This is interesting, and needs to be discussed

My concience is left... the rest of me is right

<b>I spanked her ass...then stole her pizza!</b>
<A HREF="http://members.iinet.net.au/~lhgpoobaa/images" target="_new">http://members.iinet.net.au/~lhgpoobaa/images</A>

1. No.
2. Yes.

I believe that this statement was written by a left minded person. Therefore they are going to paint the right side in the worst light possible. I consider my self a conservative right minded person. I'll explain more later. (bad thing about posting at work is you still have to work. i'll be back )

Je bend de mest onverschillige hasj dealende hoer die ik ooit heb ontmoet.

Right-wingers will argue that their economic goals encourage continuous economic growth and progress, and that by encouraging free-enterprise with minimal governmental interference, you are automatically encouraging progress, since people who are free to pursue their dreams of wealth will innovate. This is why the farther left a society goes, the less productive that society seems to become and the less innovative. Why is it the Germans still have some of the finest engineers in the world, the Americans still out-produce everyone, and the Japaneze still manufacture some of the finest automobiles and electronics on earth? It's because of free-enterprise, and it raises the standard of living for everyone in the nation willing to participate, not just the corporate big-wigs.

Actually, to be totally honest, I don't think the environment is a left-right argument. Some of the most ardent proponents of the environment inside the U.S. are arch-conservative religious organizations who use the bible's warning that "god will bring to ruin those ruining the earth" as ammunition for political lobbying. That being said, the environment is a political blind-spot for neo-conservatives in the United States, in my opinion. However, I also tend to think conservatives have been turned off by environmentalist extremism. It's one thing to say "we shouldn't have ten million oil wells in Alaska, because it harms the environment." However, the militant environmentalist says, "You shall have NO oil wells in Alaska, which increases our dependance on foreign oil!"
It's the lack of middle-ground or moderacy that creates the division.

This statement is totally false. The truth of the matter is this; left-wingers delude themselves into believing that every problem can be solved without bloodshed. That is such a noble-sounding argument, it makes left-wingers feel really, really good to say it. Unfortunately, it is not backed up by history. Sometimes bloodshed is not only necessary, but preferrable to a greater amount of bloodshed in the future.

This is true enough. The question is "WHY do the two sides focus on those two things?" Capitalists believe that socialism is bad because socialist states must have larger governments, which impinges individual freedom. Socialists believe that capitalism is bad because it favors an elite monority. Both are correct, to some extent. So what's the solution? What's more important to you--individual freedom or social equality? The conservative tends to believe social equality is a ridiculous notion, for how do you enforce social equality except with a repressive government?

Right wing politics is based on acknowledging that the whims of the majority should not outweigh the civil liberties of the individual. Ten thousand people have far more of an ability to be repressive than a single person does. Communism is based on an unrealistic vision of Utopia. It is a fantasy, not a reality. Look at the old Soviet Union. Look at Cuba and North Korea--these states that still hold to marxism <i>repress</i> their people! Things weren't better for the people in these states! Things were far worse, because the governments do NOT acknowledge individual rights. Either you are working for the interests of The Motherland, or you are removed from society. THIS is the glorious result of leftist thinking.

Bull crap. It is right-wingers who do and have always put the power into the hands of the many by empowering the individual. Left-wingers cripple the rights of the individual and place all power into the hands of the State. Can you not SEE this???

Correct. In other words, right-wing is NATURAL. However, this comment fails to address 99% of the reasons right-wingers are not left-wingers. Right wingers love <i>freedom</i> and left-wingers hate it.

Left-wing FORCES common survival. What if everyone in the commune does not agree on the proper path to survival? In a right-wing government, it will invariably be he or she with the best idea who wins the debate. In your kind of government, there IS no debate. The government will FORCE everyone down the path it sees as best for the GOVERNMENT.

How the HELL can you say communism is perfect in theory? My God, that is so naive. Communism is BY FAR the MOST imperfect form of government, because it forces every person to BOW DOWN to the state and WORSHIP the commune. It totally destroys civil liberties and the concept of the individual.

I've got some news for the leftists--we are NOT in a beehive. We are NOT ants. We are NOT whales or dolphins. We are HUMANS. More government=less freedom. ALWAYS. No matter what kind of lofty ideals you claim to espouse, and no matter how much you claim to be loving and caring to Everyman, no matter how much you feel our pain, the fact is you want to TAKE AWAY individual civil liberties and create Big Brother.

Evidently your education sucks. The U.S. is afraid of communism because it goes against EVERYTHING WE STAND FOR! Is it that difficult for you to see?

Look, you keep saying, "communism would be great IF...IF...IF this, IF that, IF my arse! You can't decide on a form of government based on "IF!" You have to acknowledge the world and humanity for what it is, and not try to make it conform to some idiot fantasyland Utopia that is simply impossible.

More government = less freedom.

Less government = more freedom.

Now let's find a middle ground. THAT'S what life is all about.


<font color=green>The Netherlands is where you go when you're too good for heaven.</font color=green>

Sounds kind of boring, actually.

Money is not truly the evil in our society. Money is an inanimate object. It's no more evil than a clump of dirt. Take a bill out and sit it on your desk. It will never do anything (good or evil) other than sit there until somebody or something does something with it. People who use money to evil ends may be evil, however.

<font color=red>Breaking News:</font color=red> God expelled from Netherlands; not good enough. Details to come.
War Eagle

Like I said, that sounds pretty boring. If you gave everyone a job to ensure that they all had one, there would still be sorry-ass mofos who want to sit around and do nothing, and those that want to work hard. So would the lazy sh|ts deserve to have everything that the hard workers do?

If you just "give everyone everything", you'd eliminate most of the reason for jobs to exist, and few people would want to work. But then, there would be nobody to work and create those goods and services in the first place.

If we made "everyone even somehow", then I'd be an equal of the sorry-mofos that like to sit on there ass and do nothing, like some of the worthless pieces of crap I saw when I contracted to Alabama's DHR IT group. NO THANKS! I'd rather have to work for the things I want, go as far in life as I want to, based on my own effort, and know that I earned the things I have at the end of the day.

Money doesn't cause bad things to happen. People cause bad things to happen. Money just sits there.

<font color=red>Breaking News:</font color=red> God expelled from Netherlands; not good enough. Details to come.
War Eagle<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Auburn9698 on 04/28/03 03:17 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

As far as alltaken's post...it's not really worth discussing what he wrote since I don't believe anything he said.

<font color=green>Everyone should be like the Dutch. They're perfect.</font color=green>

I think <A HREF="http://members.shaw.ca/globalutopia/meritocracy.html" target="_new">Meritocracy</A> may be the better way.

Flame not, lest ye be phlegmed.

that sounds like a good system in theory, however who would choose who the"experts" are. Milwaukee public schools are run by teachers and we have one of the worst public school systems thanks to infighting and politicing. very interesting however.

<i><font color=red>What you need and everything you'll feel is just a question of the deal In the eye of storm just think of the lonely dove the experience of survival is the key to the gravity of love</font color=red></i>

Why corporation as to be bad because there are big.

Shell in canada just change all there fuel procees to polute less it up and running right now.According to them the new technologie dont cost more in long term only intial investment but reduce the chimical release in the air at consumation for car market.

They have won nothing out this.

[-peep-] french