Er ... come again?
-
@unknownuser said:
I don't think his point was to suggest that the students were like nazis in any political or moral sense. I think he was just commenting about the disturbing nature of having any sort of political camp for children.
-Brodie
Possibly. It still was an exceptionally crass thing to say. While Beck's obviously entitled to his opinion, he deserves a firm kick in the groin, IMHO. Wait ... make that two kicks.
I went on several socialist 'political' camps as a kid, btw. They'd occasionally tell us we ought to respect others, then it was back to playing soccer and making out again. These sort of camps aren't about indoctrination, they're a remnant of the days working class people could only afford a vacation for their kids trough their respective unions. I went on a 'christian democratic' camp too, one year. (My parents apparently liked to shop around.) It was virtually identical to the 'socialist' ones.
-
The Nordic countries have a long, long tradition of youth movements linked to political parties. Also the conservative ones have theirs. And especially between the wars children of leftist parents didn't feel very welcome into the "apolitical" movements like Boy Scouts or the youth organizations belonging to the semi-official paramilitary corps (in Sweden and Finland).
Anssi
-
@unknownuser said:
I don't think his point was to suggest that the students were like nazis in any political or moral sense.
You're kidding, right? This is <i>Glenn Beck</i> we're talking about.
@unknownuser said:
I think he was just commenting about the disturbing nature of having any sort of political camp for children.
You mean like religion camps? Or Tea Party camps? (http://thelastword.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/06/15/6867750-tea-party-camp-every-childs-dream)
The event in question in Norway was a gathering for teenagers, like a teen leadership meeting. Sort of like most political parties have at times as a way to try to interest about-to-go-to-college kids. I realise (having lived there) that anything to the left of Genghis Khan is seen as <b>ohmogodlordsaveuscommielibrulsatanism</b> in the US but really, most European left-ish parties are pretty bland "the country is supposed to be run for the benefit of the people not a few rich corporations" types. Y'know, quite like a lot of bits in the US declaration of independence, the constitution and other writings dating back a fair while.
-
BACK IN BLACK
this says it all.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-may-12-2010/back-in-black---glenn-beck-s-nazi-tourette-s
-
@tim said:
(...) most European left-ish parties are pretty bland "the country is supposed to be run for the benefit of the people not a few rich corporations" types.
True. We do have a communist party over here (Belgium), but I've yet to meet someone who's actually voted for them. Sadly, the 'blandness' of the left is one of the reasons, I think, why right-wing nationalism is on the rise around here. (People seem to prefer the right's clear-cut aswers to the left's nuanced discourse.)
-
@unknownuser said:
You're kidding, right? This is <i>Glenn Beck</i> we're talking about.
So? It was a complete side comment unrelated to his point.
@unknownuser said:
You mean like religion camps? Or Tea Party camps? (http://thelastword.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/06/15/6867750-tea-party-camp-every-childs-dream)
I don't know how he feels about those but I'd also say that tea party camps would be disturbing as well. One of the most beautiful parts of being a child is that you don't have to worry about politics yet. I don't see why parents would want to take that away from their children. I'm not sure I'd lump all religious camps in that group (although some of them probably), however, I can see why a nonreligious person might.
@unknownuser said:
The event in question in Norway was a gathering for teenagers, like a teen leadership meeting. Sort of like most political parties have at times as a way to try to interest about-to-go-to-college kids. I realise (having lived there) that anything to the left of Genghis Khan is seen as <b>ohmogodlordsaveuscommielibrulsatanism</b> in the US but really, most European left-ish parties are pretty bland "the country is supposed to be run for the benefit of the people not a few rich corporations" types. Y'know, quite like a lot of bits in the US declaration of independence, the constitution and other writings dating back a fair while.
When he made the comment the story was just recently surfacing. The reports weren't about how a shooter killed a bunch of young adults at a leadership meeting, but that a bunch of kids were killed at a political camp. They may be the same thing in context but he was responding to the later reports.
-Brodie
-
@unknownuser said:
Political and religious organizations have been exploiting children for years...I think Glen went too far with a good point.
We call our political system democratic. What a misused word. Money rules as we know. I have worked with many people in my life that have money and although many use the word democracy, there is not a single one that has aquired money using democratic pricnciples.
Ask the Walmart/Macdonalds/TimHortens/GM employee how democratic their working environment is...have you ever talked to a Casino employee about employment rights. How about minimum wage...
I think there's some confusion here. The United States is not a democracy but a Republic (for example, "I pledge allegiance to my flag and the republicfor which it stands...). The confusion comes from the fact that we're a Democratic Republic I suppose. We ALL vote (the democracy part) for a group of citizens to rule the country (the republic part).
Why don't companies work like a democracy? Why should they? Are you going to start a business, invest all your time, energy, and money and then abdicate all of the decisions to the employees you hire? Indecently, many large companies do have some similarities to a republic, however. The owners (stockholders) vote in a board of directors and CEO to run the company.
@unknownuser said:
how democratic is it to be enslaved for hours for the benifit of an employer who barely helps you keep a full stomach. What is fare....bread and water?
Enslaved? Didn't that person apply to work there? Weren't they told how much they'd be paid and how long the hours were? Can't they quit at any time? The options are to work somewhere else, work nowhere, or start your own company.
@unknownuser said:
Where exactly is democracy being practiced? Why do we even use the word to describe our system?
In its most extreme for in a democracy every able bodied person would have to vote on everything that came up and anyone could raise an issue. It simply wouldn't work at large scale so you have to settle for a representative democracy at some point. In my understanding the main difference between this and a republic and a democracy is that a republic has more safeguards for minorities whereas democracies are completely mob rule.
-Brodie
-
@unknownuser said:
You do a much better job of describing the reality than I do...it is a one party system for sure.
It certainly seems that way. I saw a funny political cartoon the other day. A cow standing in front of 2 hallways, one labeled Left Wing the other Right Wing. From the viewers perspective you could see that the wall separating the two hallways was only about 10' long before the 2 paths merged and lead to the slaughter house.
@unknownuser said:
Yes after his social assistance ran out he/she had a choice, live on the street or take the job.
An able bodied person who stayed on social assistance until it ran out? /tear
@unknownuser said:
Yes ...but you know the choices they have. They can tollerate the suffering until it is unbearable and then move on.
Suffering? What, you mean work?
@unknownuser said:
Starting your own company is out of reach for the majority.
Given the backgrounds of a great deal of small business owners that's a difficult case to make.
@unknownuser said:
I am confused about the word. I don't see it has any meaning and wonder why it is used at all.
I certainly think it's overused and idealized. A true democracy is two steps away from anarchy.
-Brodie
-
Good point, although I think the intention was that the cow is us. Which, would mean, I guess, that the powers that be are the ones who constructed the 2 'paths'. Seems pretty fitting.
I'd be very interested to see what would happen if someone truly different got into office. Personally, someone like Ron Paul would be interesting just to see how much he could or couldn't change in the system.
-Brodie
-
I have my doubts that it would change anything as well. Replacing the president with one off the wall Ron Paul type is one thing, but you'd have to replace 2/3 of congress as well it seems like.
I've pretty much given up on voting. I'm tired of the 'lesser of 2 evils' game. That's like putting Jabba the Hut in charge of the Death Star because you don't like Darth Vader. I'll vote when someone runs worth voting for. It's amazing that given the size of our country the two people we're handed are consistently unimpressive.
-Brodie
-
I am convinced that until some type of horific event occurs here in the states that we will never get that one person to vote for that could enact any type of meaningful change. The powers that be ($$$$$$$) wouldn't allow for it.
As I get older - I fear the only chance for real change to occur is if some entity (with the financial resources and the moral convictions to take on the big money corporations in their own arena) is able to come from outside the "inner circles" of our current political society and last long enough to make a difference. Unfortunately - anyone capable of meeting that criteria will likely have their own baggage (religion) that influences their objectives.
Dean
Advertisement