Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Mandatory voting in the US? (Page 7)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 8 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8   
Author Topic: Mandatory voting in the US?
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Interestingly, under the category "reasons of circumstance" they have included "too busy/conflicting schedule", "bad weather conditions", and "inconvenient polling places", which are all different ways of saying "we didn't have enough motivation to make the trip", which are therefore really all reasons of choice and not of inability
You say this based on what actual experience and study of the situation? Your pronouncement here sonds more like the owrds of someone who has no idea of the conditions on the ground in such situations trying to dictate to owthers what they really must be feeling.

All of them read to me as possible common expressions of "I can't afford be fired, to lose hours at work (and potentially be fired for it), or to be sick (and thus fired or lose hours)"

You are seeing a choice, because for _you_ it would be a choice. Asserting that others see it equally at a choice is speaking from privilege and not from understanding.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
So you say it ends when the bad feelings are fully spent?
Where "it" is a mob, yes.

quote:
Could you predict a timeframe, then: how long do you suppose it'll be before this dysphoria of democratic politics has settled down?
Only if I allow you to completely beg the question. There are instances of mob like behavior when certain groups are, rightly or wrongly provoked to anger, but on the whole we have fractious disagreements, not mob mentality, being intentionally stoked in modern scenarios.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
A mob acts to find an outlet for shared pain and anger, and dissipates once that emotional state is spent.

A pack operates for mutual support, survival, and to the degree that resources allow it, enrichment of its members. It may be somewhat defensive, even xenophobic of outside interlopers, but it generally operates on a mutually constructive baseline with regards to its own members.

In context of the above conversation- mobs will tend to drag those who try to resist destructive behaviors down with them, while packs will tend to seek to elevate members that resort to destructive behavior toward more communally beneficial behavior.

Thank you. Nicely done.

I'm not sure that what you said actually contradicts my thesis that a mob is a short term reversion to pack behavior. Consider the nature of those who lead mobs... The difference being that it's the person whose destructive nature enable. the mob, rather than benefiting the community.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seriati
Member
Member # 2266

 - posted      Profile for Seriati         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Seneca:
If Obama was always for this then why when his party had full control of the Congress and presidency and passed one of the most controversial and dividing pieces of legislation of all time did they not also do this?

Bridge too far? Remember, he was still pretending not to be an autocrat at that point.

I also think, he didn't believe it was necessary. He had just had an electoral map changing victory, giving his party supramajority control. It wasn't till the effect of his "enlightened" policies were understood and his party starting see electoral damage that the idea of constructing a permanent majority became appealing (of course then you see efforts to grant massive amnesties to aliens, expand the ability to manipulate elections while reducing controls on fraud, and now mandatory voting).

And keep in mind Seneca, even my preference would be to see a massive increase in voter turnout. I'd just like to see it based on increased voter engagement and comprehension of the issues. As much as the Dems feel its in their favor to bring uneducated voters to the polls, I feel its in the Republicans favor to bring informed voters into the process.
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
So why have they not prioritized pushing through items to increase voter turnout, much as Republicans have prioritized pushing through items to suppress it? Because they are not as cynical and sleazy as Republicans.

Translation, making an argument about issues is hard, so I'll just be nasty.

There is absolutely NO evidence that Republicans are trying to suppress legitimate voters. In fact, the only evidence on voter intimidation in recent memory goes the other way and was conveniently ignored by Holder. It's also incredibly true that major democrat blocks, cough unions, are adept at voter manipulation and intimidation efforts.
quote:
Just a quibble: that was not Seriati's claim. Rather, his claim was that Democrats and Republicans are roughly equally racist, not that either party is as racist as they have ever been.
By the way, that made my day. You interpreting what I said accurately, I mean.
quote:
Originally posted by Wayward Son:
But the silliest thing about your assertion is that "2015 Democrat party hates blacks and other minorities." Which American political party has the majority of black and other minorities? Isn't it the Democrats? Why is that?

I don't actually know why their is such a single minded support of the Democrats by certain racial minorities. It's not in their interest, at all, to become a guaranteed vote.
quote:
If Republicans really cared about blacks and other minorities, they would create programs that would guarantee conditions would get better, rather than rely on some invisible hand that has never worked for them in the past.
And what HAS worked for them in the past? If we look at the trajectory and history of success in the black community over time, you see that even starting from the horror of slavery, it was upwards for the longest time. That trend didn't reverse until after the left's "helpful" policies got fully implemented. If anything, I think this is a battle of words (the nice words of the left) versus results (the far better results of the right).

The single biggest determinant in success today, appears to be an answer to one simple question. Are the parents married. Which particularly for children from poorer and minority backgrounds seems to be overwhelming correlated to ultimate success. What programs have the left put in place to encourage marriage (isn't the left the party of science?)?
quote:
Originally posted by GregDavidson:
Sp, I am curious - from your perspective, is mandatory jury duty similarly a form of rape? Because you would similarly be implicated in approving that form of justice by your participation?

You do realize that there are virtually no similarities between voting and jury service, other than they relate to citizenship? Jury service is mandatory as part of the social contract to ensure that any one accused of a crime gets the benefit of a representative jury of their peers. And by the way, SP, deliberately avoiding jury service harms people similar to yourself more than anyone else, because you're denying a important perspective to their defense and removing an understanding that could temporize the impact of naked laws and rules.

In effect, removing yourself from the pool does not show contempt for the courts, it instead allows those same courts to have power over your fellow citizens that you could be acting to restrain.
quote:
Ah Ron, if you believe that IQ is relevant to voting, how do you reconcile that with the correlation between people with college and graduate degrees and those who support the Democratic Party?
That's not really a mystery for anyone that went to college. Propaganda works, that's established fact, and higher education is filled with pro-left propaganda.

What's more interesting to me, is how many people on the educated left have a appreciation for the policies of left that ends at the borders of their own neighborhood. Ensuring the poor homes - great idea - building low income housing in nice neighborhoods and good school districts - massive protests. Free health care to all - great idea - having to wait longer for your own appointments with the doctor - unacceptable, lets move to concierge service. Racism - awful - their daughter dating a minority troubling.

It boils down to people wanting to be seen as believing in the "correct" causes, but not wanting to actually pay any price for it. They're liberal at arms length.

And it's not everyone, its just enough people. What really do elite north easterners and Californians have in common with regular union Joes and minorities anyway? It's almost like a group of really smart wealthy people decided their own self interest was in building a block of voters they could ensure the loyalty of with specific bribes so they would be able to pursue their own goals out of sight.

Posts: 2309 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seriati
Member
Member # 2266

 - posted      Profile for Seriati         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Greg Davidson:
Greg Davidson, I question your That's why only 43% of Republicans say they believe in evolution link

That's not what your link says. Are you attempting to be deliberately misleading? Your link is referring solely to evolution in the human species, not to evolution overall. I can see how you'd be mislead, since it appears to mis-cited all over the place, but you should still read a link and make sure your claim is accurate.

By your same link, only 67% of Democrats "believe in evolution". And even of that number, only 37% of Democrats attribute it to natural causes pushing the evolution of humans.

All that really shows, is that a significant amount of people believe that humanity may be a special case, not anything about intelligence.

Posts: 2309 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
He had just had an electoral map changing victory, giving his party supramajority control.
Leaving aside the superior ideological nonsense about being an "autocrat", this is still simply factually false. The Election, even under the best interpretation of the eventual outcome of the dead heat between Coleman and Franken, did not provide a supermajority. A supermajority wasn't even possible until the GOP drove Arlen Specter out, several months into Obama's first term and caused him to switch parties.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
The single biggest determinant in success today, appears to be an answer to one simple question. Are the parents married. Which particularly for children from poorer and minority backgrounds seems to be overwhelming correlated to ultimate success
CArt before the horse. Economic security and success lead to greater emotional and relationship stability. So you'd expect to see families that enjoy greater success (without complicating factors such as celebrity) also show more cohesion over time.

If you're motivation is it increase the stability of marriages, then you need to start by increasing baseline economic security across the board. Forcing people to jump into unhealthy relationships on the basis of the promise that it will improve their economic state- as people who argue from the nonsense assert that you tried to make have done,is socially and economically damaging for all involved.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
You do realize that there are virtually no similarities between voting and jury service, other than they relate to citizenship? Jury service is mandatory as part of the social contract to ensure that any one accused of a crime gets the benefit of a representative jury of their peers. And by the way, SP, deliberately avoiding jury service harms people similar to yourself more than anyone else, because you're denying a important perspective to their defense and removing an understanding that could temporize the impact of naked laws and rules.

In effect, removing yourself from the pool does not show contempt for the courts, it instead allows those same courts to have power over your fellow citizens that you could be acting to restrain.

You just made the case that not voting is just about identical to jury duty in most important ways.

Both are implicit obligations of the social contract, the ensure representation and provide important perspectives to the decision making process, and refraining from doing them is harming yourself as much as anyone. Not representing you views, similarly, allows those elements of society that do put their desires forward to have much more power over you and your fellow citizens.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I'm not sure that what you said actually contradicts my thesis that a mob is a short term reversion to pack behavior. Consider the nature of those who lead mobs... The difference being that it's the person whose destructive nature enable. the mob, rather than benefiting the community.
Some mobs have leaders, some don't. Some packs have leaders, some don't. Mob behavoir is a special case of pack behavior. PAck behavior on the other hand, is effectively slightly extended family behavior, probably just above family in scope and just below tribe (proceeding on up to clan, then nation) as names for communal identity behavoir based on the size and scope of the community in question.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
(Alternately equal to family, as "pack" effectively amounts to "self-selected family")
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seriati
Member
Member # 2266

 - posted      Profile for Seriati         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
A mob acts to find an outlet for shared pain and anger, and dissipates once that emotional state is spent.

A pack operates for mutual support, survival, and to the degree that resources allow it, enrichment of its members.

What on earth are you talking about? A pack, in reference to humans, is analogy or metaphor, not a proper description of humanity. All the other items you're reading into it are not inherently part of the concept.

Nor is your description of a mob any part of the fundamental characteristics of a mob.
quote:
In context of the above conversation- mobs will tend to drag those who try to resist destructive behaviors down with them, while packs will tend to seek to elevate members that resort to destructive behavior toward more communally beneficial behavior.
Which makes this nonsensical parsing.

Is all you are really trying to assert that long term bonding results in more uplifting practice than reactive flash bonding? Why pretend that you are using significant terms?
quote:
Leaving aside the superior ideological nonsense about being an "autocrat", this is still simply factually false. The Election, even under the best interpretation of the eventual outcome of the dead heat between Coleman and Franken, did not provide a supermajority. A supermajority wasn't even possible until the GOP drove Arlen Specter out, several months into Obama's first term and caused him to switch parties.
Lol, parse and pretend all you want. The 111th Congress was the largest Democratic majority in how many years? And it did in fact, not only end up with a supramajority, but at certain points one that could break a filibuster in the senate.
quote:
quote:
The single biggest determinant in success today, appears to be an answer to one simple question. Are the parents married. Which particularly for children from poorer and minority backgrounds seems to be overwhelming correlated to ultimate success
CArt before the horse.
Which is the kind of words that the left uses to pretend that we should ignore the results of their policies.
quote:
Economic security and success lead to greater emotional and relationship stability. So you'd expect to see families that enjoy greater success (without complicating factors such as celebrity) also show more cohesion over time.
Which makes it self reinforcing, but doesn't change that the best thing you can do for your children or future children, regardless of social class, is to get married and raise them in a stable family.
quote:
If you're motivation is it increase the stability of marriages, then you need to start by increasing baseline economic security across the board.
Not really. I could instead act to remove impediments to the creation of families, or I could overtly incentivize them. If I'm correct, the end result of that will be for improvement in financial condition.

What I'm sure of is that handing money to people and ignoring this factor has NOT worked. It's just lead to more people in need (which is a self reinforcing effect of the left's policies, which coincidentally enough ties directly into increasing their pool of likely voters).
quote:
Forcing people to jump into unhealthy relationships on the basis of the promise that it will improve their economic state- as people who argue from the nonsense assert that you tried to make have done,is socially and economically damaging for all involved.
Did anyone propose forcing unhealthy relationships? Sounds to me like an effort at a strawman argument that you're making.
quote:
You just made the case that not voting is just about identical to jury duty in most important ways.
No, I certainly didn't. There is nothing about my right to be governed that requires you to vote, whereas everything about my right to justice requires you to potentially serve on a jury. The closer analogue would be to military service (jury like) and working for the government (voting like).
quote:
Both are implicit obligations of the social contract, the ensure representation and provide important perspectives to the decision making process, and refraining from doing them is harming yourself as much as anyone.
They are not both implicit OBLIGATIONS of the social contract. My argument for why you should vote would however be very similar, though I'd argue that an ignorant person should not vote, while they should still serve on a jury.
quote:
Not representing you views, similarly, allows those elements of society that do put their desires forward to have much more power over you and your fellow citizens.
Which is true, and why its a good idea to vote, whereas its a tragedy to avoid jury service.

Edit to fix quotes error

[ April 03, 2015, 02:13 PM: Message edited by: Seriati ]

Posts: 2309 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
(Alternately equal to family, as "pack" effectively amounts to "self-selected family")

A mob is a groupiness selected by sympathy or antipathy, by whim of momentary emotion. rather than by ond of lasting loyalty. That's why i characterize it as a temporary pack. Naziism, Imperial Russia and some us southern law sets went out of their way to foster mob formation against designated groups. Mainly through selective gun control...
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
" A pack, in reference to humans, is analogy or metaphor, not a proper description of humanity. "

It's not a complete description of humanity, but it stands to reason that humans would have vestigial pack impulses. Stockholm syndrome, for example, the impulse to grovel to power. Hard to survive without it. Vestiges are more than mere metaphor.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think properly serving jury duty without evasion or excuse should be prerequisite to voting.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seriati
Member
Member # 2266

 - posted      Profile for Seriati         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
quote:
A pack, in reference to humans, is analogy or metaphor, not a proper description of humanity.
It's not a complete description of humanity, but it stands to reason that humans would have vestigial pack impulses. Stockholm syndrome, for example, the impulse to grovel to power. Hard to survive without it. Vestiges are more than mere metaphor.
I'm not sure if it stands to reason or not. Humans definitely have instincts, its the instincts of animals that cause them to form packs. But not all animal groupings are properly described as packs, and that's the point here. Dominance behaviors exist in animals that live in colonies, or herds, or that normally live solitary existence. Pack-like is a concept sure, but it's only an analogy and it gets strained incredibly quickly when used to explain behavior in humans.
quote:
I think properly serving jury duty without evasion or excuse should be prerequisite to voting.
Which is similar in concept to why we sometimes exclude felons from voting. Failing to live up to your obligations under the social contract, should divorce you from participating in the decision making. It gets messy real quick though to exclude citizens for anything but the most egregious reasons.
Posts: 2309 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
quote:
Interestingly, under the category "reasons of circumstance" they have included "too busy/conflicting schedule", "bad weather conditions", and "inconvenient polling places", which are all different ways of saying "we didn't have enough motivation to make the trip", which are therefore really all reasons of choice and not of inability
You say this based on what actual experience and study of the situation? Your pronouncement here sonds more like the owrds of someone who has no idea of the conditions on the ground in such situations trying to dictate to owthers what they really must be feeling.

All of them read to me as possible common expressions of "I can't afford be fired, to lose hours at work (and potentially be fired for it), or to be sick (and thus fired or lose hours)"

You are seeing a choice, because for _you_ it would be a choice. Asserting that others see it equally at a choice is speaking from privilege and not from understanding.

Since as I understand it it's illegal to disallow an employee to go vote, the worst case is the employee has to go unpaid while he's out. Your example of fear of being fired may actually happen except that it's not legal and so not relevant in terms of systemic discussion. If an employer wants to break the law then that's a whole other matter. And I didn't say anything about being sick, that's a comment not directed anything I said.

Which leaves preferring to get the pay rather than vote (optimizing $30 rather than voting once in four years), 'bad weather' (which I notice you conspicuously didn't address since it's obviously a personal choice not to vote due to rain), and having conflicting appointments. Since the day of the vote is know long in advance I'd wager that anyone who cared to set an afternoon aside for it could have planned for that in advance. Some very few people probably find themselves in the position of having critical unchangeable appointments at voting time (like an emergency room visit, or a meeting with one's lawyer about a lawsuit), but I suspect the total number of Americans who can't vote because of critical unchangeable appointments is small. More likely than not someone who decided it was a nice day and to go to the park with the kids would check off "busy schedule" as a reason for not voting, since that would be the most applicable choice. So all of those people are lumped in with the few who have weird scheduling issues and just can't make it.

Don't forget my claim is that the numbers from the study pretty much don't tell us anything. It's you are trying to make specific claims from unspecific data. My only suggestion is that the data seems to not even suggest what you're saying it does.

Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
seekingprometheus
Member
Member # 3043

 - posted      Profile for seekingprometheus   Email seekingprometheus   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pyrtolin:
quote:
quote:
Could you predict a timeframe, then: how long do you suppose it'll be before this dysphoria of democratic politics has settled down?
Only if I allow you to completely beg the question.
[LOL]

Agreed.

It would be indeed the vainest vanity to answer rhetorical questions rhetorically. But unfortunately, there is also a humbling humility hidden in the context of this thread's text. You see, it was proposed that you should put forth more precisely the difference you conclusively claim distinguishes the mindset of a mob from the prepossessions of a democracy--and thus was forged this irony: this “diffusive dysphoria” may be a meming molded in the replicative melding of my own mouth's morphemes, but the idea's original meaning was demarcated in our dialogue in your own denotation as a definitive delineation dividing a mob from a democracy.

So, as much as it bothers me to bugger a bigger bard than me, I’m bound by the bounce of our own bombast to thus beggar thee: who is it who begs the question after all, when you make your play at a theme, and then ply with my prying queries by praying that I ask not after the conclusion of your own inquiry?

Posts: 3654 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"'m not sure if it stands to reason or not. Humans definitely have instincts, its the instincts of animals that cause them to form packs. But not all animal groupings are properly described as packs, and that's the point here. Dominance behaviors exist in animals that live in colonies, or herds, or that normally live solitary existence. Pack-like is a concept sure, but it's only an analogy and it gets strained incredibly quickly when used to explain behavior in humans.'

if you arent sure, dont be so quick to dismiss a theorem as a mere metaphor. especially given the number of cult leaders that adopt the sex lives of silverback gorillas.

(Disney's Tarzan depicts an annihilation level tragedy, since in replacing Kerchak. Tarzan would be expercted to serve as the sole male mate for all the pack females.)

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
seekingprometheus
Member
Member # 3043

 - posted      Profile for seekingprometheus   Email seekingprometheus   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Seriati:
quote:
And by the way, SP, deliberately avoiding jury service harms people similar to yourself more than anyone else, because you're denying a important perspective to their defense and removing an understanding that could temporize the impact of naked laws and rules.
Nay, not at all--the clever devil in your detail is that my similarity is criminality. And although it may be true that I might be found guilty of an ignorance of the court’s mandates as a matter of technicality, this speaks to no reality of criminality which I can see, excepting perhaps for that of the arrogance of the court’s mandates.

On the other hand, if your simile intended simply to mean that I seem as much a victim as the pitiful souls crushed in the twisted warp of the machine, then I must dissent, respectfully, that such a likening bespeaks much similarity, if only because such a seeming makes it seem to me that there is much more difference in how we see me as seeming, respectively.

A more puckish simile might be more liked of me--one that notes the notes of my impiety. Heed: when called a criminal as common as a thief, I rebut the allegation by stealing the ground beneath my accuser’s feet; and when abused with an illusion which cloaks my head in a victim’s hood, I respond by blindfolding the abusive Illusor--wrapping his mien in the deepest folds of metaphor. [Wink]

But perhaps you've had enough of wordplay--so like a laser to the point: in the enlightened coherence of a fully colored-in reality, I cannot help the helpless victims of your Mob's court. The guilt of society's noble savage must indeed be measured and judged, if we are just to keep the balance of society--but society cannot render balance just by so simply judging that the simplest process for measuring off the unbalancing guilt of criminality, is to try each defendant's neck in an “Occam’s Guillotine.” What good should one delude oneself that one could do, if one would but do the duty due of the cog in so severe an overly simple machine? Here is a simpler truth for you: there is no use of such an unjust instrument of Justice that will ever prove anything more than how lowly our society has allowed the bar of Justice to fall.

Posts: 3654 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
seekingprometheus
Member
Member # 3043

 - posted      Profile for seekingprometheus   Email seekingprometheus   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Grr.

That's supposed to be "...humbling *homily* hidden..."

Posts: 3654 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
seekingprometheus
Member
Member # 3043

 - posted      Profile for seekingprometheus   Email seekingprometheus   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Come to think of it, "...wrapping his mien in the deepest *seams* of metaphor..." is also a full order of metaphorical magnitude better than "folds," given the punny way it would have gathered together all those "seems" from the alluded-to text in the paragraph above it.

Sigh.

I'd insinuate that I might could be persuaded to democracy if only Ornery would take a vote to allow for a longer temporal liberty to edit our text toward greater clarity, except I'm too cynical not to assume that the vulgar process is likely to cause this mob to come to find the right answer on such a question wrong.

[Big Grin]

[ April 03, 2015, 10:26 PM: Message edited by: seekingprometheus ]

Posts: 3654 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
seekingprometheus
Member
Member # 3043

 - posted      Profile for seekingprometheus   Email seekingprometheus   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What would we call a dumbstruck democracy? (Ignoring the fact that such seems the de facto theme of the deme…)

If the mob’s ear harks suddenly the horror of its hoarse howl, has the rabble-animal horse-sense enough to leave off the rabid babble of its monstrous growl? Or--in another way to word this flow of woe: can a stampeding herd of precipitous lemmings be startled to a standstill before stumbling over the looming precipice whence they go? If so, then whatever word works, hear: “Whoa!”

I’ve been saving the basic structure of the following piece out of hope that some especially atrocious audio-audacity I might commit would eventually irk some errant interlocutor to ask me who the f*ck I think I am, but since hope springs not truly eternal, then in the spirit of this fiery revolution, let's pretend that the following was always meant to be my signature upon this resistance piece.


I am Dragonsbreath,
one who withers wit.
Have ye not heard?
Can ye not see?
how burns my word,
and how my tongue hath wrought Irony?

Must I read aloud my True Name for thee?

My Light is the fiercest Fire,
my Dark the furthest Deep;
I thirst Entropy,
and I hunger Gravity.

I am


Elemental.


I aspire Titanically, of becoming beyond the Gods.

Behold!

See King Prometheus prophesy:
My blood streams the pillars of the sky--
red rivers raining off the beak of God’s blackest crow--
and batters the brows of the beasts below,
giving fruit to the thoughts their fertile brains grow.
And so the carnal creatures sow,
thinking, but not seeing by whose blood they know.
But ere this eternal liver’s liquid life doth overflow,
In my bloody bile will all bestiality be drowned;
then, and only then, will be Prometheus unbound.

And when the then of this Forethought is not yet then, but now,
I will crack Olympus off of Heaven’s crown,
hale whole the hallowest horrors out of Hell’s hollowest hall,
and command conflagratory Chaos --Pure Creative Fire--to consume us All.


…or perhaps I’m just a subfuscous joke,
and as there seems no fan this flame to stoke,
Puff the Magic Dragon vanishes in smoke.

[ April 04, 2015, 07:45 PM: Message edited by: seekingprometheus ]

Posts: 3654 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
To be fair, it's been pretty clear that you've been wanting people to call you out for masturbating all over the thread for a couple pages, now.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
seekingprometheus
Member
Member # 3043

 - posted      Profile for seekingprometheus   Email seekingprometheus   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
T-diddly-D.

I thank thee--the tenderly touching description thou dost draw! Do tell: drawing thus, didst think thou diagrammatically of thy design? Tell to it true, T: didst draft the deft-turning delineation of thy drawing thinking through the thorough detail as thou didst stroke it down with thy pen?

[Wink]

Posts: 3654 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
seekingprometheus
Member
Member # 3043

 - posted      Profile for seekingprometheus   Email seekingprometheus   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
PS, TD:

I keep a special stock of such scripted talk, as the stuff of my craft's trade.

Thus it is that I thank thee kindly for thy good custom, and pray that thou dost come back as soon as thou hast grown hard up again--there's naught that would please me more than to give thee another ream.

Posts: 3654 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yeah, see, "I am rubber; you are glue" doesn't actually improve when you Elizabethan it up. [Smile]
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
seekingprometheus
Member
Member # 3043

 - posted      Profile for seekingprometheus   Email seekingprometheus   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
[Big Grin]
Posts: 3654 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
seekingprometheus
Member
Member # 3043

 - posted      Profile for seekingprometheus   Email seekingprometheus   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
But--to this topic's tabulation, T: my equation states that democracy is but a mob's charade--and as far as I have seen, the demographers of your populist culture have not listed any consensus which contradicts my claim.

Are your tongues caught because I inverted the terms of my algorhythm, and only supplied the missing key--presuming the logic sufficiently elementary that I could set the equivocation straight with such a remedial remedy?

If the problem was how unbalanced you found my broken mathematics, here again is my schematic, this time with right-rendered thematics:

A society which relies on the LCD of the intelligence of its population to write its rules, cannot overcome the limit of the GCD of its individual constituents' ideals.

I will not be a party to such demonic debauchery!--and whilst I have whistled all this while to drown down the wind of this Witless Wonder's wearisome wail of whimsy, when your demotic despot decides
democracy may be mandatory--that day you will have this word with me, and whether you will hear it "whoa!" or "woe," is a wondering to which I give not a wit of worry.

[ April 05, 2015, 03:09 PM: Message edited by: seekingprometheus ]

Posts: 3654 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
Yeah, see, "I am rubber; you are glue" doesn't actually improve when you Elizabethan it up. [Smile]

It's not elizabethaning when SeekingAnonymous alliterates like V through a Guy Fawkes mask. [Smile]

[ April 05, 2015, 03:43 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
seekingprometheus
Member
Member # 3043

 - posted      Profile for seekingprometheus   Email seekingprometheus   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"he sharpens is to am
he sharpens say to sing
you’d almost cut your thumb
so right he sharpens wrong"

-cummings

Alliterate literature languages letters lithographically

and then smears the phonemes queerly clear into a coherence like to that of photons of cutting light...

[ April 05, 2015, 04:05 PM: Message edited by: seekingprometheus ]

Posts: 3654 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Greg Davidson
Member
Member # 3377

 - posted      Profile for Greg Davidson   Email Greg Davidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Seriati, you assert that there is no evidence that Republicans are trying to suppress the votes of legitimate voters.

I cite as evidence the scandal in the Bush era when nine members of the Justice Department resigned when it was exposed that they were firing a wide range of Republican-appointed US attorneys because they were unwilling to fabricate false cases about non-existent voter fraud

Posts: 4178 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
seekingprometheus
Member
Member # 3043

 - posted      Profile for seekingprometheus   Email seekingprometheus   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What!--will you stand about and bicker with each other, or will you treat with the doorkeeper of this gate you have come to crash?!

I speak for the unaccounted here, for the horde your herd has come to claim! I stand by the door at which you would knock, and I say you shall not pass--I will have it heard that this hoard beyond my walls is not your stake to take!

You brutish barbarians have bound your boots and brought your band of bandit broadswords to batter down our battlements, that you may have our booty without our consent--why does this beast of babbling rabble who pretends to speak free speech not hear the words which we would freely say?

Be banished, you bifurcated beast, or at the least, beware--you are not the only breed of being here whose will will not be tamed!

[ April 05, 2015, 04:57 PM: Message edited by: seekingprometheus ]

Posts: 3654 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
seekingprometheus
Member
Member # 3043

 - posted      Profile for seekingprometheus   Email seekingprometheus   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
By the by, if Mod Almighty (whomsoever She might be) happens to be hearing any of this, please let my solipsistic prayers be heard on the issue of amending our meaning minus such a stiff statute of limitation--because while I concede that the common class which can't comprehend me is too concerned with the correct scoring of their plebeian games to ever consent to such a high-minded ideal, the curs would curse me less if I could fix the syntagmatic stutter that sometimes renders me unreadable because I can't edit poetry I'm trying to time to the quick beat of ethereally discursive speech.

Which is only to say--since I'm clearly of the mind that Mod is dead--that OF COURSE I originally meant to say "taken wing" instead dropping my carrion to bend my beak at a bauble of of/off alliterative gleam for a single beat of a wingstroke (the time it took to remember that it wrecked the model of my murderous murmuration, to be precise), only to lose my meat!

(I am not truly Prometheus, you see, I am he who each day the Elemental Oracle seeks--if I seem to speak for my great king, it is only because my beak carries his carrion--for I am the crow, he who plucks of the Allknowing, known also to feyfolk as the Puck).

It's not like I'm really trying to offend folks with the asperity of an uneven ending to the bouncing of my bits, and I'm not trying to condescend by patronizing the meta-topic in a transcendentally parenthetical tone either--I'm really just trying to work metaphorically around the way it withers my wits when I note in my notes that whence is where wither should be...

[ April 05, 2015, 06:19 PM: Message edited by: seekingprometheus ]

Posts: 3654 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
seekingprometheus
Member
Member # 3043

 - posted      Profile for seekingprometheus   Email seekingprometheus   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
To wit--not an hour and a half an hour later: that should be wingstrike--and through the lens of my prescription, it always ought have been thus, even if it took me 90 minutes to see something originally missing in the rough hand.

[ April 05, 2015, 07:39 PM: Message edited by: seekingprometheus ]

Posts: 3654 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
By Ayn's analysis, an anal anarchist aint an antichrist.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 945

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
the curs would curse me less if I could fix the syntagmatic stutter that sometimes renders me unreadable because I can't edit poetry I'm trying to time to the quick beat of ethereally discursive speech
No, nobody's complaining about typos.
Posts: 6847 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I'm not trying to condescend by patronizing the meta-topic in a transcendentally parenthetical tone either
For what it's worth, I really don't believe this.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Since as I understand it it's illegal to disallow an employee to go vote, the worst case is the employee has to go unpaid while he's out.
Which, in and of itself is not a makeable choice form any people. But getting fired because you don't take a shift that you've been assigned or been called in for is not being fired because you were voting, even if the shift happens to coincide with when you could have voted. The employees wouldn't be foride for voting, they'd be fired for missing an assigned shift, which is perfectly legal, particularly if they have no idea how mean hours they'll need to get to their polling place, wait in line, then return to work, where the transit each way itself might represent a few hours of time.


quote:
Your example of fear of being fired may actually happen except that it's not legal and so not relevant in terms of systemic discussion.
Except that it's perfectly legal, especially when you're at the low end of the spectrum and it can be papered over by the fact that the employer can simply fire you without actually having to provide any reason at all, and thus don't have to even care that there was a vote that day, just that they can find someone who is willing to skip voting to take your place because they also desperately need to pay their bills.

quote:
And I didn't say anything about being sick, that's a comment not directed anything I said.

'bad weather' (which I notice you conspicuously didn't address

If you can't see how these statements are self contradictory, then perhaps consider that you're really speaking from a perspective that has no awareness of concerns that are the part of other people's everyday life.

Guess what's very likely to happen if you have to walk for an hour in the rain, wait for two hours in line in the rain, then walk back for another hour in the rain? Especially if you're already not able to afford decent nutrition, have a drafty house, and are losing sleep because you're at the mercy of shift work?

quote:
Which leaves preferring to get the pay rather than vote (optimizing $30 rather than voting once in four years),
And a loss of $30 can turn into a loss of hundreds if that $30 doesn't hit your account in time to make sure your utility checks clear. Again, if you've had the privilege of never having to live under that kind of financial constraint, then perhaps you should step back and actually learn what people in those economic conditions have to deal with instead of obtusely asserting choices that you have, but they don't.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
So, as much as it bothers me to bugger a bigger bard than me, I’m bound by the bounce of our own bombast to thus beggar thee: who is it who begs the question after all, when you make your play at a theme, and then ply with my prying queries by praying that I ask not after the conclusion of your own inquiry?
IT is your unsubstantiated and very classist assertion that there is do difference between collective, civilized human effort and mob mentality, not mine. You "math" doesn't hold, because it uses the assumption that people collectively act as mobs to prove that people collectively act as mobs.

What actual social and historical evidence to you proffer, outside of the ruling elites of any given time, who may just have a vested interest in believing that the average person is not capable of participating in self-governance, to suggest this is actually the case?

There are certainly breakdowns that can happen in the face of externalities- resource limitations or external threats, real or imagined, but by and large istory has generally shown that people tend to make better decisions when coming from more secure positions, including within the context of community support.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
philnotfil
Member
Member # 1881

 - posted      Profile for philnotfil     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
Again, if you've had the privilege of never having to live under that kind of financial constraint, then perhaps you should step back and actually learn what people in those economic conditions have to deal with instead of obtusely asserting choices that you have, but they don't.

Applicable to entirely too much political discourse these days.
Posts: 3719 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 8 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1