Reviews:
 ·magicjack.com
1 edit | reply to Matt
Re: Global Crossing & Hurricane Electric looked other way ?? said by Matt:they feel justified in taking action themselves. I wouldn't mind seeing a more militant mindset among Americans. We paint ourselves as patriotic, the home of the brave, etc. But, if you travel through other parts of the world, they have a much stronger expression of such traits. For example, in Latin America it's not uncommon to have annual demonstrations, often violent. Or, for labor sectors to shut down the country. Or, to walk through the main airport and find demonstrators disrupting operations (for better working conditions). It's all accepted as part of how society works. That it's better than "staying in line, and waiting for the authorities to take care of something."
Occasionally we read stories about a group of neighbors who beat the heck out of a burglary (or child molestation) suspect before the police arrive. Everyone gets a tingly feeling about that. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing some episodes like that involving corporate executives.
Mark |
|
| If thats the case (an I do understand the desire), then we should be marching on wall street and dc with pitch forks and torches in a scene reminiscent of Frankenstein.
However, we are and always will be, above that. The minute we're not, then we become the criminals that we abhore!
--
"For duty and humanity!"
- Moe Larry and Curly (MEN IN BLACK, 1934)...These are the guys we have in Congress |
|
Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:said by Matt:they feel justified in taking action themselves. I wouldn't mind seeing a more militant mindset among Americans. We paint ourselves as patriotic, the home of the brave, etc. But, if you travel through other parts of the world, they have a much stronger expression of such traits. For example, in Latin America it's not uncommon to have annual demonstrations, often violent. Or, for labor sectors to shut down the country. Or, to walk through the main airport and find demonstrators disrupting operations (for better working conditions). It's all accepted as part of how society works. That it's better than "staying in line, and waiting for the authorities to take care of something." Occasionally we read stories about a group of neighbors who beat the heck out of a burglary (or child molestation) suspect before the police arrive. Everyone gets a tingly feeling about that. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing some episodes like that involving corporate executives. Are you seriously advocating violent demonstrations as a normal everyday thing, and beatings of corporate executives? Is this troll/flamebait?
If you are being serious (which I doubt), I certainly don't want my country to be lke that. |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
2 edits | said by MyDogHsFleas:If you are being serious (which I doubt), I certainly don't want my country to be lke that. It was just an observation. I like the calm and orderly nature of our society. But, it's contradictory to our gleamy-eyed depiction of ourselves as rebellious, independent, militant. Other countries are far more militant, and encourage militancy. Heck, there are countries in Latin America that *require* voting (under penalty of law). They emphasize participation in the process, and openly allow demonstrations. Not demonstrations like ours, where you need a permit to march, and a safely cordoned zone, at a certain time of day.
For people who take the US founders' rhetoric seriously, the Latin American model is closer to the mark. For example, Jefferson's admonishment that this country should have a revolution every 20 years(?).
Mark |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to S_engineer
said by S_engineer:If thats the case (an I do understand the desire), then we should be marching on wall street and dc with pitch forks and torches in a scene reminiscent of Frankenstein. I agree. And, you have to admit, if we validated such "justice" we'd probably see more caution among execuctives (as it pertains to AIG's lavish parties after taxpayer bailout. Or, obscene differences in compensation.).
I'm not saying I'd prefer such a society. But, I'm not sure I prefer a society where it seems like people get away with anything, and have no shame, because the masses don't seem to be ashamed by *anything*.
When I'm in Latin America and see workers lawfully protesting inside the airport (not just silently walking in circles, but making violent, disruptive noise using musical instruments) it makes me wish we were a little less tolerant of things that should make us angry.
Mark |
|
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:said by MyDogHsFleas:If you are being serious (which I doubt), I certainly don't want my country to be lke that. For people who take the US founders' rhetoric seriously, the Latin American model is closer to the mark. For example, Jefferson's admonishment that this country should have a revolution ever 20 years(?). Mark And the purpose of revolting was to keep our government powers in check. My how we've strayed. But many of those rights have also been tweaked towards perfection. But human right violations are an integral part of the latin American model. Are we too supposed to emulate that? |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
1 edit | said by S_engineer:But human right violations are an integral part of the latin American model. Are we too supposed to emulate that? We used to. And it took behavior considered "uppity" by those who liked the status quo. Latin American tolerance (even encouragement) of popular protest is part of preventing such abuses. Silence would likely lead to resurgences of dictatorships.
Like I said. I like our calm, content, orderly society. It has its benefits. But, it has its downside too. Such as abusers who feel there's no limit to popular "norms" (acceptance = validation, etc.).
Mark |
|
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:said by S_engineer:If thats the case (an I do understand the desire), then we should be marching on wall street and dc with pitch forks and torches in a scene reminiscent of Frankenstein. I agree. And, you have to admit, if we validated such "justice" we'd probably see more caution among execuctives (as it pertains to AIG's lavish parties after taxpayer bailout. Or, obscene differences in compensation.). I'm not saying I'd prefer such a society. But, I'm not sure I prefer a society where it seems like people get away with anything, and have no shame, because the masses don't seem to be ashamed by *anything*. When I'm in Latin America and see workers lawfully protesting inside the airport (not just silently walking in circles, but making violent, disruptive noise using musical instruments) it makes me wish we were a little less tolerant of things that should make us angry. Mark The validation that you and many others seek won't put the money back in your pocket...however you'd get a pretty good nights sleep. As far as protests, you can see such discourse anywhere that there are collective bargaining agreements left. Unfortunately, theres not too many of those regions left.
For years we've had the "cowboy" attitude as a nation under the Bush administration. The supporters of this plan were labeled as neocons. And all of the hipocrites that blasted gov't for giving the telecoms immunity for doing "the right thing" are in here with the same vigilance as the gov't was at that time. |
|
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:said by S_engineer:But human right violations are an integral part of the latin American model. Are we too supposed to emulate that? We used to. And it took behavior considered "uppity" by those who liked the status quo. Latin American tolerance (even encouragement) of popular protest is part of preventing such abuses. Silence would likely lead to resurgences of dictatorships. Like I said. I like our calm, content, orderly society. It has its benefits. But, it has its downside too. Such as abusers who feel there's no limit to popular "norms" (acceptance = validation, etc.). Mark Mark, if you've traveled as I have, you know it's still the best game in town! |
|
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:For example, in Latin America it's not uncommon to have annual demonstrations, often violent. Or, for labor sectors to shut down the country. Or, to walk through the main airport and find demonstrators disrupting operations (for better working conditions). It's all accepted as part of how society works. That it's better than "staying in line, and waiting for the authorities to take care of something." For someone who has seen those demonstrations first hand, your entire statement speaks volumes of how ignorant you really are.
Those demonstrations do NOTHING but give the governments the excuse to crack down and beat the crap out of protesters and rarely help the situation. |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to S_engineer
said by S_engineer:Unfortunately, theres not too many of those regions left. That's my only point. "Calm, orderly, content and knowing one's place" has it's merits. But, it has its downside too. One could say we, collectively will tolerate a lot more behavior which would have been considered outrageous decades ago. We'd still be under British rule if we followed today's sense of playing nicely.
I don't know where the balance should be. But, when exposed to other cultures, I often feel we've gone too far toward civility and "herd" behavior. But, I agree with others that daily street vengeance wouldn't be pleasant either.
Mark |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to S_engineer
said by S_engineer:if you've traveled as I have, you know it's still the best game in town! Better in some ways. Not in others. This shouldn't have to boil down to "love it, or leave it." There should be room to discuss the pros and cons of how our country has matured. Maturing is not always good. If you're older, I'm sure you can think of a few examples of what I mean.
Mark |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
1 edit | reply to moonpuppy
said by moonpuppy:Those demonstrations do NOTHING but give the governments the excuse to crack down and beat the crap out of protesters and rarely help the situation. But, your contention is that, if commoners were less "uppity" (stayed home, engaged in calm discourse), things would be better. That's largely how dictatorships arose in the 70s - 80s (with US assistance, I might add).
Your argument could have (and was) applied to the US founders too.
Mark |
|
|
|
| reply to amigo_boy
theres always room for improvement. And as a maturing adult, I certainly feel the pain. One of the most troublesome aspects that has formed in recent years is the merely competitive nature of business morphing into the crisis model thats now in place. This is not only in business, but its in gov't at every level. This marketing technique is used to create shortfalls in budgets, but also to shape our policies, and recently used with several presidential candidates. But you can't keep looking at what the "Joneses" across the borders have, because behind close doors, they have plenty of their own grief!
--
"For duty and humanity!"
- Moe Larry and Curly (MEN IN BLACK, 1934)...These are the guys we have in Congress |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
3 edits | said by S_engineer:But you can't keep looking at what the "Joneses" across the borders have, because behind close doors, they have plenty of their own grief! I agree they have their own grief. But, that shouldn't mean we can't consider what's possibly better.
Many of our problems seem to be attributable to apathy, or contentedness, or how we've written into law how every little thing should work (instead of encouraging the use of common sense, however imperfect that is in daily operation).
For example, I think there's something to be said for forcing all eligible adults to vote (done in some Latin American countries) as a way to keep the population engaged and reminded of their *duty* to participate, rather than expect someone else to fix problems. It has its downside too. (I'm not sure I'd want people voting who don't want to vote.) But, it's at least a step toward addressing a problem which I don't see us even trying to.
Mark |
|
| Let me ask you something rhetorically, and I don't mean to demean. Are you raising a family? Do you have several jobs?
The reason why I ask because I'm not sure people without kids understand the obligations that MUST be met just to maintain necessities. This becomes an induced apathy because you don't have time to monitor the representative you've elected in your particular corner of the earth. I think this is the case with most working adults. It is peoples duty to participate, but it's also their duty to imform themselves about legislation. And what good is legislation if you're going to bypass it with a lynch mob mentality.
In addition, forcing an electorate would only fuel marketing to the ignorant.
--
"For duty and humanity!"
- Moe Larry and Curly (MEN IN BLACK, 1934)...These are the guys we have in Congress |
|
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:But, your contention is that, if commoners were less "uppity" (stayed home, engaged in calm discourse), things would be better. That's largely how dictatorships arose in the 70s - 80s (with US assistance, I might add). Your argument could have (and was) applied to the US founders too. Mark Not my contention at all.
The fact is the more violent a crowd becomes, the easier it is for police and the military to justify their actions whether it be tear gas, attack dogs, water cannons or bullets (rubber and real.)
The second a crowd turns from peaceful protests to rioting the tide of public opinion turns away from them. |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to S_engineer
said by S_engineer:the obligations that MUST be met just to maintain necessities. This becomes an induced apathy I agree to some extent. But, I'm not sure how many people merely don't have time as opposed to being caught up in making the payments for their new all-wheel-drive, armor-laden SUV (purchased every 2 years). Or, their time-share condos. Or, the latest Wii game. Or, downloading all the "free" music they can find on the net.
Sometimes I think apathy translates more into contentedness. I think most people are like the hoard shown in the movie The Matrix. Plugged in, all their bodily functions performed for them, and slowly slipping into uselessness as a consumer.
They may occasionally express an opinion about current affairs, stopped in mid-sentence with "oooh, is that the new Blackberry? (salivation)"
said by S_engineer:It is peoples duty to participate, but it's also their duty to imform themselves about legislation. That's the rub, isn't it? How does something carry the weight of a duty if it's not enforced? We've lost a great deal in this regard. The jury was intended to be a fourth branch of government. Where individuals could essentially veto a law (nullification). Today, most good citizens would be as horrified by that idea as they would be by violent protests (or even horn-blowing labor strikers in the middle of an airport). They'd see it as "anarchy."
The same thing with the militia. It was intended to give the people the ability, working within a framework of government (a state militia), the power to *choose* to oppose government. It's no surprise that the militia's disappearance began in the 1880s through 1930s, as there were instances where the militia was called out to put down a labor strike, and instead defended the strikers.
Both of those institutions were originally compelled. (The jury still is, but is typically instructed that it only has the power to judge the facts of the case, not the law itself.).
The question is how do we get back to that. Or, do we want to? Whatever we do will be problematic. I at least feel a sense of wishing we were a little more like Latin American countries when I see students and the police squaring off for their annual violent protest (an eerie sense of the casualness of a re-enactment, but with real bullets). Or, 20 protestors in the airport raising heck (legally, as a recognized and encouraged act). Something about the passion at least. And the respect for passion as a part of civil life.
Mark |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to moonpuppy
said by moonpuppy:The second a crowd turns from peaceful protests to rioting the tide of public opinion turns away from them. I don't disagree with that, as far as it goes. It's the old adage that the definition of a terrorist or patriot depends on who won (and, by extension, how popular the rebellion was). Just a few years after the American Revolution some whiskey makers felt put upon by taxation. Using the same rhetoric of the founders just a decade earlier they rebelled in what came to be called Shay's Rebellion.
The public was horrified. It was the leading cause for calls to abandon the relatively libertarian Articles of Confederation for the Federal Constitution. Backers of the AoC defended (or at least poo-pooed) Shay and his men. But, their side lost. We ended up with a relatively colossal government from the *very* same people who used Shay's arguments against the British.
OTOH, if nobody ever tests popularity (or even encouraged to discuss it, and consider their right to test it) you end up with a populace who is largely apathetic, disengaged, content.
If we applied the same mindset which pervades our society today (you have to play by the rules) we wouldn't have had the original Revolution. However, that doesn't mean I want to see anarchy, or every nutjob blowing up federal buildings. Just saying there's a certain level of passion and critical thought that we've lost. (And, I see expressed in countries we tend to look down upon.).
Mark |
|
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:said by S_engineer:the obligations that MUST be met just to maintain necessities. This becomes an induced apathy The question is how do we get back to that. Or, do we want to? Whatever we do will be problematic. Mark Getting back what we would lost would mean all the cards would have to be laid out. No circumventing by people with their own greed or agendas. Complicating this mess are the globalization factors that continue to erode our manufacturing base and our sovereignty.
I think about how my parents went through years of the great depression. They had the tenacity to tough it out. The question seems to me is in a era where we want everything right now, are we as tough as they were?
If we're not, we're in trouble!
--
"For duty and humanity!"
- Moe Larry and Curly (MEN IN BLACK, 1934)...These are the guys we have in Congress |
|
