Constitutionalist

[Ecnelis_Doogod]

Hello, My name is Silence Dogood, I am a member of the A.R.M., I was curious as to you're positions on Obama and his programs / actions so far. I am NOT a republican, they anger me more than I can describe, and I am most definately not a democrat they make me equally mad, if I HAD to pick a party it would be libertarian, however I trust no party. Do you all believe in the Constitution? Also, I am a guest here and will behave as such, I am not here to flame, but to learn and maybe have a clean honest debate or two.

~Sincerely, Silence Dogood

[Ele'ill]

Hello, My name is Silence Dogood, I am a member of the A.R.M., I was curious as to you're positions on Obama and his programs / actions so far. I am NOT a republican, they anger me more than I can describe, and I am most definately not a democrat they make me equally mad, if I HAD to pick a party it would be libertarian, however I trust no party. Do you all believe in the Constitution? Also, I am a guest here and will behave as such, I am not here to flame, but to learn and maybe have a clean honest debate or two.

~Sincerely, Silence Dogood

But under what circumstances would you actually 'HAVE' to pick a party?

[Skooma Addict]

Do you all believe in the Constitution?

Do you? Did you sign the constitution? Do you think it has any legitimate authority?

[GPDP]

Hello, My name is Silence Dogood, I am a member of the A.R.M.

Welcome, I suppose.


I was curious as to you're positions on Obama and his programs / actions so far.You'll find little love for Obama here. We regard him as a bourgeois, right-of-center conservative capitalist who only talks like a progressive when it suits him, but otherwise acts like Bush's third term for the most part. His policies are more of the same to us, both in the domestic and foreign realms. We dislike him about as much as you guys do, though obviously for far different and IMO better reasons.


I am NOT a republican, they anger me more than I can describe, and I am most definately not a democrat they make me equally mad, if I HAD to pick a party it would be libertarian, however I trust no party.We dislike both Republicans and Democrats here as well. They are essentially two wings of the same capitalist party. Though we don't hold much love for libertarians either.


Do you all believe in the Constitution?Most of us do not, for several reasons. One, none of us ever consented to it. Two, it is a woefully antiquated document that was arguably only progressive for its time. Third, even if it wasn't, we still regard it as an oppressive and authoritarian document that gave power to a small ruling class to the detriment of the working class. Fourth, even if that wasn't so, the ruling class sees fit to violate whatever provisions are supposed to hold them back all the time, so to us, it's little more than a piece of paper that does nothing to constrain them.


Also, I am a guest here and will behave as such, I am not here to flame, but to learn and maybe have a clean honest debate or two.Looking forward to it.

[yuon]

Hello, My name is Silence Dogood, I am a member of the A.R.M., I was curious as to you're positions on Obama and his programs / actions so far. I am NOT a republican, they anger me more than I can describe, and I am most definately not a democrat they make me equally mad, if I HAD to pick a party it would be libertarian, however I trust no party. Do you all believe in the Constitution? Also, I am a guest here and will behave as such, I am not here to flame, but to learn and maybe have a clean honest debate or two.

~Sincerely, Silence Dogood
I'm not a yank, so I don't have to worry about the yank constitution. But as noted, I didn't agree to any constitution. I wouldn't agree to any that currently exist, even.

Consider the method of electing the federal government in the USA. Pathetic.

So far as it goes, I suspect that the Libertarian party is closer to my ideals than the other two parties mentioned. But only because they claim to be small government. But, so far as it goes, I don't really think they would stay that way if elected with a majority.

Also, what the heck is "ARM"?

[Robert]

As for Obama, the commies are right (thank god) about his not being a socialist as the Right claims. There is nothing remarkable about his policies, foreign or domestic. He's a weak (purposefully weak) reformist, and even less reformist than Roosevelt or Reagan. I'd put him between the two.

I wish he expressed more concern about the USA's obscene national debt.

I'll let him know next time he calls.:rolleyes:

[Ecnelis_Doogod]

Welcome, I suppose.

Bush's third term for the most part. His policies are more of the same to us, both in the domestic and foreign realms...They are essentially two wings of the same capitalist party

Fourth, even if that wasn't so, the ruling class sees fit to violate whatever provisions are supposed to hold them back all the time, so to us, it's little more than a piece of paper that does nothing to constrain them.

Looking forward to it.

1: Finally someone who notices the media's version of the left and right and just the same party disguised:)

2: I agree with that, I feel this country is a complete B*st*rd*z*t**n of what the colonists envisioned. This is why I value my second amendment, or what's left of that piece of swiss cheese :crying:

3: Me to :)

As for not consenting to the constitution, I believe people who don't believe in it, or like it, should be given the free choice to secede and form a land of their own, In my mind, what I consider liberties, should not even be forced on someone who doesn't want them, it defeats the purpose in my mind. You guys don't seem half as bad as the media makes you look, and rest assured, we aren't as bad as the media spins us either. We have the same goal I think, just different ideas on how to obtain it. A land where a hard working man can support his family free of persecution and ridonculous taxes, and free from being taken advantage of.

[Ecnelis_Doogod]

But under what circumstances would you actually 'HAVE' to pick a party?
That's why I said if, and also, I did have to @ school, my teacher said I had to pick a party I would vote for or I'd fail that assignment, as I said I trust no party, I might trust their ideals, but they will inevitably crumble as we've seen time and again

[Radical]

1: Finally someone who notices the media's version of the left and right and just the same party disguised:)

2: I agree with that, I feel this country is a complete B*st*rd*z*t**n of what the colonists envisioned. This is why I value my second amendment, or what's left of that piece of swiss cheese :crying:

3: Me to :)

As for not consenting to the constitution, I believe people who don't believe in it, or like it, should be given the free choice to secede and form a land of their own, In my mind, what I consider liberties, should not even be forced on someone who doesn't want them, it defeats the purpose in my mind. You guys don't seem half as bad as the media makes you look, and rest assured, we aren't as bad as the media spins us either. We have the same goal I think, just different ideas on how to obtain it. A land where a hard working man can support his family free of persecution and ridonculous taxes, and free from being taken advantage of.

It is true that liberty is precious. So precious that it must be rationed

Welcome to RevLeft

[Ecnelis_Doogod]

So precious that it must be rationed
No. Liberty need not be rationed for a REAL man. Liberty lives in my heart, and somewhat in my gun. And no one can ever take either from me. I don't know about you, but what lives in my heart can never be extinguished and no government can ration or touch that. I somewhat feel that was a childish remark with no real backing explanation, why don't you elaborate on that statement.

[GPDP]

I may as well point out we also oppose gun control here for the most part.

Glad you're willing to see past the media smoke and mirrors about us evil commies.

[scarletghoul]

While some parts of the constitution are cool, like the 2nd amendment, it's overall an outdated document written by rich white slave-owning males so I don't think it's right when these Americans uphold it as some precious and holy guide to eternal freedom. Society must progress, the world must change, and there is no place for documents like these but in the dustbin/museaum of history.

[Ecnelis_Doogod]

I may as well point out we also oppose gun control here for the most part.

Glad you're willing to see past the media smoke and mirrors about us evil commies.
Why do you oppose gun control?


so I don't think it's right when these Americans uphold it as some precious and holy guide to eternal freedom. Society must progress, the world must change
Society does progress, and always will, but are you suggesting people like me shouldn't be allowed to live by our own rules seperate from a communist/socialist/anarchist county/land. A land of Libertarian(Jesus I hate that word) and Constitutionalists wouldn't hurt anyone else but us. I wish people could form their own government's and just keep to themselves, and leave others alone. I wouldn't care if America was communist, so long as those of us who didn't believe in it were allowed to live seperately by our own laws. Also, for anyone who's about to say that capitalism leads to imperialism I'll probably hit you through the computer monitor, because real Constitutionalists would never let their government go that for.

[Durruti's Ghost]

Why do you oppose gun control?


We'd be pretty shitty revolutionaries if we wanted to disarm the working class.

The Constitution--or, rather, the Bill of Rights--is a pretty decent document, overall. IMO, though, the Articles of Confederation were far superior.

[scarletghoul]

I'm not suggesting you shouldn't be able to live by your beliefs if you wanna make your own constitutionalist republic or whatever. However, there's no way a place like that could last if there were communist and socialist countries around it. For one, the workers would all move out to the socialist/communist countries where they would have a better standard of life compared to this traditional constitutionalist capitalist country.

[GPDP]

Why do you oppose gun control?

As an anarchist and a communist, my answer is twofold. One, it is an authoritarian measure which leads the state and its armed wings, such as the police and the military, to assume a monopoly on violence, which can be used to repress the rest of us. Two, we advocate revolution to overthrow the capitalist order, which means the ruling class and the state(s) that support it, and how would we be able to do that if the state has confiscated our weapons?

True, the state has access to military technology none of us could ever dream of possessing, but an armed revolution still has a better chance of succeeding than one without arms.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

The Constitution, she is a most allusive creature.

[Ecnelis_Doogod]

Oh jesus im sorry i misread youre quote, i thought you opposed guns, not gun control, im whole heartedly against gun control, jesus, thats my bad, really, i feel stupid, holy crap, i apologize on that one, I'll die gripping my 30/30 Marlin, as to Scarletghoul, I doubt theyd flee to a communist country where they'd never make money relative to their amount of work, if anything I'd think the lazy workers would leave. If I recall, in most communist countries, didn't they flee to capitalist countries? Like Cubans riding on doors and tired to the US, then their communist governments would imprison them or beat them for trying to run away, or did that never happen?

[scarletghoul]

People left some commie countries to go to the USA because these countries were all poor (mostly as a result of American aggression and economic embargo). Also, America has a special law called the Cuban Adjustment Act that allows any Cuban to gain full American citizenship if they move to America and stay there for a couple years. Imagine if they done this to other Latin American countries, they would be flooded. Just look at the huge number of mexicans going to the US already. Certainly its higher in proportion than the number of Cubans. This is because Mexicans have a lower standard of living, due to their capitalist system, whereas cuba has socialism so people are better off

And you seem to misunderstand communist economics too. "I doubt theyd flee to a communist country where they'd never make money relative to their amount of work" The whole point of communism is that workers get the the value that their work creates. Unlike in capitalism, where this goes to the owner of the business who then pays the workers just a small portion, enough to keep them alive and working the next day.

[Durruti's Ghost]

People left some commie countries to go to the USA because these countries were all poor (mostly as a result of American aggression and economic embargo). Also, America has a special law called the Cuban Adjustment Act that allows any Cuban to gain full American citizenship if they move to America and stay there for a couple years. Imagine if they done this to other Latin American countries, they would be flooded. Just look at the huge number of mexicans going to the US already. Certainly its higher in proportion than the number of Cubans. This is because Mexicans have a lower standard of living, due to their capitalist system, whereas cuba has socialism so people are better off

And you seem to misunderstand communist economics too. "I doubt theyd flee to a communist country where they'd never make money relative to their amount of work" The whole point of communism is that workers get the the value that their work creates. Unlike in capitalism, where this goes to the owner of the business who then pays the workers just a small portion, enough to keep them alive and working the next day.

This, and no "communist" country has actually had a communist economy. At best, they may have had socialist economies (though I don't believe they did).

[scarletghoul]

Well I try not to confuse people with the whole "classless stateless society" thing. Communism and socialism are the same thing anyway in my opinion, just no country has ever reached the higher stage of communism (classless statelessness)

[Ecnelis_Doogod]

People left some commie countries to go to the USA because these countries were all poor (mostly as a result of American aggression and economic embargo). Also, America has a special law called the Cuban Adjustment Act that allows any Cuban to gain full American citizenship if they move to America and stay there for a couple years. Imagine if they done this to other Latin American countries, they would be flooded. Just look at the huge number of mexicans going to the US already. Certainly its higher in proportion than the number of Cubans. This is because Mexicans have a lower standard of living, due to their capitalist system, whereas cuba has socialism so people are better off

And you seem to misunderstand communist economics too. "I doubt theyd flee to a communist country where they'd never make money relative to their amount of work" The whole point of communism is that workers get the the value that their work creates. Unlike in capitalism, where this goes to the owner of the business who then pays the workers just a small portion, enough to keep them alive and working the next day.
In a world where everyone makes the same wage, what incentive is there to work hard? I pick strawberries and split logs, real work, and if everyone in the fields got the same amount of money no matter how well or fast we picked, I guarantee you everyone would have been fiddle farting around. Whereas since we all are paid proportionate to how good we are, we work harder. Eventually if the work output keepes lessening the economy WILL collapse, not to mention communist contries dont have a very good record themselves with treating their workers very good. Don't even try to deny the numerous human rights abuses, and try to explain why no "Communist" country founded has ever reached true communism, instead stuck in some backwards socialist totalarian hell. Don't even try to blame the US, for a country to be successful, they must be capable of being self sufficient, their problems cannot be blamed on the non-military actions of another SOVEREIGN nation. (the embargo is not militaristic regardless of you say, we didn't invade them, the bay of pigs was their own countrymen)

[Kwisatz Haderach]

Society does progress, and always will, but are you suggesting people like me shouldn't be allowed to live by our own rules seperate from a communist/socialist/anarchist county/land. A land of Libertarian(Jesus I hate that word) and Constitutionalists wouldn't hurt anyone else but us. I wish people could form their own government's and just keep to themselves, and leave others alone. I wouldn't care if America was communist, so long as those of us who didn't believe in it were allowed to live seperately by our own laws. Also, for anyone who's about to say that capitalism leads to imperialism I'll probably hit you through the computer monitor, because real Constitutionalists would never let their government go that for.
There is a problem with that, though: Who gets to decide which land goes to "people like you" and which land goes to "people like us"? Living by your own laws is all nice and good, but where exactly would you be doing this?

Also, there is an eternal problem facing anyone who believes that we should return to a certain kind of society that existed in the past but has been corrupted: If it was corrupted once, what's to stop the same thing happening again? If the constitution failed to protect itself, maybe it wasn't that good to begin with.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

In a world where everyone makes the same wage, what incentive is there to work hard?
Who said anything about a world where everyone makes the same wage?

There are two kinds of societies that people on this forum may support. The standard names for them are socialism and communism; Marxists believe that we need socialism first and communism later, after technology has developed sufficiently, and anarchists believe that we can move straight to communism right away. (note: this is an extremely simplified account of the issue)

Socialism is usually seen as a kind of society where work is the only source of income (in other words, there is no profit, interest or rent), and where some democratically elected body - which may or may not be the state - runs a planned economy for the good of all. It is also supposed to be a highly egalitarian society, but not perfectly egalitarian. People who do more work still receive higher pay. However, since your pay depends entirely on your work, differences in wealth would be very small compared to what we have now. Think about it: It's not often that you find a person who can work twice as hard as another. Under socialism, the highest income may be three or four or five times larger than the smallest income. But under capitalism, the highest income is hundreds of times larger than the lowest income (and this is due to profits, not work - but that's another story).

Communism is usually seen as a more communal kind of society, which goes one step further. It does not only abolish profit, interest and rent, but also money itself. So it makes no sense to talk about a person's "wage" or "pay" in communism. The principle of distribution is "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need". People are expected to work to the best of their abilities, and in return they can take whatever they need from a common pool of products.

Won't this lead to people working below their abilities? Only if they don't like their work. In capitalism, we spend part of our lives doing stuff we don't like ("work"), so that we can spend the rest of the time doing stuff we do like ("fun"). One of the goals of communism is to combine work and fun, so that people work because they like it - or at least because they have nothing better to do. Jobs that cannot be made enjoyable should be eliminated by having them done automatically by machines (this is one of the reasons why Marxists believe that it will take some time before we can reach communism).

Also, notice that the hardest jobs in capitalism are often the lowest paid. Some people ask, "who will clean toilets if you don't offer higher wages for such a hard, unpleasant job?" To this, I answer, "capitalism gives the lowest possible wages to people who clean toilets, and yet the job still gets done."


Don't even try to deny the numerous human rights abuses, and try to explain why no "Communist" country founded has ever reached true communism, instead stuck in some backwards socialist totalarian hell.
The simple fact is, "communism" is just a word. The kind of society we name "communism" is not the kind of society that existed in those countries. You can use the word "communism" any way you like, but don't use it as a name for two different things.


Don't even try to blame the US, for a country to be successful, they must be capable of being self sufficient, their problems cannot be blamed on the non-military actions of another SOVEREIGN nation.
What about the military actions of another sovereign nation? The Soviet Union was invaded by many nations (including some US troops) after the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution, and then they were devastated by WW2 about two decades later.

But in any case, no country is self-sufficient, and no country can ever be self-sufficient. People, social classes, governments, corporations and countries all influence each other.

[Demogorgon]

Constitution worship is a funny old thing really. It is closely related to things like National Romanticism of course, but it bestows almost Godly powers on a single document.

The thing is the US constitution is historically impressive for a number of reasons, but not beyond reproach, not by a long shot. Where it has deviated from how it was supposedly meant to function, it is usually because it would not be possible for it to function that way in the modern age.

Now it can be considered impressive for historical reasons in that a Constitution was written that managed to hold, but it has been bettered since. Even given the fact that I am never going to be satisfied with a document Governing a Capitalist society, there are other Capitalist Constitutions that are superior in every way. The Constitutions of South Africa, Switzerland and Italy to name but a handful. There is nothing mystical about the US constitution.

[Ecnelis_Doogod]

There is nothing mystical about the US constitution. It doesn't need to be, because it's MY constitution. As to the question how would be choose our land, that'd be for my 30/30 to find out, scratch that, I'd rather have an M4.

[Kronos]

Like Cubans riding on doors and tired to the US, then their communist governments would imprison them or beat them for trying to run away

Except for Tony, who didn't play that shit:

http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd45/lil_nappy/tony_montana.jpg

"I kill a communist for fun, but for a green card, I gonna carve him up real nice."