Frank, I know you’ve got an angle. I’m grinning at how you’re trying to tempt me into this argument.
Feel free to make it.
Change my mind.
(Hoping your argument doesn’t center around some generic increase in laws and regs due to the passage of time. Was Cro-Magnon Bob *really* freer?)
I guess before anybody wastes time—what is your definition for freer?
@Lash,
Lash wrote:
Frank, I know you’ve got an angle. I’m grinning at how you’re trying to tempt me into this argument.
Feel free to make it.
Change my mind.
(Hoping your argument doesn’t center around some generic increase in laws and regs due to the passage of time. Was Cro-Magnon Bob *really* freer?)
I guess before anybody wastes time—what is your definition for freer?
YOU were the one who wrote: "The things that make us truly free aren’t available to most citizens, tho."
I want to find out what YOU mean. What difference does it matter what I mean?
@Frank Apisa,
Define what you mean by
freer if you want any response.
@Frank Apisa,
I can't speak to everyone's personal experiences, but has anyone (other than me) actually had to spend time in an actual oppressive regime. I was sent to Romania during Ceausescu's time in office and I can tell you from personal experience that it was very, very, very different from anything you have seen in the United States. Every time I hear people in this country complain about the "Deep State" they fear exists here, I shudder because they don't have a frigging clue what they are talking about. But what the hell, all this ridiculous fear that Democrats/Progressive/Child Abusing people are trying to destroy the America only Conservative Christians love as they work toward establishing a theocracy puts more bizarre people like Matt Gaetz, Majorie Taylor Green, John Kennedy, Gym Jordan, and other hate filled representatives in office every thing will be just as Jesus wishes it to be. Of course that flies in the face of all of Jesus's teaching, but he lived a long time ago before he invented Christianity and inspired all the faithful to hate Jews, homosexuals, fringe politics, people who don't mow their laws, heretics, people who curse, people who go to the wrong church and other such scum suckers. Thank God for the real Americans.
All this nonsense is being discussed while that Paragon of Freedom, Russia, is systematically destroying Ukraine. They have been hauling off personal property of the homeowners they slaughter, tried to ship tons of farming equipment, robbing everyone blind (old Russian habit, for centuries) and turning an entire country into dust and ashes. It's really too bad that we don't teach history in our schools, really, really bad.
@Lash,
You don't grant credence to the World Freedom Index that Mame cited but go on to link these guys...
Quote:"The Heritage Foundation (abbreviated to Heritage)[1][2] is an American conservative think tank based in Washington, D.C., primarily geared towards public policy. The foundation took a leading role in the conservative movement during the presidency of Ronald Reagan, whose policies were taken from Heritage's policy study Mandate for Leadership.[4]"
Current activities include (per wikipedia)
Quote:2.1 Climate change skepticism
2.2 Voter fraud claims
2.3 Anti-critical race theory legislation
Lash is pushing a species of ideology (and/or agitprop) increasingly common on social media. It is anti-government, anti-institutions and anti-legacy media. There's little difference between what she's doing and what Farage or Steve Bannon or the Russian troll farms or Fox are all pushing out and it is what unsophisticated social media users gobble up and forward. Because it is easy and because they are both unsophisticated and lazy. This "style" has a long history in the American right. As Trillin put it, it's not argumentation but rather a compendium of "irritable mental gestures".
Note for just one obvious example her refusal to describe to Frank her definitions/metrics for what she claims are the "lost freedoms". She doesn't name them, she certainly doesn't detail when America last had them and gives no careful history of how they were lost. She just provides a white noise of angry grunts.
@glitterbag,
That's a very good post, madam.
@Lash,
Lash wrote:
Define what you mean by freer if you want any response.
I don't even know what "freer" means. YOU were the one who wrote, " "The things that make us truly free aren’t available to most citizens, tho."
So I am trying to find out what you meant by that.
Being "truly free" obviously means "being freer (more free)."
So what did you mean by that?
By the way, if you do not want to discuss or explain what you wrote...no problem. You are under no obligation. Just tell me you do not want to talk about it.
@Lash,
Lash wrote:
Define what you mean by freer if you want any response.
Using "freer"...free er...was a mistake on my part. I should have used "more free." I acknowledge the error and apologize.
@blatham,
blatham wrote:
That's a very good post, madam.
It was indeed...and so was yours.
@blatham,
I think, blatham, you are describing something that is now commonplace among the right and opponents of democracy elsewhere.
Here we have the so-called
lateral thinkers ("Querdenker"): first they were Corona deniers, then vaccination opponents, now they are against supporting Ukraine ...
(Still) a tiny minority, but loud, with media-effective
demonstrations actions.
I cannot understand at all how people complain about restrictions on freedom, lack of democracy, etc. - but at the same time exploit the allegedly non-existent rights to the utmost and in the process restrict the rights of others.
@Walter Hinteler,
It's always the need to be the most powerful, most influential, most wealthy, best church faithful, most trophy holders......you know, the best people, the absolute best. ..............the most worthy. That way you can't be criticized by all the less worthy and less deserving.
@Walter Hinteler,
That's my sense of it exactly, Walter. When the truck-driving convoy flag-sluts descended on Ottawa, I began engaging people on Facebook (mostly Canadians but including obvious troll accounts posting Russian and Chinese media commentary) and I found precisely what you describe - Virus deniers, rabid anti-vaxers, kneejerk anti-Trudeau and anti-British Columbia government sentiments, anti-NATO and pro-Putin posts and, for the most part, these were the same (highly active) posters. As you possibly know, many of the key organizers were QAnon fans and others had histories pushing Wexit (lobbying for the Western provinces to separate from Canada) and who were tied to the fossil fuel interests in Alberta (with their ties to the American fossil fuel interests and libertarian/John Birch ideology). The religious right here (with its ties to the American religious right) is also a component.
Quote:I cannot understand at all how people complain about restrictions on freedom, lack of democracy, etc. - but at the same time exploit the allegedly non-existent rights to the utmost and in the process restrict the rights of others.
Oh yeah. Lack of education is fundamental to this, certainly, as that really does provide fertile ground for disinformation. Glitterbag's wonderful post speaks to a key aspect of that element. If one doesn't learn (from family stories or from school or from books etc) that our lives in the West have been (for most of us) uniquely privileged and fortunate, then the slightest perception of aggrievement about almost anything can look like a terrible and oppressive curb on happiness and liberty.
But I think there is an overarching psychological factor here as well - the understanding, however dim, that the world's future looks likely to be bad indeed or, at minimum, highly uncertain.
The past few pages have been very interesting. I find myself not fully agreeing with either 'side' of the argument. Frank for example said in the same post, something like 'we have never had more freedom than today' and then 'the more complex the society, the more freedoms one has to give up'. The world has gotten much more complex, so his second point means freedoms must have diminished.
Lash seems to believe that almost all government officials are corrupt - at least that is how it comes accross. I don't believe that all government officials are corrupt, and even that the majority of them are actually trying to make their sphere of influence better. However, my view is:
- government has more and more started seeing itself as an entity in and of itself . Same goes for members elected to government - they have started seeing themselves as 'the government' rather than as 'the member elected on behalf of the people to government'. If these sounds innocuous, they aren't - it means government can do things for the sake of the government (ie the members of the government), rather than for the people. When entrenched, it means that some people in power will use that to their own benefit).
- censorship of views is becoming more entrenched (democracy, which entitles even minorities to a voice ,requires that all views be heard, even the ugly ones. The government, in service to the people, can use education to mitigate the uglier views)
- centralisation of government PR departments has grown massively over the last 3 decades (democracy requires informed votes - you can't have this when the truth is buried in PR spin)
- corporations are paying less and less tax compared to individuals (you'll find this in the Whitehouse Tax Revenue history files). Last I looked in the US it was 1:8 ratio, with the 8x being paid by the populace, and that ratio was exponentially moving towards the populace.
- surveillance has increased exponentially. Right now this is not an issue, but should the big tech corporations ever get fully in bed with the googles, facebooks, and apples of the world, they will have access to any dissenters: friends, family, otherwise private thoughts, movements, safehavens, favourite places, finances, etc
The above doesn't happen in a vacuum of ignorance. Most politicians (from all the major parties) at the highest levels of power must be, to some extent, aware of this degredation, and they aren't doing anything substantial to stop that slide.
My view is that democracy has eroded over the last 4 decades, but it doesn't compare to a dictatorship. However, my view is also that the way technology is going, there are significant dangers should the US in particular, ever fall as a democracy. If the US was no longer a democracy, with the surveillance capability its tech companies have - how would anyone ever overthrow such a regime?
So I think this thread is a really important discussion - on the side of those that fear that it is sliding down a slope, and on the side of those that think that we have to give up some freedoms to co-exist peacefully.
@blatham,
Quote:But I think there is an overarching psychological factor here as well - the understanding, however dim, that the world's future looks likely to be bad indeed or, at minimum, highly uncertain.
Thanks blatham, this part seems to be the loudest arguments coming from the Libertarian Right Wingers. They make the future look dim then turn it around as a thing the Left Wing is doing! This makes it more likely the elections will go to the anti Democracy crowd.
@vikorr,
vikorr - it is also true that the exponentially wealthy pay no taxes - neither in their corporate or individual capacities. They do, however, received massive government payouts to create money I the form of research, infrastructure, promotion, etc; that they then charge the public to "pay them for" also. Finally, in the time of recession, big business makes money and charge more for their producs - bringing in double windfall profits.
@BillW,
Is that an argument for them paying less taxes?
If so, then I think perhaps you have fallen for their propaganda - this is a lie they've been pedalling for decades, with an obvious motive - the massive benefit to them (propaganda being when something is said enough, it becomes truth). After all, after the economy picks up, they never give back a single one of the '
tax breaks to create jobs'. A much better argument would be 'they need to compete with Asia, and under the current tax rates, they can't...except for both arguments - the actual outcome is the wealth keeps piling up exponentially at the top end, and it wouldn't be if their arguments were legitimate.
@vikorr,
Sorry vik, not even close. The rich pay little to nothing. I can't see how you read the other into my comment. A little article:
