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.

 

Let's just say it: Political Parties are the Problem

page: 3
60
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 18 2012 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by HangTheTraitors
They're ALL BUMS, the Right and the Left.

They all deserve a a trip to the gallows for being TRAITORS to this country. Though its HARD not to say that the Right needs their ticket of admission there FIRST and FOREMOST.



edit on 17-5-2012 by HangTheTraitors because: (no reason given)


right...let's all have anarchy in america...because...that's your solution?...i'll take the dems anytime, they want to perserve the middle class, the repubs don't




posted on May, 18 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   
A political party is a THING. Blame it on greedy corrupt people! The have existed since the beginning of time and will continue to do so until the end of the human race. FACT!!!!



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by jimmyx
 


If you truly believe this, then i believe you have no idea what their real motivations are. They have zero intention of helping anyone but themselves.


Republicans = Democrats

Two sides of the same coin, the only difference is what they "say" regarding hot button issues, but how they act will never follow the promises they tell the people. Their goal is to divide the people, and by making you believe they care about something you care about, they get to you.



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Nationalists have the right idea, Take over, ban all other political parties, Impose tariffs, internalize industry and infrastructure, imprison the Marxists...



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 02:49 PM
link   

edit on 18-5-2012 by TSZodiac because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Bravo!

Something I'm still slowly coming to terms with. Not quite there yet with my frequent partisan spats. Hypocrite? Not intentionally. Just coming to terms.

It's hard enough to sit there and watch someone attack an entire political ideology in a crass manner and when you do it yourself, talk about sobering.

But thanks for a good thread!



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 03:13 PM
link   
I always liked the sound of consensual politics. No political parties - simply local representatives - with only their own communities to represent and answer to. The local community nominates those they wish to represent them nationally and have a local vote to see who actually does.

Of course, it would be an added bonus, if those who put themselves forward for nomination were subject to an automatic ban

edit on 18-5-2012 by christina-66 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by tpsreporter
reply to post by jimmyx
 


If you truly believe this, then i believe you have no idea what their real motivations are. They have zero intention of helping anyone but themselves.


Republicans = Democrats

Two sides of the same coin, the only difference is what they "say" regarding hot button issues, but how they act will never follow the promises they tell the people. Their goal is to divide the people, and by making you believe they care about something you care about, they get to you.


wrong...there are laws passed when one political party has the white house and the legislative majority of congress, these laws generally benefit the constituients of that particular party, this isn't some "theory" of mine.
look at the enacted laws, and see who they have hurt, and who they have helped.
to say they help themselves...yes...that is definitely true, and i do not like that part either....but to say they are one and the same is false.



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
If political parties are the problem, what then is the answer? Some would argue that political parties are a logical response to popular elections. A necessary tool of democracy. Of course, the purists will argue that we do not have a democracy. Do popular elections demand political parties?



I think perhaps the secret ballot system is also obsolete, or never a good idea to begin with. Voting should be held in gathered groups. Then it would go something like this:

Those in favor of candidate A, stand over here
Those in favor of candidate B, stand over there
Same for C, D, E, other.

The largest group by head count scores 1 for that candidate. Zero for all the others. If done at a precinct level, then there should be enough room to accommodate all voters.
Also, all in attendance will know of the outcome. The results of each precinct get posted to a neutral website where anyone can visit and confirm what they witnessed. No room for cheating/scandals, however there would be the chance of a fisticuff or two, and perhaps some intimidation here and there, but by-and-large, it would be wholly acceptable.

Something like this along with a partyless government, would truly be a government elected by the people.



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Couldn't agree more. THEY are the enemy as is "news entertainment" They keep us at each other's throats.



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 03:47 PM
link   
with alll due respect to the people that say "throw the bums out", there has to be a way to keep government fuctioning (stating obvious)...believe it or not, there are thousands of federal government workers that take their jobs seriously and do it effeciently. the sheer massive size of our government and its intricate connections to every part of the american economy (still the largest in the world), cannot be improved by marching with pitchforks and torches into washington



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by jimmyx
 


Yes...but there are many potentially better systems. BTW the US economy hasn't been the biggest in few years now.

Wiki

But I think the EU has achieved its status in the same way the US did....with a credit card.



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by ErroneousDylan
 


Applause to your sir/madam!!! You hit it right on the head as well as the OP!! So far I have read every post up to this one and I am actually feeling proud instead of furious.................



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 04:20 PM
link   
In a democracy only two choices can exist majority and minority so yes they are a problem,

However in a constitutional republic equal voice and equal representation one could say that both neither will ever allow any other party to exist because that jeopardizes their power.

Neither will accept or allow thus the continued battle of left and right for over 2 centuries they are the problem thus never offer any solution.



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 05:11 PM
link   
Thank you for all your replies and suggestions. In considering this problem of political parties, and of course there have been some of you who disagree that political parties are a problem, I believe the primary concern in dealing with this issue has to begin with the rights of the individual.

Under this consideration, it should be understood that political parties cannot be outlawed. Individuals have the unalienable right to form political parties. What individuals do not have the right to do is use the formation of that party to trample over the rights of other individuals. Problems, such as gerrymandering, arise when incumbents use the political process to hold political power.

Yet another concern is the distinction that needs to made between unalienable rights and civil rights. Unalienable rights preexist government, civil rights exist because of government. Voting is not an unalienable right, it is a civil right. It seems to me that in this modern age a great push to have civil rights hold supremacy over unalienable rights has taken place. Attitudes, such as "if you don't vote you can't complain" are a product of this supremacy of civil rights over unalienable rights. However, Constitutionally speaking, civil rights cannot have any supremacy over unalienable rights.

Here is a link to a SCOTUSblog interview with retired Justice John Paul Stevens. One of the questions was in regards to gerrymandering. Here is his reply:


Justice Stevens: Well it goes back to the fundamental equal protection principle that government has the duty to be impartial. When it’s engaged in districting it should be impartial.

Nowadays, the political parties acknowledge that they are deliberately trying to gerrymander the districts in a way that will help the majority. I just read a newspaper article the other day about the Maryland redistricting, which is designed to help the Democrats. That’s outrageously unconstitutional in my judgment. The government cannot gerrymander for the purpose of helping the majority party; the government should be redistricting for the purpose of creating appropriate legislative districts. And the government ought to start with the notion that districts should be compact and contiguous as statutes used to require.



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 



Don´t blame the gun for the shot! People are the problem, not those in power, but those who know they are in the hands of a bunch of corrupt, and yet, do nothing!



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 05:49 PM
link   
Any government should be considered illegitimate, until constitutional laws are implemented that clearly state and impose physical accountabilty of the governement established to its constituency.Such a law should be considered an apex jurisdicial statute upon which no amendment , interpretation or expiry may be enforced. No law can be created , amended or enforced without the apex statute mentioned above.
The statute of physical accountability is a set of laws that clearly states and imposes imprisonment ,confiscation and penalties to any of its members be they detrimental in any measurable way to their constituents. If an establishment responsible for execution or imposing of such penalties is unwilling to perform their direct tasks, constituents of such a government are allowed to avoid any taxation in any form.



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 06:14 PM
link   
Jean,

I couldn't agree more.

Can it be stopped, or are there just too many of us on too many different pages?

All I seem to be able to do is control my own reaction, and to choose not to participate in a system I know is broken.
edit on 18-5-2012 by Floydshayvious because: An addition.



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 06:25 PM
link   
The most blatant reason that political parties are the problem, is the fact that candidates who don't belong to the Republican or Democratic party are at a disadvantage with regards to ballot access and media coverage.

www.ballot-access.org...

"The extreme disparity of the burdens placed on old, established parties versus new parties has no parallel in any other democratic nation in the world. Indeed, the number of signatures required for Democrats and Republicans to get on primary ballots is itself too high in some states, and as a result about 25% of all state legislative races present the voter with only one candidate on the general-election ballot. "

The two party duopoly has enacted laws to ensure that the two party, same coin, system of governance continues.

The most important thing, is to educate others about the false left/right paradigm, they are both evil.



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


The real blame should go to the apathetic American people. We let this travesty go on unchecked.
Correction: the Occupy movement is a good start, but badly organized.




top topics



 
60
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join