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.

 

What our central problem seems to be

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 07:35 AM
link   
I could be wrong here, but in all of the threads I've been reading about TSA abuse, police brutality, under 10 year old kids being taken to police stations for mundane things, etc; one central theme is standing out.

We've got one group of people on the one hand (including the OP, of course) who thinks these things are terrible, and are evidence of the gradual political transition towards outright fascist authoritarianism, or military dictatorship, etc.

Then, on the other hand, we'll have another group of people. These will be people who support the police, or the TSA, or whoever it is that the first group will be complaining about and viewing as fascist.

We don't seem to be able to agree on this central point; whether or not we think there really is an overall imbalance towards authoritarianism. Some people seem to think that the increase in active authority figures, anti-terrorism laws, and how much more seriously law enforcement is being taken, is a good thing. These people seem to derive a sense of security from the presence of the TSA and the police, and to genuinely believe that these groups can protect them from crime, terrorism, and the numerous other threats which supposedly exist.

So who is wrong, here? Are we really seeing an unacceptable move towards totalitarianism, and away from civil liberties, or is it actually entirely OK in people's minds, to eventually get to the point where we potentially have checkpoints everywhere, and either a human police officer or video surveillance cameras on every corner?

Is it possible that it is really true that, "if you're not doing anything wrong, you don't have anything to worry about?"




posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 07:42 AM
link   
Who decides what is right and wrong?



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 07:46 AM
link   
I think the whole problem is that too many on either side are ALL THE WAY on either side. I'm biased toward police but wouldn't call myself eactly pro-cop. I grew up around it, but I don't argue the fact that modern cops are a serious issue that need reigned in.

If I'm not mistaken, you've been fairly moderate on the fact that not every single person with a badge at any level is evil or some sort of psychopath.

So many though seem to either push for the idea of NO police or that we actually don't have enough already. Both of those positions being utterly absurd, of course.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 07:47 AM
link   
It is a proven historical fact that given a certain amount of time, authority will grow stronger and more fierce.

I believe that the media also helps to hyper inflate problems by only reporting on them, and hardly ever reporting on positive. Our universe is shaped by what we perceive – and let’s face it: as a species most of us tend to dwell on the negative side of things.

For every bad TSA agent out there, I’m sure there is a good one, if not more than one.

I have traveled all over the world in my life, and not once have I ever encountered a TSA agent who was unfriendly or grabbed me in my no-no spot. I’m sure there are some out there that do though.

I think for us to focus on negative authority would be the equivalent to saying: I saw a Hispanic rapist on TV today – so all Hispanics must be rapists….

This is just not the case.

There is good. There is bad. Although the bad tends to stand out in our minds more.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 07:48 AM
link   
People will never agree on the topics you mentioned, but collectively i think we can all safely say that times are bad and there getting worse.
I believe the word is heading for global disaster, how that will come about is uncertain. I can only speculate myself.

Everyone is watching. Everyone is waiting. Nobody is prepared.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 


I dont do anything wrong but I worry about my privacy.

I also lean toward socialism so I worry that in the near future I will be considered an 'enemy of the state'.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 07:59 AM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 


I think we are moving toward the type of Gov that I prefer not to think about. I believe (and I hate to use this catch phrase) that our leaders are treating us like herds of cattle and sheep. I believe they have intentionally taken over the public education system to dictate and control what goes on in your head. They know that you don't know all the facts so therefore you must be led and your ability to make decisions must be diminished.

That being said, there are some people that genuinely need to be led. We have those signs on the continuous roll hand towel dispensers in public restrooms that say "Do not hang from towel by neck" precisely for these types of people. Not everyone is capable of logic and critical thinking.

But I tend to lean toward your side of the argument. You cannot ever be totally safe and the more security and regulations you impose to try to be...the less Liberty and Freedom the overall people have. I disagree with the whole idea of the Government trying to mandate and legislate certain things

You cannot ever be totally safe...that is a fantasy.
You cannot legislate morality.
You cannot mandate "good will toward your fellow man"

Trying to do these things to protect the few who are truly incapable of doing these things for themselves is not freedom or liberty.

"Those that would sacrifice Liberty for security will lose both and deserve neither" (Thomas Jefferson - Ben Franklin paraphrase)

“The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men”. Plato

People need to learn to be self sufficient and stop relying on the Gov to provide and protect...that is not what they are there for.


Edit to add video:



edit on 4/27/2012 by Damrod because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by KillThePoor
Who decides what is right and wrong?


I don't know. That's what I'm trying to find out.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 08:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
If I'm not mistaken, you've been fairly moderate on the fact that not every single person with a badge at any level is evil or some sort of psychopath.


I don't think all of them are, no. I think some of them might be, though; and the idea of psychopathic police scares me more than the idea of criminals, to be honest.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 08:09 AM
link   
reply to post by KillThePoor
 


obama and his cronies



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 08:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by petrus4

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
If I'm not mistaken, you've been fairly moderate on the fact that not every single person with a badge at any level is evil or some sort of psychopath.


I don't think all of them are, no. I think some of them might be, though; and the idea of psychopathic police scares me more than the idea of criminals, to be honest.


Just my opinion, Id rather be FREE than SAFE... specifically when my "safety" is of no concern to law enforcement and enforcement of law is the only objective. I am not more safe from home invasion and my own murder because we now have police in tactical uniforms rather than the old uniforms they had a few yrs ago and a new armored vehicle for my city. I am more safe when I am free to bear arms and free to defend myself and maintain my own safety.

Just on this issue, the central problem of it is people looking to someone else to keep them safe who has no personal vested interest in it rather than taking responsibility for their own safety and that of their family/property. The central issue is capitulation.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Advantage
Just my opinion, Id rather be FREE than SAFE...


I like being safe. It's just that I also think that freedom is safer than the alternative.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 11:05 AM
link   
This is my philosophy:

Do what thou wilt at no harm to others.

This is how I determine what is wrong and is right.

And also the atheist wager.

People should be allowed to live as they see fit. That is what life, liberty, and the pursuit of hippyness, is what America is all about.

It shouldn't matter if someone believes in something different than you. As long as they aren't sacrificing children and eating the entrails of cats what should it matter if someone believes in something different than you.

It shouldn't, and you should leave them alone.

If you try to change people all you're doing is making yourself miserable and generating a lot of resentment.

Live your own life, and let people be. Stop forcing people to conform to that way of thinking.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   


au·thor·i·tar·i·an
1:favoring complete obedience or subjection to authority as opposed to individual freedom
2: a political system, principle, or practice in which individual freedom is held as completely subordinate to the power or authority of the state
3:exercising complete or almost complete control over the will of another or of others



lib·er·tar·i·an
1: an advocate of the doctrine of free will
2 :a person who upholds the principles of individual liberty


I always enjoy your posts, Petrus, and I believe this to be THE most important topic civilized and rational people can contemplate. Shall Libertarianism or Authoritarianism prevail? It is the political incarnation of the age old fight of GOOD vs EVIL. Should the human race be free to live their lives any way they choose, so long as their conduct is peaceful? Can individuals run their lives better than the government can and be left alone in order to do it?

A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being, or to advocate or delegate its initiation. Not just physical force but coercive force also. Those who act consistently with this principle are libertarians, whether they realize it or not. Those who fail to act consistently with it are not libertarians, regardless of what they may claim.

An authoritarian is a person who believes it is acceptable for a political entity to use force over their own and their neighbors' lives, as long as they personally believe it is for the greater good of "society". An authoritarian relies on force, subjugation and coercion. Those who act consistently with this principle are authoritarian, regardless of what they might claim.

Unfortunately it is painfully obvious that, at the most basic level, a vast majority of Americans are authoritarians. And most don't even know they are.

Unfortunately there is an element of human nature that relishes in having control over another or others. Our current political and social construct is based upon the authoritarian values of physical coercion, compulsion and control. It seems that when authoritarian values are entrenched into a culture it becomes a positive feedback loop, and it takes hardly any energy to get into it.

The error of the authoritarians- and the danger- is first in the conceit inherent in the desire to plan the lives of others; second, the force necessary to impose that plan on unwilling subjects. This is not a formula for freedom but for tyranny.

You are absolutely correct! This is the central problem and it is the central question. Obedience and subjection to authority is intrinsically at odds with the way human beings come to live satisfying lives. Everything that is really great and inspiring is created by the individual who can live in freedom. Which of these worlds do we want to live in?



Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive because those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. – C. S. Lewis



So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men. – Voltairine de Cleyre



The wave of the future is not the conquest of the world by a single dogmatic creed but the liberation of the diverse energies of free nations and free men. – John F. Kennedy, University of California, 3/23/63


Self-interest. Property. Independence. Individualism. Personal Responsibility. Free Association.


I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it. – Alexis De Toqueville


Me too, Alexis. Me too.
edit on 27-4-2012 by METACOMET because: sp



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 




We've got one group of people on the one hand (including the OP, of course) who thinks these things are terrible, and are evidence of the gradual political transition towards outright fascist authoritarianism, or military dictatorship, etc.

Then, on the other hand, we'll have another group of people. These will be people who support the police, or the TSA, or whoever it is that the first group will be complaining about and viewing as fascist.


That is really a false division as I think both groups are mentally challenged and i do not fall into either of them.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 


well excellent thread. People don't read history. Nazi Germany used the excuse of security to push for and succeeded in the abolishment of civil liberties just like patriot act did. Executive orders resemble the universal powers Hitler gave himself after the night of February 27th, the Reichstag Building, the German House of Parliament was set ablaze. The whole thing was credited to a communist plot perpetrated by a simpleton. Just like 9/11, a single event was used to dramatically change Germany, a bastion of civil liberties and social progress. That all changed with the Reichstag fire decree. Just like Patriot act, it destroyed the constitution. Hitler in short order declared martial law and the NAZI regime was in place.

Before martial law and leading up to it, many decrees were made prohibiting many things necessary for a free society. One by one the excuse of security and safety was used to coerce the people into slowly falling for the ploy of "danger and threat" to allow surveillance and control to set in. When the people were primed and resistance was eliminated after a long period of adjustment through security measures and public limitations of free speech and secret detention. Much like what is being done in the USA, the Nazi´s made their move.

Those of us that love our country think that any threat is not valid enough to completely change our country into what resembles Nazi Germany before Hitler rose to power. We feel that the danger of repeating history is too great to try and have COMPLETE and TOTAL CONTROL or SECURITY. We feel we have to remain strong as a people in our values and culture. Our freedoms are too important to just throw away because a decade ago some radical Muslims chose to attack us. I will not say it was all a lie like the Reichstag fire. False flag or not, certain people used it as an excuse to change our country and put it on the dangerous road to fascism.

It should be noted that Bush´s family has a well documented history with Nazi leadership. American industrialists are often accused of playing both sides and making huge profits from aiding both the allied and axis war efforts. Some accuse them of creating the great wars so as to destabilize the world and eliminate resistance to fascist rule.

I don't know. I do know that this country is not about great leaders and omnipotent laws that remove civil liberties in the name of false security. We are a nation of radical thinkers and free people. Our freedom is our legacy, not our perceived security from Muslims.


edit on 27-4-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 



I don't think all of them are, no. I think some of them might be, though; and the idea of psychopathic police scares me more than the idea of criminals, to be honest.

Sounds perfectly fair to me and we've sure seen proof a plenty that the bad cops exist. I recall a case in the 90's where a murder for hire ring (among other things) was said to be run right out of the Rampart division of the LAPD. They apparently had the majority of a whole station go south by how many cops finally got tagged on that one.


Heck, I blame the cops who know about any level of corruption and allow it as much as the bad ones. The corruption can't exist like it does today without good men saying nothing to cover and allow it to continue. In that way, I suppose I can come far enough for the other side to even say the good cops have some issues where that's concerned.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 08:12 PM
link   
I think the OP has put his finger on something important. There is a division and its not a political or even a philosophical one...its fundamentally psychological. You are talking about two separate personality types, when you get right down to it. On one hand, you have the worriers, the sticklers, the jackboot-lickers, those that roll over and expose their shaggy bellies to be scratched by The Man. On the other hand are your fighters, your freedom-lovers, those who are at home in defiance and opposition, who embrace the nobility of the sovereign individual. (You can tell, no doubt, from my heavily-slanted characterization which side I come down on.
). This isn't a political division at all, its deeper than that and for whatever reason its being exacerbated, either purposively or spontaneously. Most peculiar.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by silent thunder
 


I think it's being done purposely, silent.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 


The 4-part documentary Century of Self describes how people came to be psychologically manipulated on a mass scale, first in private-sector advertising and then later in electoral politics. The whole series is worth watching but part 4 is particularly relevant to this discussion. It shows how political spin-masters learned to use psychological warfare techniques to deepen divides among people for victory in elections (both on the right and on the left - both "sides" use the same tactics). Well worth watching:




edit on 4/27/2012 by silent thunder because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join