PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

I think it would lead to too much power going in one direction.

On 2004-11-04 10:53, krizrox wrote:
Maybe I would have voted for Ralph Nader but he didn't make the Illinois ballot for some odd reason.

That some odd reason would be the army of lawyers the Democrats hired to get Nader off the ballot in as many states as they could.

Interestingly enough, the Republicans actually spent a fair bit of dough keeping Nader on the ballot in several key states!

If anyone in the world could vote anywhere ? Denmark, Norway, New Zealand etc would never get a say about anything !

And why are people dismissing the election as not democratic ? Why wasn't it democratic and what system in real-world operation is democratic ?

And what's the media conspiracy you refer to Ken ? I don't see it. Or is more a case that you don;t like their style of reporting, or news judgments ? How would YOU decide which items to run and how to write them ?

Are all blogs and alternative internet news sites somehow part of this conspiracy ?

It's very easy to claim these sorts of things and people agree with a tired sort of resigned "yes, I know it's terrible", but rarely does anyone get into detail about the reality of it or exactly what they propose as alternative.

I don;t like a lot of the media, but I don't believe for a moment there is any sort of conspiracy in western media about anything. Media companies are businesses and tend to give their select target market the kind of information perceived as suited to that market.

That may be left or right wing, liberal or conservative, facist or communist, big business or single-person entrepreneur.

But just because some organisations taget their markets does not mean this is wrong or there's a conspiracy.

And it in no way stops any oridnary citizen using one of the great tools of democracy and freedom - the internet - to say exactly what they want AND have the chance to influence millions if they find wide enough appeal.

There has never been such a free, democratic and information-rich age.

But it's not utopia. It's not perfect. Of course not. But maybe that's what some people are expecting.

Just means we've got to keep working at it. That's the human condition.

well, I wasn't knocking on a media conspiracy, so much as I wanted to point out that it seemed to me, that the election quickly became a race of which campaign had the most catchy slogan, who ran the most effective commercials, etc.. Sure, using media to your advantage is a must. But the extent to which they used it made media strategy the key, and I think lots of issues were burried beneath it.

Which I guess is a strategy in itself.. Whatever it is tho.. these guys are really good with media.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: kensuguro on 2004-11-04 15:48 ]</font>

The hope is that people will get better at seeing through the meaningless sloganeering. In some ways I think the slicker that stuff gets the more suspicious people become.

I like to think that most people have some critical thinking ability and are not taken-in completely.

It certainly helps if you watch only limited TV & with a critical eye. That's the most propaganda-prone medium since information slides by without chance of stopping and going "hang-on, exactly what did that mean?". It is also bad for the way that voice-overs can be teamed up to sometimes inappropriate footage and draw conclusions that don't exist.

This, combined with the flawed idea that "seeing is believing".

Maybe mass-user-controlled webcams at big events could help there

................. ' Hi I'm Burca, I did vote for Bush, because he also hates homosexuals '

On 2004-11-04 07:00, Counterparts wrote:

paulrmartin wrote:
What the hell does TRUTH have to do with politics?

SFA, unfortunately

SFA?

'Sweet F... All' in other words.

Now can you tell me what "Mister Steely Danneh whatevah" means?

spirit wrote: I like to think that most people have some critical thinking ability

what makes you beleive that????

krizrox wrote:

Lighten up.

What?!

That's what I was trying to get you to do, man. My post was intended as humerous.

I voted for Kerry. Now could you please make sure I'm on the scrolls. Thank you.

??

I really don't understand what you're going on about.

edit: so 'tis true. Two nations separated by a common language...

My last word on the subject:

http://attenuation.net/files/iq.htm

Royston

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Counterparts on 2004-11-05 07:14 ]</font>

For some reason, I just got to think of "The State" by Platon.

spirit wrote: I like to think that most people have some critical thinking ability

I'm not convinced of that, but I am sure this is what the general consciousness wants. They want war, they want to give up their freedom, they do want to be controlled. They want to keep up the poordom in Africa, cos they're putting the money in their pockets. They want people to be fired in the homeland and to outsource, cos that gives them cheaper stuff and more money for other things.
Don't blame it all on the Administration - they have been authorised to do what they want, it's been reconfirmed in this election that (a narrow majority of) the people agree.

And that the media (for example) only put the corruption involved w the war once in a while in small letters, it's because the people don't care or don't want to know. You can follow the scandals in any decent newspaper, reading the 5-line articles on the side of the frontpage, but who cares. Big companies are dividing the resources in Iraq amongst them, and they are going the bring the world more oil. Why be against that?

cause the beleive in jesus hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha......

ah well, the oil will be exhausted in a few years, so the stocks will crash then and the American empire will go down in civil wars.
China, India, and Holland of course will be the new leaders of the world...

I guess, there is hope for Holland, if fosil fules run out.

Hint: water, global warming, water, Holland :/

other option: we'll be the new Atlantis then

bush re-elected.
it is so frustrating, i have no words for it.
how can he justify thousends of deaths, for the sake of democracy, when he at the same time degenerates so many aspects of the usworld democracy.

Hey Royston,
Great link, very interesting.
@Nprime, I'm afraid I agree with your reptile stuff in essence. I work as a nurse and there's nothing humane about nurses doctors or any other health care worker, except for a select few.

On 2004-11-05 07:10, Counterparts wrote:

krizrox wrote:

Lighten up.

What?!

That's what I was trying to get you to do, man. My post was intended as humerous.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Counterparts on 2004-11-05 07:14 ]</font>

So was mine. Lighten up part 2 already.

The protected scrolls reference was a line from The Coneheads movie. You'll have to go rent the video to understand. I'm not going to bother to explain it. IT WAS A JOKE - JUST LIKE THIS RIDICULOUS THREAD IS QUICKLY BECOMING.

btw: I fully support everyone's right to free speech but why do you guys feel a need to come HERE to dump this stuff? Aren't there like thousands of other websites devoted to political rantings and ravings? Why can't we keep PlanetZ politics & religion free? Is that too much to ask? Just one little slice of musical heaven where we can come and not have to be bombarded by each other's political viewpoints?