yeah fwancophile was basically just completly wrong

Our civilization has failed. Changes need to be made. In the words of a true hero
"Revolution is easier than reform"
-Ted Kazcinski

Having skipped to the very end to chip in without reading (sorry): I think "microdemocracy" (fancy speak for internet voting on many smaller policies/issues) is potentially interesting, and on the other end of the spectrum I also think a meritocracy (fancy speak for: give the political jobs to the smartest) could also work well.

Then again it is working very nicely the way it is at the moment, at least here in Australia (I hate Rudd and don't like a single one of his policies, and he has quite possibly ruined my career plan, but I can't really complain that the political system here is bad)


I just flicked back through some of the discussion. It's great to see we have many smart cookies here, very nice to see people who aren't going over the top with extreme ideas or visions of a utopia. :-)

Not over the top? there s a guy on here who wants to turn people into gears of a machine. not individuals, not something in itself, but merley parts of a whole, in which none have free thoughts or independence. thats not over the top?

Well I'm not going to get dragged into this, but good luck with your revolution sir. :| You'd find it pretty hard to incite anyone to revolt around here. With enough banners and posters you might incite them to a BBQ though

i believe he just said that it's nice to see people who aren't going over the top, not that everyone wasn't.

As to the materialist accusation against me, and yes I say accusation, let me just say: What you see is most definitely NOT what you get. There is so much more to things than the observable, and I stand by that.

Inciting rebellion is hard work, but we do "incite" them to bbq's. we make food outside our building all the time and give it away. I actually just got done making jambalya, and inviteda homeless person up to eat with us. (now when I say homeless, I 'm using the negative connotation, as in like bum. think old nasty man, or baglady. because technically I am homeless)

it turns out the "disgusting homeless man" I invited to dinner is a harvard lawyer lol

so even more disgusting but not homelesss then? :)
gor, im hungry and whatever jambalya is it sounds good.
im homeless! but not apartmentless.
i have just joined the landowning capitalist running dogs class and bought some land. for my future home.

no he's homeless. he's not actually like repulsive, I just described him as such to play into most peoples perceptions about homless people. I'm homless and I smell like roses and I'm on the internet

What economic structures are best, for all you who would have one?

I'm actually sort of ambiguous here. I'm all for capitalism, but nothing like laissez-faire. Somewhere in the middle. A little more regulation than what we have in America, that's about it. I'm pretty dull on economics lol.

well we could just have everyone become a gear, and everyones money would be everyones money, and the country would spend money like one person, since ordianry citizens would have no power, only the leader. doesnt that sound better thucy?

Hahaha. Refer to above post about "ideal" and "pratical" situations. That would never happen so I don't even get into the economics of such a scenario, because honestly, I don't care much for economics one way or another. I spend money and shamelessly support corporations I guess you would say. By that I mean, I buy from them. So, while I am in the system, I don't pay a heck of a lot of attention to it, at least I don't yet, maybe once I pay taxes I will.

why pay taxes at all?

why not just paint/travel/sing/eat/talk/swim/cook/run/write/draw/do whatever you want. live life to the fullest man.
The outside world is alot more welcoming when your house is a backpack and your bed is the earth itself

That's sounds nice, but, I'd still pay taxes lol.

enjoy wage enslavement lol

do any of you have political "heros"

ex: trotsky, chomsky, etc.

How far back can we go? If you want in the last century, I'm hard-pressed to give you anyone. If you give me two centuries, I'd go with Napoleon, and if you give me the span of history I'd go with Justinian.

Though Winston Churchill was a beast... and so was Margaret Thatcher. But to call them political heroes of mine is an exaggeration.

Justinian overall though.
(sry 3rd post)

chomsky, robert fisk (the war of civilization , one of the most heartrenching longest, darkest, history books ive read.after it you want to have a shower and condemn the Americans,the zionists, the arab royal families and the islamic terrorists groups all to hell for what they've done to the poor people of that region)
oh and it goes with out saying the dalai lama,


the usual suspects!

Justinian the Byzantine? hmmm, interesting. him and Napoleon were both conquerers, is that what you were getting at?

I'm getting at consolidation. Hence my statist position. Lol. But no I don't only admire them for their conquests. I admire them for giving dying states a moment of glory. Justinian briefly combatted the long decline of the Roman State, and Napoleon took France out of their revolution and made the world respect them again.

But yes I also admire their military beastliness.

I have quite a few and most not military based but the only one who comes to mind right now is Julius Caeser. When you look at some of the things he's done its just incredible. Its funny how Suetonius recorded that he looked at a statue of Alexander the Great when he was 30 and sighed at the comparison - Within another 30 years though he saw Rome's corner's expand all the way to England and the Nile.

Some of the lesser known events in his life are also quite interesting. For example, when he was on his way to Rhodes to study he was kidnapped by pirates, after his family paid the ransom for his release he - without any real military experience - raised a small force out of the villages in north Africa and chased down the pirates, captured and executed them, took their boat, and then went to Greece to help with a campaign there and put himself in the senate's spotlight.

I think the story goes that he looked upon a bust of alexander the great and cried, because he felt he was letting his life slip away without any real acheivements. at least thats how I've heard it

Suetonius in his biography of the twelve caesers said it was a statue in Spain if I'm not mistaken.

I think thats the most reliable source but I'm not willing to go pick up my translation to verify my claim. Then again, I think that the chance that we're talking about different translations or even translations of translations is quite likely as well. The Twelve Caesers was though written after or during the reign of Emperor Hadrian which was 2 or 300 years after the death of Julius Caeser and included a lot of rumours and hearsay. So its validity on something as insignificant as that is definitely questionable.

Even then though, he had already gotten his 'triumph' for his works in Greece with his make-shift army. And taken multiple political positions in Spain.

Its very interesting when you look at who chose to hang aroud him though as well as what people said. The dictator Cornelius Sulla wanted him executed after he took control of Rome claiming there were many of Marius' in Julius Caeser. When you look at the achievements of Marius (Reforming the Roman army into Legionairies being the most notable, he was also the Caeser's uncle and incredibly popular among the people) this was an incredible compliment. He was convinced by those around him not to execute the 19 year old boy who obviously wouldn't amount to anything.