America #1 ? not after reading this....

wicastawakan · Mar 27, 2005, 03:41 PM

The United States was founded as a republic, not a democracy. And I didn't suggest anyone should leave the US, I simply stated our freedom, including leaving if it is as intolerable as some make it out to be. The information you give is indeed pertinent & should be a wake up call but as usual, most will wait until it's too late or blame the commies, hicks, conservatives, liberals, ?. Many can identify the problems, few address the solutions. Sorry you didn't get the real drift of what I was saying, but it's back to if I have to explain, you wouldn't understand. So you've posted some good info that people can either act on or try to talk away. For those that need a roadmap, read the history of Rome & you'll be better prepared to understand/accept US direction & fate.

raid517 · Mar 27, 2005, 09:57 PM

No the American state was founded as a 'democratic republic.' It was certainly based on democratic ideals - this is very easy to see and to prove by reading your consitution and by reading about the people who helped write it and who their influences were - and which pilosophers and political figures of the day helped inspire its basic principals.

A republic is only part of this equation in that it refutes the need or any kind of monarchy - but a republic is not and was not all that America is or was intended to be. A republic on it's own is a fairly empty thing - but what your consitution tells you in this instance is that the American republic is designed to be a government for the people, on behalf of the people and by the people - so no need for a monarchy. These are still however, all very much extremely well established and widely recognised democratic principals.

I am not going to lecture you on your own consitution, but you really should consider studying it, it's history, the people who wrote it, what their influences were and how it all came to be. It really is quite a facinsting subject - and I am certain that you will learn some extremely interesting things that you may not have previously known.

It will certainly help prevent you from again making the empty and misguided distinction between America as a republic and America as a democracy - since you will quickly learn that in every sense it was very much intended to be both.

As for the subject of people leaving - I am glad you feel that it is a good idea to promote tourism among your fellow countrymen. Clearly though if your country is to survive, you would not want them to leave for too long - or indeed all at once, as this would quickly break the back of your economy. Better still if you want your country to prosper, that you promote tourism in your own country, so that your fellow countrymen can spend their hard earned dollars there - and then no one ever has to leave at all.

Best regards,

GJ

wicastawakan · Mar 28, 2005, 04:16 AM

I appreciate your input but you obviously have missed the point of most of what I've said. The key ending is "for the people" which seems to have drifted a little with the current two party system. I have indeed read the constitution as well as the Mayflower Compact, etc, etc, etc. Also the Bible in several versions & the Koran. I have plenty of experience in the process itself as a veteran and public office for 12 years. I also have been very interested in history & of course Giap ended up teaching me a lot about application of history. Again, I have managed to work through multiple college degrees and still working & voting. do. I appreciate your concern & do indeed practice what I preach. I also donate plenty of time to social causes including a free health clinic several times a month & work closely with others not of my race or spiritual persuation. As a disabled veteran, I don't see our government representing the people as it should & I work to improve that. I still maintain if one chooses not to participate, they can hunt for gold in a better place rather than whine or destroy.

raid517 · Mar 28, 2005, 04:44 AM

No I often get the impression that when someone from the right says that people who hate America should leave, what they really mean is anyone who disagrees with right wing politics should leave. And as I pointed out to you quite clearly, that is a wholy impractical proposition. You can disagree with conservatism, you can disagree with the right wing religious right of your country - without it meaning that you are somehow against America. You say that you think the two party system is unreperentative? How representative would it be then if there was only one party and one view expressed? How does that conform to any of the democratic ideals and pricipals that you say you have read and claim to understand? The truth is it doesn't - and by saying you think people who disagree with you or disagree with right wing politics should leave, or feel free to leave (or which ever way you want to spin it) what you are actually doing, is advocating is dismatling everything your country is supposed to stand for. And that has nothing at all to do with anything in your consitution or with the motivations or inspirations of the men who helped to write it.

In a real democracy you must admit for the views and opinions of a lot of people - many of who's views you might fundamentally disagree with - even if it meant it were true (which I doubt very much is the case) that there was a significant body of people in your country who claim to hate everything that America stands for. Because even they should have a place to express their views freely - without fear of censure from those who would prefer to not be able to hear them at all. You claim that it is they who hate America - yet I wonder if indeed it is not you who hates America and what America stands for? For it is you who would gladly see every priciplal that the contitution was drawn up to defend unceremonially trashed, by gladly wishing all opposing voices to leave - so that only one voice remains. And this my friend undoubtedly would be the voice of a totaliterian state.

Is that really what you wish America to be? If so how can you be a patriot - or even claim to care about your country at all? You cannot claim to love your country - then ask those who disagree with your views to leave. Because that would just make you a hypocryte.

GJ

Gabriel_Etranil · Mar 28, 2005, 05:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raid517

No I often get the impression that when someone from the right says that people who hate America should leave, what they really mean is anyone who disagrees with right wing politics should leave.

There you go that's your problem right there.

Dude...

Quote:

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

http://www.archives.gov/national_arc...ranscript.html

http://www.williampmeyers.org/republic.html

http://www.historychannel.com/perl/p...k.pl?ID=224834

http://www.thelibertycommittee.org/repdem.pdf

Falstaff · Mar 28, 2005, 05:52 AM

it is the spirit of the Constitution that makes our democracy unique...
laws may change, but the pursuit of freedom should never die, even when we ourselves seek to cast off the responsibilities that accompany our own democracy..people can bitch and moan about why we have elected our president twice, but the people spoke nonetheless whether they voted or not.
If people choose not to make a choice, they have still made a choice.....
I remember the Zager and Evans song...
In the year 2525
If man is still alive
If woman can survive
They may find

In the year 3535
Ain't gonna need to tell the truth, tell no lies
Everything you think, do, or say
Is in the pill you took today

In the year 4545
Ain't gonna need your teeth, won't need your eyes
You won't find a thing to do
Nobody's gonna look at you

In the year 5555
Your arms are hanging limp at your sides
Your legs not nothing to do
Some machine is doing that for you

In the year 6565
Ain't gonna need no husband, won't need no wife
You'll pick your son, pick your daughter too
From the bottom of a long black tube

In the year 7510
If God's a-comin' he ought to make it by then
Maybe he'll look around himself and say
Guess it's time for the Judgement day

In the year 8510
God's gonna shake his mighty head
He'll either say I'm pleased where man has been
Or tear it down and start again

In the year 9595
I'm kinda wondering if man's gonna be alive
He's taken everything this old earth can give
And he ain't put back nothing

Now it's been 10,000 years
Man has cried a billion tears
For what he never knew
Now man's reign is through
But through the eternal night
The twinkling of starlight
So very far away
Maybe it's only yesterday

In the year 2525
If man is still alive
If woman can survive
They may find

In the year 3535
Ain't gonna need to tell the truth, tell no lies
Everything you think, do or say
Is in the pill you took today

raid517 · Mar 28, 2005, 06:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabriel_Etranil

There you go that's your problem right there.

Dude...

http://www.archives.gov/national_arc...ranscript.html

http://www.williampmeyers.org/republic.html

http://www.historychannel.com/perl/p...k.pl?ID=224834

http://www.thelibertycommittee.org/repdem.pdf

And what exactly is my problem? That I am telling you that a republic and a democracy can be and in many instances are the same thing? And that America was in fact founded exactly as a democratic republic? If you care to read the links that you posted correctly you will see that they are saying exactly this.

A republic simply means that your sytem of government does not require that there be a king or a queen as the head of your state - it is though only one half of the equation - because you still need a system of government. It is entirely possible to live in a republic and to organise your government and your political system through the expression and exercise of democratic principals. Wether that system of government is weighted or not to take account of the views of everyone in that society (which is supposed to be the case with your own system of government) or whether it only takes into account the views of the majority (which many of you often seem to confuse as meaning a 'democracy') is irrelevant, you cannot simply dismiss the need for a working system of government by saying we are a 'republic' and nothing more. What is your system of government within this republic? Are you anarchists, are you communists, are you facists, are you a dictatorship, or are you democratic? You still have to choose, because all of these are and have been different kinds of a republic in the past. And 'democratic principals' does not mean the kind of mass mob rule that some of you people refer to and describe as a 'real democracy.' A principal is something you aspire to, it does not have to be absolute, it is not a case of 'all in or all out'. It can just as well be about 'half in and half out' as anything. Modern democracies - be they republics or not, would rarely survive for long without compromise.

GJ

Falstaff · Mar 28, 2005, 06:10 AM

Rome for awhile was a republic
and for the most part a mob.
keep the mob fed and keep them busy and entertained...
and the mob ruled along with the ruler...
but that was Rome.

raid517 · Mar 28, 2005, 06:13 AM

Indeed Jeff that was Rome - one of the many forms of republic to have existed.

GJ

Gabriel_Etranil · Mar 28, 2005, 06:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raid517

And what exactly is my problem? That I am telling you that a republic and a democracy can be and in many instances are the same thing? And that America was in fact founded exactly as a democratic republic? If you care to read the links that you posted correctly you will see that they are saying exactly this.

A republic simply means that your sytem of government does not require that there be a king or a queen as the head of your state - it is though only one half of the equation - because you still need a system of government. It is entirely possible to live in a republic and to organise your government and your political system through the expression and execise of democratic principals. Wether that system of government is weighted or not to take account of the views of everyone in that society (which is supposed to be the case with your own system of government) or whether it only takes into account the views of the majority (which many of you often seem to confuse as meaning a 'democracy') is irrelevant, you cannot simply dismiss the need for a working system of government by saying we are a 'republic' and nothing more. What is your system of government within this republic? Are you anarchists, are you communists, are you facists or are you democratic - because all of these are and have been different forms of a republic. And 'democratic principals' does not mean the kind of mass mob rule that some of you people refer to and describe as a 'real democracy.' A principal is something you aspire to, it does not have to be absolute, it is not a case of 'all in or all out' it can just as well be about 'half in and half out' as anything. Modern democracies - be they republics or not, would rarely survive for long without compromise.

GJ

There you go again exactly what I was saying. I put NO words in there and amazingly I said something I didn't say. If you would have read what I linked to you would understand what I was "saying".

And if you still think I'm "saying" what you said I said then the problem is on you. And what you said means you either didn't read what I linked or you have a problem with comprehension.

Falstaff · Mar 28, 2005, 06:14 AM

I do a little reading (puts encyclopedia away)

raid517 · Mar 28, 2005, 06:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabriel_Etranil

There you go again exactly what I was saying. I put NO words in there and amazingly I said something I didn't say. If you would have read what I linked to you would understand what I was "saying".

And if you still think I'm "saying" what you said I said then the problem is on you. And what you said means you either didn't read what I linked or you have a problem with comprehension.

Well I confess I am having extreme difficulty comprehending any kind of meaning at all from that.

What exactly were you implying with your links? You appeared to simply be fixated on the word 'republic' - as though you imagined that a republic could be a form of government initself. I simply opted to point out to you that without an accompanying system of government a 'republic' is really quite an empty concept.

That is all I attempted to do.

GJ

Falstaff · Mar 28, 2005, 06:35 AM

good luck Raid.....lol

Gabriel_Etranil · Mar 28, 2005, 06:51 AM

If you read through it you would have came across that America was founded as a Federal Republic. You were putting words in my mouth again, I said it was there if you read it. I'm also not denying democratic influences, again your putting words in my mouth.

You said : "No the American state was founded as a 'democratic republic.'"

My implications are simple.

A federal republic:

Quote:

A federal republic is, as the term suggests, a state which is both a federation and a republic. A federation is a state composed of a number of self-governing regions (often themselves referred to as 'states') united by a central, federal government. In a federation, unlike in a unitary state, the self-governing status of autonomous regions is constitutionally entrenched and cannot be revoked by a unilateral decision of the central government.

raid517 · Mar 28, 2005, 07:15 AM

The term Fedration in other words is just a part of the overall system of government. You cannot take these words in exclusion from each other and say that your system of government is simply one of these - or even only two. You cannot for example simply say "we are a republic!" Because you must ask then, how is that republic organised? How is it governed? You cannot just say "we are a federation!" Because then you must ask how is government organised within that federation - or if indeed it has any formal government at all? You cannot even just say that you are a "republican federation"- because then all you have said then is that you are a nation with no head of state and with no real visible system of government.

How are the members of this federation organised? Is there any unifying structure, or do all the individual member states follow their own system of government? And if they all have the same system of govenment, what is it? You still have to give it a name. You still have to be able to describe it. And in your case your founding fathers chose democracy as your system of government. Again you do have to be careful about distinctions - as some people as I noted would have you believe that democracy in it's purest form is little more than mob rule. But a modern democracy is not designed that way - it is designed to not just take into account the views of the majority - but as much as possible of everyone in that society. And that my friend is what is meant by 'democratic principals'.

So really to clear matters up for you, what you have (or what your founding fathers intended you to have) is a Federal Democratic Republic. Whether or not you actually still have this is possibly another issue.

GJ

Gabriel_Etranil · Mar 28, 2005, 07:19 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation

Just in case you don't read anything:

Quote:

Representative democracy comprises a form of democracy and theory of civics wherein voters choose (in free, secret, multi-party elections) representatives to act in their interests, but not as their proxies—i.e., not necessarily as directed but with enough authority to exercise initiative in the face of changing circumstances. Modern liberal democracies are important examples of representative democracy. In the United States this term is often synonymous with "republic".

raid517 · Mar 28, 2005, 07:27 AM

Mmm I see that you are attempting once again to divide these ideas? (I mean why print them sepearely?) Even a democracy taken in isolation needs to be organised in some way. So you must ask if it is a republican government within that democracy, or if it is a monarchist government, or if it is a federal government, or simply a regional government (as is the case here in the UK)?

You cannot take these ideas and seperate them out from each other. If you did what you had left would simply make no sense. You need to consider each of them in light of the other.

Or before I jump the gun again was there some other point to you posting those links?

GJ

Gabriel_Etranil · Mar 28, 2005, 07:31 AM

I knew again you would not take the time and read through.

Read the Quote in the previous post that I "added".

raid517 · Mar 28, 2005, 07:38 AM

So what is it you are trying to say? That the term republic on its own is meaningful to you? I'm afraid that you are not explaining yourself very clearly. It is very easy for me to do the same as you and make certain words in that statement larger than others.

Quote:

Representative democracy comprises a form of democracy and theory of civics wherein voters choose (in free, secret, multi-party elections) representatives to act in their interests, but not as their proxies—i.e., not necessarily as directed but with enough authority to exercise initiative in the face of changing circumstances. Modern liberal democracies are important examples of representative democracy. In the United States this term is often synonymous with "republic".

So what I wonder do these enlaged words say to you? Particularly when they are in the same comment posted you discussing a republic.

And I did read your comments and your links - although they didn't particularly tell me anything I didn't already know. Unfortunately however I cannt always catch comments when you subsquently go back and edit your posts.

GJ

Gabriel_Etranil · Mar 28, 2005, 07:41 AM

You do have a comprehension problem don't you, if I have to explain to you what that means and the point behind it then the problem is not with me but rather you.

There is also more to read in there for you to read since you said you "read" it.

raid517 · Mar 28, 2005, 07:48 AM

No I think you should at least make an effort to try to explain the point you are trying to make. Anyone can post a bunch of random links - but what is the point of posting them if you personally have nothing to say? And no my powers of comprehension are more than adequate thank you.

GJ

Gabriel_Etranil · Mar 28, 2005, 07:53 AM

You must have had a good education growing up if that is how you learned everything.

-And if I have to explain to you this comment then there is no point explaining anything to you.

raid517 · Mar 28, 2005, 08:01 AM

No, you don't have to explain it thanks. I'm not sure that it actually made any sense. But curioiusly I still don't really have any deep or burning desire for you to explain anything to me.

GJ

~~trodas~~ · Mar 28, 2005, 08:56 PM

Speaking about links, this comix strip is pretty sweet and it is about America after all

http://elftor.com/elftor.php?number=21

Enjoy

raid517 · Mar 28, 2005, 09:16 PM

Lol, that should be on the political funnies thread.

GJ

Pompey · Mar 29, 2005, 12:03 PM

A republic is an independent nation. That is all it means. China is a republic even though it is communist. Iraq was a republic, France is a republic as is America. All have very different styles of government. "Republic" is a word too broad to describe one specific form of government. The opposite of a republic is a monarchy. Britain, is a constitutional monarchy although it is democratic, they have a Queen as the head of state (however deminished her power is). There are few true monarchys left. Nepal and Tonga are the only ones I can think of at the moment. A federation is almost as vague as a republic, all it means a group of semi-autonomous states united (however loosely) to form a country. The US, Australia and Russia are the main ones.
A country is either a republic or monarchy. Then, Federation or single united state. Then a countrys style of government is defined (Authoritarian, Democratic, communist, theological etc).

Quote:

Representative democracy comprises a form of democracy and theory of civics wherein voters choose (in free, secret, multi-party elections) representatives to act in their interests, but not as their proxies—i.e., not necessarily as directed but with enough authority to exercise initiative in the face of changing circumstances. Modern liberal democracies are important examples of representative democracy. In the United States this term is often synonymous with "republic".

Exactly, in the US the term is often synonymous with republic.
This is from the link you yourself posted:

Quote:

The term republic thus most commonly means the system of government in which the head of state is selected for a limited term, as opposed to a [color=#0000ff]monarchy[/color]. Republicanism in this sense is support for the abolition of monarchies. This definition is particularly appropriate in countries such as [color=#0000ff]Australia[/color], where the abolition of the monarchy is a major political issue, and other [color=#0000ff]Commonwealth[/color] nations such as [color=#0000ff]Canada[/color], [color=#0000ff]New Zealand[/color], [color=#0000ff]Jamaica[/color], and [color=#0000ff]Barbados[/color]. A state not headed by a monarch is the primary meaning of the term republic in these nations.

In these countries, republicanism is largely about the post-colonial evolution of their relationships with the United Kingdom. Even in the [color=#0000ff]United Kingdom[/color], where there has never been much popular support for republicanism, it nonetheless commands a significant minority position. There, however, it's motivated more by the decreased popularity of the Royal Family as well as the classical argument against monarchy versus the egalitarian aspects of republicanism.

It also said this:

Quote:

In its basic sense, a republic is a state in which sovereignty derives ultimately from the people (however defined), rather than from a hereditary principle.

LuCifer · Mar 31, 2005, 07:05 AM

I Agree.

Mar 27, 2005, 03:41 PM	#151
wicastawakan DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Ada, OK Posts: 10 Rep Power: 0	The United States was founded as a republic, not a democracy. And I didn't suggest anyone should leave the US, I simply stated our freedom, including leaving if it is as intolerable as some make it out to be. The information you give is indeed pertinent & should be a wake up call but as usual, most will wait until it's too late or blame the commies, hicks, conservatives, liberals, ?. Many can identify the problems, few address the solutions. Sorry you didn't get the real drift of what I was saying, but it's back to if I have to explain, you wouldn't understand. So you've posted some good info that people can either act on or try to talk away. For those that need a roadmap, read the history of Rome & you'll be better prepared to understand/accept US direction & fate. __________________ Clint

Mar 27, 2005, 09:57 PM	#152
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	No the American state was founded as a 'democratic republic.' It was certainly based on democratic ideals - this is very easy to see and to prove by reading your consitution and by reading about the people who helped write it and who their influences were - and which pilosophers and political figures of the day helped inspire its basic principals. A republic is only part of this equation in that it refutes the need or any kind of monarchy - but a republic is not and was not all that America is or was intended to be. A republic on it's own is a fairly empty thing - but what your consitution tells you in this instance is that the American republic is designed to be a government for the people, on behalf of the people and by the people - so no need for a monarchy. These are still however, all very much extremely well established and widely recognised democratic principals. I am not going to lecture you on your own consitution, but you really should consider studying it, it's history, the people who wrote it, what their influences were and how it all came to be. It really is quite a facinsting subject - and I am certain that you will learn some extremely interesting things that you may not have previously known. It will certainly help prevent you from again making the empty and misguided distinction between America as a republic and America as a democracy - since you will quickly learn that in every sense it was very much intended to be both. As for the subject of people leaving - I am glad you feel that it is a good idea to promote tourism among your fellow countrymen. Clearly though if your country is to survive, you would not want them to leave for too long - or indeed all at once, as this would quickly break the back of your economy. Better still if you want your country to prosper, that you promote tourism in your own country, so that your fellow countrymen can spend their hard earned dollars there - and then no one ever has to leave at all. Best regards, GJ Last edited by raid517; Mar 27, 2005 at 10:38 PM.

Mar 28, 2005, 04:16 AM	#153
wicastawakan DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Ada, OK Posts: 10 Rep Power: 0	I appreciate your input but you obviously have missed the point of most of what I've said. The key ending is "for the people" which seems to have drifted a little with the current two party system. I have indeed read the constitution as well as the Mayflower Compact, etc, etc, etc. Also the Bible in several versions & the Koran. I have plenty of experience in the process itself as a veteran and public office for 12 years. I also have been very interested in history & of course Giap ended up teaching me a lot about application of history. Again, I have managed to work through multiple college degrees and still working & voting. do. I appreciate your concern & do indeed practice what I preach. I also donate plenty of time to social causes including a free health clinic several times a month & work closely with others not of my race or spiritual persuation. As a disabled veteran, I don't see our government representing the people as it should & I work to improve that. I still maintain if one chooses not to participate, they can hunt for gold in a better place rather than whine or destroy. __________________ Clint

Mar 28, 2005, 04:44 AM	#154
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	No I often get the impression that when someone from the right says that people who hate America should leave, what they really mean is anyone who disagrees with right wing politics should leave. And as I pointed out to you quite clearly, that is a wholy impractical proposition. You can disagree with conservatism, you can disagree with the right wing religious right of your country - without it meaning that you are somehow against America. You say that you think the two party system is unreperentative? How representative would it be then if there was only one party and one view expressed? How does that conform to any of the democratic ideals and pricipals that you say you have read and claim to understand? The truth is it doesn't - and by saying you think people who disagree with you or disagree with right wing politics should leave, or feel free to leave (or which ever way you want to spin it) what you are actually doing, is advocating is dismatling everything your country is supposed to stand for. And that has nothing at all to do with anything in your consitution or with the motivations or inspirations of the men who helped to write it. In a real democracy you must admit for the views and opinions of a lot of people - many of who's views you might fundamentally disagree with - even if it meant it were true (which I doubt very much is the case) that there was a significant body of people in your country who claim to hate everything that America stands for. Because even they should have a place to express their views freely - without fear of censure from those who would prefer to not be able to hear them at all. You claim that it is they who hate America - yet I wonder if indeed it is not you who hates America and what America stands for? For it is you who would gladly see every priciplal that the contitution was drawn up to defend unceremonially trashed, by gladly wishing all opposing voices to leave - so that only one voice remains. And this my friend undoubtedly would be the voice of a totaliterian state. Is that really what you wish America to be? If so how can you be a patriot - or even claim to care about your country at all? You cannot claim to love your country - then ask those who disagree with your views to leave. Because that would just make you a hypocryte. GJ Last edited by raid517; Mar 28, 2005 at 06:53 AM.

Mar 28, 2005, 05:52 AM	#156
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,047 Rep Power: 206	it is the spirit of the Constitution that makes our democracy unique... laws may change, but the pursuit of freedom should never die, even when we ourselves seek to cast off the responsibilities that accompany our own democracy..people can bitch and moan about why we have elected our president twice, but the people spoke nonetheless whether they voted or not. If people choose not to make a choice, they have still made a choice..... I remember the Zager and Evans song... In the year 2525 If man is still alive If woman can survive They may find In the year 3535 Ain't gonna need to tell the truth, tell no lies Everything you think, do, or say Is in the pill you took today In the year 4545 Ain't gonna need your teeth, won't need your eyes You won't find a thing to do Nobody's gonna look at you In the year 5555 Your arms are hanging limp at your sides Your legs not nothing to do Some machine is doing that for you In the year 6565 Ain't gonna need no husband, won't need no wife You'll pick your son, pick your daughter too From the bottom of a long black tube In the year 7510 If God's a-comin' he ought to make it by then Maybe he'll look around himself and say Guess it's time for the Judgement day In the year 8510 God's gonna shake his mighty head He'll either say I'm pleased where man has been Or tear it down and start again In the year 9595 I'm kinda wondering if man's gonna be alive He's taken everything this old earth can give And he ain't put back nothing Now it's been 10,000 years Man has cried a billion tears For what he never knew Now man's reign is through But through the eternal night The twinkling of starlight So very far away Maybe it's only yesterday In the year 2525 If man is still alive If woman can survive They may find In the year 3535 Ain't gonna need to tell the truth, tell no lies Everything you think, do or say Is in the pill you took today __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Mar 28, 2005, 06:10 AM	#158
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,047 Rep Power: 206	Rome for awhile was a republic and for the most part a mob. keep the mob fed and keep them busy and entertained... and the mob ruled along with the ruler... but that was Rome. __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Mar 28, 2005, 06:13 AM	#159
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	Indeed Jeff that was Rome - one of the many forms of republic to have existed. GJ

Mar 28, 2005, 06:14 AM	#161
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,047 Rep Power: 206	I do a little reading (puts encyclopedia away) __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Mar 28, 2005, 06:35 AM	#163
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,047 Rep Power: 206	good luck Raid.....lol __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Mar 28, 2005, 07:15 AM	#165
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	The term Fedration in other words is just a part of the overall system of government. You cannot take these words in exclusion from each other and say that your system of government is simply one of these - or even only two. You cannot for example simply say "we are a republic!" Because you must ask then, how is that republic organised? How is it governed? You cannot just say "we are a federation!" Because then you must ask how is government organised within that federation - or if indeed it has any formal government at all? You cannot even just say that you are a "republican federation"- because then all you have said then is that you are a nation with no head of state and with no real visible system of government. How are the members of this federation organised? Is there any unifying structure, or do all the individual member states follow their own system of government? And if they all have the same system of govenment, what is it? You still have to give it a name. You still have to be able to describe it. And in your case your founding fathers chose democracy as your system of government. Again you do have to be careful about distinctions - as some people as I noted would have you believe that democracy in it's purest form is little more than mob rule. But a modern democracy is not designed that way - it is designed to not just take into account the views of the majority - but as much as possible of everyone in that society. And that my friend is what is meant by 'democratic principals'. So really to clear matters up for you, what you have (or what your founding fathers intended you to have) is a Federal Democratic Republic. Whether or not you actually still have this is possibly another issue. GJ Last edited by raid517; Mar 28, 2005 at 10:29 AM.

Mar 28, 2005, 07:27 AM	#167
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	Mmm I see that you are attempting once again to divide these ideas? (I mean why print them sepearely?) Even a democracy taken in isolation needs to be organised in some way. So you must ask if it is a republican government within that democracy, or if it is a monarchist government, or if it is a federal government, or simply a regional government (as is the case here in the UK)? You cannot take these ideas and seperate them out from each other. If you did what you had left would simply make no sense. You need to consider each of them in light of the other. Or before I jump the gun again was there some other point to you posting those links? GJ Last edited by raid517; Mar 28, 2005 at 10:27 AM.

Mar 28, 2005, 07:31 AM	#168
Gabriel_Etranil DriverHeaven Lover Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 186 Rep Power: 0	I knew again you would not take the time and read through. Read the Quote in the previous post that I "added". __________________ "I want to believe the voice in my head, but it lies"

Mar 28, 2005, 07:41 AM	#170
Gabriel_Etranil DriverHeaven Lover Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 186 Rep Power: 0	You do have a comprehension problem don't you, if I have to explain to you what that means and the point behind it then the problem is not with me but rather you. There is also more to read in there for you to read since you said you "read" it. __________________ "I want to believe the voice in my head, but it lies"

Mar 28, 2005, 07:48 AM	#171
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	No I think you should at least make an effort to try to explain the point you are trying to make. Anyone can post a bunch of random links - but what is the point of posting them if you personally have nothing to say? And no my powers of comprehension are more than adequate thank you. GJ

Mar 28, 2005, 07:53 AM	#172
Gabriel_Etranil DriverHeaven Lover Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 186 Rep Power: 0	You must have had a good education growing up if that is how you learned everything. -And if I have to explain to you this comment then there is no point explaining anything to you. __________________ "I want to believe the voice in my head, but it lies"

Mar 28, 2005, 08:01 AM	#173
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	No, you don't have to explain it thanks. I'm not sure that it actually made any sense. But curioiusly I still don't really have any deep or burning desire for you to explain anything to me. GJ Last edited by raid517; Mar 28, 2005 at 10:25 AM.

Mar 28, 2005, 08:56 PM	#174
~~trodas~~ fanless WC Opty 3GHz Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Czech republic Posts: 349 Rep Power: 0	Speaking about links, this comix strip is pretty sweet and it is about America after all http://elftor.com/elftor.php?number=21 Enjoy

Mar 28, 2005, 09:16 PM	#175
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	Lol, that should be on the political funnies thread. GJ

Mar 31, 2005, 07:05 AM	#177
LuCifer DH sig maker! Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Fontucky Posts: 1,158 Rep Power: 45	I Agree. __________________