Mark Steyn was right

[August1991]

Mark Steyn predicted a Bush victory.

Robert Fisk has been wrong too often.

----

Adam Smith is still right.

John Kenneth Galbraith was wrong.

----

Toyota is a big firm.

General Motors is a smaller firm.

----

IBM is no longer BIG Blue.

Microsoft is on everyone's computer, for the moment.

----

Go figure about life. It's simple.

Admit it. No one knew who would be US President tonight. People said that it would take weeks to decide.

THE AMERICAN SYSTEM MEANS CHOICE.

[Black Dog]

What were you smoking, man? It's still up in the air.

THE AMERICAN SYSTEM MEANS CHOICE.

Yeah, a choice between two rich, white, Ivy League educated male Skull and Bones members representing parties with little discernable difference in platforms. And a system where the average voter's choice ultimately means nothing.

I sincerly hope that someday the U.S. and Canada will take their place among the true democracies of the world. But that day is stil a long way off. Longer if Bush wins.

[August1991]

Yeah, a choice between two rich, white, Ivy League educated male Skull and Bones members representing parties with little discernable difference in platforms.

Black Dog, you obviously have never lived in a regime where choice did not exist.

Call them Team A and Team B if you want, but it means there is an alternative. That's all democracy really amounts to.

[Guest eureka]

A choice between widening the war of civilizations and trying to rejoin the world community. A choice between some small attempt to return to democracy and yhe Orwellian politics of fear. A choice between demonstrated incompetence and chance to bring a little integrity to government.A choice between a religious fraud and a normal political leader.

And, once again, the American public makes the wrong choice. Apublic frightened out of its wits by the Big Brother propaganda of the last couple of years votes for Big Brother.

[August1991]

Wow, BD claims there was no choice and eureka makes it seem the choice was between life and oblivion.

I suspect many in Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, China, Belarus and so on would be happy merely to have a choice.

[Black Dog]

Black Dog, you obviously have never lived in a regime where choice did not exist.

Call them Team A and Team B if you want, but it means there is an alternative. That's all democracy really amounts to.

If there's no fundamental difference, then there is no alternative, is there? As Gore Vidal said, there's only one party in America, the Property Party, with two right wings. The only difference lies in the platitudes that ooze out of the respective candidates. How can you tout a sytem where people are given such a choice? A system with a two-tiered electorate? A system so easy to corrupt? There are other democracies in the world, functioning democracies that make the U.S. look like the backwards, oligarchal state that it is.

[Hugo]

Blackdog's point is perfectly valid. Democracy is a compromise, usually a huge one, since the only way to get an elected representative who agrees with everything you do is to run yourself, and then what of everybody else?

Democracy is a big sham. It's called freedom, but all it really is is a system to allow the slaves to choose their slave-driver, and a system for people to confer rights over others that they don't have on to politicians, and call it justice. Whoever gets elected will retain the ability to abuse your freedom, violate your property rights and more.

None of it is helped by the braying of the media that one should "get out and vote". No system of slavery is more secure than the one that manages to convince its slaves to fight for it.

A choice between a religious fraud and a normal political leader.

Yes, Kerry is a pretty normal political leader. He lies, he changes his mind depending upon the latest polls, he tells people what they want to hear, his true opinions are a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, he makes promises he could never possibly deliver on, he demands the right to commit crimes and to call them just, and so forth.

Blackdog, I love your signature. I heard a very similar quote, and I can't remember who said it or exactly how it went (really useful, I know), but it said something like, "A nation is the success of an attempt to deceive several million people into thinking they could ever be a community."

[August1991]

If there's no fundamental difference, then there is no alternative, is there?

In a nutshell, that is the problem with the Left. You confuse the symbol of something with the reality.

Because Crest and Colgate look the same, it does not mean that you can dispense with one and simply keep the other. It is having the alternative that is critical.

Democracy is a big sham. It's called freedom, but all it really is is a system to allow the slaves to choose their slave-driver, and a system for people to confer rights over others that they don't have on to politicians, and call it justice.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Government is a legitimate institution that can do good. We will have this argument (once again, *sigh*) in a different thread, Hugo.

[Only a Bush Jnr victory could get Hugo and Black Dog to agree.]

[Black Dog]

None of it is helped by the braying of the media that one should "get out and vote". No system of slavery is more secure than the one that manages to convince its slaves to fight for it

And having done so in record numbers, the citizenry can now sit back down on their collective asses and wait four years for the next opportunity to select their favorite empty platitudes and jingoistic rhetoric.

Blackdog, I love your signature

Another quotation that is particularily relevant today:

"This may be the year when we finally come face to face with ourselves; finally just lay back and say it -- that we are really just a nation of 220 million used car salesmen with all the money we need to buy guns, and no qualms at all about killing anybody else in the world who tries to make us uncomfortable."

-Hunter S. Thompson

Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail

November 1972

[Hugo]

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Government is a legitimate institution that can do good.

Well, August, we had a 9-page thread on this subject in which you were completely unable to defend this assertion, and eventually you bowed out altogether, leaving it to Theloniusfleabag, who couldn't defend it either.

Repeating what you'd prefer to be true will never make it so.

[Black Dog]

In a nutshell, that is the problem with the Left. You confuse the symbol of something with the reality.

Because Crest and Colgate look the same, it does not mean that you can dispense with one and simply keep the other. It is having the alternative that is critical.

Your example makes my point: both choices are identical, will accomplish the same task and serve the same purpose. The only difference is in the packaging. Therefore, since there is no difference between the alternatives, choice is an illusion.

[Hugo]

Another quotation that is particularily relevant today:

Oh, oh, I have some!

None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.

-- Goethe

When the government's boot is on your throat, whether it is a left boot or a right boot is of no consequence.

-- Gary Lloyd

Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.

-- John Adams.

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until a majority of voters discover that they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury.

-- Alexander Tytler

Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.

-- George Washington

No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session.

-- Mark Twain

Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

-- James Bovard

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground

-- Thomas Jefferson

Blessed are the young, for they shall inherit the national debt.

-- Herbert Hoover

[Black Dog]

"Fascism in America will attempt to advance under the banner of Americanism and anti-Fascism."

Georgi Dimitrov (1882-1949).

[Hugo]

America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy.

-- John Quincy Adams

Let the people think they govern and they will be governed.

– William Penn

Left-wing politicians take away your liberty in the name of children and of fighting poverty, while right-wing politicians do it in the name of family values and fighting drugs.

-- Harry Browne

[Slavik44]

If all fools, wise men, rich men, poor men, greedy men, humble men, selfish men, altruistic men, and neutral men in the world were killed, anarchy might actually be able to exist.

[August1991]

BD! Georgi Dimitrov! The Lion of Leipzig! I think Stalin had him killed.

Well, August, we had a 9-page thread on this subject in which you were completely unable to defend this assertion, and eventually you bowed out altogether, leaving it to Theloniusfleabag, who couldn't defend it either.

Far from it, I just got tired of banging my head against a wall.

But I'll try again with your slave-driver example.

In China in the 19th century, teams of men would haul boats up the rapids of the Yellow River. The men would hire another man to follow along and whip any shirkers. It was in the interest of each man individually to have such a slave-driver. That in essence is the logic of government.

[Hugo]

Far from it, I just got tired of banging my head against a wall.

Was the "wall" an argument you couldn't defeat? Or was it your own self-contradictions?

It was in the interest of each man individually to have such a slave-driver. That in essence is the logic of government.

This is an incredibly lame argument.

Why was it necessary to whip shirkers? Why could the other teamsters not expel him from the team? Why could the shirker, who didn't want to work, not quit? There has to be coercion involved, so what you are saying is that more coercion is necessary to correct the effects of coercion.

But if you want to continue this discussion, I'd suggest you resume posting in the relevant thread.

[Hugo]

If all fools, wise men, rich men, poor men, greedy men, humble men, selfish men, altruistic men, and neutral men in the world were killed, anarchy might actually be able to exist.

Did you make that up yourself?

[August1991]

Your example makes my point: both choices are identical, will accomplish the same task and serve the same purpose. The only difference is in the packaging. Therefore, since there is no difference between the alternatives, choice is an illusion.

BD, you still don't get it.

Remember the lesbian (gay?) couple that were refused service in a bar in Alberta? The best defence against idiocy is to cross the street and go elsewhere. But that requires an alternative.

Now, if Crest and Colgate were a cartel, then there would be no alternative.

But from what I can see in the US now, the Dems and Republicans are at each other's throats. There is no bipartisanship. It's no cartel.

BTW, I have always admired the US precisely because it produces and sustains such people as Hunter S. Thompson, Michael Moore, Sean Penn and Noam Chomsky.

-----

Hugo, I started another thread.

[Black Dog]

Remember the lesbian (gay?) couple that were refused service in a bar in Alberta? The best defence against idiocy is to cross the street and go elsewhere. But that requires an alternative.

Bad analogy. Let's call the bar the couple were kicked out of teh Republican party. Let's say they head across the street to the Democrat bar, only to be refused service there as well. Different managers, different establishments, same policies.

Now, if Crest and Colgate were a cartel, then there would be no alternative.

You are simply condfusing the difference in brand names with an actual difference in the product. Of course, both are toothpastes, both do the same job and, unlike the two mainstream parties, both leave your mouth feeling minty fresh. Yours is a difference without a distinction.

[August1991]

You are simply condfusing the difference in brand names with an actual difference in the product.

There need be no difference in the product. (Think of gasoline or sugar where there is no chemical difference.) The existence of a choice is what is critical. This changes entirely the nature of any relationship.

Bad analogy. Let's call the bar the couple were kicked out of teh Republican party. Let's say they head across the street to the Democrat bar, only to be refused service there as well. Different managers, different establishments, same policies.

I am not saying that choice solves all problems. You'll look a long time before finding a 20 cent beer.

[Black Dog]

There need be no difference in the product. (Think of gasoline or sugar where there is no chemical difference.) The existence of a choice is what is critical. This changes entirely the nature of any relationship.

A choice without distinction is a false choice. By your logic, third world dictatorships that hold sham elecions with the same candidate "running" for two parties are legitimate democracies because the people have the option of checking one of two different boxes. Silly.

[Slavik44]

If all fools, wise men, rich men, poor men, greedy men, humble men, selfish men, altruistic men, and neutral men in the world were killed, anarchy might actually be able to exist.

Did you make that up yourself?

well unless your name is proudhon, it is more then I can say for you. But no i didn't I figured since you were having so much fun quoting people about society a hundred years ago, I would have some fun to.

[Hugo]

Proudhon, eh? Proudhon the anarchist? Do you have a source for your quote?

[Anarchy] ... the ideal of human government... centuries will pass before that ideal is attained, but our law is to go in that direction, to grow unceasingly nearer to that end

Proudhon, from P.J. Proudhon, George Woodcock, p.249

[August1991]

By your logic, third world dictatorships that hold sham elecions with the same candidate "running" for two parties are legitimate democracies because the people have the option of checking one of two different boxes.

No, that would be a cartel, like Singapore, or several Soviet bloc countries. A single party in effect presents different faces.

That is most definitely not the case in the US. BD, you may find it interesting that some right-wing thinkers, following this idea, are very much against bipartisanship. I suspect Bush's recent victory speech was mere window dressing. He has no intention of co-operating with Democrats.

Incidentally, one condition for the conclusions of so-called perfect market competition is a homogeneous product.

I think you are right that my "same sex kissing in a bar" example was a bad analogy. Here we would want heterogeneity (!) across a spectrum.

My main point though was choice. It's the age old phrase, "He was so different before we got married."