British Colonization Of Africa

[Vigile]

My wife certainly became very disillusioned with The American Dream^TM and it didn't take her too long either.  She quickly realized that this simply is not the land of freedom and liberty she had been told about.  In some ways her life here is better than it was in Ukraine; but she'd gladly go back if she could, and I'd be only too happy to go with her.

yeah, it's changing a little for the worse lately, but I was really surprised how much freer I am in russia than I ever was back home.

[mymistake]

 

I'm getting a bit tired of reading this

 

 

 

Those who do not live in America fail to realize

 

 

 

Well can you honestly say that you already understood that the US is controlled by the ultra rich?  Did you already know that the ultra rich "have everything under control at this point, and they make the laws, so they will not change a thing because everything works great...for them"?  Did you already know in "the Corporate States of America, money is the only thing that motivates our politicians"?

 

Those who want to understand my country should start there.

 

[TrueFreedom]

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/princeton-scholar-demise-of-democracy-america-tpm-interview

 

"....rather than average citizens of moderate means having an important role in determining policy, ability to shape outcomes is restricted to people at the top of the income distribution and to organized groups that represent primarily -- although not exclusively -- business."

 

Our policies are decided upon by money-dealers, arms-dealers, food-supply-monopolizers and energy barons. 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

My wife certainly became very disillusioned with The American Dream^TM and it didn't take her too long either.  She quickly realized that this simply is not the land of freedom and liberty she had been told about.  In some ways her life here is better than it was in Ukraine; but she'd gladly go back if she could, and I'd be only too happy to go with her.

yeah, it's changing a little for the worse lately, but I was really surprised how much freer I am in russia than I ever was back home.

 

I've felt a little of that when I have been over there, which is why we're hoping things will settle down soon.  Not only would we like to be able to visit; we've still not given up hope of retiring in Odessa.

[wanderinlostchild]

 

 

 

 

 

People in the US are hardly in a position to criticise the UK for messing up dozens of other countries.

because we have such a say over our government's actions? I'd say people in the us military, since they volunteered, don't have much they can say, but the rest of us have every right to express our moral indignation without being accused of hypocrisy.

Do you vote?

Doesn't make a difference. We only have two parties with any power so we have to choose the lesser of two evils. All too often there is no real difference between our candidates except window dressing. Different candidates will pander to various special interest groups but none of them will offer a moral high ground in our policies. Besides the candidate who spends the most money wins.

I grew up with hatred for the redcoats! That is why I'm so passionate about this thread. Childhood memories of paul revere, The Boston massacre, and bunker hill.

[TrueFreedom]

I grew up with hatred for the redcoats!

Well, the bluecoats have done a fine job of picking up where the redcoats left off.

[wanderinlostchild]

 

 

I grew up with hatred for the redcoats!

 

Well, the bluecoats have done a fine job of picking up where the redcoats left off.

if only Napoleon could have controlled the English Channel.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

 

People in the US are hardly in a position to criticise the UK for messing up dozens of other countries.

because we have such a say over our government's actions? I'd say people in the us military, since they volunteered, don't have much they can say, but the rest of us have every right to express our moral indignation without being accused of hypocrisy.

 

Do you vote?

 

 

 

Doesn't make a difference.  We only have two parties with any power so we have to choose the lesser of two evils.  All too often there is no real difference between our candidates except window dressing.  Different candidates will pander to various special interest groups but none of them will offer a moral high ground in our policies.  Besides the candidate who spends the most money wins.

 

 

This was exactly my point and is the same everywhere regardless of voting system or the extent to which the rich control everything.  We have to choose the lesser of two evils.  If we don't, we may well end up with the greater of two evils.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

I'm getting a bit tired of reading this

 

 

 

Those who do not live in America fail to realize

 

 

 

Well can you honestly say that you already understood that the US is controlled by the ultra rich?  Did you already know that the ultra rich "have everything under control at this point, and they make the laws, so they will not change a thing because everything works great...for them"?  Did you already know in "the Corporate States of America, money is the only thing that motivates our politicians"?

 

Those who want to understand my country should start there.

 

 

None of that changes the fact that in presidential, congressional and state elections there is a choice between two main candidates and one of them promotes the social policies of the religious right.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

I'm getting a bit tired of reading this

 

 

 

Those who do not live in America fail to realize

 

 

Let me explain this to you. I live in Oklahoma. We have seven electoral votes that count for President of the United States. In the electoral college that's not enough to matter under any current calculus that's used to determine the magic number of 270 electoral votes FTW. Now, I'm a Democrat living in the reddest of the red states. Oklahoma carries Republicans 3 to 1 in every single type of election. My vote for POTUS means jack squat in the US of A before we even get into the minor policy differences between our parties. My vote will not influence Oklahoma's electors and Oklahoma electors will not influence the outcome of the Electoral College. 

 

 

I am aware of how the Electoral College works.  In other countries there are also "safe seats" where opposing party votes don't effectively count, other than as a protest vote.  This is why I mentioned proportional representation, which makes every vote count regardless of local differences such as red states or safe seats.

[mymistake]

 

 

 

I'm getting a bit tired of reading this

 

 

 

Those who do not live in America fail to realize

 

 

 

Well can you honestly say that you already understood that the US is controlled by the ultra rich?  Did you already know that the ultra rich "have everything under control at this point, and they make the laws, so they will not change a thing because everything works great...for them"?  Did you already know in "the Corporate States of America, money is the only thing that motivates our politicians"?

 

Those who want to understand my country should start there.

 

 

None of that changes the fact that in presidential, congressional and state elections there is a choice between two main candidates and one of them promotes the social policies of the religious right.

 

 

You did not answer my question.  As for your dodge right now we have the president who did not cater to the religious right.  Can you show me where that made a difference in US foreign policy?  The Leftguy continued with the war in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan along with all the other tiny little nations we attack plus he started another war in Libya.  With that war on Libya he ignored our own laws requiring Congressional oversight.

 

You imply there is an alternative when the recent US policy demonstrates there isn't a choice.

[mymistake]

 

 

 

Doesn't make a difference.  We only have two parties with any power so we have to choose the lesser of two evils.  All too often there is no real difference between our candidates except window dressing.  Different candidates will pander to various special interest groups but none of them will offer a moral high ground in our policies.  Besides the candidate who spends the most money wins.

 

 

This was exactly my point and is the same everywhere regardless of voting system or the extent to which the rich control everything.  We have to choose the lesser of two evils.  If we don't, we may well end up with the greater of two evils.

 

 

 

Well our current president said he would close Gitmo and end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  That was before his first term.  So does that mean he was the greater evil than John McCain?  Or were we suppose to elect Mr. ReligiousRight himself, Mitt Romney?

[florduh]

Everybody has a better idea of how to run this country, including us. We can't fucking do it. Read that again.

 

Besides, those important "social" decisions come down from the Supreme Court, a body over which we don't have even the illusion of influence.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

Everybody has a better idea of how to run this country, including us. We can't fucking do it. Read that again.

 

Besides, those important "social" decisions come down from the Supreme Court, a body over which we don't have even the illusion of influence.

 

No need to get so defensive.  It's a globalised world and what happens in one country affects the others.  All I am saying is don't complain about your government if you're not going to vote or try to work towards reforming the electoral system so that everyone's votes count.

 

The social decisions of the Supreme Court are largely determined by the relative conservativeness of the Justices, who are appointed by the President.  It comes down to the luck of seats becoming vacant during Rep or Dem presidencies.  So as long as you are not in a red state, you do have (somewhat indirect) influence over the makeup of the Supreme Court.  You have just had some extremely bad luck in recent years.  Other countries have a less politicised judicial system.  I feel sorry for you.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

 

 

I'm getting a bit tired of reading this

 

 

 

Those who do not live in America fail to realize

 

 

 

Well can you honestly say that you already understood that the US is controlled by the ultra rich?  Did you already know that the ultra rich "have everything under control at this point, and they make the laws, so they will not change a thing because everything works great...for them"?  Did you already know in "the Corporate States of America, money is the only thing that motivates our politicians"?

 

Those who want to understand my country should start there.

 

 

None of that changes the fact that in presidential, congressional and state elections there is a choice between two main candidates and one of them promotes the social policies of the religious right.

 

 

You did not answer my question.  As for your dodge right now we have the president who did not cater to the religious right.  Can you show me where that made a difference in US foreign policy?  The Leftguy continued with the war in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan along with all the other tiny little nations we attack plus he started another war in Libya.  With that war on Libya he ignored our own laws requiring Congressional oversight.

 

You imply there is an alternative when the recent US policy demonstrates there isn't a choice.

 

 

I didn't know your questions weren't rhetorical.  My answers are "yes i know".  Happy now?  Perhaps a little less of the aggro then?

 

As I said earlier in this thread I'm not particularly interested in foreign policy.  The area with the choice is social policy.  Not voting leads to the religious right being in power.

[mymistake]

 

 

 

 

 

I'm getting a bit tired of reading this

 

 

 

Those who do not live in America fail to realize

 

 

 

Well can you honestly say that you already understood that the US is controlled by the ultra rich?  Did you already know that the ultra rich "have everything under control at this point, and they make the laws, so they will not change a thing because everything works great...for them"?  Did you already know in "the Corporate States of America, money is the only thing that motivates our politicians"?

 

Those who want to understand my country should start there.

 

 

None of that changes the fact that in presidential, congressional and state elections there is a choice between two main candidates and one of them promotes the social policies of the religious right.

 

 

You did not answer my question.  As for your dodge right now we have the president who did not cater to the religious right.  Can you show me where that made a difference in US foreign policy?  The Leftguy continued with the war in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan along with all the other tiny little nations we attack plus he started another war in Libya.  With that war on Libya he ignored our own laws requiring Congressional oversight.

 

You imply there is an alternative when the recent US policy demonstrates there isn't a choice.

 

 

I didn't know your questions weren't rhetorical.  My answers are "yes i know".  Happy now?  Perhaps a little less of the aggro then?

 

As I said earlier in this thread I'm not particularly interested in foreign policy.  The area with the choice is social policy.  Not voting leads to the religious right being in power.

 

 

 

What aggro?  Since you understand that the rich control everything how do you expect voting to change anything?  None of these questions are rhetorical.

 

I assumed you were talking about foreign policy based on your post #10  "People in the US are hardly in a position to criticise the UK for messing up dozens of other countries."

 

 

As for "Not voting leads to the religious right being in power" that is either true or false depending upon who you are talking about.  If Republicans are included it is false.

 

So how exactly do our social policies put us in the position that Americans are not allowed to criticize the past British Imperialism of Africa?

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm getting a bit tired of reading this

 

 

 

Those who do not live in America fail to realize

 

 

 

Well can you honestly say that you already understood that the US is controlled by the ultra rich?  Did you already know that the ultra rich "have everything under control at this point, and they make the laws, so they will not change a thing because everything works great...for them"?  Did you already know in "the Corporate States of America, money is the only thing that motivates our politicians"?

 

Those who want to understand my country should start there.

 

 

None of that changes the fact that in presidential, congressional and state elections there is a choice between two main candidates and one of them promotes the social policies of the religious right.

 

 

You did not answer my question.  As for your dodge right now we have the president who did not cater to the religious right.  Can you show me where that made a difference in US foreign policy?  The Leftguy continued with the war in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan along with all the other tiny little nations we attack plus he started another war in Libya.  With that war on Libya he ignored our own laws requiring Congressional oversight.

 

You imply there is an alternative when the recent US policy demonstrates there isn't a choice.

 

 

I didn't know your questions weren't rhetorical.  My answers are "yes i know".  Happy now?  Perhaps a little less of the aggro then?

 

As I said earlier in this thread I'm not particularly interested in foreign policy.  The area with the choice is social policy.  Not voting leads to the religious right being in power.

 

 

 

What aggro?  Since you understand that the rich control everything how do you expect voting to change anything?  None of these questions are rhetorical.

 

I assumed you were talking about foreign policy based on your post #10  "People in the US are hardly in a position to criticise the UK for messing up dozens of other countries."

 

 

As for "Not voting leads to the religious right being in power" that is either true or false depending upon who you are talking about.  If Republicans are included it is false.

 

So how exactly do our social policies put us in the position that Americans are not allowed to criticize the past British Imperialism of Africa?

 

If you followed the trail of posts after #10 it would explain how we got from foreign to social policy.

 

Do you care if the religious right are in power?

[mymistake]

 

 

Do you care if the religious right are in power?

 

 

 

I am ecstatic over their defeat in the 2012 elections.  Not only did Romney lose but so did most of the lessor candidates running for senate, congress and govenor.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

 

Do you care if the religious right are in power?

 

 

 

I am ecstatic over their defeat in the 2012 elections.  Not only did Romney lose but so did most of the lessor candidates running for senate, congress and govenor.

 

I'm ecstatic about it too.  Do you see a connection between people voting, and getting that result?

[mymistake]

 

 

 

 

Do you care if the religious right are in power?

 

 

 

I am ecstatic over their defeat in the 2012 elections.  Not only did Romney lose but so did most of the lessor candidates running for senate, congress and govenor.

 

I'm ecstatic about it too.  Do you see a connection between people voting, and getting that result?

 

 

 

NZ the views you have shared here regarding democracy have been juvenile.  There is no correlation between voter turnout and the democrats winning.  Our people vote the way the television tells them to vote.  And the television tells them based on who spends the most on advertising.  When the Religious Right lost in 2012 the voter turn out was almost as high as 2008 (57% for both) when they were stronger.  When the Religious Right was at it's peak in 2000 and 2004 there wasn't much difference (50% and 55% respectfully).  We have not had a voter turnout over 60% since the 1960's.  

 

The reason Obama won was because of the focused media circus at the end of the Bush administration that hurt the Republicans.   For crying out loud they even gave Obama a Nobel Peace Prize for not being Bush right before Obama ramped up the war effort.  It is all driven by advertising and media and that is driven by money and power.

 

Do you see me lecturing the people of New Zealand regarding the politics of New Zealand which I know almost nothing about?  (Okay that question is rhetorical.  Maybe you should stop pretending you can teach us about US politics.)

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

 

 

 

Do you care if the religious right are in power?

 

 

 

I am ecstatic over their defeat in the 2012 elections.  Not only did Romney lose but so did most of the lessor candidates running for senate, congress and govenor.

 

I'm ecstatic about it too.  Do you see a connection between people voting, and getting that result?

 

 

 

NZ the views you have shared here regarding democracy have been juvenile.  There is no correlation between voter turnout and the democrats winning.  Our people vote the way the television tells them to vote.  And the television tells them based on who spends the most on advertising.  When the Religious Right lost in 2012 the voter turn out was almost as high as 2008 (57% for both) when they were stronger.  When the Religious Right was at it's peak in 2000 and 2004 there wasn't much difference (50% and 55% respectfully).  We have not had a voter turnout over 60% since the 1960's.  

 

The reason Obama won was because of the focused media circus at the end of the Bush administration that hurt the Republicans.   For crying out loud they even gave Obama a Nobel Peace Prize for not being Bush right before Obama ramped up the war effort.  It is all driven by advertising and media and that is driven by money and power.

 

Do you see me lecturing the people of New Zealand regarding the politics of New Zealand which I know almost nothing about?  (Okay that question is rhetorical.  Maybe you should stop pretending you can teach us about US politics.)

 

Oh do get over yourself MM.  If you perceive it as lecturing then maybe you need to go into therapy for your insecurity issues.   If you don't like the religious right, then vote against them, it's very simple, almost "juvenile".

[wanderinlostchild]

Thank you vigil for the information on the death camps and gulags in Kenya. the genocide nobody cares about. I just viewing it. Unbelievable. Ill remember them. I was not awareof the Kenyan atrocities and genocides. I was more interested in the Zulu!

[mymistake]

 If you don't like the religious right, then vote against them, it's very simple, almost "juvenile".

 

 

So that is how it is done.  Thanks for the tip.  I will try to keep it in mind.  I'm so glad you shared your wisdom with us.

[Vigile]

Personally, I don't give a rats ass what you think about me as I think your values are twisted and your logic simplistic. So, there ya go.

 

 

Just what makes that little old antThink he'll move that rubber tree plantAnyone knows an ant, can'tMove a rubber tree plantBut he's got high hopesHe's got high hopesHe's got high apple pieIn the sky hopes...

Regarding the write in idea,

[wanderinlostchild]

 "The difference is that the Brits were good at it, and had no conscience to trouble them. Thanks to that careful incineration of records and highly adaptive national sociopathic disorder, "...there would be no soul-searching or public accounting [in Britain] for the crimes perpetrated against the hundreds of thousands of men and women in Kenya."