Politicians and Government Cringe Thread

[Agent23]

Regardless of what was meant in that post: that is very much how it is in the book. Heinlein explicitly mentions that people who live there have every right that a citizen has, except the right to vote or to hold office. Citizenship is reserved to those who have served, and the franchise is exclusively reserved for citizens.

For the rights and advantages that come from simple residency (e.g. freedom of expression, right to a fair trial, use of whatever public amenities...), you pay with your taxes. For the right to vote, you pay with the service. And nobody is pressed into service. You can just refuse, lead your life, not be hindered in anyway. You just won't get the franchise, because you didn't do what it takes to earn it.

Frankly, I think that paying more into a system than you take out of that system is enough proof of skin in the game, and enough for you to "earn" a place in the system.

(That last bit is why all leftists hate the idea. It involves having to earn something.)

And because you earn it, you cherish it more.

Yes, hence my comment about "skin in the game".

Whatifalthist actually goes into some detail about the sentiments that drive civilizations, and he, like me stresses the point that voting and democracy came out of being part of the tribal war band:



Furthermore, a more limited franchise was the norm until recently, and frankly, I think that you can get much better decisions if you limit the franchise to only the net tax payers, who will be more careful about their taxes not being squandered or freedoms curtailed.


Let us not forget how oligarchies and bureaucracies have historically used the mob of useful idiots to get themselves more power.

A man chooses, a slave obeys, and most of the low IQ, parasitic social dregs of society are slaves to the media and their own stupidity.

 

[Bacle]

So you think the people who can declare us to war, can get millions killer should not have to have put thier lives in the same boat?
I see you would gladly send me a d my brother's and sisters to die without knowing what we are dully capable of.

I don't think forcing government service on people who do not want to serve the government will fix a damn thing that is facing this nation, and in fact will only cause more strife and corruption in the government.

The US is bigger than just the DoD, or the desires of DoD employees, and the DoD exists under civie control for a damn good reason.

Edit: Also, Trump never served and yet we saw that when he tried to get troops out of harms way, he was straight up ignored/lied to by the State Dept and Pentagon.

I am.not serius in that YOU specifically but your outlook

And your outlook ignores that trying to force gov service is both unConstitutional and unreasonable, along with ignoring the corruption in our current government that is part of what turns people off to serving it.

You just want to be able to force people to serve the government, because you already swore yourself to them, and only care about what impacts the DoD, not what impacts the civies of America.

But you just want your Starship Trooper's esque society of forcing people to serve if they want to vote, Constitution be damned.

Do you really not understand the fundamental difference between 'taking less of your money away' by cutting taxes, and 'giving you other people's money' by giving money taken from others through taxes, to someone else?

I understand the GOP/fiscal conservatives do see a huge difference between the two, but the end result is the same; more money back in people's pockets one way or another, and both are accomplished via voting.

People voting themselves better economic conditions, via removing taxes, or increasing tax rebates, or reshoring jobs, or any of the dozens of methods people have to trying to increase their wealth via ballot measures is all fair play and always has been.

 

[DarthOne]

Well... I certainly agree with him. I think people like you, frankly, could use this incentive.

(Not that I care what the USA does; that's your business. But I'd want this implemented in my country ASAP. Plus property ownership as a requirement, and a literal poll tax, too.)

The problem you Europeans have isn’t that most of you don’t vote. It’s that your political parties are pretty much indistinguishable despite supposedly being left or right wing.

That and, like the USA, you’ve got other problems most western countries share these days. Your education system has been captured by the leftoids on top of being dumbed down. Which means most voters are low information and get their news from a mainstream media that’s just as bad as your education system. Your politicians are untrustworthy bastards who say one thing but do another. They also don’t have any loyalty to your nation or past; seeing the citizens as replaceable drones in an economic zone, not a nation. Oh and your countries are being flood with foreign economic migrants who are eating up a collapsing welfare system.

 

[Skallagrim]

The problem you Europeans have isn’t that most of you don’t vote. It’s that your political parties are pretty much indistinguishable despite supposedly being left or right wing.

That and, like the USA, you’ve got other problems most western countries share these days. Your education system has been captured by the leftoids on top of being dumbed down. Which means most voters are low information and get their news from a mainstream media that’s just as bad as your education system. Your politicians are untrustworthy bastards who say one thing but do another. They also don’t have any loyalty to your nation or past; seeing the citizens as replaceable drones in an economic zone, not a nation. Oh and your countries are being flood with foreign economic migrants who are eating up a collapsing welfare system.

I surely don't disagree with your points.

I do note that all of this has pretty much come to pass... since the universal franchise was introduced. Which stands to reason: if any sucker can vote, the most opportunistic and vile politicians can far more easily manipulate the voting cattle (either by trickery or by promising 'free' hand-outs via re-distribution). That's what perpetuates the toxic system.

Restricting the entirety of the political sphere to those who A) actually pay into the system, B) are willing to serve their people, and C) are in some way rooted to the land they inhabit is frankly the fundamental solution. It means that those who make the decisions are A) disinclined to support re-distribution and excessive taxes, B) of the sort of character that values duty and responsibility, and C) particularly filled with a sense of belonging in (and love towards) their native land and its autochthonous community.

Again, all these ideas are utterly antithetical to leftist goals, so all leftists hate notions such as these.

 

[Cherico]

I certainly don't disagree!

I do note that all of this has pretty much come to pass... since the universal franchise was introduced. Which stands to reason: if any sucker can vote, the most opportunistic and vile politicians can far more easily manipulate the voting cattle (either by trickery or by promising 'free' hand-outs via re-distribution). That's what perpetuates the toxic system.

Restricting the entirety of the political sphere to those who A) actually pay into the system, B) are willing to serve their people, and C) are in some way rooted to the land they inhabit is frankly the fundamental solution. It means that those who make the decisions are A) disinclined to support re-distribution and excessive taxes, B) of the sort of character that values duty and responsibility, and C) particularly filled with a sense of belonging in (and love towards) their native land and its autochthonous community.

Again, all these ideas are utterly antithetical to leftist goals, so all leftists hate notions such as these.

As is I just don't think the current left will hold the room as it were forever.

We already have ruralization starting because their wreaking their own power bases with their frankly bad ideas, their pissing people off enmass, and world wide left wingers just are not having as many kids as conservatives (40% fertility advantage is a death sentence for them on a generational level)

They own the present but all of the fundamentals are sceewed horribly against them long term. Which is why I think your right they are going to give up on democracy entirely are going to rely just on brute force and while it will give them time the movement is doomed to suffer the conquences for its actions.

 

[Skallagrim]

As is I just don't think the current left will hold the room as it were forever.

We already have ruralization starting because their wreaking their own power bases with their frankly bad ideas, their pissing people off enmass, and world wide left wingers just are not having as many kids as conservatives (40% fertility advantage is a death sentence for them on a generational level)

They own the present but all of the fundamentals are sceewed horribly against them long term. Which is why I think your right they are going to give up on democracy entirely are going to rely just on brute force and while it will give them time the movement is doomed to suffer the conquences for its actions.

The best we can do, afterwards, is not repeat the mistakes that led to this.

Bottom line: honest, hard-working people should have a stake in their country and its governance-- and free-loaders should not.

 

[Cherico]

The best we can do, afterwards, is not repeat the mistakes that led to this.

Bottom line: honest, hard-working people should have a stake in their country and its governance-- and free-loaders should not.

another reason why I think your plan of limiting the franchise will go through once the chaos all shakes out.

Just having it be a condition that you have to actually serve the country put some thing in even if its not much screens out the worst of the lot.

 

[LordsFire]

I understand the GOP/fiscal conservatives do see a huge difference between the two, but the end result is the same; more money back in people's pockets one way or another, and both are accomplished via voting.

People voting themselves better economic conditions, via removing taxes, or increasing tax rebates, or reshoring jobs, or any of the dozens of methods people have to trying to increase their wealth via ballot measures is all fair play and always has been.

If you do not understand the significance of this difference, then you are willfully blind. There's no point in discussing this further.

 

[Zachowon]

I don't think forcing government service on people who do not want to serve the government will fix a damn thing that is facing this nation, and in fact will only cause more strife and corruption in the government.

The US is bigger than just the DoD, or the desires of DoD employees, and the DoD exists under civie control for a damn good reason.

Edit: Also, Trump never served and yet we saw that when he tried to get troops out of harms way, he was straight up ignored/lied to by the State Dept and Pentagon.

And your outlook ignores that trying to force gov service is both unConstitutional and unreasonable, along with ignoring the corruption in our current government that is part of what turns people off to serving it.

You just want to be able to force people to serve the government, because you already swore yourself to them, and only care about what impacts the DoD, not what impacts the civies of America.

But you just want your Starship Trooper's esque society of forcing people to serve if they want to vote, Constitution be damned.

I understand the GOP/fiscal conservatives do see a huge difference between the two, but the end result is the same; more money back in people's pockets one way or another, and both are accomplished via voting.

People voting themselves better economic conditions, via removing taxes, or increasing tax rebates, or reshoring jobs, or any of the dozens of methods people have to trying to increase their wealth via ballot measures is all fair play and always has been.

I think everyone who wants to be in power has to serve the government in someway, be it service in the military or public service

 

[Cherico]

If you do not understand the significance of this difference, then you are willfully blind. There's no point in discussing this further.

Voting to keep more of the money you earn is different then voting to get more money that someone else earned.

 

[Agent23]

I think everyone who wants to be in power has to serve the government in someway, be it service in the military or public service

Government exists for the benefit of the folk, it is an extension of the tribe/principality/clan which is an extension of the old, extended family.

You also have the view that government should be afraid of its people, and not the otehr way around.

Voting to keep more of the money you earn is different then voting to get more money that someone else earned.

Taxation is theft, unless the society is an ethnostate, then it is grudging, strings-attacehd support for poorer relations.

 

[Zachowon]

Government exists for the benefit of the folk, it is an extension of the tribe/principality/clan which is an extension of the old, extended family.

You also have the view that government should be afraid of its people, and not the otehr way around.



Taxation is theft, unless the society is an ethnostate, then it is grudging, strings-attacehd support for poorer relations.

Yes, but the people should know that should they have to be confident in that of the people sending them to war have also done the same.

 

[Scottty]

Voting to keep more of the money you earn is different then voting to get more money that someone else earned.

I think what it comes down to is what each side sees as "my money".

To one side - the money they earn from their salaries, or their business, and so on, is "my money".
But to the other - the money the government gives them as a hand-out is "my money".

One upon a time, the government was supposed to be spending the funds they collected from taxes in a way that equally benefited everyone.

 

[Agent23]

I think what it comes down to is what each side sees as "my money".

To one side - the money they earn from their salaries, or their business, and so on, is "my money".
But to the other - the money the government gives them as a hand-out is "my money".

One upon a time, the government was supposed to be spending the funds they collected from taxes in a way that equally benefited everyone.

Equally benefited everyone should be replaced to be "produce a net benefit to the society as a whole." Guess what moochers, and bureaucrats,and idiots with degrees in underwater lesbian dance therapy and other welfare queens aren't.

 

[mspence]

Heh:

New Orleans City Council votes to revoke Mayor LaToya Cantrell's access to luxury apartment; veto promised

The New Orleans City Council revoked Mayor LaToya Cantrell's access to a luxury apartment in the famed French Quarter.

www.foxnews.com

 

[mspence]

Welcome to Biden's America:

MSN

 

[bintananth]

Welcome to Biden's America:

MSN

More like small town corruption and overreach becoming national news. The nearest big city is Wichita (60mi South). I highly doubt that Marion, KS is filled to the brim with staunch leftists because a democrat living in a town like that is likely to be more conservative than your typical republican.

 

[Husky_Khan]

The Democratic Mayor of Burbank, California, Konstantine Anthony is getting spanked by a Drag Queen in front of kids.

BREAKING: Mayor of Burbank gets spanking from drag queen at campaign event

News and videos you won’t see anywhere else.

www.libsoftiktok.com

It was apparently part of a political fundraising event. So this is normal Democratic Party operations.

Very normal. Very stable.

What would the OG Constantine say???

 

[PsihoKekec]

Cringy as the statement is, it did make me laugh a bit.

 

[DarthOne]

Cringy as the statement is, it did make me laugh a bit.

Who the heck does he think he is fooling?!