I don't give a damn about politics

the problem with the idea of the majority is that a large enough number of people just don't bother to vote at all (and I believe thats not because of political apathy, but because politicians offer NOTHING. Why would anyone want to cast a vote thats going to be sold straight to the devil) that the ones that actually do make it to the ballot booths don't exactly constitute the true majority.

No thanks. I am about as cynical as you can get when it comes to politics. I think Ron Paul makes more sense than most politicians in Washington, but that doesn't mean I like him enough to defend him to someone that has already made up their mind about him.

I do like him because he favors a decentralized federal government and giving power back to the states (that is, after all, the very notion this country was founded upon) but that doesn't mean I'm going to vote for him.

I don't think the answer lies with any white-haired career politician. The answer to this country's problems lies with its citizens.

Its not that I don't care, its that I think politics as a whole is a farce. I think we're at the point where the entire government needs a complete restructuring.

 

TheGhost

To me politics is more than a job done by someone else.

What about all the people that are directly involved in politics but for whom it isn’t a job or career? I know of many that have given their time and energy free, I have myself and I never got paid for it. I mean there are hundreds, if not thousands of political campaigns out there that depend for their very existence on volunteers.

And what about those that do make a living on the back of politics but are not part of the formal political process? All the journalists, television pundits, members of lobbying groups and political think tanks, the PR firms and lawyers? They are involved in the political process and often have a huge impact on political thinking and decision making.

I’ve mentioned the Koch brothers, they’ve spent millions on political groups, to try and direct political thinking yet their jobs are as head of their company so does that mean they are not politicians?

Aren’t you creating a certain barrier between political discussion and the politicians? Isn’t what you’re saying trying to imply that political discussion cannot have influence on ‘politicians’ because they’re just liars and cheats, who say yes to everything and then go on to just pad their own pockets?

It seems to me this is the same ‘anti-politics’ agenda that tells people not to get involve with politics, that ‘politics’ is for liars and cheats and scoundrels, so is not worth getting involved in and so should be avoided.

Of course that leaves the field wide open to such people like the Koch’s to achieve their goals.

 

Scratcho

Again the same ‘anti-politics’ view on display

I don’t blame you or anyone for having this viewpoint, it is popular and pumped out at use all the time, I often think it myself and have said similar things, I think taken to a certain point its healthy – but I’ve started wondering who does it gain if taken beyond a certain point.

I’ve said before that I thought the US needs a political reform movement but what it has got so far is the wealth backed ‘Tea Party Movement’ instead. And the TPM has promoted itself as the anti-politics political movement, anti-government, anti-Washington, anti-the political establishment, anti-, anti-, anti-….

It makes me wonder why a movement that is being backed by powerful and influential concerns wants to push that message.

I agree with you that the influence of wealth at this time seems to be the major problem with the US political system at is major obstacle to reform. So why are so many people supporting people and ideas that would give even more power and influence to wealth? The answer being, of course that it’s because wealth is using its influence to back such people and ideas.

So how do you counter that?

Well it seems to me that there’s always this background chorus of - you can’t, nothing can be done, its impossible, so just forget it, be anti-politics and anti-government, just do nothing, don’t campaign, don’t question, don’t vote…

I mean as one person says here many people just don't bother to vote at all – “because politicians offer NOTHING. Why would anyone want to cast a vote thats going to be sold straight to the devil”.

(But if you are going to vote, vote for those nice right wingers with their anti-government, anti-political ‘common sense’)

I mean this thread was begun to promotion of a right wing libertarian politician under the guise of being an anti-politics message.

 

Meliai

Once more the anti-politics agenda - that then goes on to promote a politics that would favour wealth over the interests of the majority -

But as I’ve said right wing libertarianism doesn’t seem to make sense and those that promote it don’t seem able to defend it from the charge that it doesn’t make sense.

I don’t give a fuck about Ron Paul I’m interested in the political ideas he promotes (and you are promoting). And I’ve ‘made up my mind’ about these ideas because I’ve researched them and discussed them and frankly most of them seem to be bollocks and people like you who promote them seem totally incapable of defending them.

I mean can you actually defend your view that his ideas make more sense than others and if you can’t why are you saying that they do?

Fine but what does that actually mean?

The US was founded over 200 years ago, things have changed, I mean if you were ill would you trust your heath to a 200 year old medical book? For example at the beginning only around 10% of the American citizenry had the vote and fewer had the ability to seek office.

Localism is ok but it can also assist globalised wealth, which can play off one area against another – one state brings in ‘business friendly’ deregulation and tax breaks and that is used by wealth to coerce other states to follow suit.

A great slogan – but what does that actually mean? What would you want the citizens to do? What ideas should they follow, so far you only seem to be promoting right wing libertarianism which would only ever seem to favour wealth?

 

Depending on what these volunteers actually do in a campaign I'd draw a line somewhere. Somebody who hasn't got the ear of the "candidate", meaning no direct influence on decision making (such as personal advisors) is not a politician in my book. But that is my definition.

A lobbyist is not a politician, he's a businessman (in most cases) .... on a sidenote: he's also the main reason why politics is so screwed up. Journalists and mass media in general may have an effect on politics but are not politicians by my definition. I have to say you're putting too many people into the same category. Not everyone who's old enough to vote is a politician.

I'm not aware of creating any barriers here.

Yes, most politicians are liars and cheats. They will declare anything for a couple of votes.

We should actually all abstain from voting at the next election. THAT would be a signal. Yes we can?

But I'm not saying politics should be avoided. Politics and politicians need a serious makeover though. The reasoning and the inner workings of most (democratic) governments are seriously rotten .... to rotten to do any good for the people.

 

I never cared about politics, and I studied political science which is sad.

 

I don't care as long as the shit house dosn't go up in flames..

sagitarious, phisosophicAL, DARK, mstic death and pother shit.

PEACE GREAT TGHREAD

 

Thats cool. I don't give a damn about right wing libertarianism. I'm sick of finger-pointing, arguing, labeling within politics. It literally makes my skin crawl.

I have no interest in promoting any kind of political idea.

Not to sound like a broken record but I'm not promoting anything so I don't feel the need to defend some ideology you dislike.

I don't feel the need to. I'm not interested in arguing about politics.

Because I think the Federal government is entirely too big.

Uh, that the Federal government is entirely too big. Look at our budget, our debt, look at how inefficient the government is. Its too big. Smaller governments are able to operate more efficiently.

lmao.

That is EXACTLY why I hate politics. I don't subscribe to right wing libertarianism, I certainly don't promote any ideology that favors wealth, and yet you're pointing fingers at me as if these ideas I'm not even promoting have anything to do with me.

Politicians and political junkies create differences where no differences truly exist. It seems to me thats what you are trying to do.

I didn't create this thread to argue about politics.

And by the way, its not a slogan. I think the government needs to be completely changed. Not a little reform here and there, but a complete overhaul of our current political system.

 

There's some momentum now behind the idea of voting out of office EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM. Even tho I like my congressman, I think this might be a very good idea. Shake them to the core. Make them fear the wrath of the voters.

I mean when 82% of Americans say that Congress is doing a bad job (which is true) and "leaders" like Boehner continue to say they are listening to the American people while they continue to do the same damn things -- well, isn't it time to give them the boot? Despite all the corruption, it's still possible to do that.

 

I didnt watch the stupid debate,I HAVE NO INTEREST IN SEEING THAT CLOWN!!

 

Which clown? There are so many of them!

 

meliai

But you come to a politics forum to promote Ron Paul who you think is the only politician who doesn’t lie and who speaks logic and common sense?

It seems to me that you want to promote a political view (that so far seems to be right wing libertarianism) while actually refusing to debate the merits or not of that view.

I mean you claim you want to completely change the system, I’m just trying to work out if you would change it for the better or for the worse?

This is also a right wing libertarian stance. They also don’t seem interested in good governance only in small government.
As to the budget and debt that has come about mainly because of the neo-liberal ideas and policies followed over the last 30-40 years – ideas that most right wing libertarians support.

But I don’t know what you would change the system into, so far all you seem to have promoted is a right wing libertarian who you believe makes more sense than others.

The problem is that right wing libertarianism would only serve wealth not the majority.

 

Ya lets let people care about what they care about. I doubt i will ever give the holiest of fuck about this topic.

 

I'm not promoting Ron Paul.

wrong.

wrong.

I'm not interested.

I'm not wealthy, I don't own a multi-million dollar business, I don't have ties to any political families, and I don't have a Ivy league degree so I doubt I'll ever be given the chance to find out.

That has nothing to do with me.

right wingers support neo liberal ideas? What?

I'm so glad you asked.

For one, the Federal budget needs to be completely redistributed. Withdraw from the Middle East, cut the military budget drastically, invest money into infrastructure. Roads, education, small business tax cuts (while increasing the taxes on corporations). End all these tax loop holes that are widening the wealth gap. Invest money into public transportation, not just limited in cities but nationwide high speed rail. invest money into a healthcare system modeled after France (France spends LESS of their GDP on healthcare than the US, yet covers ALL of their citizens while we only cover those who qualify for medicare and medicaid....thats what I mean by efficiency in government). Give tax subsidies and breaks to forward-thinking industries....alternative energy, hemp, etc. America was founded on cash crops; the tax revenue from hemp alone would generate a substantial amount of revenue for the government in addition to stimulating the economy.

Do away with any and all bills that interfere with basic constitutional rights; the biggest being the Patriot Act. Create committees to investigate any invasion of rights done by the CIA and FBI. Ban GM food or at least require better labeling. Completely revamp the FDA because the American quality of food quite frankly sucks.

Hmm......I haven't even touched the tip of the iceberg, but does that give you an idea?

yeah I can say the same thing over and over again and ignore the same response over and over again too.

neat.

 

Melai for preskdent!:sunny:

 

Yep, you just reminded me. I don't like any of them although John Huntsman is the least bad. He likes progressive rock.

 

Thank you and I agree with many of your ideas, it was a great political speech and I think qualifies you as a politician.

But why promote Ron Paul?

 

lol thanks. I have illusions of grandeur sometimes. I think I could at least be a better president than Bush

I'm really not promoting Ron Paul. I'm not planning on voting on him. I'm actually not planning on voting at all, in probably a misguided attempt at protest rather than apathy. I just think he's the only politician that doesn't come across as polished and measured - it actually seems like he really believes in some of his political stances, some of which happen to make sense to me.

 

I was a political junkie circa 2004-2010.

I stopped giving a shit about political agendas and debate with average joes and janes like me.

I liberated myself when I moved away and left my TV behind; I've been TV deprived for more than a year.

It seems that regardless what we do to change the system, the ruling class who runs the banks will come along and stamp it out, trying to get every American to play a silly game of 'left vs right.'

The last president who tried to change the system got a bullet

The last few political campaigns who tried to spread a message of change got swallowed up by establishment Dems and GOP.

It seems hopeless.

Just grab your guns and gold and brace yourself for the whole collapse.

 

They don't give a damn about you either!