Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 1 decade ago

Is it an outlawed premise in the US --- that so called state of freedom the beacon of the world?

All arguments can be heard ? Given equal time ? Shown the light of day .... digging for the truth are they ?

What about unpatriotic views -- anti war people the hated the weak the poor -- the ugly the fat -- getting equal time ? Sharing their view along with every other in the land of freedom --- acting only to ban the criminal in intent? Doing so unwillingly when it did occur society of old ?

If you go to school and get a degree you might work for them ----- and they will tell you what is important and you will say yes sir or out the door you go --- and you know that means your lazy and just plain bad .... right?

Does art imitate life ?

Or are you imitating the art --- the TV -- are they telling you --- or informing you and letting you decide amongst all the views available

Or are you living in a culture that attacks the other --- and only some others are worth attacking -- like mainstream concerns as dictated to you by billionaire Lords who own the place with 7 of there other buddies ?

------------ How do you think the rule of ancient Lords over the estates of England was different in its manner or its goals ?



The problem is that you compare a good master to a bad one --- either way it is still a master in relationship with their equals good or bad ---- Yours and theirs does nothing to imply the existence of the state as anything less than the people who serve it The term subject seems more fitting for both of us all the time ---- does it not to you ?

We are subject to their decisions --- and yet are told we have a voice in it --- but yet it is the State who still tells us most of the time when it comes to war or or or

The distinction has always existed --- ALWAYS -- it is just that we used to know it -- Now us and the State are the same entity in our minds -- How convenient you might say

4 Answers

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Freedom of speech was not designed for the benefit of the people, but as a tool to control them.

    That doesn't mean I'm totally against it, only that I recognize it's origins.

    That you or I know the truth is irrelevant, for ours are but two voices among many.

    America is not "free" it is a nation of less consequence, while a country like North Korea is a nation of many consequences.

    I can say anything I want to about the president and short of threatening his life I will suffer no consequences for having done so. I can go to North Korea and call Kim Jong Il whatever I want as well, but I will probably find myself imprisoned, tortured or even killed. That is the consequence of doing so.

    So what is it with freedom of speech?

    Freedom of speech has always been there-anytime anyone said anything-that is freedom of speech-they were free to speak. It was a matter of consequence though that is the issue and always has been.

    The founding fathers of the United States understood that the masses needed to be controlled and also understood that allowing them to speak their minds was an outlet for them to vent their frustrations.

    I.e. all talk and no action. Talk is cheap. These sayings are very true and apply here.

    It was those that felt their views weren't being listed to that took up arms, as it always has been.

    However with the convergence of the major media outlets people want to still be heard and heeded so they claim a major network, unwittingly doing the bidding of those that still don't want them to think.

    Who backs you? FOX, CNN, MSNBC, ABC and so forth, but is this YOU or is it them?

    Therein lies the problem.


    There is a new type of power, Trout.

    It is that of public opinion, and it has shown itself to be more powerful in shaping the minds of the people all over this country and others like it. Granted, there are those who make a living implanting certain thoughts and ideas into us, while others cheer us on when we get the "right" answers.

    They hand the slaves the whips and tell us to whip ourselves if ever we get out of line.

    We must understand that the people are their own task masters, and the masters of old sit on the porch drinking lemonade while they watch the slaves whip themselves.

    We need to fully understand that we posses the whip, not them. Once we cease the desire to belong to some country or creed we can break free of the shackles of our own making, those shackles which we all willingly don that keep us free from isolation and the true freedom which in reality terrifies us to our very cores.

    It is a perpetual hypocrisy on our part that causes us to say what we don't mean, cheer what we don't support and vote in what we don't really believe in. Those in power understand that by fooling the people into thinking they are free they have given us our own whips, and eager to belong with the other slaves, we whip ourselves if ever we get out of line.

    We are our own oppressors, Trout.

  • 1 decade ago

    I've always been able to fight my way through for my voice to be heard when I needed it to be heard. If we're losing this, blame the media, because they are the biggest screeners of information. I'm not sure your view of old America isn't fantasy, Trout. The freedom here was being able to chart your own destiny without risking imprisonment or death by the government. I do not think that the notion of "equal time" is really in our US C as any kind of right.

    Is it getting harder to be poor and feel free? I don't know, because I've only lived here now. Maybe, but if so, might it be that our values have changed? That "In God We Trust" is an empty saying? Lots to think about. I doubt money or land has ever equaled the total essence of freedom to any who came here looking for a beacon of freedom.

    Added: Travis, I take issue with this proposition of yours: "The founding fathers of the United States understood that the masses needed to be controlled and also understood that allowing them to speak their minds was an outlet for them to vent their frustrations."

    It hardly requires an evil genius to realize that when people speak freely they are less inclined to violence. That hardly equivocates with government control. And you speak as if the matter of consequence is minor. Yet you bring up the consequence of NK as compared to here. And try to decry that we are free. Which is a self-defeating argument.

    Trout, "good master, bad master" you speak without clarity here. Government is not per se in place as a master. In fact, it has long been my contention that our form of government, our rule of law (US Constitution) is the most anti-government form of government we're likely ever to see. Human societies will have laws and governments, it's the nature of the beast, if you will.

    This is not a pure democracy. It is a Constitutional Republic. Our voice is represented in our vote. If the people are not getting good representation, then why do they continue to reelect the same people? I would say therein lies the problem.

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    i think of that something of the worldwide is bored to death in the present conceited U.S. administration attempting to tell actual everyone else what to do - whilst they are violating the rights of their very own electorate. We was a beacon of desire, yet i'm ashamed that there wasn't greater of an outcry whilst we discovered appropriate to the indignity and torture of POW's that became occurring in Abu Gharib and Gitmo. We would not choose our very own electorate taken care of that way, so it stands to reason that we'd desire to continuously no longer torture others and that something reported is inadmissable in courtroom besides. there became no substantial outcry whilst we discovered that the present corrupt administration is breaking the regulation and spying on it is very own citizen without warrant. The FISA courtroom became designed to shelter the rights of human beings on a similar time they are fairly lenient in granting warrants for wiretaps. The criminals in skill are maximum in all probability spying on their enemies, a similar way that Richard Nixon did, and he tried to justify it by potential of asserting it wasn't unlawful if the president does it. talk approximately history repeating itself! we are a democracy and George Bush isn't a king, inspite of the certainty that he seems to have self belief in any different case. And there are people who do no longer look to understand The President of the united states might desire to be the Commander in chief of the Armed centers, yet he's no longer the Commander in chief of human beings. He became elected to serve us, and Bush has performed no longer something yet serve the wealthy firms and his cronies whilst the main susceptible between us go through! How does that postpone as a beacon of desire whilst the wealthy get richer and the undesirable are disregarded, like the individuals in New Orleans who're nonetheless suffering to rebuild enormously much a year after Hurrican Katrina? There has by no potential been a time interior the existence of our united states of america that there became no longer some grave danger, and whether there's a grave danger dealing with us - no person is above the regulation. How can different worldwide places look to the U.S. as a beacon whilst our optimum real brags approximately breaking the regulation, and condones torture? it is no longer what our founders had envisioned and that i'm finding forward to having the rule of thumb of regulation restored whilst the present clueless president is impeached for violating our civil rights under the guise of looking terrorists. there's no excuse!

  • 1 decade ago

    What on earth is this about?

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.