in the US.

I wrote a thread on that. I never knew much about their use in the beginning of the US and wanted to do a little research into it.

Basically, Grand Juries were used as the place where citizens could go with evidence of anyone committing a crime, be they politicians, businessman or other citizens. The Grand Jury decided if their were enough evidence to charge someone with a crime. If there were, the person was placed under arrest and held for trial. Kind of how are LEO's are now. But everyone had the right to act as a LEO.

That is the kind of system that I could get behind. I could dig up enough evidence on numerous politicians right now that could get them arrested.



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


The despicable ACT OF 1871 is what brought america down!

They changed america's sovereign constitution to a corporate charter and everything has been going downhill ever since. How can they turn a country to a business?

Basically the illuminati is running everything for profit and then governments say "we are running out of funds and need to cut x,z,z programs". Of course they would, since cutting expenses means more profit for them......

As for grand juries and such, I will admit I have not read enough to formulate opinions, but since everything has been perverted I don't see why the judicial system would escape.



new topics

top topics



 
60
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join