Even the Greeks and the Romans didnt stick with a democracy throughout!

Our nation is more about capitalism than it is about democracy. Industries (I mean all industries, not factories) give politicians the financial means in which to increase there exposure, this exposure creates votes and politicians become beholden unto these industries. Most politics has less to do with the electorate's differences than industries' differences, this makes for an apathetic electorate.

 

Many different types of campaign finance reforms have been suggested but I don't that as an answer. In my opinion industries should have a say/involvement in government that they don't currently have. They need there own seat at the table apart from the general populace with there own set of rules This in my opinion would help illuminate differences that people have from industries. The current system muddles the two together in a way that has allowed industries to get control through the people.

How? This all looks like one big uber-right talking point to me.

I really haven't heard a lot of conservative analysts, TV hosts, etc. talking about this often (albeit I don't watch them often).

 

Did you read what I posted, or immediately discard it as a talking point? The cycle makes sense, and seems accurate to me. It seems logical the states that it proposes. If you read it, and disagree, be my guest. Tell me something to the contrary. But just saying it is a talking point doesn't add anything to the discussion.

I've read and heard this cycle since college and we even spent a day discussing it in one of my American studies classes. It has always struck me as a huge talking point b/c of the over-injection of religion into the cycle. Spiritual truth doesn't lead to democracy nor does democracy lead to spiritual truth. Liberty doesn't mean abundance. The richest and most populous civilizations on the planet were far from being bastions of freedom. Democracy exists b/c the people allow it to exist. That's it. We in the USA live in a Republic not a democracy. We were not designed to be a democracy. Democratic governments sometimes give poor results. Sin Fein is represented in Irelan, Hamas in Palestine, and so on.

 

I can find numerous examples of great nations that have been totalitarian in their makeup and lasted hundreds and even thousands of years. Great nations usually fall from poor economic policy or by over-extending their power. Rome over-extended and couldn't supports itself, the same with Egypt, Britain, Babylon, and the USSR. All of this cyclical stuff is just flower words that try to broad brush history. The USA has never in its history had a huge portion of the populous interested in voting or politics.

To most Americans at the time it was an embarrassment to go "on the dole" (ask anyone who lived during the Depression and WWII). So, even though the FDR established the framework for "the Takers", the attitude for using it was not widespread. Very few people felt they were "entitled" to other people's money.

 

Today, there is no embarassment or stigma attached to the Takers.

 

This is not meant as a support for or against your point Bluto, but reading your post reminded me of a conversation yesterday.

 

I was talking with a family whose husband/father had died (75 years old). The mom was telling me that for a while they were seperated and she raised the 2 boys on her own. She wanted to file for "free lunch" but the boys did not want her to because of the stigma it carried (60's to early 70's). So the boys got paper routes to pay for their lunches at school and help out at house.

 

I thought it was interesting reading your post the day after that story.

Show me a democracy that has these things that is no longer a democracy. France is has a national healthcare system, garunteed employment after college, and some government controlled businesses but still enjoy all the freedoms we have today.

 

 

SO you are going to compare a country in Europe who is made fun of constantly for a lack of will to protect itself or fight, and is absolutely being overrun with Muslims and will be a Muslim country in about 25 year.

 

 

 

You proved the point...........................

SO you are going to compare a country in Europe who is made fun of constantly for a lack of will to protect itself or fight, and is absolutely being overrun with Muslims and will be a Muslim country in about 25 year.

 

 

 

You proved the point...........................

 

France is about as nationalist, anti-foreigner of a country you will find. Perhaps the U.S. should take note of their successful endeavor when looking at our own border situation.

France is about as nationalist, anti-foreigner of a country you will find. Perhaps the U.S. should take note of their successful endeavor when looking at our own border situation.

 

They also have the largest military in Europe IIRC. Are assisting us in Afghanistan as a key ally in NATO and are a nuclear power. I would not want to mess with France.

To most Americans at the time it was an embarrassment to go "on the dole" (ask anyone who lived during the Depression and WWII). So, even though the FDR established the framework for "the Takers", the attitude for using it was not widespread. Very few people felt they were "entitled" to other people's money.

 

Today, there is no embarassment or stigma attached to the Takers.

This is a dead on, 100% right post imo.

 

In the '30s the social programs created by the FDR adminstration helped, and were successful. Then the system started changing in the '60s with LBJ's Great Society programs.

In the Great Depression times the government paid money for people to work. Today, too many people simply wait for their monthly check to arrive in the mail. Work is not a requirement. Actually, many people drawing a monthly check, such as SSI, won't work because they are afraid of losing their government money. Some will work, but only if paid in cash, which is a killer for the employer (if it's a business) when tax time rolls around.

Show me a democracy that has these things that is no longer a democracy. France is has a national healthcare system, garunteed employment after college, and some government controlled businesses but still enjoy all the freedoms we have today.

 

 

France has also gone through about 8 different constitutions since their original revolution, have had a number of revolutions. Gone into a dictatorship(probably the best gov't they have ever had under Napoleon), re-established the Monarchy, gone back to democracy BACK to a dictatorship under Napoleon III then back to democracy again after the Franco-Prussian War. Not even taking into account the complete rebuilding of the French Government after WWII. I think that you need a better example.

France is about as nationalist, anti-foreigner of a country you will find. Perhaps the U.S. should take note of their successful endeavor when looking at our own border situation.

 

They also have the largest military in Europe IIRC. Are assisting us in Afghanistan as a key ally in NATO and are a nuclear power. I would not want to mess with France.

 

 

And for what it's worth their Leclerc tank is definitely comparable to our own M1A1 and M1A2 Abrams tanks.

 

I would still put my money on our troops though as our Airforce and Navy would put a hurting on theirs. Although either way it would be a costly conflic. I am thankful it won't be happening anytime soon.

This is a dead on, 100% right post imo.

 

In the '30s the social programs created by the FDR adminstration helped, and were successful. Then the system started changing in the '60s with LBJ's Great Society programs.

In the Great Depression times the government paid money for people to work. Today, too many people simply wait for their monthly check to arrive in the mail. Work is not a requirement. Actually, many people drawing a monthly check, such as SSI, won't work because they are afraid of losing their government money. Some will work, but only if paid in cash, which is a killer for the employer (if it's a business) when tax time rolls around.

 

While there were many great projects completed by the New deal programs, they did not get us out of the Depression. A very good example of why big government programs are not the solutions to economic problems.

Do not confuse this with there was a real need to help people feed their families during this time of economic despair. The point is that government cannot spend us into prosperity.

While there were many great projects completed by the New deal programs, they did not get us out of the Depression. A very good example of why big government programs are not the solutions to economic problems.

Do not confuse this with there was a real need to help people feed their families during this time of economic despair. The point is that government cannot spend us into prosperity.

 

 

I don't think he had said the New Deal did get us out of the Depression.

 

What the New Deal did was bring hope until we could get out of the Depression. That activity is lost sometimes in the worries of being seen as supporting Big Government.

In a democracy there is a choice, people voice their opinion or beliefs by voting. Here is what I do not understand... most on the right and left, what to have welfare reform. most on the right and left want people to have insurance. most people on the right and left want their children to be educated. Most on the right and left want a military. most on the right and left want to have secure boarders. most on the right and some on left want not to be taxed. most on the left and some on the right want to be left alone when it comes to their personal life. most on the left and some on the right want to protect the envirnoment. Both on the Right and Left want lower gas prices.

 

 

I just showed about six to seven different things were the majority would agree on, yet on these areas nothing ever seems to happen, with the representives are doing their job and representing, should this not be hammered out?