A question for all - what future for America?

[valpomike]

Pieter,

And all the others, many who are still receiving our aid, don't care?

We may never need this outside aid, but if we did. No only in time of war, but for everything.

Mike

[uncltim]

What do we need help with Mike? The US has the largest civilian militia in the world www.libertynewsonline.com/article_301_30097.php
Only a fool would attempt to occupy us. Another good thing to remember is this group. oath-keepers.blogspot.com/2009/03/oath-keepers-declaration-of-orders-we.html
Relax bro. Let the government and media spin themselves silly. The only power they have is that which we allow. F*ck 'em.

[pjotr]

[valpomike]

Pieter,

I am going to stop this chat with you, since I don't think you understand what I want to say, or just don't care.

Mike

[uncltim]

If the past is any indicator, The future isn't great. In this video I like to ignore the generally crazy parts and focus on the mechanics of government and the willingness to use lethal force for basically no real gain. The upside is, retribution is always forthcoming. The people never forget.

[valpomike]

This president, here in the U.S.A. wants a One World Operation, and he wants to be the King of it. If we don't stop him soon, he may get his wish, since many others in far away places think he is King now. He and his congress, must, and I hope, will be, repaced. I am work on this with many others.

Mike

[pjotr]

Mike,

I take you serious. The future for America in my opinion is that in the 21th century America must focus more on the American civilization. The USA should put the USA first, and next to that keep the good ties with the world it has. We have no idea how incredible powerful the USA is, because we see the crisis of today, the economical problems, financial problems, social problems which come with that. But in my opinion Mike I am very optimistic about the future for America, because the future lies in the hands of the American people. American families, American communities and American individuals like you and Tim.

I tend to look at the long term, not to much at the short term. That are just political games, Media hypes, short term economical crisis (what is that in the entire human existance, we will overcome the crisis), and the reality we are shown by our politicians, media and icons. For America I think that the Americans simply must continue to live their lives as they do, take care of and enjoy their families, be responsable, give their kids good education, have their role in their community (in the sense of the church one belong too, the social networks people have in their neighbourhoods -subburbs-, towns or cities, the sports they enjoy -the sport community-).

If the Americans have any influence they can change the politics and media, by voting Independant, if they do not like the Democrats and Republicans, they can boycot the media if they don't like them and learn from real sources and files (encyclopedia, libraries, social networks of reliable people or local/regional newsnetworks). I believe in the power of the individual to change things, and in the power of families, groups and communities to change things. Change starts at the roots, at the core of society, an that is the neighbourhood, the workfield, the church (with the influence of the priests, bible groups, Catholic and Evangelical organisations), the city council and etc.

Keep what is good, change and reform what is needed. Maybe a more sober lifestile is needed to realise the cutbacks to deminish the state depth. Maybe the Federal government and the National governments should be smaller. Maybe some Federal institutions should be privatized or reorganised. Maybe America should spend less money, energy and human capital and material (technology and militairy equipment) into foreign interventions and wars. What if America goes out of Afghanistan, the Middle East and Lybia? What if the Americans say, people we helped ya, we intervened for you. Secure your own borders, mind your own business, don't coun't on us?

America should dedicate itself to the 21th century American civilization. Education (universities), health care, a better free market (reforming capitalism), smaller government, investment in Research & Development (the American human capital), American culture, American contemporary art, American cinema (Hollywood and New York cinema), American agriculture, how to continue the American Space exploration (NASA), preparing the American Armed Forces better for the 21th century (more special forces, more hi-tech solutions, like drones and robots), gentechnology, clone technology, nano-technology and robotica. We will see some remarkable scientific and technological progress in the near future. Things you will not believe that it could be possible. And not only you, but Tim, me, Tufta and Bo too. The only fear I have about the future is that the control of the state will grow, the *Big Brother scenario. We will always have to defend our liberties as civilians against a growing state bureaucracy, and the power of the state over the people.

Cheers,
Pieter

* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Brother_(Nineteen_Eighty-Four)

[pjotr]

The American civilization



The culture of the United States of America is a Western culture, having been originally influenced by European cultures. It has been developing since long before the United States became a country with its own unique social and cultural characteristics such as dialect, music, arts, social habits, cuisine, and folklore. Today, the United States of America is an ethnically and racially diverse country as result of large-scale immigration from many different countries throughout its history.



Its chief early influences came from English and Irish settlers of colonial America. British culture, due to colonial ties with Britain that spread the English language, legal system and other cultural inheritances, had a formative influence. Other important influences came from other parts of western Europe, especially Germany, France, and Italy.

Original elements also play a strong role, such as the invention of Jeffersonian Democracy. Thomas Jefferson's Notes on the State of Virginia was perhaps the first influential domestic cultural critique by an American and a reactionary piece to the prevailing European consensus that America's domestic originality was degenerate. Prevalent ideas and ideals which evolved domestically such as national holidays, uniquely American sports, military tradition, and innovations in the arts and entertainment give a strong sense of national pride among the population as a whole.



American culture includes both conservative and liberal elements, military and scientific competitiveness, political structures, risk taking and free expression, materialist and moral elements. Despite certain consistent ideological principles (e.g. individualism, egalitarianism, and faith in freedom and democracy), American culture has a variety of expressions due to its geographical scale and demographic diversity. The flexibility of U.S. culture and its highly symbolic nature lead some researchers to categorize American culture as a mythic identity; others see it as American exceptionalism.



It also includes elements which evolved from Native Americans, and other ethnic subcultures; most prominently the culture of African Americans and different cultures from Latin America. Many cultural elements, especially popular culture, have been exported across the globe through modern mass media.
The United States has often been thought of as a melting pot, but recent developments tend towards cultural diversity, pluralism and the image of a salad bowl rather than a melting pot. Due to the extent of American culture there are many integrated but unique social subcultures within the United States. The cultural affiliations an individual in the United States may have commonly depend on social class, political orientation and a multitude of demographic characteristics such as religious background, occupation and ethnic group membership.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolationism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectionism

[pjotr]

Globalization

Globalization of Culture

A majority of Americans has a favorable view of American popular culture, though a large minority of the public is pessimistic about the quality of US movies and television. Americans are divided about the spread of American culture, but only a small minority considers the dominance of US culture a threat to other cultures. When it comes to globalization bringing greater cultural influences into the US, Americans express a positive attitude.

One of the most controversial aspects of globalization is the worldwide spread and dominance of American culture. Just as US goods flooded world markets in the post-Word War II era, US culture is now penetrating every continent through the dramatic growth of mass communications such as music, television, films and the Internet, as well as through the penetration of American corporations into foreign countries. From China to France to the Middle East, foreign leaders and activists have expressed fear that global culture may become too Americanized, destroying their own cultural, economic, and religious traditions. Where does the majority public stand?

Evaluation of American Culture

Polls show that a majority of Americans have a positive view of US culture. In the January 2004 PIPA poll, 55% said they had a favorable view of "American popular culture, such as music, television, and films". Forty-three percent found it to be unfavorable. This is a bit less favorable than when the question was asked in October 1999 and 60% had a favorable view and 39% said unfavorable. Those who expressed a "very favorable" view declined from 21% to 11% between 1999 and 2004.

With regard to the content of films and television, though, a substantial minority has serious misgivings about the direction of US culture. In a February 1999 Los Angeles Times Poll, respondents were nearly divided on the question of the quality of American movies, with 47% saying they were satisfied and 42% saying they were dissatisfied. Five percent volunteered that they were neutral. A plurality (45%) expected the content of future American films to be about the same as it is now, but twice as many thought it would get worse rather than better (29% to 16%). Thus, some may sympathize with other countries that might not want to readily accept US cultural dominance in certain areas.

Spreading American Culture

However Americans are divided about the value of spreading Americans culture around the world. In August 2002 an Investor's Business Daily/Christian Science Monitor poll found that only 47% felt that "American movies and popular culture" had a positive impact on "the rest of the world." Forty-four percent thought the impact was negative. In fact, in an October 1999 PIPA poll a plurality of 48% said they feel either mixed (43%) or bad (5%) feelings when they "hear about McDonalds opening up in cities around the world, or…the popularity of US TV shows in other countries." Forty-three percent had "good feelings".

At the same time, Americans reject the idea that US popular culture is a threat to foreign cultures. In October 1999 PIPA asked, "How much of a threat, if at all, do you think American popular culture, such as music, television and films, is to the cultures of other countries in the world?" Just 24% said American popular culture was a "very serious" (7%) or "serious" threat (17%) to other countries. By contrast 33% considered it only a minor threat, and a plurality (41%) said it was not a threat at all. They may also see foreign concerns as overblown. For example, French restrictions on the showing of foreign films-the only trade restriction presented based on cultural grounds-was the only restriction a majority of Americans (54%) rejected as illegitimate in PIPA's October 1999 poll. The public certainly does not view the spread of US culture as a threat serious enough to provoke a lethal reaction. When a December 2001 by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner and Public Opinion Strategies offered a list of 6 potential causes of international terrorism, just 10% cited the "spreading of US culture and values" as one of their top two choices. All of the others were cited by at least 21%.

A strong majority thinks US culture had a lot of impact on other countries in the 20th century, and an overwhelming majority believes it will have equal or greater influence in the 21st century. When asked in a December 1999 CBS News survey "how much impact…the United States has had on popular culture in the rest of the world" in "this past century", 70% said it had "a lot." Another 22% said it had "some" and just 6% said the impact was "not much" or "none at all." In the same CBS survey, nearly 9 out of 10 said the US would have either more impact (34%) or the same impact (55%) on popular culture throughout the world than it has now. Only 20% felt the impact would be less.

Impact of Other Cultures on US

When it comes to globalization bringing greater cultural influences into the US, Americans express a positive attitude. When asked in the January 2004 PIPA poll, to think about "how globalization has resulted in new ideas and cultural influences coming into the US from other countries," a strong majority of 68% regarded this as positive. Just 25% felt those influences to be negative.

In a 1998 Yankelovich poll, a near-unanimous majority (91%) agreed, "the global economy makes it more important than ever for all of us to understand people who are different than ourselves."

In May 1999, a Pew poll found that 71% of Americans agreed that cultural diversity was a "major reason" for America's success.

[pjotr]

Aug 4, 2011 21:20:34 GMT 1 uncltim said:

If the past is any indicator, The future isn't great. In this video I like to ignore the generally crazy parts and focus on the mechanics of government and the willingness to use lethal force for basically no real gain. The upside is, retribution is always forthcoming. The people never forget.

Interesting documentry Tim, the young woman of the family is a strong girl. The documentry shows a devided America. The guys of the government force and the local and national supporters of the family. A very dramatic, tragic, and extreme example of government misuse of power and the dangers of being asociated with so called extremist or radical movements. In the Netherlands there were examples of good people who bought one time in their youth a communist newspaper or were attracted to communism for a short period of time. The rest of their lives they were marked. In the Cold war they were herassed by the Dutch secret service, the Social-democratic Union (anti-communist) worked against them. These skilled people never got a job in their lives. Their lives were ruined. These were a few people, but their story was real. Government, employers and Unions blocked their carreer opportunities. It is like the example in the documentry, because in my opinion extremes are extremes. These people had connections to the Aryan Nation, but weren't White suprematists or Neo-Nazi's themselves. It is sad to see how the girl lost her brother and mother. And how marked the father and daughter are. It is sometimes scary how powerful Federal or Centralist governments in larger countries can be, with their militairy police forces. The case of the documentry is a sad case of developments which lead to a disaster.

Cheers,
Pieter

[pjotr]

www.lp.org/

Libertarian Party (United States)

The Libertarian Party is the third largest and fastest growing political party in the United States. The political platform of the Libertarian Party reflects its brand of libertarianism, favoring minimally regulated, laissez-faire markets, strong civil liberties, minimally regulated migration across borders, and non-interventionism in foreign policy, i.e., avoiding foreign military or economic entanglements with other nations and respect for freedom of trade and travel to all foreign countries.
In the 30 states where voters can register by party, there are over 225,000 voters registered with the party. Hundreds of Libertarian candidates have been elected or appointed to public office, and thousands have run for office under the Libertarian banner. The party has not fared very well in Presidential elections. It only once generated more than 1% of the popular vote (in 1980) and also only ever received 1 electoral college vote (1972). The Libertarian party currently holds no seats in the House, Senate or any state legislatures. It also currently holds no governorships.

History

The Libertarian Party was formed in Colorado Springs in the home of David Nolan on December 11, 1971. The formation was prompted in part by the Vietnam War, conscription, and the end of the Gold Standard. The first Libertarian National Convention was held in June, 1972. In 1978, d....k Randolph of Alaska became the first elected Libertarian state legislator. In 1994, over 40 Libertarians were elected or appointed which was a record for the party at that time. The year 1995 saw a soaring membership and voter registration for the party. In 1996, the Libertarian Party became the first third party to earn ballot status in all 50 states two presidential elections in a row. By the end of 2009, 146 Libertarians are holding elected offices.
The Libertarian Party is the first party to earn an electoral vote for a woman. In the 1972 Presidential Election John Hospers ran for president on the Libertarian Ticket, with his running mate, Tonie Nathan (a woman). The team earned one electoral vote in that election, making history.



Platform

The preamble outlines the party's goal: "As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty; a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and no one is forced to sacrifice his or her values for the benefit of others." Its Statement of Principles begins: "We, the members of the Libertarian Party, challenge the cult of the omnipotent state and defend the rights of the individual." The platform emphasizes individual liberty in personal and economic affairs, avoidance of "foreign entanglements" and military and economic intervention in other nations' affairs and free trade and migration. It calls for Constitutional limitations on government as well as the elimination of most state functions. It includes a "Self-determination" section which quotes from the Declaration of Independence and reads: "Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of individual liberty, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to agree to such new governance as to them shall seem most likely to protect their liberty." It also includes an "Omissions" section which reads: "Our silence about any other particular government law, regulation, ordinance, directive, edict, control, regulatory agency, activity, or machination should not be construed to imply approval."

Structure and composition

The Libertarian National Committee (LNC) is responsible for promoting Libertarian campaign activities. While the LNC is responsible for overseeing the process of writing the Libertarian Platform, the LNC is more focused on campaign and organizational strategy than public policy. In presidential elections, it supervises the Libertarian National Convention. The 17-member Libertarian National Committee (currently chaired by Mark Hinkle) is responsible for overseeing day-to-day operations of the Libertarian Party and its headquarters, in representative style.

The Libertarian National Congressional Committee (LNCC) was created by the LNC for the purpose of raising funds to elect Libertarians to the United States Congress. It is modeled after the Democratic and Republican equivalents, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the National Republican Congressional Committee. Wayne Allyn Root is chair of the LNCC.

State chapters

Each state also has a state committee, usually consisting of statewide officers and regional representation of one kind or another. Similarly, county, town, city and ward committees, where organized, generally consist of members elected at the local level. State and local committees often coordinate campaign activities within their jurisdiction, oversee local conventions and in some cases primaries or caucuses, and may have a role in nominating candidates for elected office under state law.

Membership

Since its inception, individuals have been able to join the Libertarian Party by signing their agreement with the organization's membership pledge, which states that the signer does not advocate the initiation of force to achieve political or social goals. During the mid 1980s and into the early 1990s, this membership category was called an "instant" membership; currently these are referred to as "signature members".

Name and symbols

In 1972, "Libertarian Party" was chosen as the party's name, narrowly beating out "New Liberty Party."
Also in 1972, the "Libersign"—an arrow angling upward through the abbreviation "TANSTAAFL" (There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch)—was selected as the party's emblem. Some time after, this was replaced with the Lady Liberty, which has, ever since, served as the party's symbol or mascot.



For many years, there has been a small movement to adopt "LP" the Liberty Penguin as the official mascot, much like the Republican elephant or the Democratic donkey. The Libertarian parties of Tennessee, North Carolina, Utah, Hawaii, Delaware and Iowa have all adopted "LP" as their mascot.
The first official slogan of the Libertarian Party was "There Ain't No Such Thing as a Free Lunch" (often seen as "TANSTAAFL" for short), a phrase popularized by Robert A Heinlein in his 1966 novel The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress, sometimes dubbed "a manifesto for a libertarian revolution". The current slogan of the party is "The Party of Principle".

Links:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_(Ayn_Rand)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayn_Rand

[pjotr]

[valpomike]

We don't need more parties here, just correct the ones we now have. And another party here, does not even have a chance.
The best party is where you eat, drink, and dance, and could be have sex.

Mike

[valpomike]

As a outsider, why do you think you know what could be best for us here? I don't know, and would not tell others, what is best, where I don't live, and work, and help.

Mike

[uncltim]

I don't think Piotr is trying to dictate anything to us, just trying to amalgamate some understanding. Our method of thinking is quite foreign to the European mind-set. I find this forum to be very non-judgemental.

[pjotr]

Aug 7, 2011 12:13:59 GMT 1 valpomike said:

We don't need more parties here, just correct the ones we now have. And another party here, does not even have a chance.
The best party is where you eat, drink, and dance, and could be have sex.

Mike

Mike,

From the perspective of Freedom and Democracy, the Freedom of speech and expression you are right. You have the right to express yourself and disagree with me and other fellow Americans. That is the greatness of freedom and democracy in the USA and in Europe (The Western World). I think a Third party could or would be a good idea. You disagree with me on that subject and that is okay. Some Conservative Independant Americans, Libertarians, Tea Party people and radical liberal Americans who vote for the Green Party agree with me. Other Americans, Democrats and Republicans disagree with me. I think they are the majority. Maybe you are right that a Third party will not have a chance. I don't know. What I know is that there are Political American parties outside the Republican and Democratic Parties. They have supporters and a grassroots movement. So there must be Americans who believe in the Third party option. That's all!

Cheers,
Pieter

[pjotr]

Aug 7, 2011 12:16:34 GMT 1 valpomike said:

As a outsider, why do you think you know what could be best for us here? I don't know, and would not tell others, what is best, where I don't live, and work, and help.

Mike

Mike,

I don't know what could be the best for the American people. I just showed what I found on the Internet about the American democracy. That there are more than two parties. I also expressed an European view from the Media and Internet information I found. Ofcourse you and Tim are better people to judge, you are Americans. It is about your republic, your political system, your nation, your politicians and your future. I put the word "Maybe" in front of many of my sentances, and that shows that I don't think or believe that I have the absolutist truth. And even if I had it would have zero influence on American politics and voters. The American democracy works, and most people vote Democrat or Republican. But stil these other parties exists, whether they gain enough votes or not.

Cheers,
Pieter

[pjotr]

Aug 8, 2011 0:27:43 GMT 1 uncltim said:

I don't think Piotr is trying to dictate anything to us, just trying to amalgamate some understanding. Our method of thinking is quite foreign to the European mind-set. I find this forum to be very non-judgemental.

Tim,

You are right in everything you said in this message.

Thank you!

Cheers,
Pieter

[valpomike]

Pieter,

What is going on with you, no news for a few days, and I miss you, please post something soon.

Mike

[pjotr]

Mike,

I was bussy, being a local radio journalist cost time and effort!

Cheers,
Pieter