WikiLeaks

[Stephen Biko]

INothing is going to change short of an armed revolution.

Why does your nihilism stop there? Name one armed revolution that has fixed the problem of corruption in the history of the world. You can't -- we had one 200 years ago and look where we are today -- a total failure by your very own definition.

Your entire argument boils down to defining the situation as unfixable and then dismissing anyone who says otherwise. You aren't even a glass half-empty kinda guy, you are a glass is a bottomless pit kinda guy. Good thing people like Upton Sinclair, Martin Luther, Martin Luther King, Mohandas Ghandi, Nelson Mandela and tens of thousands more weren't nihilists.

[Marlin]

Why does your nihilism stop there? Name one armed revolution that has fixed the problem of corruption in the history of the world. You can't -- we had one 200 years ago and look where we are today -- a total failure by your very own definition.

Umm, a 200 year run is pretty good, and I never said we are a failure, especially by my own definition. But with huge sums of money comes complete corruption, especially when it isn't your money, hence the necessity for a small government and lower taxes. Let people take care of themselves, bring back responsibility and accountability. That has to start at the bottom. In counter to your anti-revolution question, name me one successful revolution that occurred without violence that was just as successful, one that has lasted 200 years.Hell, while your at it, name a ruling society that has lasted...greeks-nope,romans-nope,persians-nope, European monarchies-nope.

Your entire argument boils down to defining the situation as unfixable and then dismissing anyone who says otherwise.
I never dismissed anyone, I just continue to ask the question of what you are going to do when wiki releases something of actual importance. What are YOU going to do? You aren't even a glass half-empty kinda guy, you are a glass is a bottomless pit kinda guy. I am actually a silver lining kind of guy for most things. But I am realist when it comes to these big picture concepts. I have been around the world, I have seen some ****ty places, Bahrain, UAE, Malaysia and so on. I have seen what becomes of a place overrun with corruption. That is the path we are headed down. Good thing people like Upton Sinclair, Martin Luther, Martin Luther King, Mohandas Ghandi, Nelson Mandela and tens of thousands more weren't nihilists.

All the above folks were civil rights leaders, not whistle blowers. Those are two completely different things. If the country found out that everyone in South Dakota had been enslaved to work a government Nike factory, something might happen, but corporate corruption, government spying, we already know about all these things, and we don't care. We care more about catering to the gay minority than we do the big problems that affect the entire nation and our economic foundations because helping the underdog makes us feel better. Toppling a corporate empire doesn't. There is no risk in supporting some special interest group.
Hopefully someone can make a liar out of me and lead a non-violent revolution that will set things straight. Till then, I will continue building my survival kit to support my family in a worst case scenario and not wait for someone else to take care of me and mine.

[Stephen Biko]

All the above folks were civil rights leaders, not whistle blowers.

You don't know who Upton Sinclair was.

We care more about catering to the gay minority than we do the big problems that affect the entire nation and our economic foundations because helping the underdog makes us feel better.

That's a false dichotomy. It is entirely possible to care about both things without one interfering with the other.

I never dismissed anyone, I just continue to ask the question of what you are going to do when wiki releases something of actual importance.

Sure you did - when you say things like, "Until the day that money no longer talks, it will continue to be this way." and "Nothing is going to change short of an armed revolution." Those are outright dismissals of the idea that informed voting and the rule of law can change anything.

[Y33TREKker]

...but corporate corruption, government spying, we already know about all these things, and we don't care...

And if that were the case, we wouldn't be having this conversation right now.

[Marlin]

On the contrary. My answer was even specifically tailored for you; a person who has admittedly chosen to do nothing...at least in the way of supporting an entity that is trying to do something anyway.

Saying that you agree with wikileaks or not agreeing is not doing something. My lack of caring about wikileaks does not weaken or strengthen their position.

I provided an option anyone could choose to adopt, and just because you personally didn't feel that option qualified as an acceptable answer doesn't mean it didn't.
What option? I didn't see anything about any possible actions to be taken.

Viewed even another way though, maybe it's as you say, and the efforts of wikileaks will do no good. Since you think what they are attempting is impossible, why is it apparently not enough for you to just sit back and watch them fail? Instead, you are going out of your way and expending an awful lot of effort to convince others that's the inevitable conclusion.

Well why is that? That's my question.

Multiple reasons:
1. I enjoy intelligible banter. You have some valid points and do not resort to name calling. For the most part, your arguments include some meat to justify your position.
2. I do care what others think,one way or another. I am adult enough to admit that I could be wrong, and if someone else feels so strongly as to support the opposite side, it must mean something...
3. If there was more conversations like ours during the elections, we wouldn't have had a majority of the population voting without having any real idea what they were voting for. At work we called it MTV voting. There should be Q&A when you vote, or else your vote does not count, predisclosed questions, you gotta get 3/5 correct or something along those lines. Candidates can only spend a certain amount of money on their campaign to prevent buying the vote...you get the idea. Maybe we make it so they can only have a certain amount of money, so you know they are a Real American and representative of the majority of our nation. It should be popular vote only, to prevent the major cities from determining the entire state's vote. IIf you are a liberal in Utah, your vote doesn't count. If you are a conservative in California, might as well not even vote. It doesn't count.
4. I am not taking any classes right now, too cold to work on the VX, and I only go into work every few days for christmas stand down.
5. I am not really expending any effort, just a few minutes here and there on the puter, keeps me from buying stuff I don't need...lol.


That's a false dichotomy. It is entirely possible to care about both things without one interfering with the other.
Actually, based on the way propositions pass through the senate and house, they can't do both at the same time. DADT is just another 'look over here' tactic that really doesn't matter in the big picture. How many millions of dollars in man hours alone did the house/senate waste on something that affects a very TINY portion of our population. Especially since they still have to follow the rules of the UCMJ, they will not get benefits for their 'partners' or base housing privileges, commissary, medical and so on. We are actually insulting them even more. We respected women enough to spend billions of dollars to create their own berthing areas, millions to put a few on submarines, but we can't spare any money for the homosexuals. It is all a dog and pony show. I think we should make handicap accessible facilities for our armed forces. Its not fair, we are discriminating against those in wheelchairs and whatnot. I realize that is a cheeky response, but the spirit of my point remains intact.
When you try to care about everything, it loses its value. How about focusing on important things, such as social security, immigration, drug control. Per the census bureau, in 2006 there were an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants, a bulk of which were mexican/south american. Lets say only 1/4 have children each year. That means we have 20 million or so in our country.
Drugs are out of control. We kick students out of the Navy every week for the abuse of legal derivatives of illegal drugs. Social security is going to be broke in the future if we keep borrowing against it. This is a program that every tax paying citizen HAS TO PAY INTO. Same concept as Obamacare, force me to pay into something that I will most likely never receive a return from.

Sorry this is longer than I had initially intended,
the point being, we know our politicians are corrupt, we know corporate america is corrupt, we know shady business goes on at all the levels of government, we don't need wikileaks to prove it. We already know these things, but nothing happens. Hillary Clinton is still in her position, all of the clowns appointed by Obama and Bush alike are still in charge, not in jail. I just want someone to tell me what they expect to happen, and what they are going to DO about it.

[Stephen Biko]

That's a false dichotomy. It is entirely possible to care about both things without one interfering with the other.

Actually, based on the way propositions pass through the senate and house, they can't do both at the same time.

Which is irrelevant since 99+% of the work in congress does not happen on the floor.

Umm, a 200 year run is pretty good, and I never said we are a failure,

If you were to read old newspapers you'd see that people have been complaining about similar sorts of corruption for at least 100 years now - probably more. I haven't read any older than that so I can't say how long the corruption has been rampant. And if all your ranting about things like why they haven't put entire staffs of political appointees in jail isn't a claim of failure, then I don't know what is.

BTW your habit of sometimes quoting in red instead of using the system's quoting mechanism discourages people from reading and responding to what you write.

[Marlin]

Which is irrelevant since 99+% of the work in congress does not happen on the floor.

BTW your habit of sometimes quoting in red instead of using the system's quoting mechanism discourages people from reading and responding to what you write

Sorry, I don't quote in red, but rather respond in red, to allow a reader to read the original and my response in order. Makes it easier to follow in a long post, or so I thought...if you look back, the original is always in black, only my additions are red.

I will try to cut and paste sections to make it easier to read if anyone else doesn't like the format.

As for the 99% of the work happening out of session, that makes it even worse. Even more wasted man hours on stuff that doesn't matter, then it gets stuck in congress on the floor, making it all for not.

[circmand]

Sorry, I don't quote in red, but rather respond in red, to allow a reader to read the original and my response in order. Makes it easier to follow in a long post, or so I thought...if you look back, the original is always in black, only my additions are red.

I will try to cut and paste sections to make it easier to read if anyone else doesn't like the format.

As for the 99% of the work happening out of session, that makes it even worse. Even more wasted man hours on stuff that doesn't matter, then it gets stuck in congress on the floor, making it all for not.

Use the quote button or the multi quote button at the bottom right of the post you are replying to.

[Marlin]

If you were to read old newspapers you'd see that people have been complaining about similar sorts of corruption for at least 100 years now - probably more. I haven't read any older than that so I can't say how long the corruption has been rampant. And if all your ranting about things like why they haven't put entire staffs of political appointees in jail isn't a claim of failure, then I don't know what is.

Then what is the point of wikileaks? If we have had 100 years of the same info being put out to the common person and nothing changes, what are you expecting to come out of it now? As you pointed out, we have history of violent rebellion being unsuccessful in the longterm, the same can be said of reporting corruption?

All in all, realistically, do you deep down inside think that wikileaks released documents are going to be anything more than a brief news flash? It does give us (here on the VX forum, well at least the few of us still goin on about it) something to talk about it. Good entertainment value. I wonder how many of our little family here are lurking in this thread? I would be curious to know what others think. I know I come off as an ******* sometimes, but I do try to write coherently without name calling or anything as childish as that. I am fair and I try to be consistent. I harbor no ill will to anyone regardless of our discussions. TomDietrying has exact opposite political views as I do and we got along great at Moab!
Are we really the only ones still lookin at this thread?
Are my thoughts way over the edge and no one agrees with anything I say? (and vice versa).
For you lurkers, feel free to throw in your thoughts!!! (minus name calling and the like)

[Stephen Biko]

Then what is the point of wikileaks? If we have had 100 years of the same info being put out to the common person and nothing changes, what are you expecting to come out of it now? As you pointed out, we have history of violent rebellion being unsuccessful in the longterm, the same can be said of reporting corruption?

Except that its undeniable that the standard of living for the entire country has vastly improved during the time so the reformers have been successful. If corruption was as absolute as you make it out to be we'd all be subsistence farmers or working 12 hour days 7 days a week in sweatshops.

[Marlin]

And if that were the case, we wouldn't be having this conversation right now.

Oh, I should have said "we don't care enough to actually do anything about it". A representative doesn't get reelected, he still gets paid for the rest of his life and receives full benefits. That is like being suspended with pay....pick me, pick me! I want to be suspended with pay.