Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Grizzly on August 10, 2011, 03:06:59 am
-
The "Teaser" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFYH4ROPgAo&feature=related)
The Top 1% documentary (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdVODFombco&feature=feedwll&list=WL)
Al Jazeera's documentary on inequality in the US. Watching trough it right now. Will comment on what I think later, but some of you may already have seen it
And everyone should, obviously.
-
Good find, watching through the trailer now, watching through the documentary in a bit. :)
EDIT: Wow, at around 10:50, this woman confronted Paul Ryan and asked "The majority of Americans don't agree with your plan. Doesn't that make it undemocratic?" and the guy just has no answer. Why can't our media ask these questions? Why is this debate not being had?
-
EDIT: Wow, at around 10:50, this woman confronted Paul Ryan and asked "The majority of Americans don't agree with your plan. Doesn't that make it undemocratic?" and the guy just has no answer. Why can't our media ask these questions? Why is this debate not being had?
He probably has no answer because that's a stupid question. Whoever asked that has a woefully poor understanding of US government.
-
EDIT: Wow, at around 10:50, this woman confronted Paul Ryan and asked "The majority of Americans don't agree with your plan. Doesn't that make it undemocratic?" and the guy just has no answer. Why can't our media ask these questions? Why is this debate not being had?
He probably has no answer because that's a stupid question. Whoever asked that has a woefully poor understanding of US government.
While at the same time understanding the basics of democracy. The implication is that the US/UK/NATO is at war in the middle east, the core region for Al Jazeera, to bring Democracy to the region yet we are unable to implement the systems in our own countries properly.
-
While at the same time understanding the basics of democracy. The implication is that the US/UK/NATO is at war in the middle east, the core region for Al Jazeera, to bring Democracy to the region yet we are unable to implement the systems in our own countries properly.
That's a stupid implication on top of a stupid question. Well done, Al-Jazeera.
-
While at the same time understanding the basics of democracy. The implication is that the US/UK/NATO is at war in the middle east, the core region for Al Jazeera, to bring Democracy to the region yet we are unable to implement the systems in our own countries properly.
That's a stupid implication on top of a stupid question. Well done, Al-Jazeera.
As stupid as it sounds that is what is going off, both the US and UK democratic systems are subject to significant corruption, though far from the worst, and on many occasions the public has suffered for it.
-
While at the same time understanding the basics of democracy. The implication is that the US/UK/NATO is at war in the middle east, the core region for Al Jazeera, to bring Democracy to the region yet we are unable to implement the systems in our own countries properly.
That's a stupid implication on top of a stupid question. Well done, Al-Jazeera.
As stupid as it sounds that is what is going off, both the US and UK democratic systems are subject to significant corruption, though far from the worst, and on many occasions the public has suffered for it.
I can't speak for politics in the UK, but I will say some things about how the US government works and why this has nothing to do with any corruption that may or may not be in our government. Firstly, Paul Ryan represents Wisconson's 1st congressional district and no one else. Given that, saying `most Americans disagree' is very misleading in the way that it leads you to believe that `most Americans' are actually the 264,000 people in that district (of which 68% voted for Paul Ryan in 2010). And secondly, Americans are supposed to vote for representatives assuming the candidate's character, beliefs, and intentions don't change. If representatives were to change how they vote just because most Americans feel differently, you'd be undermining major parts of the constitution, not to mention that it wouldn't actually matter who you voted for in the end. Thirdly, Al-Jazeera seems to fail to grasp how America isn't supposed to be a true democracy (well maybe they do, it's very probably they're just using democracy as a buzz word). What Al-Jazeera implied democracy is is actually direct democracy, which I can say neither the US nor the UK (nor most other modern nations typically called democracies) have. The US has a system of constitutional democracy, in which fractions of the population elect representatives who in turn vote on laws. In fact, in prior versions of the US Constitution the general population had even less say in who represented them. It wasn't until the 17th amendment that Senators were directly elected. I can't say I know much about democracy in the Middle East, but government in the US is, if anything, more `democratic' than it was intended to be.
-
neither the US nor the UK (nor most other modern nations typically called democracies) have.
The u.k is not a democracy and as far as i know never has been (although It may have been shortly after the english civil war, not sure)
-
neither the US nor the UK (nor most other modern nations typically called democracies) have.
The u.k is not a democracy and as far as i know never has been (although It may have been shortly after the english civil war, not sure)
The UK is very much a democracy, its just not a Republic as we have a symbolic (mostly) Monarch as head of state, the passing of law etc is done by the House of Commons and the House of Lords (effectively our lower and upper houses in the US ) and usually requires agreement of both houses, though the House of Commons can move to override the House of Lords using certain controversial procedures.
-
The u.k is not a democracy and as far as i know never has been (although It may have been shortly after the english civil war, not sure)
You seem to be confusing democracy and republic. UK is a democracy, but it indeed was a republic only for a short time (under Cromwell).
IIRC, the biggest difference between monarchy in UK and republic is that position of president isn't hereditary.
-
In the most basic, overly simplified sense, the United Kingdom is a theocratic monarchy. Closer to reality, it's a contitutional monarchy with a half-democratic parliament.
-
EDIT: Wow, at around 10:50, this woman confronted Paul Ryan and asked "The majority of Americans don't agree with your plan. Doesn't that make it undemocratic?" and the guy just has no answer. Why can't our media ask these questions? Why is this debate not being had?
He probably has no answer because that's a stupid question. Whoever asked that has a woefully poor understanding of US government.
While at the same time understanding the basics of democracy. The implication is that the US/UK/NATO is at war in the middle east, the core region for Al Jazeera, to bring Democracy to the region yet we are unable to implement the systems in our own countries properly.
The US congress has had record low approval ratings for several years now, right now it stands at 14% (http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7375699n). Something is seriously wrong (http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/07/19/worst_congress_ever) with that.
-
Am I the only one who was hoping for a map of the most active 1% of tectonic faults worldwide? :(
-
no, you are not.
-
I'm pretty sure there's one pretty near me... :drevil:
Pure democracy might not be the best way to go imo...
-
Pure democracy is pretty much 51% deciding for the rest; a republic (not republican blah) would be more prudent. That way your rights are protected even if 99% would vote to steal your land/house/children. With free information and the boons of the 21st century technology such as fast internet, it could definitely turn out very positively.
-
EDIT: Wow, at around 10:50, this woman confronted Paul Ryan and asked "The majority of Americans don't agree with your plan. Doesn't that make it undemocratic?" and the guy just has no answer. Why can't our media ask these questions? Why is this debate not being had?
He probably has no answer because that's a stupid question. Whoever asked that has a woefully poor understanding of US government.
While at the same time understanding the basics of democracy. The implication is that the US/UK/NATO is at war in the middle east, the core region for Al Jazeera, to bring Democracy to the region yet we are unable to implement the systems in our own countries properly.
The US congress has had record low approval ratings for several years now, right now it stands at 14% (http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7375699n). Something is seriously wrong (http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/07/19/worst_congress_ever) with that.
Nothing can be done about this without a radical change in the constitution (like making a new one that doesn't have congress). In general, people approve of their representative, but not others. Granted, I haven't watched that video but if I'm wrong it's nothing that voting out incumbents shouldn't be able to fix.