• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Citizens are suppose to serve the state vs self entitlement

JEDI

JEDI

Lifer
jurt duty
sacrifice for the good of the country
etc

vs

self entitlement

Right now, i'm all for self entitlement. serving the state will get you nothing but screwed over. (ie: CIA officer Valerie Bloom, joining the military and the forced recalls into more tours of military duty, etc)

Discuss!
 
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: RichardE
The state is what matters, everything else comes second.
Click to expand...

*taps sarcasm meter*
Click to expand...

The state protects you, gives you freedom (it may take it away, but you still get more freedoms than you would under another ruler perhaps), give people something to rally around. Without the state people would dissolve into chaos and progress would cease. The state, even in its mistakes main goal is to survive. For it to survive the people need to survive, without the people the state is useless. It is a love hate relationship, but one that is needed and is by far the most important I think.
 
People use the government to get their entitlements. Thus, they become like slaves to it, never biting the hand that feeds them. Allowing Patriot Acts to go unchecked. We?ve just started down this path, it?ll get a lot worse.
 
A state is simply a group of individuals governed by a body of law. Whether that law infringes on their rights is a separate question.
 
This topic makes no sense. It isn't a question of "Citizens are suppose to serve the state vs self entitlement" it's a question of whether "Citizens are suppose to serve the state vs the state is supposed to serve it's people". And incase some of you pro-state/government people have forgotten this, this government is supposed to be a "government of the people, by the people, and for the people".

The government is supposed to serve it's people, not the other way around. Too believe otherwise is to invite a self serving, or in worst case scenario, a totalitarian government into your lives. Never forget this.

Those of you that feel this overwhelming need to "serve" the government/state, should do so ONLY if it betters the lives of the people. You should NEVER do so for the sake of preserving what could potentially be a corrupt government.

P.S: Jaskalas is correct. Take care that you don't become slaves to the government through "entitlements" and handouts. It's a fine line we walk. The government is supposed to serve us, but if we invite it into our homes and allow ourselves to become dependant on it, then we have lost just as surely as if a totalitarian government had marched into our home.
 
Originally posted by: RichardE
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: RichardE
The state is what matters, everything else comes second.
Click to expand...

*taps sarcasm meter*
Click to expand...

The state protects you, gives you freedom (it may take it away, but you still get more freedoms than you would under another ruler perhaps), give people something to rally around. Without the state people would dissolve into chaos and progress would cease. The state, even in its mistakes main goal is to survive. For it to survive the people need to survive, without the people the state is useless. It is a love hate relationship, but one that is needed and is by far the most important I think.
Click to expand...

At times chaos is preferable to the horrors a state unencumbered with citizens who are able or willing to resist is capable of perpetrating (even against its own people).

 
Originally posted by: RichardE
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: RichardE
The state is what matters, everything else comes second.
Click to expand...

*taps sarcasm meter*
Click to expand...

The state protects you, gives you freedom (it may take it away, but you still get more freedoms than you would under another ruler perhaps), give people something to rally around. Without the state people would dissolve into chaos and progress would cease. The state, even in its mistakes main goal is to survive. For it to survive the people need to survive, without the people the state is useless. It is a love hate relationship, but one that is needed and is by far the most important I think.
Click to expand...

States have killed more people than chaos over history. Even the absolute chaos of Africa pales in comparison to what state sanctioned genocide has produced.

Stalins Soviet Union
Hitlers Nazi Germany
Mao's Communist China
Pol pot
Kamir Ruge(sp).
N. Korea
N. Vietnam
Japanese Empire

All combined have probably accounted for 150+ million dead in the last 80 years directly and another 30-50 million through the wars they have created.

Through history you will note that wars are fought by states, and states will enslave and kill another states peoples after they are conquered.

States dont give you freedom, they oppress your freedoms. They may provide safety but their sole purpose is to control the population below them. Even in the most free of nations the govt still oppresses to some degree.

Total freedom requires no laws, no authority, and could lead to total chaos.
 
Originally posted by: fitzov
Only listing a bunch of tyrranical regimes proves nothing--you could just as well list some good ones.
Click to expand...

Sure it does, it proves the idea that the state gives you freedom is a bunch o crap.

Even the beacon of freedom has a history of using the state to force people off their land and oppress.

 
Originally posted by: Genx87
States have killed more people than chaos over history. Even the absolute chaos of Africa pales in comparison to what state sanctioned genocide has produced.

Stalins Soviet Union
Hitlers Nazi Germany
Mao's Communist China
Pol pot
Kamir Ruge(sp).
N. Korea
N. Vietnam
Japanese Empire

All combined have probably accounted for 150+ million dead in the last 80 years directly and another 30-50 million through the wars they have created.

Through history you will note that wars are fought by states, and states will enslave and kill another states peoples after they are conquered.

States dont give you freedom, they oppress your freedoms. They may provide safety but their sole purpose is to control the population below them. Even in the most free of nations the govt still oppresses to some degree.

Total freedom requires no laws, no authority, and could lead to total chaos.
Click to expand...
Now that is piss poor, small minded thinking. :thumbsdown: :frown: :thumbsdown:

The moment you need, or just want, to interact with anyone else, your "total" freedom is limited by mutual respect for the rights and freedoms of others.

In its positive forms, society provides more than it takes from its members if for no other reason than that the necessary tasks of providing for the common good are more efficiently handled through division of those duties. Without a common societal governing body, it would be impossible to provide such basic functions as sanitation, roads, communications and a host of other goods and services required for survival. Someone has to pay for those goods and services and compensate those who provide them for their labor.

Governments can be positive and beneficial to the society. They can also be negative and destructive. So can cars, computers and a host of other things, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't exist.

There is no such thing as "total" freedom in a society of people. If that's what you want, grab all the survival gear you'll need for the rest of your life, and go hide out on some remote cave, mountaintop or desert.
 
Where in my reponse did I say states shouldnt exist?
I think that is your first problem with replying to my post. Your red colored glasses kept you from understanding the main point of my post.

 
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: RichardE
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: RichardE
The state is what matters, everything else comes second.
Click to expand...

*taps sarcasm meter*
Click to expand...

The state protects you, gives you freedom (it may take it away, but you still get more freedoms than you would under another ruler perhaps), give people something to rally around. Without the state people would dissolve into chaos and progress would cease. The state, even in its mistakes main goal is to survive. For it to survive the people need to survive, without the people the state is useless. It is a love hate relationship, but one that is needed and is by far the most important I think.
Click to expand...

States have killed more people than chaos over history. Even the absolute chaos of Africa pales in comparison to what state sanctioned genocide has produced.

Stalins Soviet Union
Hitlers Nazi Germany
Mao's Communist China
Pol pot
Kamir Ruge(sp).
N. Korea
N. Vietnam
Japanese Empire

All combined have probably accounted for 150+ million dead in the last 80 years directly and another 30-50 million through the wars they have created.

Through history you will note that wars are fought by states, and states will enslave and kill another states peoples after they are conquered.

States dont give you freedom, they oppress your freedoms. They may provide safety but their sole purpose is to control the population below them. Even in the most free of nations the govt still oppresses to some degree.

Total freedom requires no laws, no authority, and could lead to total chaos.
Click to expand...


States have also protected there citizens against being conquered. As I said it is a love/hate relationship, but one that is needed if advancement of this species is to keep advancing. States do give you freedoms, or at least semi-protection of basic freedoms. Without the law of rape being illegal, where is the moral deterent for me not to rape someone and therefore violate there right to security? Humans need to be lead, they need someone over them that they can feel validated by, that they can feel as if they belong in the overall scheme of things. (sort of like religion you could say). The State serves this prupose, people never hate the state, they hate the leaders perhaps, or the ones in control, but the state unifies everyone within its borders. Service to the cause of the state is the most important job an individual can take. Even people on this board, the ones who say they will move to another country do not hate the United States, they hate the leaders (Bush) of the state. If the country was actually threatened (a real threat) you would see people disregard there dislike/hate of Bush and rally around the state to protect it. The state is needed for a modern civilization.
 
Originally posted by: Cerb
The state does not own the airwaves.
Click to expand...
Right. The FCC, which basically does just that, is a figment of my imagination.[/quote]
No, they are a lawfully constituted agency of a government of, by and for the people, responsible for licensing the use of the people's airwaves.

Whether or not they're doing a good job is another question.
 
Originally posted by: RichardE
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: RichardE
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: RichardE
The state is what matters, everything else comes second.
Click to expand...

*taps sarcasm meter*
Click to expand...

The state protects you, gives you freedom (it may take it away, but you still get more freedoms than you would under another ruler perhaps), give people something to rally around. Without the state people would dissolve into chaos and progress would cease. The state, even in its mistakes main goal is to survive. For it to survive the people need to survive, without the people the state is useless. It is a love hate relationship, but one that is needed and is by far the most important I think.
Click to expand...

States have killed more people than chaos over history. Even the absolute chaos of Africa pales in comparison to what state sanctioned genocide has produced.

Stalins Soviet Union
Hitlers Nazi Germany
Mao's Communist China
Pol pot
Kamir Ruge(sp).
N. Korea
N. Vietnam
Japanese Empire

All combined have probably accounted for 150+ million dead in the last 80 years directly and another 30-50 million through the wars they have created.

Through history you will note that wars are fought by states, and states will enslave and kill another states peoples after they are conquered.

States dont give you freedom, they oppress your freedoms. They may provide safety but their sole purpose is to control the population below them. Even in the most free of nations the govt still oppresses to some degree.

Total freedom requires no laws, no authority, and could lead to total chaos.
Click to expand...


States have also protected there citizens against being conquered. As I said it is a love/hate relationship, but one that is needed if advancement of this species is to keep advancing. States do give you freedoms, or at least semi-protection of basic freedoms. Without the law of rape being illegal, where is the moral deterent for me not to rape someone and therefore violate there right to security? Humans need to be lead, they need someone over them that they can feel validated by, that they can feel as if they belong in the overall scheme of things. (sort of like religion you could say). The State serves this prupose, people never hate the state, they hate the leaders perhaps, or the ones in control, but the state unifies everyone within its borders. Service to the cause of the state is the most important job an individual can take. Even people on this board, the ones who say they will move to another country do not hate the United States, they hate the leaders (Bush) of the state. If the country was actually threatened (a real threat) you would see people disregard there dislike/hate of Bush and rally around the state to protect it. The state is needed for a modern civilization.
Click to expand...

States provide safety as I noted above.
 
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: RichardE
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: RichardE
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: RichardE
The state is what matters, everything else comes second.
Click to expand...

*taps sarcasm meter*
Click to expand...

The state protects you, gives you freedom (it may take it away, but you still get more freedoms than you would under another ruler perhaps), give people something to rally around. Without the state people would dissolve into chaos and progress would cease. The state, even in its mistakes main goal is to survive. For it to survive the people need to survive, without the people the state is useless. It is a love hate relationship, but one that is needed and is by far the most important I think.
Click to expand...

States have killed more people than chaos over history. Even the absolute chaos of Africa pales in comparison to what state sanctioned genocide has produced.

Stalins Soviet Union
Hitlers Nazi Germany
Mao's Communist China
Pol pot
Kamir Ruge(sp).
N. Korea
N. Vietnam
Japanese Empire

All combined have probably accounted for 150+ million dead in the last 80 years directly and another 30-50 million through the wars they have created.

Through history you will note that wars are fought by states, and states will enslave and kill another states peoples after they are conquered.

States dont give you freedom, they oppress your freedoms. They may provide safety but their sole purpose is to control the population below them. Even in the most free of nations the govt still oppresses to some degree.

Total freedom requires no laws, no authority, and could lead to total chaos.
Click to expand...


States have also protected there citizens against being conquered. As I said it is a love/hate relationship, but one that is needed if advancement of this species is to keep advancing. States do give you freedoms, or at least semi-protection of basic freedoms. Without the law of rape being illegal, where is the moral deterent for me not to rape someone and therefore violate there right to security? Humans need to be lead, they need someone over them that they can feel validated by, that they can feel as if they belong in the overall scheme of things. (sort of like religion you could say). The State serves this prupose, people never hate the state, they hate the leaders perhaps, or the ones in control, but the state unifies everyone within its borders. Service to the cause of the state is the most important job an individual can take. Even people on this board, the ones who say they will move to another country do not hate the United States, they hate the leaders (Bush) of the state. If the country was actually threatened (a real threat) you would see people disregard there dislike/hate of Bush and rally around the state to protect it. The state is needed for a modern civilization.
Click to expand...

States provide safety as I noted above.
Click to expand...

I know, I just wanted to expand on my point now that I am more awake 🙂

States have horrors, but they are needed and should be put above all else.
 
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: Cerb
The state does not own the airwaves.
Click to expand...
Right. The FCC, which basically does just that, is a figment of my imagination.
Click to expand...
No, they are a lawfully constituted agency of a government of, by and for the people, responsible for licensing the use of the people's airwaves.
Whether or not they're doing a good job is another question.
Click to expand...
Whether they are doing a good job is irrelavent. They control what can be broadcast--they own the airwaves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top