Election

[William]

William;

First off, nice to see you back posting here; always nice to see you post.

That being said; America does have it's flaws but that is the system we use in this country and for the most part it's worked rather well. And yes, the country was founded on violence taking place but it was necessary in order to break ties with England.

I agree that we should be treating the causes and not the symptoms as well.

Thanks! I don't post much now 'cos I don't have lots of free time. I'm 19 now and in my first year at uni - lectures, etc. take up most of my time on the internetz.

But I felt that needed to be said. And I know you may not agree, but the violence (in fact- high treason) which led to your independence was not absolutely necessary. Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and any number of colonies were given their independence without war - it just evolved naturally, and we have all retained important ties.

[PoliTalker]

Hello Gamewell45,

I think we can all agree what occurred on January 6th was most unfortunate, carried out by fringe elements of both sides and hopefully never again occurs in our country. Most Americans would rather democracy not be placed in jeopardy by violent means.

I have seen no evidence nor reports that anyone from the left was involved in the capitol riot / haphazardly hopelessly botched insurrection attempt of January 6th. So no, I do not agree both sides were involved.

[PoliTalker]

Hello Gamewell45,

I think one thing we can all agree on is that violence breeds violence.

Personally I feel that violence is unnecessary and all Americans should use the mechanism in place (the legal system) to resolve differences that may arise between the parties. And if the decision is issued that you don't agree with, then work to change the laws in your favor or to something that is more acceptable. I've always believed that their is always a way to solve issues without the use of violence. And this goes for both sides; peaceful protests are fine but burning down buildings or cars, committing acts of violence are totally wrong.

Just my two cents.

Now THAT, I absolutely agree with!

[PoliTalker]

Hello William,

It may be considered presumptuous of me - as a non-American - to comment upon this matter, but I see a continuing problem with what Americans consider 'rights', and 'freedoms'. Too many people consider what they regard as their rights as inherent or God-given, and freedom as the licence to do or say what ever they want to in the moment - without due regard to how those words or actions may affect their fellow human beings.

Any 'rights' we may enjoy - in any society - are afforded by that society, and neither by our human condition nor by some insubstantial Supreme Being. That something is not in breach of some law or statute does not necessarily mean that it is not injurious to some individual, or to society as a whole.

The gathering of congregations singing in relatively close proximity in churches is both unwise and dangerous under present circumstances, but not always illegal.

The right to 'free speech' is another example of a similar principle. We do not morally enjoy the right to destroy someone's reputation because of some socio-political-religious belief we hold - much less importune society to wreak violence upon some demographic with which we disagree.

Americans in general do not like the concept of 'hate speech' being repressed, but this iniquitous aspect of society, if allowed free reign, results in the situation extant in Germany in the 1930s.

And, I hate to say it - but Americans have always believed in solving their problems by means of violence - your nation came into being by means of that method. You are a developed military/industrial complex, ostensibly governed by the rule of law, but unfortunately, more often governed by corporate greed and the rule of .38 or .45. Americans, on the personal level, are also my favourite people in the world, and I am saddened by the fact that you consider the 2nd Amendment to your constitution as akin to Holy Writ. The result of which is roughly 40 thousand Americans killing each other and their children (and themselves) each and every year.

The violent demonstrations pale into insignificance by way of comparison. Treat the causes, not the symptoms.

Well said, and with such eloquence. It is very refreshing to hear the English language being spoken so deftly.

Yes, we Americans are rather adamant about religion and guns. As if the two were interchangeable, it would seem. England is much older than the USA, and we yanks have so much to learn. I wish more Americans could allow their thoughts to expand beyond such limited circles, but these limitations are forged during childhood and become stubbornly difficult to transcend in adulthood.

We do have a pronounced idealistic streak. We would like to allow all speech and then think that goodness shall prevail despite the ugliness. It generally has, since our conception, but the recent new forms of electronic communication have been a particular challenge in that the crudest voices are the ones we are drawn to, and are thus afforded the most attention.

Thanks! I don't post much now 'cos I don't have lots of free time. I'm 19 now and in my first year at uni - lectures, etc. take up most of my time on the internetz.

But I felt that needed to be said. And I know you may not agree, but the violence (in fact- high treason) which led to your independence was not absolutely necessary. Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and any number of colonies were given their independence without war - it just evolved naturally, and we have all retained important ties.

I would say that after the American revolution, England learned a lesson; and Canada, Australia and New Zealand benefited from it. England was nowhere near granting Americans independence. Americans had to take it. American violence was bred out of English violence against the colonists. If America is a violent nation, we have England to thank for it. England dominated the world for hundreds of years through militaristic might. Not that it was anything unique with England. It was the way of the world, and still is. Although there may be one new exception to that model. It appears that China is attempting to dominate the world through psychological and economic means.

[William]

Hello William,



Well said, and with such eloquence. It is very refreshing to hear the English language being spoken so deftly.

Yes, we Americans are rather adamant about religion and guns. As if the two were interchangeable, it would seem. England is much older than the USA, and we yanks have so much to learn. I wish more Americans could allow their thoughts to expand beyond such limited circles, but these limitations are forged during childhood and become stubbornly difficult to transcend in adulthood.

We do have a pronounced idealistic streak. We would like to allow all speech and then think that goodness shall prevail despite the ugliness. It generally has, since our conception, but the recent new forms of electronic communication have been a particular challenge in that the crudest voices are the ones we are drawn to, and are thus afforded the most attention.



I would say that after the American revolution, England learned a lesson; and Canada, Australia and New Zealand benefited from it. England was nowhere near granting Americans independence. Americans had to take it. American violence was bred out of English violence against the colonists. If America is a violent nation, we have England to thank for it. England dominated the world for hundreds of years through militaristic might. Not that it was anything unique with England. It was the way of the world, and still is. Although there may be one new exception to that model. It appears that China is attempting to dominate the world through psychological and economic means.

Thanks for that interesting response. LOL, you are working against my resolution not to spend too much time on the internet!

I am fully aware of the evils of colonisation, and being the way of the world at that time did not make it virtuous. I do not approve of the gunship diplomacy that Britain practised for a couple of hundred years, and I approve even less of our tramping around in other people's countries - bossing them around and taking their stuff.

IMO, Lord North was being inflexible with the English colonists in America, and while their demands for a representative of every colony in the British Parliament were simply impractical (imagine if every British colony had a physical representative in Westminster - from Australia to Africa to India to The Falklands - we would have to build several houses of Parliament,) I think a minister for each collective land mass would have solved the situation.

It is also my opinion that nobody - apart from the slave owning social elites (Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, etc.) benefitted from the high treason which gained you your independence. The ensuing violence was hardly a benefit to the colonies concerned, and many American colonists were driven from their homes to what is now Canada.

America is a violent nation, and you have your concepts rights and freedoms (not to mention your 2nd Amendment) to thank for that. We all find our own way to Hell, and we all justify that as best we can.

I am not under any illusions that Britain is an ideal nation - the British are as self-serving as anyone else - but I would rather live in a society wherein citizens don't kill each other at the rate of 40,000 every year by means of guns alone - where we are not afraid of the police (particularly if we happen to be brown) - where there is free healthcare irrespective of financial standing - and there are other social safety nets such as government funded age pensions, etc. In short - a civilisation.

But your history books are written by Americans, and mine by the British - and it seems that ne'er the twain shall meet.