Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 1/9/09 11:33 AM, morefngdbs wrote:

At 1/9/09 12:27 AM, Dawnslayer wrote: By the way, I saw your thread on how everyone should "live like us" so they're not in a hole anymore, "like Africa." Quick sidenote: they're in a hole 'cause we put them there.

;;;;;;;
For your information.
Fact : Zimbawe was the bread basket of Africa. When white landowners who knew what they were doing & had tens of thousands of Black men & women working & doing well.
Fact: Zimbawe was handed back to Black African control. Who then started governing with a gun barrel

FACT: Zimbawe is the poorest country in the world with inflation running at 231,000,000 % .

FACT: WE never had anything to do with it. Robert Mugabe & his cronies did it to their own people. FACT !

Fair enough. But you missed one thing: that the white land owners were there owning other people's land, and other people, in the first place. When I say "we," I refer not to you and I, but to the Europeans of the era. Had they allowed the African people to build their own countries, Mugabe might not be an issue.

English Amendment Final Results: 41,752 NO ; 32,144 YES -- 173 of 173 Precincts Reporting

English only has been struck down by a 56% majority.

http://www.wsmv.com/news/18543949/detail .html

See, now this is why I don't like Democracy.

Were a Republic for a reason, vote for your representatives and let your state legislature deal with the problem, not mob rule.

At 1/22/09 11:44 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote: Were a Republic for a reason, vote for your representatives and let your state legislature deal with the problem, not mob rule.

Why is it when somepbody agrees with a bill, it's democracy in action, but when they disagree with it, it's mob rule or tyranny of the majority? Can someone explain that for me?

At 1/23/09 10:47 AM, Proteas wrote:
Why is it when somepbody agrees with a bill, it's democracy in action, but when they disagree with it, it's mob rule or tyranny of the majority? Can someone explain that for me?

its always mob rule, the only dif being whether or not your part of the mob.

Besides the people who crow over "democracy in action" never complain about tyranny of the majority.
Two distinct groups.

At 1/9/09 11:33 AM, morefngdbs wrote: Fact : Zimbawe

Fact: Its Zimbabwe not Zimbawe
Fact:Thats only one country in the whole of africa.

This whole thread reminds me of this.

America is often so hypocritical.

At 1/23/09 01:34 PM, glomph wrote:

At 1/9/09 11:33 AM, morefngdbs wrote: Fact : Zimbawe

Fact: Its Zimbabwe not Zimbawe

;;;;
Spelling nazi, I appologise profusly

Fact:Thats only one country in the whole of africa.

;;;;
D.R. Congo
Somalia
Uganda
Ethiopia
Ivory Coast
Republic of Congo
Chad
Sudan
... there's a couple more.

This whole thread reminds me of this.

America is often so hypocritical.

At 1/23/09 10:47 AM, Proteas wrote:

At 1/22/09 11:44 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

Why is it when somepbody agrees with a bill, it's democracy in action, but when they disagree with it, it's mob rule or tyranny of the majority? Can someone explain that for me?

I've always disliked direct populous based votes on any bill or ammendment, due to the nature of mob rule.

People seem to forgot that a pure and true democracy is no different then any despot, thier both tyranys.

For this, I would have actually wished it passed, but there was no need of it being voter based. The voter should have the ability to petition for a bill to come up to the legislature, but not to have direct vote on it.

If a bill is directly voted in but goes blatantly against some group's freedoms, generally this is tyranny of the majority. This is where the Republic aspect comes in, such as the Supreme Court's ability to shoot it down.

I hope sincerely that they get rid of Prop 8 due to this.

I couldn't imagine me being on the side of the people who say that it is just "democracy in action" if it limits someone's freedoms/rights. This goes for topics on both sides - I agree with what the ACLU did in defending Nazis marching through Skokie, just as I agree with the Supreme Court for getting rid of the "Separate But Equal" bit.

At 1/10/09 08:54 PM, Dawnslayer wrote:

At 1/9/09 11:33 AM, morefngdbs wrote: Fact : Zimbawe was the bread basket of Africa. When white landowners who knew what they were doing & had tens of thousands of Black men & women working & doing well.

Fair enough. But you missed one thing: that the white land owners were there owning other people's land, and other people, in the first place. When I say "we," I refer not to you and I, but to the Europeans of the era. Had they allowed the African people to build their own countries, Mugabe might not be an issue.

;;;;;;;;
What many people seem to forget is these 'white farmers' were for the most part 4th or even 5th generation to be born iin that country. How many generations does one have to be to be considered a resident of the country they are born in?
Not too mention the people living there didn't practice agriculture or livestock farming the way the white farmers were. One of the real problems in African tribal mentality is hanging on to the past. For example bushmen were shown the advantages years ago , many , many years ago how having flights on the back of an arrow helps it fly more true. but they say the way they do it is the 'way it has always been done' so they stay with that. Raising livestock in their traditional ways , means roaming around the country sdie. They don't farm & store grazing feed for their animals...they just go somewhere else.
I don't believe without outside ideas , their farming practices would have changed.