Why American News isnt good.

Ahh, now that the beta fuss has died down its good to see the old political threads.

You're not gonna fina a country in the world that tells its citizens everything, and that genuinely saddens me, it doesn't seem anyone is comitted to a true democracy.

The end of the video creeped me out though, internet army? Viva la revolution!

They used Army as clever little note on the war. Build a virtual army to defeat the real oen.

I watch the Daily Show and the Colbert Report every day, its all the news you need...

Hah, same here.

But, they dont really give the real fact either.

Their just hallarious.

I already know why. ever read "Amusing ourselves to death"?
it also applies to European countries though... so I'd watch you're attacks.

I say watch fox and watch Daily and you'll have all the news you need.

ah... more anti-waronIraq crap.

this isnt the issue of news, news is not under the power of the government, influence sure. but the real issue is that they sidetrack the importance of such things as how the war is actual going for more interesting things such as explosions.

put simply: I dont believe this crap. there is an issue of the news not presenting the truth, but it has nothing to do with the administration.

^so true.

Oh really?

Hm... thats strange. Because the administration is what gives out the subsidies that keep big media going. The Administration is what has made all of the laws that let them have so much influence.

I would say the Administration has a lot of say in what big media produces, the same way big media has a strong grip on this government.

In the begining of the war anyone who spoke out against it, especially reporters, were fired.



Ew... fox. I find it a tad too over dramatic, and lacking personality.



Ahaha, what makes you think I watched news there either. Big media rules much of the world, not just this country.

the definition of democracy is... "1. government by the people..."
a true democracy can never work,
http://library.thinkquest.org/C0121653/bell.h3.jpg
that is a picture of the |IQ bell curve in a society, most all traits form a similair curve (height etc.)
looking at that, in a pure majority rules system, the top 50% of the most educated/able/best suited (I'm using IQ as a general showing of whether or not someone is capable of understanding things, obviously the test itself is flawed, but look at my post in a theoretical sense, pretend it's perfect)would be tied with the bottem 50%

now, think about he most average people you know.
how much do they know about the world at large? how much do they want to know?
now imagine someone 30 IQ points less intelligent than them.

in all honesty, do you really want people like that to have 50% of the power?
this may sound elitist, because in a way it is, but it's the reality, the majority of people are not capable of rule, because even totaly discounting IQ, the same situation is reached looking just at whether someone truly understands what they are voting for, understand the whole complex issues behind it. Very few do.
The average citizen should NOT know everything about the government, or have an equal say in the runnings of said government

ah, a hamiltonian!
trust me, I see exactly what you're saying. I believe that a true democracy (like a true communist country) is oversimplistic and stupid. what I also believe is that people judge what they know nothing about, and giving them "the actual news" is a bunch of wasted time.

because you seem quite anti-american, or pro-non-american; whatever you wish.

But those who care, would then actual send a message to those that are currently being brainwashed by the media.



Actually, I am quite pro-american. I like this country, I just dont like the people running it. I mean the candidates running for any office must be a representative of the corporate world first, and the representative of the people second. To them we are just a vote, we dont even amount to a person.

Plus, I dont think the system works anymore, it just doesnt feel that way to me. The government should be helping the right people for the right reasons.
People, not companies, not the rich, normal every day people.

i'm not sure how to argue against that, but you're wrong
it's against human nature, the reason you're wrong, is because your fundamental beliefs about People are wrong (IMHO)
the people being brainwashed (the ones you are talking about anyway) are not going to form opinions of their own, at least not in their current state of mind (the set ways people act/think and their fundamental beliefs etc.) , so even if these "carers" as you call them, went against human nature to help all the others, it wouldn't do enough good to offset the things I mentioned above, reasons why Democracy doesn't work.

Yea, someone who understands

I will always remain that one person in a thousand that actually tries to do something when things go wrong. And in my mind, I will hope that many others wil adopt a more carefree, giving attitude and take the time to apreciate their live as well as others.

you know, i don't think i've ever been complimented during a discussion like this, that's part of the reason i joined in, you two at least seem civil to eachother, anyway, thanks to both of you for your sportsmanship.

It took a few months and about 100 pages of arguing for us to become the... er.. friends we are

I am glad you enjoyed arguing, usually me and Schem argue everyone else out.

then watch 60 minutes, and cry me a river.

allow me to juxtapose this with another comment from another thread:

right, moving on.

hey, I never said it was perfect. just better than communism and socialism

you overstate the level of people "being brainwashed" (how about those government tracking devices in your cereal!).
I still think there is too much corporate blah blah blah, but its naive to say that they run everything. you just have to put in 1/2 a second to realize what is complete bull and ignore it.

...
you mean 1/2, ever seen the democratic party?

although this makes no sense...

I spoke to a lady from germany not 2 weeks ago. first thing she said about America "people are a lot nicer here".
yup.

civil? I dont think so...

but your input is interesting, and I like it. its interesting how you appear to be hamiltonian (people are stupid) and yet still... anti-heirarchy.

but its fun!

AHAHA!!

Yes, I find it depressing, but only currently. I like this country, just not what is happening to it.

the democratic "coup", isnt that good enough?

well i think you misunderestimate (Bush quote, and no, i'm not a "Bush Hater") the stupidity of the population, the majority are unable or unwilling to put in that .5 second.
On a side note, this is how the Human mind works, thoughts of your own are an illusion, everything is brought on by others influences that you've had throughout your life, so there you go (ominous organ music indicating suspense should be felt)



Hierarchy.... doesn't work, because people are stupid and there has yet to be a way to effectively continue a successful hierarchy... mind you, i'm thinking on it
i'll try and post some of my thoughts etc. in more detail later.

and thats why we should manipulate and exploit them.

it makes their lives easier anyhow.

and you cant live without it

there are plenty of ways to make sucessful heirarchies, you put the stupid people as exploited at the bottom, you have progressive levels of smarter managers, and all radicals get excluded.

Not quite.

The only thing I like is the fact that some of the members of the parties are reasonable enough to consider bipartison action, knowing that they owe it to the country to be good representatives, not to the special interest groups or party allegiances.



You can look it at that way.

I look at it this way.
More people vote on the American Idol, than on the president. Either this country has to get voting available on cell phones or start limiting its subsidizations to decrease the power and influence of the companies.



The behavioral pholosophy.

Its actually quite good to see another person who actual knows something about psychology here on these old forums.



Yes, but then you have to manage a lower uemployed class, cripling the economy. A higher ambitious class who will start having infighting and corruption to furthe their own goals. And without radicals there wont be any political and social reform as the world changes.

Quite the great combination in my opinion

and you want to know why that is? a hint; its more about age groups.

and so the truth comes to light; you support the apathetic vote, the person who knows nothing and doesnt care should have as much vote as you or I. I dont think so.

finally; not subsidizing is economic suicide. now I know how much you would love to let that happen, ruin the lives of millions, its not something that anyone, repeat; anyone, would benefit from.

how do you look at it? someone who argues that the inception of companies to critical neighborhoods is a bad thing, go find someplace else where your contribution actualy will help rather than hurt the people.

...
another thing that you postulate yourself to know, emp. psychology is a bit more than just knowing freud's theories

...
obviously you've never heard of coca cola. their company isnt crippled economically. dont see where you are getting that from.

and I said it was a succesful heirarchy, not a succesful reform wheel. again, go cry me a river for sad, made up fantasies of people dying at the hand of "the man"

ha, Amen brother, spread the word

see below



yep, exactly, not to mention how you decide who is smart (don't say IQ!) lol

You can not say that you are better than any human being. Everyone has something to contribute to society, no matter how small or how big.



Yet, singapore and hong kong seem to be doing just fine in leaving funds in the hands of the people. Not only that, they dont provide subsidies, instead they have government industries which benifit them in controlling the industry indirectly and helping bring in funds.



I dont want to collapse companies or shrink their expansion. I just want their influence in the government and the public dimished, and vice versa.



Yes, it is. That is why I prefer behavioralism, makes much more sense.



I meant a government, a country, not a company, companeis dont have to provide aid to the poor and cripled.

People arent dieing at the hands of 'the man', but we are having our individuality and our opinions taken away in small incraments. We are losing our free will.

I can say that I am more savvy politically, and thats all I need.

I'm sure you think that.
hong kong and singapore are some of the most heavily subsidized regions, for christ sake hong kong was one giant subsidy for over a hundred years.

I do support this. but you make it sound like you're an anarchist, which is why I oppose you at every turn.

emp, dont make a fool of yourself over this. please?

just show me one way that companies are revoking your free will. if anything consumerism (while manipulative) requires you to have your own free will.

anyway, all of this comming out of someone that supports the type of communism that requires you to be a mindless tool. I'm starting to think that you have bipolar disorder.

Sometimes anarchism lays the best grounds for political reform.



You should talk, your the one who thought behavioralism was a Freudian theory.



Eh... maybe so.

I dont support the fact that communism requires mind controlling government, and if people werent the way they are it wouldnt have to be so. What I found great is that it helped the common man, or at least was supposed to. Thats why I admire the more moderate social form, socialism.

I never said I was communism, I am not a die hard Russian nationalist, im just a little less a realist and a little more a dreamer then most people.



Heres a comparison of Hong Kongs economic freedom
http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/country.cfm?id=HongKong

Heres a comparison of Singapores economic freedom
http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/country.cfm?id=Singapore

and finally the US
http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/country.cfm?id=Unitedstates

Both of them have higher 'freedom from the government' and lower tax rates. I would say their public is better off for it.