How far the US have change in 150 years

[Bathory]

No need to use perfect grammar on an online forum. I think we will survive if someone types a run on sentence or a fragment. Even thought I like to type correctly It's not something I'm picky about.

Like Bathory said, in the end we are going to have to agree to disagree. Agreed?[/b]

I do agree, you don't need to use perfect grammar all the time, you can make mistakes. However, when some ppl constantly can't seem to put together a correct sentence, I think it says a lot about how smart they are.

[moemoneyman]

Many errors here which I shall correct:

The movement to abolish slavery was generally pushed by secularists (people smart enough to transcend religion are smart enough to transcend race), and was generally resisted by southerners who used scripture as justification among other things. Of course there were exceptions, but that was the jist of things. I think you're a bit late if you're trying to preserve a clean history for Christianity, because it has been in tatters for centuries.

By the way, I'm not left-wing at all. I guess you would categorise me as a free thinker somewhat like Christopher Hitchens; I lean left on some issues but for the most part I believe in small government and individual freedom which makes me closer to the Republicans. Blind adherence to one political ideology is the reason this topic exists. It is the same as England 50 years ago when the working class blindly voted labour and the upper blindly voted conservative. Don't be a sheep.

Again, you probably misunderstood me, but classical Republicanism is not nationalist. The current Republican party bears little resemblence to their original ideology and have instead resorted to appealing to the basest of demographics (ie: you) for votes. This is why intelligent republicans spent the last few months jumping ship to support Obama out of desperation at the nomination of Palin and the negative conduct of the campaign (appeals to patriotism, scare-mongering and ad-hominem attacks).

As for unregulated capitalism, it is just adam smith's theoretical ideology and does not exist in reality. Therefore one has to differentiate between the pragmatic capitalism of most of the western world, and this theoretical unregulated capitalism. Americans don't realise just how regulated they are, and it is impossible to discuss regulation intelligently because it was (until the credit crunch) a taboo.[/b]

Regulated capitalism is not capitalism. It is an oxymoron. The people who argue for "more regulations" are European nations. I find it funny how you classify it as "pragmatic capitalism of most of the western world", when we identify "most of the western world" to be a single entity called the European Union. In America, we have regulations, but our regulations are not to deter the spread of capitalism, it is to shelter it in order to protect the consumers, workers, shareholders, etc.

You can argue whatever you want. There is no standard form of capitalism. Therefore, whatever "most of the western world" (which once again translates to the European Union) thinks as pragmatic or actual, is idiotic and laughable to us.

[Natazaku]

Zero, source it. Please do so. I suggest you look up the goals of the Second Great Awakening(hint: one of them is "crusade to abolish slavery"). Then lets talk about the fact that part of the Republican base was the Know Nothings party which could also be called just the plain old "Christian Party," and if you think Republicans want a theocracy, well check out the Know Nothing party.

Also, talking about regulation before the credit crunch wasn't taboo, it was a way for the media and the left to shift the blame to the right with false facts. I remember shutting people down when they said the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was the cause of the crisis, when the fact was Government sponsored enterprises caused it by giving out loans to anyone and then selling them to private companies. The Democrats didn't want to regulate them more, corporatism anyone?, and here we are.

[Kennie]

Still doesn't change the fact that slave owners were Christians, does it?


Wow, Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. I thought capitalism was about competition. Wasn't that the goal of that act? Maybe capitalism isn't great afterall, eh?


Americans are retarded, our version of capitalism is this, free market + greed = shit on your costumers and employees. Yet they still want tax cut for big corporations lol

[vandy_vs_gator]

U.S.A. is not a democracy.

The End.

[Zaczaco11]

Still doesn't change the fact that slave owners were Christians, does it?[/b]

they talked the talk, but didn't walk the walk. they werent christians by definition, they only said they were.

[T_rey]

USA ROCKS MY SOCKS

[Bathory]

they talked the talk, but didn't walk the walk. they werent christians by definition, they only said they were.[/b]

I can agree to that.

[Kennie]

they talked the talk, but didn't walk the walk. they werent christians by definition, they only said they were.[/b]

How many Christians in America is by "definition"?

Pre-martial sex
Social justice
Masturbation
How many divorces are with valid reasoning?
Americans sure as hell don't care about human dignity
...
...
...
Huh, Christian?

[Zaczaco11]

How many Christians in America is by "definition"?

Pre-martial sex
Social justice
Masturbation
How many divorces are with valid reasoning?
Americans sure as hell don't care about human dignity
...
...
...
Huh, Christian?[/b]

yes my bad, i didnt realize sex was equal to slavery.

[Bathory]

He wasnt comparing the two. He was trying to say many ppl who claim to be christian but don't follow the doctrine. That's all, he was agreeing with you in a way....

[Natazaku]

U.S.A. is not a democracy.

The End.[/b]

It's not a Republic either anymore.

It's some weird shit where faggots who are such a small minority are allowed to have more power then the majority and appealing to that majority is wrong.

[vandy_vs_gator]

It's not a Republic either anymore.

It's some weird shit where faggots who are such a small minority are allowed to have more power then the majority and appealing to that majority is wrong.[/b]

Or lets just say we are becoming communist.

[moemoneyman]

Or lets just say we are becoming communist.[/b]

CHANGE! Yes, we can!

[Eric]

I don't understand how Americans can expect to unite the country when different regions have such different fundamental views. Honestly, the USA is being held back by the southern states; if your centers of education and tertiary industry (the north east and california) decided policy then the country would be in a much better condition. But, what Americans perceive to be virtues are in fact weaknesses (patriotism, faith, unregulated capitalism); I think that these things have to be overcome in the south before the country can move on and hopefully Obama can help that process. The cold war generation need to die out before hysterical and misinformed stigmas attached to socialism can be removed and policies can be judged on their real merits. By the way, your map is better viewed as religion versus secularism. The slave trade was justified by southerners for a long time by the bible, and it was merely a symptom of religious irrationalism.

I think one real danger to the USA if it continued on its previous course was a fall into dictatorship, or more realistically an commercial oligarchy. We have a large proportion of the population that is blindly loyal to the president, and treats any disloyalty as "un-Americanism". This sort of extreme nationalism is analogous to that of 1930's Germany. This population concedes powers to bypass human rights and basic freedoms to their government in a time of emergency, naively believing that their right to bear arms is some sort of insurance against tyranny. This paradox was growing bigger and bigger during the Bush administration. Suppose a faction of Americans objecting to a specific unconstitutional tax refuses to pay it and recruits others into joining them. The government with so much centralised power, and such a climate of paranoia, can label the group un-American terrorists and inprison them indefinitely without trial. The constitution won't help you, they already found loopholes to be exploited decades ago. You can't rely on the media either. It isn't a coincidence that after the only two occassions the USA was attacked (pearl harbour and 9/11), grave human rights abuses took place on a massive scale.

If you let the south dictate policy then you will end up with some christian fundamentalist draconian society with unlimited freedom until you decide you don't like the government, when it becomes unlimited penance. This is why this election was so important; it was the culmination of two conflicting ideologies: enlightenment, secularism, empiricism and humanism versus ignorance, fear, nationalism and superstition. I'm just glad the right side won. It didn't matter if Obama wasn't perfect (and he was nowhere near); when the alternative would be so catastrophic, one has no choice but to vote Obama. Hopefully the Republicans can spend the next 4 years returning to their roots and engaging in real adult politics. (I would be a classical republican by the way if you can believe it).[/b]

One of the few posts that actually makes any bit of sense and is backed up by pure fact is brushed aside and ignored for the most part, barring one utterly ignorant reply of epic proportions.

Seriously, 3/4s of you should just stop posting. You haven't the slightest clue what the fuck you are talking about.
I never thought someone could transcend Private/Moe's idiocy until I read anything posted by Natazaku.
/thread