X Greetings! You are not currently logged in, but please don't let that stop you from voting up any videos you like. :)
|
| |
|
xxovercastxx Member Profile  Member Since: 2007-02-23 Last Power Points used: 2009-09-23 • Available: now Max Power Points: 1 • Get More Power Points Now Comments |
Subscribe Navigation
Member Stats Rank: 246 Rating: 
81 star pointsTop 15 Videos: 2 Votes Received: 1623 Average Votes Per Video: 27.51 Votes Cast: 1711 Comments Posted: 2422 • browse Comments Applauded: 26 Sifted Videos: 59 Unsifted Vids: 1 Sift Talk Posts: 19 Quality Sift Talk Posts: 8 Poll Posts: 1 Dead Pool Fixes: 16 Public Playlists: 6 • browse Profile Views: 11419 Highest Ranked Comments Member's Highest Rated Videos |
Art Videos Submitted by xxovercastxx
In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
>> ^shole:
If I fire up gmaps in a deadzone on my blackberry, it tells me there's no service and does nothing. It ought to cache the road map if not the satellite imagery.
In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
Then why'd you vote for it?
In reply to this comment by ant:
Video doesn't seem to play for me.
In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
*dead
In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
Maybe instead of resurrecting banned members we should be hunting down appreciated members who left and trying to get them to return.
karaidl
mlx
michie
firefly
pigeon (who just might have left due to being profile-stalked by ant, it seems)
raven
james roe
ladybug
intangiblemeg
smibbo
edeot
daphne...
In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
I'm highly tempted to vote this up. That's saying a lot, coming from me.
Corporations do care about small towns. Walmart is famous for setting up shop in small towns and putting local businesses out of business. In many places, Walmart is the only shopping option. When a business as large as Walmart comes to town, they can usually strongarm local governments into tax breaks and beneficial infrastructure projects. I only know of one case where Walmart was prevented from building a store, and that was in the small town of Los Angeles. I sure hope you are right about Walmart, but I only see people becoming more dependent on Walmart as they ravage the underclass.
Democratic government is people power by definition, even when the government you elect fails to stand up to powerful financial interests. I too am disillusioned about the current state of our state, but what gives me hope is that more and more people are becoming aware of these problems through increased access to information and technology.
Despite my screenname, I don't believe things are getting worse. I believe things have always been bad, and that it is only our increased access to information and communication that gives us the perception that things are getting worse. This new awareness (potentially) gives us the opportunity to diagnose problems and (hopefully) fix them. I believe the shift in the electorate from Bush towards Obama is evidence of this, and whether or not his administration has the power to make the changes they promised, he will at least make it easier for the next president.
This is why I see hope in darkness, and the will for change in our dystopian present.
The failure of Circuit City (or any of the others on your list) has had no meaningful impact on reducing corporate abuse. Circuit City was replace by Best Buy, which treats its employees worse than its predecessor. So in this case, 'wallet democracy' has actually made things worse.
This is because "wallet democracy" isn't based on intelligence, wisdom, morality or any kind of desire for social justice, it's based on convenient location, ad campaigns, low prices and blue light specials. These out-of-whack priorities have no real chance at achieving anything positive, and usually end up doing the opposite, by empowering the worst offenders, like Wal*Mart. I've not shopped in a Wal*Mart in over a decade, but still they thrive, despite my furious wallet. I guess the people have spoken, and working class dignity is an inferior candidate to low low prices.
'State's Rights' is another favorite corporate think tank meme, for the simple and obvious reason that corporations would rather face small enemies than large ones. Corporations have vast resources that they can use to bribe desperate states, to pit states against each other, and to punish states that don't toe the line, among other things.
I don't see local politicians being any less susceptible to lobbying; or local voters being any less susceptible to expensive ad campaigns, in fact, small town folk might be more suceptible to the glitz and glamor of corporate favor than their seasoned national counterparts. A few of the larger metropolitan areas might be organized enough to make a stand, but I can't see it realistically living up to your expectations.
Beyond all that, do you ever use the local control you already have?
-Have you ever attended a city council meeting?
-Do you research your local candidates in any depth?
-Do you know the names of local politicians, state senators, state congressmen, local judges and/or city council members?
Anyway, I like the old Clinton quote that goes something like 'there is nothing wrong with America that can't be fixed by what is right with America'. For better or for worse, our country is 'our' country, and as long as it remains our country, we have the ability to change it. It's easy to feel down about our country, because we are getting our asses kicked by a very small, but wealthy and powerful segment of our population. If enough of us can figure this out, and are mad enough to do something about it, we win. It's a big if.
(hahaha, nice dick joke)
In a democracy, the power rests in the hands of the people, by way of 1 person: 1 vote. It was a populist response to older forms of government based around wealth, power and nobility. It is a testament to the success of democracy that so many now can take it for granted. Government power is people power (read=your power). Limiting the power of government limits the power of the people, and if you are interested in stopping corrupt corporations, public government is the only thing big enough and powerful enough to get that done.
It is very true that our democracy has been subverted in many ways, but through democracy, we can change this. I agree with you that apathy is one of the big enemies here, but I see much reason for hope. With increased access to information, the public has become much more aware of corporate abuse, and has become much more politically involved. Despite what Obama may or may not do in his 4-8 years in office, I think it is significant that he was able to break through the corporate propaganda and win on a very pro-people platform.
Last point, one of the great red herrings in this debate is that of 'size'. Notions about 'big' or 'small' government are completely arbitrary and meant to distract you from the more important qualities that you wisely mentioned: efficiency and effectiveness.
Government should not be shoehorned into some arbitrary concept of big or small. Government should be just the right size in needs to be, to be both efficient and effective. Getting rid of valuable social services in order to make the government smaller only makes the it less efficient and less effective.
http://www.videosift.com/video/The-Making-of-Nine-Inch-Nails-Closer
Without democracy, individual consumers would powerless to make any kind of significant political changes, hence the push for 'individual liberty' at the expense of social liberty; and all that stuff about "markets self-regulating" is little more than a religious mantra, because there is no real world evidence that suggests such a thing is even remotely true.
The corporations have been very effective at drawing a wedge between the people and their government. They have actually fooled some of us into thinking things would get better if we were to give our power away. That's a mistake we only have to make once.
In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
I wonder what would happen if the government had less power? Seems to me that corporations get all their power by buying it from the government. If the government had no power to buy, would the corporations be effectively neutered?
I suppose the obvious counter-argument is that there would be nothing to keep them in check, but that's not true. The consumer would be (and always has been) the control. The problem, as always, is that the average Joe doesn't care. Very few people are willing to boycott an abusive company.
Whatever political ideology you subscribe to, I feel they will all be undone by apathetic citizens. Nothing will change unless the people change it.
In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
Have you ever honestly questioned your belief in capitalism?
[...snip...]
In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
>> ^schmawy:
I happen to think that would look most excellent with a tophat tails and cane. It must be the penny farthing look it has.
Yike Bike Srs Cat avatar forthcoming?
In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
>> ^Sarzy:
I actually went in and tried to edit them at first, but then I realized that it was a futile gesture.
I was compulsively editing them, usually a dozen or so a day, until I lost gold in the 4.0 switch. Now I just look and seethe.
In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
I thought you enjoyed these debates. If not, just leave it at that. I'm not looking to stir up shit.
In reply to this comment by thepinky:
I don't have the time or desire to have this argument with you, but I have rebuttals for these points. Maybe if I take it bow by blow I can get through it eventually.
In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
If he's perfect then progress is not possible by definition.
He's perfect in that he possesses every godlike attribute. It's not a matter of self-improvement. He is not increasing in love, mercy, knowledge, etc., but his creations and dominions are increasing, and his children are progressing. I don't see how that's a contradiction at all.
In reply to this comment by thepinky
In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
If he's perfect then progress is not possible by definition.
He's perfect in that he possesses every godlike attribute. It's not a matter of self-improvement. He is not increasing in love, mercy, knowledge, etc., but his creations and dominions are increasing, and his children are progressing. I don't see how that's a contradiction at all.
In reply to this comment by thepinky
God is a perfect being, yet he is eternally progressing. He progresses through his creations. His creations increase, his children grow, etc. We, as his creations, are extensions of the progression of God. I think that you understand that in order for us to grow or be anything more than biological robots, we must have choice. God allows us to make evil choices and hurt ourselves and each other. He has provided the means for us to learn "the rules," but because of agency, people are free to choose what they will believe. This always worries people when I talk about it. We are all born with the ability to tell good from evil, but many people are never given a fighting chance to be "good" because of the evil of others or for whatever reason. The simple truth is that God is perfectly just. Because he has given us agency and because he will not intervene in our agency, some people do not have the same choices to be good as you or I, but it would be crazy to believe that God condemns people for things that they do not have a choice in. Whatever the inequites of this world that are created by man, God will make sure that all is fair, all is resolved, all is right. People worry about death and despair in this life, saying that a just God would not allow people to suffer so much. But to God, death is not a punishment. This life is so incredibly short in the grand scheme of eternity that it is not hard for me to believe that God will take care of it. If we suffer because of floods and famine, it will be for our good. You might say that people who live their entire lives in poverty are not benefitting from hardship, but God will reward us and make up a million times for our sufferings. You'd better believe that impoverished people are humble, and God has promised to reward the humble and meek. In the scope of eternity, suffering is a blessing. He has promised rewards in heaven for enduring our trials well that are beyond our comprehension. I think that's benevolent.
A couple more things concerning the Atonement. I do not believe that we will be punished or condemned for our sins unless we make them with full knowledge and consent. Even then, we have the chance to repent.
Here's a really corny video that is a brief explanation of why the Atonement is necessary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gdc8rKcc4t4
How does sending his son to be brutally executed better equip God to forgive us? Even if it does, how is that a moral thing to do? Did everyone that died before 1AD go to hell? If not, then what made Jesus necessary later?
Like the video explains, in order for justice to be satisfied, Christ had to "pay for" our sins. In the garden of Gethsemane, not on the cross, Christ suffered for our sins. This is a matter of faith that I cannot explain. He was a mortal god, and because of this he was the only one who could suffer all of that exquisite pain. It had to happen the way that it did because Christ had to suffer as we will suffer. He had to
1. Have a body, because we have bodies
2. Be separated from God, because we are separated from God
3. Die, because we will die
It was moral because Jesus volunteered and knew what he was doing. And of course everyone before 1AD isn't going to hell. Time is a mental construct. The Atonement pays both past and future debts. Another thing is that we are not punished in eternity for mistakes that we make in a limited amount of time. If we do not repent, we have to pay the debt for our own sins instead of Jesus doing so, and then all but the vilest of sinners will be rewarded. I believe that only those that have a perfect understanding and knowledge of God and then deny him will be cast off forever. And maybe a few other really, really bad people. And that's almost no one.
I'm not done and there are lots of holes, but I want to go to bed. As a general rule, if something about Christian doctrine seems unjust or unmerciful or illogical to you, it is probably because it is wrong.
In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx: