• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Our civilisation is pathetic. [W:459]

Is our civilisation pathetic?


  • Total voters
    51
Societies are what humans make them... societies don't change humans, humans running societies change humans.

There you go... :)


Really?

So you would be the exact same person if you grew up in caveman world, Italy in the 1500s or China, North Korea, Sweden, or the US today?

None of those societies would at all affect the way a person behaves?

Humans are definetely a result of the society and system they grow up in.
 
Oh for ****s sake... not this guy again.

Ooh my. My last friend again. I always confuse you an Hwrshaw.


I would say the same to you. Why are you even here? I mean, cant you go and be ordinary boring and rude somewhere else?
 
That's basically what I was trying to say to MZ (I made his name an acronym because I am lazy).

Society does not control humans anymore than humans control society, because the two are one and the same, or at the least, 2 slightly different things in an unbreakable feedback loop.

Even if you think you're not part of "the rest of them", you are. Everyone is.

Even if you're some hermit-like monk living in some extremely secluded location, you're still part of the overall "human" society - just not a well known part of it...


Or...something like that...

I think that it is almost certain that people are a result of the society they grow up in.
That is why people in the states, no matter how similar they are to people in the US, still are very different in generally the same way.

And those are two quite similar societies. Imagine other ones.

Japan, people there are quite different than people in Europe, because they grew up in a completely different society.

And Japan is not even that extremely different to Europe.
 
Ooh my. My last friend again. I always confuse you an Hwrshaw.


I would say the same to you. Why are you even here? I mean, cant you go and be ordinary boring and rude somewhere else?

Hahaha, no - I work from a computer - unlike eurotrash who collect their welfare checks via one.
 
Hahaha, no - I work from a computer - unlike eurotrash who collect their welfare checks via one.

Prejudice, anti European and a guessor and disregarder of facts.

Not surprising..

I had you on ignore as well. You are ofcourse part of the gang who like to hassle people, instead of having any useful input.
 
Hahaha, no - I work from a computer - unlike eurotrash who collect their welfare checks via one.

You should stop bragging about being a professional masturbator.
 
From whence springs this notion.

The stateless society which negates profit motives is pretty much the end game of the Communist Manifesto. It comes from your own words, unlike your idea that I'm in favor of a single dictatorial ruler.
 
Moderator's Warning:
OK, I've already netted out some infractions. Let's cease the personal attacks or I will give out more.
 
The stateless society which negates profit motives is pretty much the end game of the Communist Manifesto. It comes from your own words, unlike your idea that I'm in favor of a single dictatorial ruler.

You support the current US system. Do you have a single leader?
 
You support the current US system. Do you have a single leader?
HA
More like 10,000....or ... 300,000,000..
However , we do have a chain of command...thus one man, our President , Barack Obama, But, he is NOT a "one leader" man (aka dictator)...
 
You support the current US system. Do you have a single leader?

Hardly. There are thousands. If you don't know that, then you have absolutely ZIPPO business commenting on anything.
 
HA
More like 10,000....or ... 300,000,000..
However , we do have a chain of command...thus one man, our President , Barack Obama, But, he is NOT a "one leader" man (aka dictator)...

Well. You do have a single leader. The president. If he is elect or not does not really play a big role. He is the leader of your nation, this he is a single leader, because you don't have two presidents, or 3 or 10.
Furthermore, this single leader in the US is getting more and more power, while all apparatus around him is getting less and less power.
 
So, you don't have a president?

He is not the only leader, Mr. Venetian. His authority is quite limited (to the current chagrin of many) and he cannot govern by himself. As I say, if you don't know this, you're not qualified to be commenting.

Not to mention that the vast majority of governmental function is at the state level, not the national level.
 
Well. You do have a single leader. The president. If he is elect or not does not really play a big role. He is the leader of your nation, this he is a single leader, because you don't have two presidents, or 3 or 10.
Furthermore, this single leader in the US is getting more and more power, while all apparatus around him is getting less and less power.
He may be the head of state, but he is BY NO MEANS the "single leader" of our nation.


The very idea is laughable.


And furthermore, if he's getting more power (which, I admit, seemed to be the case), then how the heck did he allow congress to shut down the government recently (or rather, not renew funding, which is nearly the same thing)?


Edit: Frankly, I'd say the congressional majority leaders have more power, in some ways.
 
Last edited:
He is not the only leader, Mr. Venetian. His authority is quite limited (to the current chagrin of many) and he cannot govern by himself. As I say, if you don't know this, you're not qualified to be commenting.

Not to mention that the vast majority of governmental function is at the state level, not the national level.

Feel free to go around thinking that, or start questioning things.

He is THE leader. Undeniably, in the US. In other countries there are single leaders as well. Scandinavian countries and England all have a prime minister. France have a dual leader officially, but also a single leader symbol in the president. But they have a prime minister as well.

Of the so called democratic country, nowhere does this single leader have more power and authority than in France and the US.
 
He may be the head of state, but he is BY NO MEANS the "single leader" of our nation.


The very idea is laughable.


And furthermore, if he's getting more power (which, I admit, seemed to be the case), then how the heck did he allow congress to shut down the government recently (or rather, not renew funding, which is nearly the same thing)?


Edit: Frankly, I'd say the congressional majority leaders have more power, in some ways.

Who are the other leaders then?

Its alike that in most of the west. The single leaders do come to power in different ways and do wield different degrees of powers. In the US and France, the single leader, relative to the rest of governance wields an anourmous amount of power.
 
Feel free to go around thinking that, or start questioning things.

Your shimmering ignorance of how things actually work isn't my problem. But it's all the more hilarious given the sublime arrogance with which you post.

You have no idea what you're talking about.
 
Feel free to go around thinking that, or start questioning things.

He is THE leader. Undeniably, in the US. In other countries there are single leaders as well. Scandinavian countries and England all have a prime minister. France have a dual leader officially, but also a single leader symbol in the president. But they have a prime minister as well.

Of the so called democratic country, nowhere does this single leader have more power and authority than in France and the US.

The president and vice president represent one third of a government with balanced powers. We like to ascribe to the presidency more power than it actually has, Congress seems more than willing to give it extra powers, and, of course, the president will take any powers that he can. But, according to the Constitution, the executive branch is only one of three with equal powers.
 
Who are the other leaders then?

Its alike that in most of the west. The single leaders do come to power in different ways and do wield different degrees of powers. In the US and France, the single leader, relative to the rest of governance wields an enormous amount of power.
The other leaders are congresspersons and the like.

Not, of course, at the same level of individual power, but in theory, collectively congress could tell the Pres to go **** him (or her) self and there's not a damn thing he (or she) could do about it.
 
The president and vice president represent one third of a government with balanced powers. We like to ascribe to the presidency more power than it actually has, Congress seems more than willing to give it extra powers, and, of course, the president will take any powers that he can. But, according to the Constitution, the executive branch is only one of three with equal powers.

According to the constitution yes.

But in practice, these days, the president is getting more and more powers unfortunately. Those seem to be taken away from an inactive and unable congress and collected by the president. Some new acts and laws have also increased the executive powers of the president.
 
The other leaders are congresspersons and the like.

Not, of course, at the same level of individual power, but in theory, collectively congress could tell the Pres to go **** him (or her) self and there's not a damn thing he (or she) could do about it.


No, those are not the leaders. They are members of the so called peoples assembly. Pretty much alike to a parliament in most European countries. Except most European countries do not have a president in addition to a parliamentary leader, or prime minister as it is called. France is a notable exception. They have a prime minister and a president. The president is THE leader and the prime minister is irrelevant, alike to the the leader of house of representatives. They can also be considered leaders, but ofcourse, they arent really the leader of the country. Prime ministers and presidents are the single leaders.

Don't go thinking parliamentary democracy is better, it isn't. As soon as someone get a majority there, they can propose and pass anything that they please. They are pretty much given the power to dictate.


Yes, in theory the congress should have told the president to go **** himself many times. But unfortunately the congress no longer represent the people and they no longer perform their duty which is the act on behalf of the people and protect the constitution. Unfortunately the congress have turned into nothing less than a puppet of the parties and a playground for their fights against each others.

This scenario is pretty much the same in Europe, but under somewhat different rules. It always boils down to the same things. Two sides fighting for power, fighting against each others, neglecting the people, the noble single leaders, the election circus, lack of policies and integrity. Policies these days are sold to the cheapest bidders, be it corporations or election campaigns to sell it to people to gain votes. Once power is grabbed, election promises and actual policies are two entirely different worlds.

I would say anyone who don't see this are blind and dumb, but I don't want to generalise too much. But its obvious that this is what is going on, and I have no idea why some people are so blind that they do not see it. And what is even worse is that some people participate in it, not as free people, but as a slave of party politics and the manipulation and narrowing perspectives of their political elite.
As a result people are trapped in extremely narrow discussions about mostly irrelevant things, and completely miss all the important fundamental things that are going on. Many of the discussions on this forum is a clear evidence on that. While your politicians sell your rights to the lowest bidder, these people are busy bickering over which party is best, plague or cholera or twittering about the newest political celebrity.
 
Last edited:
The president is THE leader and the prime minister is irrelevant, alike to the the leader of house of representatives. They can also be considered leaders, but ofcourse, they arent really the leader of the country. Prime ministers and presidents are the single leaders.

John Boehner may not have quite as much power as the president, but pretty close.
 
No, those are not the leaders. They are members of the so called peoples assembly. Pretty much alike to a parliament in most European countries. Except most European countries do not have a president in addition to a parliamentary leader, or prime minister as it is called. France is a notable exception. They have a prime minister and a president. The president is THE leader and the prime minister is irrelevant, alike to the the leader of house of representatives. They can also be considered leaders, but ofcourse, they arent really the leader of the country. Prime ministers and presidents are the single leaders.

Don't go thinking parliamentary democracy is better, it isn't. As soon as someone get a majority there, they can propose and pass anything that they please. They are pretty much given the power to dictate.


Yes, in theory the congress should have told the president to go **** himself many times. But unfortunately the congress no longer represent the people and they no longer perform their duty which is the act on behalf of the people and protect the constitution. Unfortunately the congress have turned into nothing less than a puppet of the parties and a playground for their fights against each others.

This scenario is pretty much the same in Europe, but under somewhat different rules. It always boils down to the same things. Two sides fighting for power, fighting against each others, neglecting the people, the noble single leaders, the election circus, lack of policies and integrity. Policies these days are sold to the cheapest bidders, be it corporations or election campaigns to sell it to people to gain votes. Once power is grabbed, election promises and actual policies are two entirely different worlds.

I would say anyone who don't see this are blind and dumb, but I don't want to generalise too much. But its obvious that this is what is going on, and I have no idea why some people are so blind that they do not see it. And what is even worse is that some people participate in it, not as free people, but as a slave of party politics and the manipulation and narrowing perspectives of their political elite.
As a result people are trapped in extremely narrow discussions about mostly irrelevant things, and completely miss all the important fundamental things that are going on. Many of the discussions on this forum is a clear evidence on that. While your politicians sell your rights to the lowest bidder, these people are busy bickering over which party is best, plague or cholera or twittering about the newest political celebrity.

Head of State =/= Sole leader.
 
Back
Top Bottom