Posted by Baron Greenback [12.211.212.60 - ] on 01 November 2002 at 08.55.58 ZuluTime:

In Reply to: Well, yeah.... posted by Gremlin on 29 October 2002 at 09.41.09 ZuluTime:

Well, it's kind of funny, but I was reading a london news site (Ananova.com is the one I typically read, as CNN has developed this nasty habit of never, EVER showing any news whatsoever, with the exception of showing people's reactions to it, although in this case, it was the Gaurdian), and something relevant popped up. Specifically, http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,3605,823843,00.html

You know, for all the "free world" jazz, all the "liberals" who "occasionally do anything at all", etcetera, etcetera, we could use a lesson from a country that regularly douses it's prime minister with water from water baloons at rock concerts (an unrelated, but recent, couple of news stories).

Just my media-saturated opinion, while I still have one of those.

Also, just wanted to put in my two bits where my country is concerned. Basically, I've always viewed "inaliable rights" as a misnomer. Life, Liberty, and looking at pr0n are all things the government not only CAN take away, but is SUPPOSED to take away when these things are abused, the way it's set up. The big thing about this country, is that you're supposed to have due process, a fair trial, and means preventing abuse of that power. It's why we have the fifth ammendment attempting to prevent rigged trials, the fourth deliniating what the cops can do, etcetera etcetera. Anyway, the government over the people wasn't ever really supposed to get as big as it is; things like the second ammendment were supposed to, well, work as check-and-balance measures. The PEOPLE were supposed to grow... anyway, the depression happened, people were suddenly okay with the government being our rich, miserly uncle, we gave it a little extra power and re-arranged the power already in place... nevermind. Rent the Star Wars sextet some time.

At any rate, I find myself being a devout centrist where politics is concerned. Basically, we have a Republic, where the congress is supposed to listen to you. The problem is, we didn't set up any incentives for them to listen to us when we set up our country. Read the constitution; it's not in there. They have RESTRICTIONS up the wazoo, but no incentive. Elections would be incentive, except that there's no incentive either to inform voters in an unbiased manner regarding their miserable choices, or for voters to be informed or vote at all. Two hundred years ago, of course, we didn't need incentive. We had fought a war against England's church, and it's discovered-to-be-a-fucking-moron king. These were deists and atheists and sympathetic christians. They knew what the fuck they were doing, and were all about voting. They just, stupidly, assumed that we'd all be like-minded.

At any rate, that eliminates the democratic side of things. Any person that wants to have their voice heard becomes a congressman, or ends up in a hidey hole on CNN where we don't have to look at them. Anyone that is a congressman that claims to listen to the people, is either lying, or an innefective idiot. The smart democrat is one that convinces the people he's on their side, and then has as much fun as possible, while doing next to nothing; the inneffective idiots are listening to people that just want the government to make the slurpee machine at the seven-elleven work properly, damnit. Then, we get to the republic itself. Now, there's two reasons to be a congressman: To advance your own political agenda, and to make money. When people are interested in making money, it's actually a good thing. Not only are they, and our country, richer, but they're less likely to do extremely stupid things. People that are interested in advancing their political agendas, changing the system, etcetera, that are in congress, are therefore idiots, as they are not attempting to earn more money. Typically, and sadly, most republicans end up in this category. Whether it be the church, some sort of inane value, or an attack on a concept/valuable industry (our war on drugs being a prime example), they are going to find some incredibly wasteful, idiotic, and non-beneficial way to spend their time in office. So, I can't claim to be democratic, as I don't like being ineffective and don't have the really cushy job yet, and I can't claim to be republican, as I don't like being a fucking moron.

Now, we get to the centrists. Typically, in a balanced congress, the centrists are the ones that call the shots. The democrats vote one way, the republicans vote another, and the centrists actually make a decision. It actually works fairly effectively. Sure, you're working with other's agendas, and you actually have to do something to get your money, but, well, you've got supreme power. Mwa ha ha. When there happens to be an inbalance in the numbers of democrats or republicans, this power is maintained by siding with the underdogs, effectively preventing any decisions from being made whatsoever until things balance out.

Of course, I'm not a congressman (yet, heh). The reason I'm centrist, is that I don't have to be a congressman. Democrats realise that politically-minded people like myself, while not keeping them /in/ office, are capable of messaging certain newspapers, and getting them /out/ of office, or at least causing them a bit of hell in their personal lives. Oh, who am I kidding. Democrats listen to you once every two or six years, then they don't do anything anyway. Republicans, however, are just stupid enough to listen to me, if it sounds like I really just want us to be clean, moral, and starving. Basically, I can have the same amount of control over my government, without the really spiffy amount of pay.