CDZ Please explain to me something...

[evenflow1969]

The extremists don't elect people, they try to influence but in the end Average Joe and Josephine America is who elects.

You saw that in 2916...a silent majority decided the election.

25% is by no definition a "majority" of anything.

When you discount the fraudulent Democrat votes including illegals, we won the popular vote too.

Love to run your mouth on shit you can not come even close to proving dont you!

 

[Andylusion]

I blame the republican attack on education. An uneducated populace is easier to control.
Of course there is.

The Republican Tax Bill’s Attack on Higher Education - The Atlantic

It's an ongoing thing. Uneducated people are easier to lead by the nose and less likely to question what they are told. That is the republican goal. They want sheep. Are you ready to be shorn?

That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

First, we spend more money on education, than any other nation on the face of this Earth, and our students come out stupid relative to even some 3rd world countries.

Most colleges enroll many students who aren’t prepared for higher education - The Hechinger Report

Almost 50% of all students come out of high school, unable to do entry level college work.

That's YOUR system failing students, not ours. That's the Democrap education system, that they have defended with the teachers unions to the bitter end. More worried about someone taking a voucher to a private school, than the utter incompetence in public schools.

We are not holding students down. You are. We are trying to give people options. Your side is keeping them dumb, and locked into a system that fails them.

Second, most of these endowments are benefiting the elites, not the average student.

Third, I'm constantly amazed by how many idiots advocate higher taxes, but then complain when the taxes hit themselves. How many of these endowed schools have professors that run around supporting tax the rich? Then when they themselves, who benefit from over half a trillion in endowments, have to pay some taxes, they squeal like the pigs they are.

If you can't take it, then you shouldn't dish it out.

Besides, maybe you are a little oblivious, but having these tax free endowments hasn't exactly kept education costs low. Aside from benefiting the elite tenured professors, it certainly hasn't been a benefit to the students.

So if this is the best you have to support your mythical Republican 'attack' on education BS crap... then you have no argument.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I blame the republican attack on education. An uneducated populace is easier to control.

Are they? Hmmm... not sure I see the math there. I'd guess it's more likely to the other way, depending on who's doing the educating.

Not so. The have deliberately removed any teaching of critical thinking making many of the lower intelligence folks easily lead and influenced.

Yep...all these progressive professors are really dumbing down the populace.

You are apparently a victim of the process.

Nope...didnt go to college so I avoided the indoctrination process.
And also managed to retire at 46.

"Good for you. BTW Al Capone was 33 when he retired and spent his final years in San Francisco Bay. He didn't go to college either.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Are they? Hmmm... not sure I see the math there. I'd guess it's more likely to the other way, depending on who's doing the educating.

Not so. The have deliberately removed any teaching of critical thinking making many of the lower intelligence folks easily lead and influenced.

Yep...all these progressive professors are really dumbing down the populace.

You are apparently a victim of the process.

Nope...didnt go to college so I avoided the indoctrination process.
And also managed to retire at 46.

"Good for you. BTW Al Capone was 33 when he retired and spent his final years in San Francisco Bay. He didn't go to college either.

Have no fear!!
I only ripped off the poor who have no ability to fight back in a court of law.
Fuck the peasants!!!
Let them eat cake!!!

 

[emilynghiem]

I am having trouble understanding where we (as the people and voters) made a mistake. While i have my own conclusion about that, I would like to hear some opinions first.

In most democracies we see a rise of extremists on the left and right (more obvious in most countries is the right wing). On the same time we have had a peaceful period of time for several decades, the living standards rise since ww2 and yet, everybody seems to be unhappy. Why is that the case?
And a more specific question is, how can 30-40 percent of US citizens blindly stand behind this president? I do not blame them specifically as I am starting to believe this can happen anywhere else as well (i am from germany). Lets say that all of his political ideas (tariffs, walls, health care, taxes, etc.) would make sense to you, does it bias his rethoric? Apart from white male supremecists i dont think there is a group that he didnt attack. Do you really believe he is the only one who could improve your country? Why wouldnt a "normal" politican be able to do it without all the lies?

My simple ideas i currently have are education and lobbyism. But given the fact that the leading political party changed over the last decades quite often in all those democracies, why did we end up being so uneducated, that a lot of us are going extreme as the only solution? Why is belief more important than facts? When did we stopped checking what people say? Did this start with social media? Is social media the modern radio, that empowered Hitler? And why do we allow lobbys to write laws for the elected government to pass? Why can't they formulate their own ideas and write them into a law? I agree, that involved parties should be heard and their opinions taken into account into an decision, but to what extent?

Where will this development lead to? Back to markantilism? Back to nationalism and wars? To some new and better future? if that is the case, how is that accomplished?

Dear baum: For English not being your first language, you are doing quite well to discuss something as complex and deep as politics.

To frame this process, I would suggest you look at how colonies start off depending on a parent govt.
Then break free from outside control and become independent.
Then split into north and south, or left and right, based on class control.

There seems to be a common pattern as people grow toward independent self-govt.

If you look at the warring parties, they also need to learn to become self-governing.
The Catholic church governs its own programs and policies, and has these same
splits among its membership and leadership. Some groups break free and form
their own congregations.

And you can see the same with counties or cities within states that
incorporate to become self-governing.

The common pattern is that people learn to govern and represent themselves
as LOCALLY and independently as possible.

When we don't, the opposite happens, where the more we rely on COLLECTIVE
representation, a RIFT develops between the fewer in power and the masses that follow.
This doesn't work over time.
Eventually those masses break free and need more localized control and representation.

If you can understand the stages of development in terms of
seeking independence and self-reliance, it makes sense.

If groups get TOO LARGE, then those people will break into separate groups.
So those groups want equal power and representation.

The best way to get this is to organize self-governing
states and then cities. Or independent ORGANIZATIONS
that decide their own policies. The less we depend on outside authority,
and the more we learn to manage our own programs and fund and run
these ourselves, then we won't see as much conflict between competing groups.

We will have independent sovereign states,
or cities, or religious or political organizations.
So when everyone has the representation and policies of their choice,
there is no more need to fight over power through govt to get this.
We build it and manage it ourselves locally, and let others to do the same.