Government can't help, it can only hurt

[nebraska]

If the government is enslaving Americans then why should Americans be defending it?

If the USA is supposed to be fascist then why did the US fight Nazi Germany?

If the US is supposed to be communist then why did the US fight North Korea?

[Classic-Xer]

(01-29-2018, 09:24 PM)nebraska Wrote: If the government is enslaving Americans then why should Americans be defending it?

If the USA is supposed to be fascist then why did the US fight Nazi Germany?

If the US is supposed to be communist then why did the US fight North Korea?

If the US is supposed so imperialistic then why did we conquer Nazi Germany and Imperialist Japan, dumped billions of old hard earned American dollars into both of them and then gave the countries back to the Germans and Japanese. I don't know, the overly dramatic blue arguments of old never made much sense to me.

Why would a highly educated blue like Bob take a position like that with a guy who knows a thing or two about history, who knows a thing or two about old school imperialism, who knows a thing or two about words and definitions and a thing or two about computers and smart phones and the internet and cable TV channels and whatever else is available that I'm able to obtain with the use of my income.

[Bob Butler 54]

(01-29-2018, 09:21 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-29-2018, 03:58 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Extreme partisans often have strange beliefs that have nothing to do with reality.  Many labels have meaning only if they are not applied to some people.

Labels only have meaning if they're accurate. As I said, I've never labelled a socialist a socialist or a communist a communist or a fascist a fascist or an anarchist an anarchist without seeing/ gathering enough proof to use it accurately and make it stick. Hint! You should reexamine the way you use extreme partisan and consider who you are applying the label too as well. Do hippie blue values work with terrorists or my values better suited for getting rid of terrorist? Hint! You ain't going to be able to love them to death.

The communist and fascist labels are overused in my opinion.  In their heyday they properly defined authoritarian states with expansionist tendencies.  They often in the case of communism pretended to follow Marx.  Modern US  personalities are often mislabeled.  This doesn't mean they are not flawed.

Extreme partisans often follow simplistic principles that are well outside of observable reality.  My own view favors balance between opposing principles.  If Nebraska sees regulation as always bad, while the blue world view favors regulation to criminalize abusive behaviors, I will seek balance between the two.  

So, yes, I have endorsed many of Nebraskas principles and causes, but disagree in having some faith in representative democracy.

(01-29-2018, 09:21 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Hint! Don't approach a US taxpayer and use a blue argument that only works in the blues  favor when speaking to someone who has views like Nebraska. A US taxpayer with either walk away and vote against you or decide to get in your grill and educate you.  We aren't face to face here.   I don't know who taught the blues manners and taught them respect. I can only assume that weren't the people like my parents and the bulk of the older adults who were around during your hippie years. I'm pretty sure you spent the bulk of that time avoiding them as much as possible. Are you familiar with them? If you're familiar with them, then you know how critical and tough they were with raising their kids and instilling their values. I'm glad Nebraska showed up and gave me an opportunity  to point out the difference between the two of us for blues to see. If he decides to stick around and contribute more than blurts and rants.

I too had solid GI parents that taught solid values.  Their generation was also flawed in carrying race and gender prejudice, in lacking environmental values, in pursing containment to the extreme.  The protests of the 1960s did change things for the better.  The culture was imperfect then, and remains imperfect.  The need for change is eternal.

(01-29-2018, 09:21 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Ask yourself a question, is he one mine or is Nebraska more likely a loss of one of yours? I see a lot of hippie blue language and positions in his posts. What's a hippie blue kid doing advocating for the removal of the American government? You should realize that every time a group of blues place themselves or their views above the nation as far as importance, they loose another group/crop of Americans. Now, I don't think blue America would be able to survive alone without America as whole. How far away are we from blue America being placed on ignore by America? How far are we away from seeing blue states splitting up? I'd say we aren't that very far away at this point. 

Nebraska is not mine or yours, but himself.  If you see him as blue, I see him as more red.  The lack of government favors the elites and corporations.  A lack of government regulation is a Republican talking point and tugs in the direction of the wealthy elites.  Still, Nebraska is with neither you nor me.  Reds often see the government as bad, while the blue sees corporate power as often bad.  I see both as grey. both as part of the balance.  The optimum comes from balancing FDR and Reagan, not fighting one or the other.

Both parties bases are not thrilled by their establishments.  They are not thrilled by the strong influence of the elites and corporate interests.  Right now the urban / rural spit is more dominant than class divides.  I'd as soon see the parties back off using the government to force cultural change, and push the economic divide.

But that is me.

[nebraska]

Wouldn't a nation that fought fascism become hypocritical for adopting fascism?

Wouldn't a nation that fought communism become hypocritical for adopting communism?

If you hate TV, wouldn't you be hypocritical for watching TV?

If you hate killing cats, wouldn't you be hypocrital for killing cats?

[Bob Butler 54]

(01-30-2018, 02:35 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-29-2018, 09:24 PM)nebraska Wrote: If the government is enslaving Americans then why should Americans be defending it?

If the USA is supposed to be fascist then why did the US fight Nazi Germany?

If the US is supposed to be communist then why did the US fight North Korea?

If the US is supposed so imperialistic then why did we conquer Nazi Germany and Imperialist Japan, dumped billions of old hard earned American dollars into both of them and then gave the countries back to the Germans and Japanese. I don't know, the overly dramatic blue arguments of old never made much sense to me.

Why would a highly educated blue like Bob take a position like that with a guy who knows a thing or two about history, who knows a thing or two about old school imperialism, who knows a thing or two about words and definitions and a thing or two about computers and smart phones and the internet and cable TV channels and whatever else is available that I'm able to obtain with the use of my income.

The major lessons of World War II were that you had to contain autocratic expansionist powers and that war between major industrial powers was incredibly destructive.  The need to contain resulted in a reboot of Japan and Germany.  The destruction of WW II assured that the Cold War would remain cold, that at best we would see proxy wars that prevented the expansionist powers from expanding much.

At the time, the US was the only continental power with a more or less intact economy. We had a culture that believed itself nigh on invincible.  Today there are several continental powers with intact economies.  Most are not trying to be superpowers, with the ability to fight a war anywhere.  Then there is the pro military anti local prejudice of the US red culture.  During the Cold War we were allowed to be imperialistic to some extent.  Not today, as Bush 43 learned to his dismay.

I see the traditional reasons for the Cold War as sufficient.  Then again I see the tradition of Russia being invaded from Mongolia or Europe, the limits of Napoleon bringing western culture east, and China's long crisis as being more important than most in the US.

[nebraska]

A free country that went to war with a evil dictatorship should not become a police state. Thieves cannot take the moral
high ground and criticize robbers.

The USA is an immoral bankrupt warmongering police state now.

Americans have learned nothing from history.

Americans have no rights anymore and the US is no longer a democracy.

Americans think every problem should be solved by decree and force now, but every
solution causes another problem.

The solution for problems should be what worked in the past.

Americans say that rent control should be used to reduce high rents instead of reducing regulations.

When regulations lead to a bad economy, Americans think that the homeless to should be put in jail and businesses should be given bailouts.

Instead of allowing people to feed the homeless, Americans think feeding the homeless should be outlawed.

Instead of getting rid of welfare that encourages girls to marry the state instead of a man and leads to broken families, Americans
think food stamps should be expanded.

Instead of getting rid of minimum wages that cripple the ability of the USA to compete on the world market, Americans think
the US should increase the minimum wage and start a trade war by enacting tariffs.

When food stamps lead to increased debt, Americans think that taxes should be increased.

Instead of ending wars that lead to terrorism, tyranny, debt, and refugees, Americans think that the wars should be increased.

China used to encourage people to have kids, but after China became overpopulated, China had an one-child policy.

The USA is supposed to be a free country. The reason the Americans fought the British was because Americans wanted
to be free.

The elites are trying today to make Americans dependent children by outlawing everything and giving them food stamps. Once
Americans are weakened and the US Ponzi economy implodes, the ruling class will then send the 99% off to the gulags to be starved and killed.

Governments are not kind. Governments have killed millions of people in Nazi concentration camps, Soviet gulags,
the Chinese Great Leap Forward, and the Cambodian killing fields.

Freedom is good.

Tyranny is bad.

This is no joke.

History repeats and the signs are everywhere.

Anyone who supports the government now is just a tool of the elites.

Wake up.

http://f2bbs.com/bbs

[pbrower2a]

It was strong government for the time that established the Bill of Rights and abolished the Atlantic slave trade. The strongest government in the world (the United Kingdom at the time) was the first colonial empire to abolish slavery -- and it expanded its colonial empire in Africa in part to suppress the slave trade. It was strong government that decreed that small children need at the least basic schooling, and then that children attend school instead of working in mines and factories. It was big government that outlawed the infamous patent medicines typically concoctions of alcohol and laudanum that numbed people to the serious illnesses that they felt but did nothing to cure the disease. It was strong government that defeated the demonic Axis Powers and liberated the concentration and extermination camps of Nazi Germany. It was strong government that put up a meaningful defense against the Stalinist and Maoist designs for world domination. It was strong government that put an end to Jim Crow.

[nebraska]

As government expands, liberty contracts.

[Ragnarök_62]

(01-30-2018, 08:21 PM)nebraska Wrote: As government expands, liberty contracts.

As neoliberalism expands, people die.

[nebraska]

End wars, not freedom.

[Classic-Xer]

(01-29-2018, 03:23 AM)nebraska Wrote: Live and let live.

Libertarians aren't forcing anyone to be a libertarian. Think for yourself.

Freedom worked for 200 years. Fascism and communism failed.

Those fail to learn from history are doomed to reap at it. The USA wasn't a police state in 1999 or 1969
so why does the USA need to be a police state now?

The government is not your mommy. The government is not your daddy.

Government is not the solution. Government is the problem.

Killing is illegal, but there are still murders.

Airlines are regulated, but there are still airplane crashes.

The government is the cause of almost every problem in the USA.

There is obesity because of food stamps.

The economy is bad because of government regulations and taxes.

There is debt, terrorism, tyranny, and refugees because of US wars.

College is expensive because of government loans.

Medical costs are expensive because of government regulations.

Rent is expensive because of government regulations.

Families are broken because of government welfare.

Illegal immigrants are flooding the country because the government won't patrol the border.

Taxes are high because of government waste, subsidies, wars, welfare, and debt.

Inflation is high because of government money printing.

Should everyone live in a prison because one person might kill someone?

Can't you take some personal responsibility and protect yourself?

Americans used to believe in freedom.

Americans should not be Nazis and Communists.

Those who are embracing tyranny now will be just as guilty as the elites and Gestapo will be when Americans get sent to the gulags, gas chambers, and ovens.

Live and let die. That's my libertarian motto. Think for yourself. Live and let live is for Europeans who are used to being conquered and blue Americans who blurt and rant without a clue as to what they believe in, what they're saying, how stupid they look or sound to who or what group of individuals within their interests and beyond their interests . Live and let live isn't going get rid of groups like Nazi's. Live and let live is going to allow groups like Nazi's to exist, grow and make moves to expand their radius of influence. Live and let live cedes ground for the greater good of survival (pack up and leave to avoid conflict/trouble) or for the avoidance of war (give them this/that, allow this or that, with the hope they'll be satisfied and leave us alone). What is live and let live going to do when it runs of space/ places to withdraw to and places to hide? Is live and let live going to fight, commit mass suicide to spare themselves from misery or raise there hands and hand over their lives and hope for the best? How is live and let live able to take responsibility and protect itself when its belief system doesn't allow it to do much of anything about it and its belief system attracts people who are incapable of doing much of anything about it because violence isn't in their fear/flight nature.

I haven't figured out where you belong yet. I see blue live and let live (liberal column) and I see rural Libertarian and I see an anarchist who is being selfish and disruptive. Well dude, I'm a suburban (an old school suburban) who spends the bulk of of his time and his life competing for something or another in a highly competitive world with dog eat dog rules with LOTS of other suburbans and urbans who have been doing the same thing their entire lives. I spend time avoiding car crashes while driving on paved freeways and roads with thousands of other vehicles driven by people who I don't know anything about and thousands of people coming from thousands of places that I don't know either I've navigated through areas of town where gunshots are common and area's where killers exist, gays exist, blacks exist, minorities of all other types exist, whites exist,, racists of all colors exist, creeps exist, perverted exists, crazy exists, irrational exists, violent exists and so forth. I deal with threats all the time. I've dealt with threats my entire life and I'm a survivor.

My advice to Ragnarok, limit this dudes posts to only a few posts per day.

[nebraska]

Americans used to believe in free speech.

[Classic-Xer]

(01-30-2018, 04:42 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: At the time, the US was the only continental power with a more or less intact economy. We had a culture that believed itself nigh on invincible.  Today there are several continental powers with intact economies.  Most are not trying to be superpowers, with the ability to fight a war anywhere.  Then there is the pro military anti local prejudice of the US red culture.  During the Cold War we were allowed to be imperialistic to some extent.  Not today, as Bush 43 learned to his dismay.

Doesn't compute or make sense in any way. Hint. You don't invade with undersized army if your goal was to seize oil fields and assume control. Bush eliminated the largest and most capable Sunni army that existed at the time. Cut and run LOST. Obama didn't run on cut and run. Obama didn't even mention to the American people that he intended to cut and on. How did that work out for you and the Democrats Bob? Where did the old blue dog Democrats voters go? Trump? Does Hilary represent the last of the blue dogs?

[pbrower2a]

Obama did not cut and run from Iraq. Iraq made it impossible for the USA to keep a military presence in Iraq.

[pbrower2a]

(01-30-2018, 09:34 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-29-2018, 03:23 AM)nebraska Wrote: Live and let live.

Libertarians aren't forcing anyone to be a libertarian. Think for yourself.

Freedom worked for 200 years. Fascism and communism failed.

Those fail to learn from history are doomed to reap at it. The USA wasn't a police state in 1999 or 1969
so why does the USA need to be a police state now?

The government is not your mommy. The government is not your daddy.

Government is not the solution. Government is the problem.

Killing is illegal, but there are still murders.

Airlines are regulated, but there are still airplane crashes.

The government is the cause of almost every problem in the USA.

There is obesity because of food stamps.

The economy is bad because of government regulations and taxes.

There is debt, terrorism, tyranny, and refugees because of US wars.

College is expensive because of government loans.

Medical costs are expensive because of government regulations.

Rent is expensive because of government regulations.

Families are broken because of government welfare.

Illegal immigrants are flooding the country because the government won't patrol the border.

Taxes are high because of government waste, subsidies, wars, welfare, and debt.

Inflation is high because of government money printing.

Should everyone live in a prison because one person might kill someone?

Can't you take some personal responsibility and protect yourself?

Americans used to believe in freedom.

Americans should not be Nazis and Communists.

Those who are embracing tyranny now will be just as guilty as the elites and Gestapo will be when Americans get sent to the gulags, gas chambers, and ovens.

Live and let die. That's my libertarian motto. Think for yourself. Live and let live is for Europeans who are used to being conquered and blue Americans who blurt and rant without a clue as to what they believe in, what they're saying, how stupid they look or sound to who or what group of individuals within their interests and beyond their interests . Live and let live isn't going get rid of groups like Nazi's. Live and let live is going to allow groups like Nazi's to exist, grow and make moves to expand their radius of influence. Live and let live cedes ground for the greater good of survival (pack up and leave to avoid conflict/trouble) or for the avoidance of war (give them this/that, allow this or that, with the hope they'll be satisfied and leave us alone). What is live and let live going to do when it runs of space/ places to withdraw to and places to hide? Is live and let live going to fight, commit mass suicide to spare themselves from misery or raise there hands and hand over their lives and hope for the best? How is live and let live able to take responsibility and protect itself when its belief system doesn't allow it to do much of anything about it and its belief system attracts people who are incapable of doing much of anything about it because violence isn't in their fear/flight nature.

American liberals recognized early enough that for them to live, America would have to destroy Nazism. The German Nazi Party was a syndicate of organized crime that took over a major power and then started conquering other countries.  With Nazism came plunder even to the level of slavery. The Japanese regime had a criminal syndicate, the Black Dragon, as a major player that eventually became a participant in the looting of conquered countries There's nothing liberal about that.

There is little worth dying for, and far less than that worth killing for. The gangster regimes of Nazi Germany and its Japanese partner in crime gave many Americans something to die for and our leaders plenty for which to kill.

Quote:. I see blue live and let live (liberal column) and I see rural Libertarian and I see an anarchist who is being selfish and disruptive. Well dude, I'm a suburban (an old school suburban) who spends the bulk of of his time and his life competing for something or another in a highly competitive world with dog eat dog rules with LOTS of other suburbans and urbans who have been doing the same thing their entire lives. I spend time avoiding car crashes while driving on paved freeways and roads with thousands of other vehicles driven by people who I don't know anything about and thousands of people coming from thousands of places that I don't know either I've navigated through areas of town where gunshots are common and area's where killers exist, gays exist, blacks exist, minorities of all other types exist, whites exist,, racists of all colors exist, creeps exist, perverted exists, crazy exists, irrational exists, violent exists and so forth. I deal with threats all the time. I've dealt with threats my entire life and I'm a survivor.

In view of your other posting, I see you supporting a limited role of government... and "Nebraska" questions whether government has anything to offer except at a diabolical cost. Of course we need free and competitive elections as a check on governmental outrages. We can throw the bums out, which one cannot say of life in Russia or China -- let alone Iran, Syria, North Korea, Cuba, or Venezuela. Of course you know that I expect a more activist role  for government, one operating on the principles of the only ideology that has ever brought lasting happiness: humanism.

Quote:My advice to Ragnarok, limit this dudes posts to only a few posts per day.

Or better yet, ban his naked links. At least he could give us some cause to read his links, such as excerpts.  Yes, I have posted new threads that have gone nowhere, but at the least I offer some excerpts or commentary. He does not seem to respond to any thread that someone else created. He can post a link, so he can cut and paste.

[1948]

If the freedom of speech be taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.

[Bob Butler 54]

(01-30-2018, 10:49 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-30-2018, 04:42 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: At the time, the US was the only continental power with a more or less intact economy. We had a culture that believed itself nigh on invincible.  Today there are several continental powers with intact economies.  Most are not trying to be superpowers, with the ability to fight a war anywhere.  Then there is the pro military anti local prejudice of the US red culture.  During the Cold War we were allowed to be imperialistic to some extent.  Not today, as Bush 43 learned to his dismay.

Doesn't compute or make sense in any way. Hint. You don't invade with undersized army if your goal was to seize oil fields and assume control. Bush eliminated the largest and most capable Sunni army that existed at the time. Cut and run LOST. Obama didn't run on cut and run. Obama didn't even mention to the American people that he intended to cut and on. How did that work out for you and the Democrats Bob? Where did the old blue dog Democrats voters go? Trump? Does Hilary represent the last of the blue dogs?

Bush 43 eliminated the formal Iraq army, but did not eliminate the resistance on the ground.  Many used guerrilla tactics, accepted foreign arms, and continued the fight with success.  Just before the election, Bush 43 essentially adapted Obama's cut and run tactics, leaving McCain high and dry, making the handling of the economy the primary issue.  Troop levels dropped.  They hit zero when Iraq's legislature would not grant the US fighting troops immunity to Iraq laws.  Of late, ISIS became enough of a threat that some forces returned.

Early on Bush 43 started to build a huge embassy complex, which I assume is pretty empty today.  He also built large military bases while many asked where he would invade next.  He intended Iraq to be a puppet state, which it is not.  At the time I described what was planned as serial unilateral nation building, and was rather surprised that the surge started to work.  There was an overdue shift from trying to kill opponents to trying to help locals.

Bush 43s motives seem to change regularly, from week to week, with various parts of the US government working towards different ends.  It seems to me that 43 failed in the long run.  The Republicans lost power and flipped the see saw.  I do not deny that the see saw flipped again after Obama won two terms.  Looks like it will flip yet again after Trump.  We will see about a regeneracy, about moving away from the see saw pattern.  Both parties are unhappy with their establishments.  Something new is overdue.

I am not surprised to see a red selective memory.

[Mabel]

Government is not reason, it is not eloquence — it is force. Like fire it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master; never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.

[Eric the Green]

Reduce government, and therefore business-government (protected by the government) replaces it, and is a worse master, serving only the interest of the owners. Free enterprise is NOT freedom. It is slavery for everyone but the owners.

PBS had a great show last night that gives a great historic example of why libertarian approaches do not work.
http://www.pbs.org/video/american-experi...ngle-fire/

Get rid of government, and greed takes over. The city, the courts, the police, above all, the bosses, simply do the bidding of the greedy, and the people are not protected. Unions and regulations are needed! Going back to the 18th century is not progress. The 20th century is where progress is located today.

[Classic-Xer]

(01-30-2018, 04:11 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(01-29-2018, 09:21 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-29-2018, 03:58 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Extreme partisans often have strange beliefs that have nothing to do with reality.  Many labels have meaning only if they are not applied to some people.

Labels only have meaning if they're accurate. As I said, I've never labelled a socialist a socialist or a communist a communist or a fascist a fascist or an anarchist an anarchist without seeing/ gathering enough proof to use it accurately and make it stick. Hint! You should reexamine the way you use extreme partisan and consider who you are applying the label too as well. Do hippie blue values work with terrorists or my values better suited for getting rid of terrorist? Hint! You ain't going to be able to love them to death.

The communist and fascist labels are overused in my opinion.  In their heyday they properly defined authoritarian states with expansionist tendencies.  They often in the case of communism pretended to follow Marx.  Modern US  personalities are often mislabeled.  This doesn't mean they are not flawed.

Extreme partisans often follow simplistic principles that are well outside of observable reality.  My own view favors balance between opposing principles.  If Nebraska sees regulation as always bad, while the blue world view favors regulation to criminalize abusive behaviors, I will seek balance between the two.  

So, yes, I have endorsed many of Nebraskas principles and causes, but disagree in having some faith in representative democracy.

(01-29-2018, 09:21 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Hint! Don't approach a US taxpayer and use a blue argument that only works in the blues  favor when speaking to someone who has views like Nebraska. A US taxpayer with either walk away and vote against you or decide to get in your grill and educate you.  We aren't face to face here.   I don't know who taught the blues manners and taught them respect. I can only assume that weren't the people like my parents and the bulk of the older adults who were around during your hippie years. I'm pretty sure you spent the bulk of that time avoiding them as much as possible. Are you familiar with them? If you're familiar with them, then you know how critical and tough they were with raising their kids and instilling their values. I'm glad Nebraska showed up and gave me an opportunity  to point out the difference between the two of us for blues to see. If he decides to stick around and contribute more than blurts and rants.

I too had solid GI parents that taught solid values.  Their generation was also flawed in carrying race and gender prejudice, in lacking environmental values, in pursing containment to the extreme.  The protests of the 1960s did change things for the better.  The culture was imperfect then, and remains imperfect.  The need for change is eternal.

(01-29-2018, 09:21 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Ask yourself a question, is he one mine or is Nebraska more likely a loss of one of yours? I see a lot of hippie blue language and positions in his posts. What's a hippie blue kid doing advocating for the removal of the American government? You should realize that every time a group of blues place themselves or their views above the nation as far as importance, they loose another group/crop of Americans. Now, I don't think blue America would be able to survive alone without America as whole. How far away are we from blue America being placed on ignore by America? How far are we away from seeing blue states splitting up? I'd say we aren't that very far away at this point. 

Nebraska is not mine or yours, but himself.  If you see him as blue, I see him as more red.  The lack of government favors the elites and corporations.  A lack of government regulation is a Republican talking point and tugs in the direction of the wealthy elites.  Still, Nebraska is with neither you nor me.  Reds often see the government as bad, while the blue sees corporate power as often bad.  I see both as grey. both as part of the balance.  The optimum comes from balancing FDR and Reagan, not fighting one or the other.

Both parties bases are not thrilled by their establishments.  They are not thrilled by the strong influence of the elites and corporate interests.  Right now the urban / rural spit is more dominant than class divides.  I'd as soon see the parties back off using the government to force cultural change, and push the economic divide.

But that is me.