Is it Time for Two America's?

This topic of division and the dysfunctional American political system has been discussed and thrashed here on ATS until it's whimpering. That is not the point of this thread. What I would like to discuss is a point made in an article in Der Speigel.

The parties themselves are fomenting an increasingly radicalized culture that deepens political, societal and geographic divisions in the country, argues the newspaper. And finally, there are few politicians in America who are willing or capable of thinking beyond their own electoral constituencies.

Source

My point is that this is exactly what we elect people to do, represent our goals and ideals in Washington. It's obvious to me that the conservatives and the progressives will never agree on much. Even here on ATS people almost come to blows over the defense of their ideology. Maybe it is time we said it's over, we'll never agree so let's part ways. Maybe it's time for two America's.

No, we just need to pull the conservatives into the 21st century kicking and screaming. The country will likely remain center right for quite a while longer though.

reply to post by links234

If you are speaking for yourself as a progressive why do you feel the need to control and change people? Isn't a better solution to leave folks alone and let them live their lives the way they want?

reply to post by Bassago

Yeah well, those crazy Germans, I wouldn't listen to advice from them, ever.

We have to remember that the rest of the world has a deep hatred of us and would like nothing better than for us to suffer.

In the case of the Gerrys, they even have a special word for it that no one else has in their vocabulary, schadenfreude.

Thanks guys, we can handle our own affairs and this, as it turns out, is exactly how we roll.

reply to post by Bassago


Well the truth is, there is little room for free thought in the current liberal agenda. I'm being honest. Any kind of criticism is not listened to, and free thought is not appreciated. I'm sitting here in a liberal arts college as we speak.

We seem to have split into a society based on freedom and a society based on "scientific" ethical totalitarianism.

Bassago
reply to post by links234

 

If you are speaking for yourself as a progressive why do you feel the need to control and change people? Isn't a better solution to leave folks alone and let them live their lives the way they want?

I am a progressive, and I am *not* a Democrat at the moment. In fact, I recently started calling myself "progressive" in order to differentiate myself from the liberals.

I don't think a society where there is no freedom of choice, even over silly things, is very progressive.

reply to post by links234


It's time for Running Man, we'd make millions.
OR perhaps TERM Limits...
Or what I prefer is both...
He who loses is lunch.

reply to post by Bassago


Haven't we seen that movie before? It was pretty messy if the history books are any indication...

Also, what do we do about location? Can't have two America's if GOP's and DEM's live right across the street from each other.

How would it be implemented?

I don't hate the concept but there are a lot of counter-arguments to be made assuming it's even feasible.

Or were you just making a point?

greencmp
reply to post by Bassago

 

Yeah well, those crazy Germans, I wouldn't listen to advice from them, ever.

We have to remember that the rest of the world has a deep hatred of us and would like nothing better than for us to suffer.

In the case of the Gerrys, they even have a special word for it that no one else has in their vocabulary, schadenfreude.

Thanks guys, we can handle our own affairs and this, as it turns out, is exactly how we roll.

I wasn't listening to them. My point was basically that the conservatives and progressive are never going to agree. It's almost like we need a big wall down the middle where you can choose who you want to be with and what you believe.

Maybe Germany has some of that rock left over from that wall they had. I'm not kidding, the way the hate talk and rhetoric is flying I'd rather be in another country.

And what does schadenfreude mean?

Riffrafter
reply to post by Bassago

 

I don't hate the concept but there are a lot of counter-arguments to be made assuming it's even feasible.

Or were you just making a point?

I was just making a point.
I know it would be almost impossible to implement.

reply to post by Bassago


Because when their policies and ideology are taken to the nth degree they're a danger to themselves and others. There should be some moderation, I don't believe that progressivism has all the answers.

However, insisting that God will save your child if you pray hard enough or that giving robber barons more money in the 'free' market is a good thing will, ultimately, be the destruction of our society.

reply to post by Bassago

Hey Bassago

Isn't a better solution to leave folks alone and let them live their lives the way they want?

This is as liberal a statement as i have ever heard. It is also a conservative statement.
Interesting, don't you think?

links234
reply to post by Bassago

 

Because when their policies and ideology are taken to the nth degree they're a danger to themselves and others. There should be some moderation, I don't believe that progressivism has all the answers.

However, insisting that God will save your child if you pray hard enough or that giving robber barons more money in the 'free' market is a good thing will, ultimately, be the destruction of our society.

Interesting. So you believe conservatives are mostly bible thumpers. I consider myself conservative and atheist. Have never joined a political party in my life though, couldn't stomach it.

In fact I'm so conservative I wouldn't tell anyone they couldn't walk off a cliff if they felt like it. The simple fact is people don't have the right to tell others their beliefs are wrong. It's up to them to decide for themselves. Otherwise we get the nanny state.

Bassago

greencmp
reply to post by Bassago

 

Yeah well, those crazy Germans, I wouldn't listen to advice from them, ever.

We have to remember that the rest of the world has a deep hatred of us and would like nothing better than for us to suffer.

In the case of the Gerrys, they even have a special word for it that no one else has in their vocabulary, schadenfreude.

Thanks guys, we can handle our own affairs and this, as it turns out, is exactly how we roll.

I wasn't listening to them. My point was basically that the conservatives and progressive are never going to agree. It's almost like we need a big wall down the middle where you can choose who you want to be with and what you believe.

Maybe Germany has some of that rock left over from that wall they had. I'm not kidding, the way the hate talk and rhetoric is flying I'd rather be in another country.

And what does schadenfreude mean?

Well, they never have agreed. The problem is that these policies are happening at the federal level where there really ought not to be any policies, left or right.

If a state chooses to be progressive they can be. If a state chooses to be conservative they can be too. In fact, it need not be that large, cities and towns can have different policies and people will vote with their feet.

Schadenfreude is 'that feeling of pleasure that is felt from observing someone else's misfortune'. No #, they have a word for that, is it any wonder.

TerryMcGuire
reply to post by Bassago

 

Hey Bassago

Isn't a better solution to leave folks alone and let them live their lives the way they want?

This is as liberal a statement as i have ever heard. It is also a conservative statement.
Interesting, don't you think?

Maybe so, I'm the most conservative liberal you will ever meet.

Guess it was the 60's-70's that caused that. I take no blame for expanding my mind.

Yes, we need two Americas, but the problem is it would never work for these reasons:

1. You'll never get everyone to move across the country
2. Moderates, independents and undecided will get screwed
3. A lot of republicans won't want to live with the right-wing psychos, and a lot of democrats won't want to be ruled by New York and California.

there has been "two americas" for years . there is "their america" and "our america" . unfortunatley the masses are all caught up in the democratic or republican war , and not realizing that the republicans and democrats in government are part of "their america" . there is not one person , democrat or republican , in the government who are doing anything at all mfor the best interest of "our america" , besides the occasional bone they toss from their tables down to us , and then act like they are martyrs for doing so . i think we need to move back to the one america , and ship all these politicians off to the people they sold the american people out to , after they have been tarred and feathered of course.

should have let it happen the first time, and we wouldnt be in this mess now.

Liberals and Conservatives can't live together. One loves big government, one loves freedom.

Riffrafter
reply to post by Bassago

 

Also, what do we do about location? Can't have two America's if GOP's and DEM's live right across the street from each other.

How would it be implemented?

dems get-- Ca, Ny, Fla, Va, Md, Nc, Sc, Ct, Ri, Tx, Nm, Az, Hi, and Nv.

gop gets -- Ak, and the rest..

Done.

reply to post by Bassago


Instead, I would suggest getting rid of the party system all together. Let people run on their own individual platform instead of being forced to align themselves with one ideology. Moderates in both parties never get the attention they deserve. Being totally left or right in political ideology never satisfies the majority of the population. It creates divisions and results in uncompromising and government stalemates which we are witnessing now.

if we can set term limits for representatives and remove corporate and lobbying influences, allow individuals to run for office who have no financial backing from outside interests, and give all political candidates the same equal amount for their political campaigns, maybe than we would have a true government by the people and for the people.