Republicans are for a smaller government than the Democrats. That doesn't mean that they're for a small government in the slightest - just at least a tiny bit smaller than the one preferred by their opponents.
That statement is directly contradicted by reality on every level and has been for several *decades*. Reagan broke the record for growth of the federal government set by FDR. Bush II *shattered* that record.
Please pull your head out of your ass and quit repeating something so ridiculous that it hasn't been even remotely sane in over 30 years. Seriously, Republicans speaking about small government are pathetic and laughable given that they are far and away the biggest big government party.
The funny thing for me is I've always been a Randroid, since long before I even heard of her or saw any of the movies. I'd really like to know where that in me came from (and it certainly wasn't handed down by my parents or family).
Well, Rand's "philosophy" is basically just a justification for sociopathy, so it wouldn't be surprising if you arrived at it independently...assuming you have no empathy and one hell of an unjustified ego. No idea if that's true of you, but i can't really think of any other circumstances under which one could come up with such a simplistic, blatantly incorrect worldview.
It's not like it's a particularly insightful or deep "philosophy". One way of looking at it is take Liberalism, reset it as a religion instead of a philosophy and insert a big chunk of sociopathy and a brief skimming of, "The Wealth of Nations" ignoring Smith's cautions about too little regulation of the market.
Another way of looking at her "philosophy" is take Marx's "Communist Manifesto", drop the ending where he predicts Capitalism collapsing on itself when too much wealth gets filtered upward as we're seeing today. Rand ignores that very real very obvious issue and pretends that it will magically all work out. Obviously, this isn't happening and won't happen.
That's why nobody with any sense takes Rand seriously as anything but a sociopathic hack writer.
Powerful Statist governments killed >100 million people in the last century. I see this as a more immediate and real threat to us, our children, our grandchildren and theirs, so I fight anything that moves in that direction (left).
Uggh, the ignorance.
WW2 was the great war of Liberalism and the Left ( The Allies ) against the Right ( The Axis ). Yes, the Soviets et al went to the far extreme left, and were also statist, but this recent redefinition of right *by the right* to mean small government, individual liberty (which is known as *Liberalism* and is what you're left or right *of* ) is truly disgusting. The political right is entirely incompatible with Liberalism and therefore with the US Constitution by its very definition. That's why after their side lost in WW2, the American bankers and industrialists decided to redefine the term. It worked on a great many weak, stupid lazy people.
So, I'm sure you do fight anything that would help pull the country to the left, that is toward the center and away from the lunatic fringe upon which we're currently teetering, but that's not a good thing in any way shape or form. It merely demonstrates conclusively that you have no idea what the words you're using mean or much of anything about history or the principles upon which America was founded...Well, or that you're actually proud of being a Fascist. I hope you don't live here, for you should be deeply ashamed of yourself given our grandparents sacrificed so much to fight the terror of the Right in WW2. If you do live here, why not consider moving to a right wing country, like Iran or Saudi Arabia? It seems you'd be much better served living in a place that is built upon your cherished ideals rather than tearing down a place built on the idea that your ideals are shit, doesn't it?
Apart from Feudalism/Aristocracy, Fascism/Nazism and Theocracy, can you even name an actual right wing form of government that's ever been implemented?!? Have you ever even heard of a right wing government which decent people would describe in a positive light?!?
No, the media isn't centrist, it is commercial. Their primary interest is to make money, and that trumps all other interests. Making money translates into advertising dollars, and that means making their sponsors happy and getting viewers/readers.
First, McVeigh and Breivik were not "Christian fundamentalists",
Yes, they were. They were both quite explicitly Christian.
Even if they had, it would obviously be against the teachings of Christ.
Wrong again! The mythical Jesus preached crap all over the spectrum *including* every letter of every word of all the sick racist violence in The Old Testament. Plus, Christians were the most vile force of violence torture, murder and oppression ever seen for well over a thousand years. Whether or not you agree with the biblical justifications given for such actions is irrelevant. Christians did all that for a long time in the name of their gods and still do today. The only reason it doesn't happen as much these days is because Western society is based on the Secular, Liberal ideals of the Enlightenment. Islam is still hundreds of years behind, although the US is quickly regressing with the takeover by lunatic fringe religious extremists.
Also, you don't see Christians rioting and killing people in mass every time a Bible is burned or someone makes a cartoon of Jesus
Any more.
In other words, your moral equivalency argument is bullshit.
No, it's rock solid. You're looking at a Secular, Liberal society, calling it a Christian society even though the vast majority of the commands of that religion are outlawed in every decent society on Earth including the US (for now). You then compare that to Theocratic societies and act as if you're making a comparison between the religions. Christianity is every bit as bad as Islam by its teachings, it's just largely confined to Western Liberal Secular countries whose laws almost totally neuter the religion making it more of a social club than anything anybody truly believes in. Just look at all the freaking bacon Christians eat. There would be none if they took their faith seriously instead of picking and choosing bits to go spread their hatred of gays and such.
So, yes, Religious societies are hideously violent, brutal and disgusting compared to Secular Liberal societies. That should be blatantly obvious to you given that you haven't chosen to leave Secular Liberal America and move to Saudi Arabia or some other religious shithole. But choosing between Islam and Christianity solely on their merits leaves little to decide upon. Heck, at least Mohammed was almost certainly an actual person whereas Jesus almost certainly was not...especially given the fact that early Christians didn't believe anything of the sort and that was only added to the fairy tale later.
One major problem with your ratings is that you have 8, the military as heroes while they are the major tool owned and used against everybody by villains 4 and 7.
There is no way you can build a consistent system of this nature and have the military as good guys. They are the weapons used by the bad guys and since it's a volunteer force, there is no way to justify membership in the military unless you are a hard core villain.
NEVER? Be careful using that word. The fact that you are alive depends entirely upon the fact that it has happened in nature. Your cells generate the energy that keeps you alive due to the presence of mitochondria which are there due to the integration of bacteria into the genome of humans and (many?, most?, all?) animal species on the planet.
Seriously, life is a heck of a lot more wild than you think. Dawkins' "Ancestor's Tale" is a great read for the layman ( like myself) to get a decent grasp of how far out things really are.
That doesn't quite fit. Walmart itself is the predator on both Walmart shoppers and their ecosystems. There is some sort of coevolution between them, but it's definitely a predatory relationship of some sort. I don't know enough about evolutionary biology to recognize any analogous systems in nature though. Perhaps you do?
assuming SOPA doesn't pass. Your genuine evil won't materialize till the economy is far past saving.
The fact that something so far out on the fascist fringe was even proposed in Congress without those proposing it being dragged out and shot in the street as tyrants and traitors demonstrates conclusively that the genuine evil has already long since materialized.
What does it say about society that if you advocate legalizing almost everything you'll be labelled a conservative?
Nothing about society. It says about you that you're completely delusional. The right wingers/ conservatives are the police staters by definition.
What are the names of the forms of right wing government that have existed? Fascism, Nazism, Feudalism.
Yeah sparky, that's all about everything being legal all right...but only for the elite... including murdering the peons at will.
The ignorance of people these days, I mean "conservative" means "opposed to liberalism". Liberalism is the principle upon which the US was founded. WW2 was a showdown between Liberalism and the Left on one side (Allies) versus the Right ( the axis).
How soon people piss in the face of the sacrifices of their grandparents because the new Nazis tell them to on the idiot box.
Do you think bankers taking advantage of a situation to make a profit is materially different from a homeowner refinancing their house in a bubble, taking out $150k, blowing that on cars, vacations and expensive clothes and wanting a bailout when they can no longer afford the mortgage?
Obviously. The majority of the people who aren't bankers didn't take out $150K to blow on nonsense. That's something that some did that you're dishonestly trying to blame everyone for. The bankers lobbied for the repeal of the oversight that would have prevented the damage they caused. Further after causing that damage they're far richer than ever. When a system is designed to reward the worst failures the most it's broken.
these dimwit protesters now,
From what I've seen with my own eyes rather than through the filter of a media owned by the people they're protesting against, these dimwit leeches as you refer to them are composed of a large number of professionals (teachers, professors, nurses and so on) as well as college students.
They are brightwitted enough to recognize that their future was screwed and to recognize who is sitting there with all the money that was stolen from everybody else.
This is in direct opposition to the Tea Baggers who are just spouting the ignorant lies that were fed to them by Koch industries to support rule by unearned wealth.
So, no, they're not all the same. The bankers caused the problem intentionally and reaped the only benefits to be had hence are clearly the bad guys here.
The Tea Baggers are the brownshirts of the bad guys funded and fed the lies of the bad guys. The Occupy crowd are patriotic citizens standing up for their real actual rights. Like the right not to be robbed and defrauded.
If you're truly so ignorant of current events and of historical trends, why wouldn't you be ashamed to spout such blatant willful ignorance? Oh yeah, the anti-intellectual movement also funded by the bad guys made knowing what you're talking about uncool and spouting ignorant crap the new cool thing. Congrats, you're cool like Paris Hilton. Good little doggie.
Perhaps only pure mathematicians do their greatest work when they are young (like Srinivasa Ramanujan, or Ãvariste Galois)
Not really the best examples since they didn't fail to do better work later in life because they were no longer young, but because they didn't live to be old;-)
Gauss, Cauchy and Euler all were still publishing through old age.
. Smith on the other-hand misjudged human nature and didn't think regulations would be necessary (and he has some good points about propping up incumbents at the cost of society)
No he didn't. He explicitly stated that both over *and under* regulation were problems that needed to be addressed and why. The Randroid dipshits who never actually read Smith like to trot that garbage out all the time, but it's not true.
A market you have to manipulate is, by definition, not free.
Maybe you should actually learn the definition of a free market before spouting idiocy? You're talking about an unregulated market which is nothing like a free market.
Ignorance is curable, but admitting you have a problem is the first step.
Claiming that this system is evidence of a "failure" of "free markets" is like cutting the legs off of a frog and then claiming "See, look! Frogs can't jump!"
You talk of a Free Market yet describe a completely different idea, an Unregulated Market. Unregulated markets are hideously inefficient and nothing like free markets. Free markets are only a hypothetical ideal anyhow which can only be approximated by a healthy amount of regulation. Without regulation the market will never be anything close to free. This is really obvious when you take a second to think about it. Laws against murder are laws which act to regulate the market. It's irrelevant whether or not market regulation was the intended purpose of the law, it works that way nonetheless.
It is really sad to see people like you still ignoring the blatantly obvious facts to parrot the propaganda of the already rich when the only point in them having sold those lies to you in the first place is to allow them to avoid having to deal with anything like a free market.
Capitalism isn't the government giving money to corporations at taxpayer expense.
Sure it is. Whoever has the gold makes the rules. That is the golden rule of capitalism. Whoever owns the capital rules.
With true capitalism monopolies can only exist if they serve the consumer better than any other competitor
And by "true capitalism" you mean a fairy tale idealization which can't possibly exist in the real world. For those of us actually discussing the real world in which we all live you just come across as a naive child.
. "Conservative" on the hand is an ideology, it has tons of written "law" that says "thou shalt have the smallest government possible", "thou shalt tax as minimally as possible".
No, not at all. That is just the bullshit line they use to dupe idiots into voting against their own best interests.
"Conservative" means "Opposed to Liberalism". "Liberalism" is the Enlightenment philosophy of individual liberty upon which the US was founded.
As Liberalism arose, "Conservative" was coined by those in opposition to the very idea of individual liberty and support for the traditional values of rule by the *crown*, *church* and *the aristocracy*. This is how we know that you're completely full of shit.
Now, in the modern day, conservatives claim to believe in small government, but it's either the lies of the rich or the idiots duped by the rich repeating their idiotic lies.
By small government, they only mean a government without the power to do anything to reign in the power of the wealthy elite. This necessarily and absolutely leads to a return to aristocracy..that is to say the real goal of the conservative movement since its invention. It still needs to be big enough to take the money from the masses and give it to the elite. It still needs to be big enough to put huge numbers of people in prison etc.
The entire right wing *is* painted with the same brush. They stand in fundamental opposition to the idea that "We hold this truth to be self-evident: that all men are created equal" by the definition of the political right.
"Right" means an elitist, aristocratic government where the power of the state is to be used to keep the masses down for the benefit of the elite. In the French assembly the representatives of the crown, church and aristocracy sat on the *RIGHT* and the representatives of the people sat on the *LEFT* . Liberalism, which is what you can be said to be left or right of, wasn't invented at that point.
So, please stop attempting to rewrite history in order to promote your bullshit fascist agenda. Whether it's by malice or ignorance, I'm sick to death of hearing you scum piss all over every decent thing this country ever stood for
There also appears to be a shortage of land for sale to foreign nations these days. If you really want to get crazy, selling off California would be worth quite a bit, even if logistically difficult. The infrastructure alone would make it worth a lot of cash.
That would be stupid though. California is a huge asset. They pay a huge chunk of the taxes for all the welfare states...like Alaska the queen of the welfare states. Losing Alaska would be win win. Losing California would be lose lose.
..., and will probably provoke the creation of more draconian laws or harsher penalties.
Are you honestly that out of touch with reality that you don't understand that they *already are* pushing for more an more draconian laws *and* harsher penallties for everything? We're way past the point where any actual actions on anybody's part are required to allow the fascist rulers to make up insane lies in order to promote their ownership of the world.
Look at the lies that got us into Iraq and the treasonous cowards who still refuse to admit they were duped like muppets. Hell look at the people who still speak in favor of that Fascist promoting nun raping drug dealing, Osama bin Laden supporting treasonous Nazi coward Ronald Reagan.
Hell, the retarded monkeys in America piss in the face of every decent thing this country ever claimed to stand for and destroy every protection we had in order to shove their ignorant hatred of gay people into the law in spite of it being blatantly anti-American.
Seriously, dude, we're getting all that shit regardless of any actual causative actions. You're just being ignorant if you think anything these folks are doing is contributing to the already ongoing worldwide fascist revolution.
Slashdot Mirror
Republicans are for a smaller government than the Democrats. That doesn't mean that they're for a small government in the slightest - just at least a tiny bit smaller than the one preferred by their opponents.
That statement is directly contradicted by reality on every level and has been for several *decades*.
Reagan broke the record for growth of the federal government set by FDR. Bush II *shattered* that record.
Please pull your head out of your ass and quit repeating something so ridiculous that it hasn't been even remotely sane in over 30 years.
Seriously, Republicans speaking about small government are pathetic and laughable given that they are far and away the biggest big government party.
The funny thing for me is I've always been a Randroid, since long before I even heard of her or saw any of the movies. I'd really like to know where that in me came from (and it certainly wasn't handed down by my parents or family).
Well, Rand's "philosophy" is basically just a justification for sociopathy, so it wouldn't be surprising if you arrived at it independently...assuming you have no empathy and one hell of an unjustified ego. No idea if that's true of you, but i can't really think of any other circumstances under which one could come up with such a simplistic, blatantly incorrect worldview.
It's not like it's a particularly insightful or deep "philosophy".
One way of looking at it is take Liberalism, reset it as a religion instead of a philosophy and insert a big chunk of sociopathy and a brief skimming of, "The Wealth of Nations" ignoring Smith's cautions about too little regulation of the market.
Another way of looking at her "philosophy" is take Marx's "Communist Manifesto", drop the ending where he predicts Capitalism collapsing on itself when too much wealth gets filtered upward as we're seeing today. Rand ignores that very real very obvious issue and pretends that it will magically all work out. Obviously, this isn't happening and won't happen.
That's why nobody with any sense takes Rand seriously as anything but a sociopathic hack writer.
Wow. While that doesn't use vehicular references to make the analogy, the point hits home.
That is hilarious :-)
Powerful Statist governments killed >100 million people in the last century. I see this as a more immediate and real threat to us, our children, our grandchildren and theirs, so I fight anything that moves in that direction (left).
Uggh, the ignorance.
WW2 was the great war of Liberalism and the Left ( The Allies ) against the Right ( The Axis ). Yes, the Soviets et al went to the far extreme left, and were also statist, but this recent redefinition of right *by the right* to mean small government, individual liberty (which is known as *Liberalism* and is what you're left or right *of* ) is truly disgusting. The political right is entirely incompatible with Liberalism and therefore with the US Constitution by its very definition. That's why after their side lost in WW2, the American bankers and industrialists decided to redefine the term. It worked on a great many weak, stupid lazy people.
So, I'm sure you do fight anything that would help pull the country to the left, that is toward the center and away from the lunatic fringe upon which we're currently teetering, but that's not a good thing in any way shape or form. It merely demonstrates conclusively that you have no idea what the words you're using mean or much of anything about history or the principles upon which America was founded...Well, or that you're actually proud of being a Fascist.
I hope you don't live here, for you should be deeply ashamed of yourself given our grandparents sacrificed so much to fight the terror of the Right in WW2. If you do live here, why not consider moving to a right wing country, like Iran or Saudi Arabia? It seems you'd be much better served living in a place that is built upon your cherished ideals rather than tearing down a place built on the idea that your ideals are shit, doesn't it?
Apart from Feudalism/Aristocracy, Fascism/Nazism and Theocracy, can you even name an actual right wing form of government that's ever been implemented?!? Have you ever even heard of a right wing government which decent people would describe in a positive light?!?
No, the media isn't centrist, it is commercial. Their primary interest is to make money, and that trumps all other interests. Making money translates into advertising dollars, and that means making their sponsors happy and getting viewers/readers.
Which is far fringe right wing by definition.
First, McVeigh and Breivik were not "Christian fundamentalists",
Yes, they were. They were both quite explicitly Christian.
Even if they had, it would obviously be against the teachings of Christ.
Wrong again! The mythical Jesus preached crap all over the spectrum *including* every letter of every word of all the sick racist violence in The Old Testament. Plus, Christians were the most vile force of violence torture, murder and oppression ever seen for well over a thousand years. Whether or not you agree with the biblical justifications given for such actions is irrelevant. Christians did all that for a long time in the name of their gods and still do today. The only reason it doesn't happen as much these days is because Western society is based on the Secular, Liberal ideals of the Enlightenment. Islam is still hundreds of years behind, although the US is quickly regressing with the takeover by lunatic fringe religious extremists.
Also, you don't see Christians rioting and killing people in mass every time a Bible is burned or someone makes a cartoon of Jesus
Any more.
In other words, your moral equivalency argument is bullshit.
No, it's rock solid. You're looking at a Secular, Liberal society, calling it a Christian society even though the vast majority of the commands of that religion are outlawed in every decent society on Earth including the US (for now). You then compare that to Theocratic societies and act as if you're making a comparison between the religions.
Christianity is every bit as bad as Islam by its teachings, it's just largely confined to Western Liberal Secular countries whose laws almost totally neuter the religion making it more of a social club than anything anybody truly believes in. Just look at all the freaking bacon Christians eat. There would be none if they took their faith seriously instead of picking and choosing bits to go spread their hatred of gays and such.
So, yes, Religious societies are hideously violent, brutal and disgusting compared to Secular Liberal societies. That should be blatantly obvious to you given that you haven't chosen to leave Secular Liberal America and move to Saudi Arabia or some other religious shithole. But choosing between Islam and Christianity solely on their merits leaves little to decide upon. Heck, at least Mohammed was almost certainly an actual person whereas Jesus almost certainly was not...especially given the fact that early Christians didn't believe anything of the sort and that was only added to the fairy tale later.
Well, vi, obviously. But shouldn't it be named EGACS by now?
Eighty Gigs And Constantly Swapping ;-)
One major problem with your ratings is that you have 8, the military as heroes while they are the major tool owned and used against everybody by villains 4 and 7.
There is no way you can build a consistent system of this nature and have the military as good guys. They are the weapons used by the bad guys and since it's a volunteer force, there is no way to justify membership in the military unless you are a hard core villain.
NEVER? Be careful using that word. The fact that you are alive depends entirely upon the fact that it has happened in nature. Your cells generate the energy that keeps you alive due to the presence of mitochondria which are there due to the integration of bacteria into the genome of humans and (many?, most?, all?) animal species on the planet.
Seriously, life is a heck of a lot more wild than you think. Dawkins' "Ancestor's Tale" is a great read for the layman ( like myself) to get a decent grasp of how far out things really are.
That doesn't quite fit. Walmart itself is the predator on both Walmart shoppers and their ecosystems. There is some sort of coevolution between them, but it's definitely a predatory relationship of some sort. I don't know enough about evolutionary biology to recognize any analogous systems in nature though. Perhaps you do?
assuming SOPA doesn't pass. Your genuine evil won't materialize till the economy is far past saving.
The fact that something so far out on the fascist fringe was even proposed in Congress without those proposing it being dragged out and shot in the street as tyrants and traitors demonstrates conclusively that the genuine evil has already long since materialized.
Yeah, VSS is one piece of their own dogshit that even microsoft won't eat.
What does it say about society that if you advocate legalizing almost everything you'll be labelled a conservative?
Nothing about society. It says about you that you're completely delusional. The right wingers/ conservatives are the police staters by definition.
What are the names of the forms of right wing government that have existed?
Fascism, Nazism, Feudalism.
Yeah sparky, that's all about everything being legal all right...but only for the elite... including murdering the peons at will.
The ignorance of people these days, I mean "conservative" means "opposed to liberalism". Liberalism is the principle upon which the US was founded.
WW2 was a showdown between Liberalism and the Left on one side (Allies) versus the Right ( the axis).
How soon people piss in the face of the sacrifices of their grandparents because the new Nazis tell them to on the idiot box.
Do you think bankers taking advantage of a situation to make a profit is materially different from a homeowner refinancing their house in a bubble, taking out $150k, blowing that on cars, vacations and expensive clothes and wanting a bailout when they can no longer afford the mortgage?
Obviously. The majority of the people who aren't bankers didn't take out $150K to blow on nonsense. That's something that some did that you're dishonestly trying to blame everyone for. The bankers lobbied for the repeal of the oversight that would have prevented the damage they caused. Further after causing that damage they're far richer than ever. When a system is designed to reward the worst failures the most it's broken.
these dimwit protesters now,
From what I've seen with my own eyes rather than through the filter of a media owned by the people they're protesting against, these dimwit leeches as you refer to them are composed of a large number of professionals (teachers, professors, nurses and so on) as well as college students.
They are brightwitted enough to recognize that their future was screwed and to recognize who is sitting there with all the money that was stolen from everybody else.
This is in direct opposition to the Tea Baggers who are just spouting the ignorant lies that were fed to them by Koch industries to support rule by unearned wealth.
So, no, they're not all the same. The bankers caused the problem intentionally and reaped the only benefits to be had hence are clearly the bad guys here.
The Tea Baggers are the brownshirts of the bad guys funded and fed the lies of the bad guys.
The Occupy crowd are patriotic citizens standing up for their real actual rights. Like the right not to be robbed and defrauded.
If you're truly so ignorant of current events and of historical trends, why wouldn't you be ashamed to spout such blatant willful ignorance? Oh yeah, the anti-intellectual movement also funded by the bad guys made knowing what you're talking about uncool and spouting ignorant crap the new cool thing.
Congrats, you're cool like Paris Hilton. Good little doggie.
Perhaps only pure mathematicians do their greatest work when they are young (like Srinivasa Ramanujan, or Ãvariste Galois)
Not really the best examples since they didn't fail to do better work later in life because they were no longer young, but because they didn't live to be old ;-)
Gauss, Cauchy and Euler all were still publishing through old age.
. Smith on the other-hand misjudged human nature and didn't think regulations would be necessary (and he has some good points about propping up incumbents at the cost of society)
No he didn't. He explicitly stated that both over *and under* regulation were problems that needed to be addressed and why.
The Randroid dipshits who never actually read Smith like to trot that garbage out all the time, but it's not true.
A market you have to manipulate is, by definition, not free.
Maybe you should actually learn the definition of a free market before spouting idiocy? You're talking about an unregulated market which is nothing like a free market.
Ignorance is curable, but admitting you have a problem is the first step.
Claiming that this system is evidence of a "failure" of "free markets" is like cutting the legs off of a frog and then claiming "See, look! Frogs can't jump!"
You talk of a Free Market yet describe a completely different idea, an Unregulated Market. Unregulated markets are hideously inefficient and nothing like free markets. Free markets are only a hypothetical ideal anyhow which can only be approximated by a healthy amount of regulation. Without regulation the market will never be anything close to free. This is really obvious when you take a second to think about it. Laws against murder are laws which act to regulate the market. It's irrelevant whether or not market regulation was the intended purpose of the law, it works that way nonetheless.
It is really sad to see people like you still ignoring the blatantly obvious facts to parrot the propaganda of the already rich when the only point in them having sold those lies to you in the first place is to allow them to avoid having to deal with anything like a free market.
http://www.chromium.org/
The Genesis story does not rule out the possibility that God created other humans besides Adam and Eve at some point after creating Adam and Eve.
No, but it does make it much more likely that the other people were created by one of the many other gods Jehova was so rip roaring jealous of.
Capitalism isn't the government giving money to corporations at taxpayer expense.
Sure it is. Whoever has the gold makes the rules. That is the golden rule of capitalism. Whoever owns the capital rules.
With true capitalism monopolies can only exist if they serve the consumer better than any other competitor
And by "true capitalism" you mean a fairy tale idealization which can't possibly exist in the real world. For those of us actually discussing the real world in which we all live you just come across as a naive child.
. "Conservative" on the hand is an ideology, it has tons of written "law" that says "thou shalt have the smallest government possible", "thou shalt tax as minimally as possible".
No, not at all. That is just the bullshit line they use to dupe idiots into voting against their own best interests.
"Conservative" means "Opposed to Liberalism".
"Liberalism" is the Enlightenment philosophy of individual liberty upon which the US was founded.
As Liberalism arose, "Conservative" was coined by those in opposition to the very idea of individual liberty and support for the traditional values of rule by the *crown*, *church* and *the aristocracy*. This is how we know that you're completely full of shit.
Now, in the modern day, conservatives claim to believe in small government, but it's either the lies of the rich or the idiots duped by the rich repeating their idiotic lies.
By small government, they only mean a government without the power to do anything to reign in the power of the wealthy elite. This necessarily and absolutely leads to a return to aristocracy..that is to say the real goal of the conservative movement since its invention. It still needs to be big enough to take the money from the masses and give it to the elite. It still needs to be big enough to put huge numbers of people in prison etc.
The entire right wing *is* painted with the same brush. They stand in fundamental opposition to the idea that "We hold this truth to be self-evident: that all men are created equal" by the definition of the political right.
"Right" means an elitist, aristocratic government where the power of the state is to be used to keep the masses down for the benefit of the elite. In the French assembly the representatives of the crown, church and aristocracy sat on the *RIGHT* and the representatives of the people sat on the *LEFT* . Liberalism, which is what you can be said to be left or right of, wasn't invented at that point.
So, please stop attempting to rewrite history in order to promote your bullshit fascist agenda. Whether it's by malice or ignorance, I'm sick to death of hearing you scum piss all over every decent thing this country ever stood for
There also appears to be a shortage of land for sale to foreign nations these days. If you really want to get crazy, selling off California would be worth quite a bit, even if logistically difficult. The infrastructure alone would make it worth a lot of cash.
That would be stupid though. California is a huge asset. They pay a huge chunk of the taxes for all the welfare states...like Alaska the queen of the welfare states.
Losing Alaska would be win win. Losing California would be lose lose.
.
Or as Sublime said,
In their cover of a Bad Religion song...
..., and will probably provoke the creation of more draconian laws or harsher penalties.
Are you honestly that out of touch with reality that you don't understand that they *already are* pushing for more an more draconian laws *and* harsher penallties for everything? We're way past the point where any actual actions on anybody's part are required to allow the fascist rulers to make up insane lies in order to promote their ownership of the world.
Look at the lies that got us into Iraq and the treasonous cowards who still refuse to admit they were duped like muppets. Hell look at the people who still speak in favor of that Fascist promoting nun raping drug dealing, Osama bin Laden supporting treasonous Nazi coward Ronald Reagan.
Hell, the retarded monkeys in America piss in the face of every decent thing this country ever claimed to stand for and destroy every protection we had in order to shove their ignorant hatred of gay people into the law in spite of it being blatantly anti-American.
Seriously, dude, we're getting all that shit regardless of any actual causative actions. You're just being ignorant if you think anything these folks are doing is contributing to the already ongoing worldwide fascist revolution.