Tweet
This is a stupid question. That is an advantage of a one-party state, but it's not an advocation of one.
Kucinich, very good points there.
-
I disagree, it's one of the few disadvantages of the one-party state. For example, take China under Mao and the Great Leap Forward. Do you think it would've happened if there would've been any lengthy arguments in the three branches of goverment (all directly under control of Mao then)?
Kucinich, very good points there.Last edited by RGBVideo; January 6, 2005, 18:39. -
Neither of those things are nearly as important as good policy. The question should determine if you think one party systems make better or worse policy.Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
That's sort of the point.
Do you value efficiency over public discourse?
It seems obvious to me.I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
We can go over this, question by question, and you'll see why this is.There is no way BK is more libertarian then me. No way in hell.Scouse Git (2) La Fayette Adam Smith Solomwi and Loinburger will not be forgotten.
"Remember the night we broke the windows in this old house? This is what I wished for..."
2015 APOLYTON FANTASY FOOTBALL CHAMPION!Comment
-
That's an interesting question, Kid.
Do you agree with this statement:
"One party systems produce superior policies."Scouse Git (2) La Fayette Adam Smith Solomwi and Loinburger will not be forgotten.
"Remember the night we broke the windows in this old house? This is what I wished for..."
2015 APOLYTON FANTASY FOOTBALL CHAMPION!Comment
-
How can you continue to support a group of people who discriminate against americans and want a lot of them dead?
Because I want them dead too?
Only feebs vote.Comment
-
People wouldn't see the relevence of "Do you support laws against sex out of wedlock?"Originally posted by Agathon
Again, the test is meant to be general. If it suited you guys, most people wouldn't see the questions as relevant and wouldn't take the test.Comment
-
People wouldn't see the relevence of "Do you support laws against sex out of wedlock?"
Of course they would, just as they would see the relevance of the other questions. Even if they didn't it doesn't matter for the accuracy of the test.Only feebs vote.Comment
-
NopeOriginally posted by Ben Kenobi
That's an interesting question, Kid.
Do you agree with this statement:
"One party systems produce superior policies."I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
That's standard practice for commies/socialists if those thrown out are of another faction than his own.Originally posted by Kidicious
How could he throw commies out of helocopters if he weren't a fascist?
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
Disagree. Wether you are a onepartyjunkie or ekstremist democrat and don't want to lie, you has to agree to the statement which probably will make you something like a totalitarian marxist which doesn't make sense for the ekstremist democrat. Therefore the question must implicitly state that those desicions made by a one-party state also are the right.Originally posted by Kidicious
No. It assumes that neither one party systems or multiparty systems come to better decisions, but that one party systems make decisions with less delay.There is one big flaw in this. It demands that decisions made by a one-party state are the right ones, but history has proven well that that isn't the case - quite opposite. With democracy there are at least a chance to stop the worst mistakes.
edit : damn quotes.With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
Except in one case you're asking about things that are statistically correlated with their ideology, and in the other case your asking them WHAT THEIR IDEOLOGY IS (or a small part of it). So yes, it's more accurate.Originally posted by Agathon
People wouldn't see the relevence of "Do you support laws against sex out of wedlock?"
Of course they would, just as they would see the relevance of the other questions. Even if they didn't it doesn't matter for the accuracy of the test.Comment
-
I'm neutral on abortion, am pro-gay marriage, and do not care about sex outside of marriage. I just don't see how you can be anymore socially libertarian then me.Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
We can go over this, question by question, and you'll see why this is.For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
That definition is different from every political science book I've ever read.Originally posted by St Leo
You misunderstand the term. Social Libertarians are those who support civil liberties and human rights, not the really stupid US anarcho-capitalists who call themselves Libertarian.Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.Comment
-
One could be, for example, favourable or strongly favourable to abortion rights, instead of being merely neutral?Originally posted by Giancarlo
I'm neutral on abortion, am pro-gay marriage, and do not care about sex outside of marriage. I just don't see how you can be anymore socially libertarian then me."I have been reading up on the universe and have come to the conclusion that the universe is a good thing." -- Dissident
"I never had the need to have a boner." -- Dissident
"I have never cut off my penis when I was upset over a girl." -- DisComment
-
Well I could say I'm against abortion except in cases where the mother's health is at risk or if it was a case of rape or incest.Originally posted by Spiffor
One could be, for example, favourable or strongly favourable to abortion rights, instead of being merely neutral?For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
Comment