User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 4:26:02 PM EDT
[#1]
I wholeheartedly support representative government.
I just don't support THIS mis-representative government. Reset is overdue... TC |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 4:26:09 PM EDT
[#2]
I officially nominate myself as uber-dictator for life.
I promise to be benevolent. I promise. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 4:27:34 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I wholeheartedly support representative government. I just don't support THIS mis-representative government. Reset is overdue... TC This is what always happens. Founding fathers put rules in to stop this from happening, people voted them away lawl.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 4:27:36 PM EDT
[#4]
Meh. If someone has a better solution that doesn't involve conflict here that would make the Yugoslavs or Rwandans go "Gotdamn that's some savage shit", put it up.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 4:27:53 PM EDT
[#5]
It's the best thing going. Take it or leave it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 4:29:33 PM EDT
[#6]
It's been a good run, but the biggest problems have been not keeping power in check.
Absolute power to a single person? Hell naw. There have been good kings, and some very bad ones too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 4:29:58 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's the best thing going. Take it or leave it. Really? Why? Because government run schools told you so? Not even serfs had to work so long out of the year to pay off their lords. Like them we cannot own property, at least the Lords could, and you could be elevated to that status. No one can own anything in America. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 4:34:06 PM EDT
[#8]
Based upon the Constitution we started with, we would have 1 representative per 44,000 people. (Not counting the rightfully defunct 2/3's rule...)
and Senators would be representatives of the State's. This model gave us nearly 80-90 years of pure growth and prosperity. Our "Republic" as defined in 1787 is now dead. Long live Collectivism and Central Authority!!!! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 4:35:36 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Based upon the Constitution we started with, we would have 1 representative per 44,000 people. (Not counting the rightfully defunct 2/3's rule...) and Senators would be representatives of the State's. This model gave us nearly 80-90 years of pure growth and prosperity. Our "Republic" as defined in 1787 is now dead. Long live Collectivism and Central Authority!!!! Thats what the people wanted.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 4:35:52 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is what always happens. Founding fathers put rules in to stop this from happening, people voted them away lawl. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I wholeheartedly support representative government. I just don't support THIS mis-representative government. Reset is overdue... TC This is what always happens. Founding fathers put rules in to stop this from happening, people voted them away lawl. Sad, but true. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 4:43:10 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Absolute power to a single person? Hell naw. There have been good kings, and some very bad ones too. Name a King who messed up his country as badly as the Mayors of Detroit did to that city. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 4:43:29 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thats what the people wanted. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Based upon the Constitution we started with, we would have 1 representative per 44,000 people. (Not counting the rightfully defunct 2/3's rule...) and Senators would be representatives of the State's. This model gave us nearly 80-90 years of pure growth and prosperity. Our "Republic" as defined in 1787 is now dead. Long live Collectivism and Central Authority!!!! Thats what the people wanted. You're correct. The people voted them in. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 4:49:10 PM EDT
[#13]
Some people are worth more than others. Sorry, but true.
Manson vs Einstein? Any pope vs Galileo? No question. Not all are created equal. Or maintain equality. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 4:51:39 PM EDT
[#14]
FBHO
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 4:53:54 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Name a King who messed up his country as badly as the Mayors of Detroit did to that city. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Absolute power to a single person? Hell naw. There have been good kings, and some very bad ones too. Name a King who messed up his country as badly as the Mayors of Detroit did to that city. I'm sure some foolishly led their country to a military defeat... But not really the point. Lots of bad kings killing their servants and citizens in history. At least in Detroit, you're free to pack up and leave. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 4:57:44 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm sure some foolishly led their country to a military defeat... But not really the point. Lots of bad kings killing their servants and citizens in history. At least in Detroit, you're free to pack up and leave. You cant pack up and leave the United States, they still tax you. The people of Detroit ARE the government. They murder people all the time, its pretty much all they do.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 5:16:20 PM EDT
[#17]
Every morning I gaze up into the sky and wonder is today the day that we will be lucky enough to have some big rock reset the world for us because if it is left up to us we are doomed. Yeah I do not have kids
As we know power corrupts and the corrupt and mentally flawed seek power. No matter how clearly any countries constitution or governing documents are written the human mind coupled with an agenda will seek a way to pervert it or twist it into something other. Our system no longer works as orignally intended |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 5:23:50 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Really? Why? Because government run schools told you so? Not even serfs had to work so long out of the year to pay off their lords. Like them we cannot own property, at least the Lords could, and you could be elevated to that status. No one can own anything in America. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's the best thing going. Take it or leave it. Really? Why? Because government run schools told you so? Not even serfs had to work so long out of the year to pay off their lords. Like them we cannot own property, at least the Lords could, and you could be elevated to that status. No one can own anything in America. Looks like I've finally found another An-Cap on here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 5:27:46 PM EDT
[#19]
I'm one of those guys that thinks Pinochet was actually pretty cool so...yeah,take that for what it's worth.
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 5:42:32 PM EDT
[#20]
representative gubmint?
what's not to like? in 2016, I can get in line at the polls with twenty million smirking Mexicans! the yutes are proclaiming 'we new people', 'we president now'. every 'representative' or 'democratic' government in history goes through stages that lead to inevitable decline. we are at the penultimate (last but one) stage, which can be summed up as: Santa Claus wins every election. the end stages are various. no need to speculate, we don't have long to wait |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 5:45:19 PM EDT
[#21]
Representatives today gladly accept your vote but represent the people that paid to get them elected.
Not sure how you fix this particular problem, but IMO, it's the biggest problem we face right now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 5:51:38 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Really? Why? Because government run schools told you so? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: It's the best thing going. Take it or leave it. Really? Why? Because government run schools told you so? Not even serfs had to work so long out of the year to pay off their lords. Like them we cannot own property, at least the Lords could, and you could be elevated to that status. No one can own anything in America. You are talking about Allodial title. That makes me alert. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 5:52:34 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Thats what the people wanted. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Based upon the Constitution we started with, we would have 1 representative per 44,000 people. (Not counting the rightfully defunct 2/3's rule...) and Senators would be representatives of the State's. This model gave us nearly 80-90 years of pure growth and prosperity. Our "Republic" as defined in 1787 is now dead. Long live Collectivism and Central Authority!!!! Thats what the people wanted. Nope. But it's what they need. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 5:53:44 PM EDT
[#24]
Repeal of the 17th ammendment would help things.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 5:54:07 PM EDT
[#25]
As it is now...no, I don't support it. Ever hear the expression "bread and circuses"?
The one major change I would make is that anyone who goes on the government tit loses their voting rights until they get off public assistance. Never happen, unfortunately. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 5:55:34 PM EDT
[#26]
I think we have some real problems with our government. The biggest problem I believe is that the state senators are no longer appointed by the state Legislators. That process was abandoned over the years for popular votes.
After that I think their should be term limits for Congress. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:01:55 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Repeal of the 17th ammendment would help things. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:16:23 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I officially nominate myself as uber-dictator for life. I promise to be benevolent. I promise. Can I get my free handout now?  |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:19:01 PM EDT
[#29]
Democracy was just a pit stop on the way to voluntarism! (Hopefully)
I used to think democracy/representation was the only answer. Then I really researched the ideas behind self liberty and voluntarism. I hope we get there one day! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:19:09 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I wholeheartedly support representative government. I just don't support THIS mis-representative government. Reset is overdue... TC Dammit First Post. This...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:21:04 PM EDT
[#31]
The problem isn't with representative government; it's with unrepresentative government.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:23:33 PM EDT
[#32]
"A republic, if you can keep it."
- Benjamin Franklin |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:23:59 PM EDT
[#33]
This government has become a bastardized version of a representative government.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:27:18 PM EDT
[#34]
You are a thought provoking motherfucker for most of ARFcom. I'll give you that.
But I'm torn between the "trollin' " and "are you being serious" ; most of the time....... Having said that, you know full well what has happened. And, coincidentally, you are in LA with me, and should be well aware of the things and natures of some humans that have brought us to this point in American history. However, most will not notice. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:30:31 PM EDT
[#35]
When we had a representative government it was the best in the world. Today, not so much.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:30:58 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The problem isn't with representative government; it's with unrepresentative government. This is what people want. This is what millions have voted for. These horrible things were all agreed upon by the majority.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:33:47 PM EDT
[#37]
I think maybe a descent into idolatry is in order. Big brass dicks or something.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:43:43 PM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
I know this is a redo, but since last time we have had so much more fun representative government caused horribleness. As representative government insatiably destroys nations, this time before our very eyes instead of in just the pages of history, do you still support it? With its perils such as the vote buying concepts of healthcare/amnesty/Social Security/Welfare. With its raising some of the most ignorant people in the nation to the highest positions of power by their ignorant constituents. With huge bureaucracies created simply to garner or suppress votes. With masses of folks in a condo voting to steal the hard working landowners money. How can you support this? Its the tragedy of the commons writ large. At least the king owns his country and cares about it. The king is married to his country, sure he could be a bad partner, but he is invested in that country its a relationship he will leave to his children. A President has a one night stand with it on and off for 4-8 years getting all the bang he can out of it then wanders off, caring not how the nation fared. I've been opposed to Representative Democracy for about a decade now. It is a horrible form of government, only one step above direct democracy. In the post-1789 world it is a form of government almost guaranteed to end in some form of totalitarianism, a mild totalitarianism if one is fortunate (such as what can be found in most Western democracies, including the U.S.). I also agree that there are advantages to hereditary monarchy when it comes to the executive branch of government, another position I've held for some time (but not as long as my opposition to Representative Democracy). Really what is best is federal mixed government with suffrage of any sort (whether we're talking about a general electorate or a higher electorate, such as the kind involve in electoral colleges) requiring the meeting of substantial qualifications of the appropriate kind (to include some basis in land ownership), which as a part of federalism includes the observation of the principle of subsidiarity, a principle that needs to be constitutionalized. That is to a large extent the model that our original government was based upon (although it wasn't the first of its type as many of my fellow Americans seemt o believe). |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:47:00 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's the best thing going. Take it or leave it. Hardly. One of the worst forms of government man has devised. It has an inherently illiberal tendency. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:47:24 PM EDT
[#40]
Problem is, the representative government we have now is NOT the representative government envisioned and codified in the Constitution by the founders. We've worked hard to get rid of lots of safeguards (restricted suffrage, no income tax, senate elected by state legislatures, etc.) so now the representative government represents whom it purchases.
ETA: Obama for king FTMFW!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:53:30 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Repeal of the 17th ammendment would help things. And the 16th. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:53:54 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Really what is best is federal mixed government with suffrage of any sort (whether we're talking about a general electorate or a higher electorate, such as the kind involve in electoral colleges) requiring the meeting of substantial qualifications of the appropriate kind (to include some basis in land ownership), which as a part of federalism includes the observation of the principle of subsidiarity, a principle that needs to be constitutionalized. That is to a large extent the model that our original government was based upon (although it wasn't the first of its type as many of my fellow Americans seemt o believe). I like the earlier form of Feudalism where your representation was basically based on how much combat power you could bring for or against your higher ups. You could of course tweek this around for how much tax base you could bring your higher ups etc etc, but basically represent you for what you are really worth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:55:48 PM EDT
[#43]
Sure, as long as there are no liberals of any kind in it. They are predispositioned to murder liberty and freedom.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 6:55:58 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is what people want. This is what millions have voted for. These horrible things were all agreed upon by the majority. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The problem isn't with representative government; it's with unrepresentative government. This is what people want. This is what millions have voted for. These horrible things were all agreed upon by the majority. Our Constitution is supposed to help protect us from a tyranny of the majority AND a tyranny of the minority. Unfortunately, previous generations (this one, too) have allowed the Constitution to become nothing more than a "GD piece of paper." 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 7:04:47 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hardly. One of the worst forms of government man has devised. It has an inherently illiberal tendency. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's the best thing going. Take it or leave it. Hardly. One of the worst forms of government man has devised. It has an inherently illiberal tendency. ^^This^^ Whether direct or representative, is only a matter of time until politicians discover that they can buy votes with other peoples' $$. Every democracy has a finite life span that usually depends on available/accessible resources. Add a good propaganda machine and the time frame decreases dramatically. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 7:10:02 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I like the earlier form of Feudalism where your representation was basically based on how much combat power you could bring for or against your higher ups. You could of course tweek this around for how much tax base you could bring your higher ups etc etc, but basically represent you for what you are really worth. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Really what is best is federal mixed government with suffrage of any sort (whether we're talking about a general electorate or a higher electorate, such as the kind involve in electoral colleges) requiring the meeting of substantial qualifications of the appropriate kind (to include some basis in land ownership), which as a part of federalism includes the observation of the principle of subsidiarity, a principle that needs to be constitutionalized. That is to a large extent the model that our original government was based upon (although it wasn't the first of its type as many of my fellow Americans seemt o believe). I like the earlier form of Feudalism where your representation was basically based on how much combat power you could bring for or against your higher ups. You could of course tweek this around for how much tax base you could bring your higher ups etc etc, but basically represent you for what you are really worth. I'm not quite sure if you're being serious in this thread, but I do think there are some elements of feudalism that are worthwhile, especially the notion of reciprocal duties and obligations. Something like nobility becomes of singificantly reduced worth in the absence of such and in the absence of the nobleman's role as a political, social, military, and economic leader. However, in many cases noblemen were treated as equals, especially if they had the same titles. I do think there needs to be some form of popular representation in the legislature, but it needs to be counterbalanced by something else, whether it is something like the original U.S. Senate or the House of Lords (pre-1911). |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 7:11:37 PM EDT
[#47]
Hurray for non-Allodial land.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 7:13:41 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And the....People......will get what's coming to them. Like the saying goes.....You reap what you sow. You're correct. The people voted them in. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Based upon the Constitution we started with, we would have 1 representative per 44,000 people. (Not counting the rightfully defunct 2/3's rule...) and Senators would be representatives of the State's. This model gave us nearly 80-90 years of pure growth and prosperity. Our "Republic" as defined in 1787 is now dead. Long live Collectivism and Central Authority!!!! Thats what the people wanted. And the....People......will get what's coming to them. Like the saying goes.....You reap what you sow. You're correct. The people voted them in. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 7:14:13 PM EDT
[#49]
Representative government is good in concept, but here in practice we have representatives who represent only those who pay them. Congress & the presidency is owned. That's why it makes no difference which party is in charge. You get the same sh*t sammich with either.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2013 7:16:03 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Representative government is good in concept, but here in practice we have representatives who represent only those who pay them. Congress & the presidency is owned. That's why it makes no difference which party is in charge. You get the same sh*t sammich with either. It's not really all that good in concept, not if that concept includes human nature. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
