Actually, The Linde in Germany is pretty left wing. Their name literally means "The Left"
I just think they're working on getting more involved and pushing back against the austerity measures of right wingers.
Here in the US, we have the Progressive Caucus in the Democrats and the Green Party should be challenging the Democrats more as a far left challenger (they still need work but it's far better than being Socialist or Communist now)
Also, New Zealand has been pretty progressive. I mean, a judge had that balls to embarrass the FBI. Think about how Richard Dwyer was treated in the UK versus how Dotcom got rights upheld when he was at his worst.
I'm not calling you ignorant or anything. Just expanding the knowledge that I've collected on these issues as I work to make the world a better place. :)
"The Executive is controlled by the President. Are you trying to tell me that the President is a neo-con? Or that being a closet neo-con, he's packed the DOJ with neo-cons?"
Look at his policies. He's supported the conservative/neo-con positions almost whole heartedly.
"In case you didn't notice, 48% of the country didn't vote for the President."
And? He's "the lesser evil" but that doesn't make him any less conservative. If he were not an authoritarian, he would have been more like Hugo Chavez in ensuring more democracy. If he were more like FDR and pragmatic, then he wouldn't be criticized for his conservative positions on anything that has nothing to do with social policies.
"That the 52% that support ObamaCare and abortion and Guantanamo are neo-cons, and they elected the neo-con president? "
Nope. I'm asking you to actually look at his policies besides just the social ones. His policies of appointments are meant to appease the far right who has to appoint him with 60 votes.
His views on copyright are actually conservative positions meant to make Hollywood more conservative and mercantilist.
He wants to support CISPA and he's signed the NDAA. He even repealed the insider trading legislation of last year.
In essence, he's a corporatist. The Democrats en largesse are the corporatists of politics while the Republicans represent the rich more.
when someone disagrees with you, did you ever consider the possibility that you may not have thought these things through and you might be wrong?
Sure, I could be. But when it's obvious that people have very limited views on policies and politics that greatly expand their knowledge, I look to educate them about what has been occurring.
No hard feelings if you don't know. But it just seems that you want to go "But, but... Obama" when everyone's criticizing him for his energy policies, his climate change reversal, and other positions that mark him as more conservative than progressive.
The Socialists and Communists were decimated in the 40s while the Democrats became more corporate in the 70s.
The Republicans (ie conservatives) have been a huge problem with their libertarian, evangelical, and neocon ideas that have caused massive problems for the last century.
Yes, century. They tried austerity in the 20s and that changed us to a welfare state in the US. We got 40-50 years of a welfare state which changed into a private market since the 70s. Now we have eliminated the welfare state for private capitalism and conservatives have lead the way the entire time.
In other words, there IS no left wing in politics. The ones that want the laws right now are the corporations and the rich to support them over the needs of the nation. Honestly, who thinks it's a good idea to destroy Miranda rights for terrorists when Norway didn't have to?
Who thinks it's a good idea to point fingers at Progressives (accept capitalism, want state capitalism) over looking at new economic systems which Socialists and Communists want?
You have to be really ignorant of the class struggle involved here where the rich have the state do their bidding while the poor are left to work hard at the expense of their own well being.
So your theory is that neocons control the government right now and are making these decisions?
That "theory" is laid to bare in how the Senate is paralyzed unconstitutionally with no filibuster reforms, Congress does not represent people over corporations, and the Supreme Court is extremely conservative in their rulings.
I mean, it really doesn't take a genius to figure out that Obama is conservative himself given how he wants to cut Social Security and goes along with most of the austerity posturing of the extreme right wing.
If you refuse to see that, it's your choice. But it's fairly obvious they're doing things that people are opposed to regardless of if they have a D or R next to their party affiliation.
Stop blaming Obama for everything, please. Expand the knowledge and share the wealth of ideas.
Political dysfunction leads to economic dysfunction and it's not entirely the fault of the president when our legislative branch doesn't represent the people.
Then the rich, the powerful and the influential will finally realize that they should have taken more care of us in the past.
The rich and powerful want a system that only works for them. Since the end of WWII, they've chipped away at the government and the public, making them weaker and weaker.
In the 70s, they attacked the government, took it over and made it the weak... Thing we have today. So we've went from a state capitalist government to a private capitalist government with Reagan being the one at that helm for the past 40 years with regards to his Reagonomics.
The system has failed. We've tried it. The rich got richer while the poor got poorer. Their jobs are in the BRIC countries. The training is in those same places. We have a workforce that has been decimated with people looking for work but finding copyright and patent issues instead of innovation.
The system is the problem. A system that rewards the ones that have the most money is one that is very soon going to collapse when it can no longer protect its weakest members and we're very closely hitting that point.
But to suggest that the rich and powerful will help out the people when the public has already lost so much? That's ignoring the history of what people do in revolutionary movements.
This "group" hasn't been active for ~ a year with only 8-10 regular members:
In the five years that I've been an SVSA member, we've seen regular attendance at our monthly meetings grow from about 8-9 people to 20 or so – which is about half of the active membership. However, we've also seen a handful of people come and go, with no explanation in most cases. Being the sensitive songwriter types, some of us have started to wonder why some people leave (sniff), and what we can or should do about it, if anything.
Now call me pessimistic but I have to think that with SOPA being a huge factor, someone went to SVSA with a ton of money to make it worth their while to create this song to Goodlatte.
As their website entails they are big on playing music. The question is.. Why in hell are they able to connect with a copyright issue that barely registers on their scale unless they've been paid to be there?
They create songs and guitars. Copyright doesn't even register on their agenda at all.
No Youtube page, nothing to say where they make money supporting the DMCA.
So I'm officially labeling them as a member of the RIAA through sub-affiliation until otherwise noted.
Oh, come on... This is ONE example out of the many dozens in Japan! Yes, they have a more feudal society thanks to their history of the mercantilists winning more power and clout, but you also see more reliance on the government and the government being forced to LISTEN because of their homogenous culture.
What IS happening is that the publishers are exerting their force disproportionately. What isn't being discussed is the rumbles of new culture that come out of this publisher battle. IE, smaller distributors are going to be rising up to oppose these things and individuals are not going to like this publisher battle.
I'm still not positive that people will enjoy not having access to 2Ch without a shitton of protest though. Something like that is going to force people to really get PO'd about a government that is only focused on the entertainment industry, similarly to how the nuclear reactor explosion forced people to ban nuclear power.
Perhaps the answer to this lies in who does multi-flight tours.
I would think that people with more money want the convenience of just booking at one time rather than individual bookings. So we have a system set up to charge what the market will bear in this situation.
The smarter people are those that opt for individual tours and don't go first class on each leg.
Other than that, I can only think that it's a great scam that nets them huge profits for less work. Kind of like copyright.
Communists, Socialists, and unions were a problem because they stopped our capitalist system from killing itself. Now that we don't have those bogeymen, we need new ones to justify the damage we're doing to our nation.
The 20th century was about the systematic destruction of the groups opposing laissez-faire capitalism. Once we had those posts taken over, the government was next. Now it's the public because they shouldn't be informed of what a computer can do in finding out information.
I hate that our government has been co-opted by people with reactionary responses to issues, but it's not going to get better if people ignore the policies and politics that are in play.
No, Mike doesn't want to get rid of it. He wants copyright law to support the public instead of going against them.
People that are against it, would be me for the reason that it represents a mercantilist capitalism which doesn't deliver the goods for society and only supports the select few at the top of the food chain.
I think we can do a lot better without out it than with trying to reform a broken system.
Congratulations. You've just fallen for the propaganda that ignores how the US has antagonized North Korea with war like sanctions to cause it to act ruthlessly in regards to South Korea.
Maybe you should look at their playbook before thinking that Congress should nuke them.
On the post: Why The DOJ's Decision To Not Read Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights Is A Terrible Idea
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I just think they're working on getting more involved and pushing back against the austerity measures of right wingers.
Here in the US, we have the Progressive Caucus in the Democrats and the Green Party should be challenging the Democrats more as a far left challenger (they still need work but it's far better than being Socialist or Communist now)
Also, New Zealand has been pretty progressive. I mean, a judge had that balls to embarrass the FBI. Think about how Richard Dwyer was treated in the UK versus how Dotcom got rights upheld when he was at his worst.
I'm not calling you ignorant or anything. Just expanding the knowledge that I've collected on these issues as I work to make the world a better place. :)
On the post: Why The DOJ's Decision To Not Read Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights Is A Terrible Idea
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Look at his policies. He's supported the conservative/neo-con positions almost whole heartedly.
"In case you didn't notice, 48% of the country didn't vote for the President."
And? He's "the lesser evil" but that doesn't make him any less conservative. If he were not an authoritarian, he would have been more like Hugo Chavez in ensuring more democracy. If he were more like FDR and pragmatic, then he wouldn't be criticized for his conservative positions on anything that has nothing to do with social policies.
"That the 52% that support ObamaCare and abortion and Guantanamo are neo-cons, and they elected the neo-con president? "
Nope. I'm asking you to actually look at his policies besides just the social ones. His policies of appointments are meant to appease the far right who has to appoint him with 60 votes.
His views on copyright are actually conservative positions meant to make Hollywood more conservative and mercantilist.
He wants to support CISPA and he's signed the NDAA. He even repealed the insider trading legislation of last year.
In essence, he's a corporatist. The Democrats en largesse are the corporatists of politics while the Republicans represent the rich more.
when someone disagrees with you, did you ever consider the possibility that you may not have thought these things through and you might be wrong?
Sure, I could be. But when it's obvious that people have very limited views on policies and politics that greatly expand their knowledge, I look to educate them about what has been occurring.
No hard feelings if you don't know. But it just seems that you want to go "But, but... Obama" when everyone's criticizing him for his energy policies, his climate change reversal, and other positions that mark him as more conservative than progressive.
On the post: Why The DOJ's Decision To Not Read Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights Is A Terrible Idea
Re: Re: Re:
The Republicans (ie conservatives) have been a huge problem with their libertarian, evangelical, and neocon ideas that have caused massive problems for the last century.
Yes, century. They tried austerity in the 20s and that changed us to a welfare state in the US. We got 40-50 years of a welfare state which changed into a private market since the 70s. Now we have eliminated the welfare state for private capitalism and conservatives have lead the way the entire time.
In other words, there IS no left wing in politics. The ones that want the laws right now are the corporations and the rich to support them over the needs of the nation. Honestly, who thinks it's a good idea to destroy Miranda rights for terrorists when Norway didn't have to?
Who thinks it's a good idea to point fingers at Progressives (accept capitalism, want state capitalism) over looking at new economic systems which Socialists and Communists want?
You have to be really ignorant of the class struggle involved here where the rich have the state do their bidding while the poor are left to work hard at the expense of their own well being.
On the post: Why The DOJ's Decision To Not Read Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights Is A Terrible Idea
Re: Re:
That "theory" is laid to bare in how the Senate is paralyzed unconstitutionally with no filibuster reforms, Congress does not represent people over corporations, and the Supreme Court is extremely conservative in their rulings.
I mean, it really doesn't take a genius to figure out that Obama is conservative himself given how he wants to cut Social Security and goes along with most of the austerity posturing of the extreme right wing.
If you refuse to see that, it's your choice. But it's fairly obvious they're doing things that people are opposed to regardless of if they have a D or R next to their party affiliation.
On the post: Why The DOJ's Decision To Not Read Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights Is A Terrible Idea
Re: Re:
Stop blaming Obama for everything, please. Expand the knowledge and share the wealth of ideas.
Political dysfunction leads to economic dysfunction and it's not entirely the fault of the president when our legislative branch doesn't represent the people.
On the post: Former DHS Official Says Boston Bombing Proves ACLU & EFF Are Wrong About Surveillance And CISPA
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Then the rich, the powerful and the influential will finally realize that they should have taken more care of us in the past.
The rich and powerful want a system that only works for them. Since the end of WWII, they've chipped away at the government and the public, making them weaker and weaker.
In the 70s, they attacked the government, took it over and made it the weak... Thing we have today. So we've went from a state capitalist government to a private capitalist government with Reagan being the one at that helm for the past 40 years with regards to his Reagonomics.
The system has failed. We've tried it. The rich got richer while the poor got poorer. Their jobs are in the BRIC countries. The training is in those same places. We have a workforce that has been decimated with people looking for work but finding copyright and patent issues instead of innovation.
The system is the problem. A system that rewards the ones that have the most money is one that is very soon going to collapse when it can no longer protect its weakest members and we're very closely hitting that point.
But to suggest that the rich and powerful will help out the people when the public has already lost so much? That's ignoring the history of what people do in revolutionary movements.
On the post: Bob Goodlatte Receives Most Awkward Serenade Ever With Pro-Copyright Song
I love astroturf groups...
Larry Sakayama
SVSA Songs critique
This "group" hasn't been active for ~ a year with only 8-10 regular members:
In the five years that I've been an SVSA member, we've seen regular attendance at our monthly meetings grow from about 8-9 people to 20 or so – which is about half of the active membership. However, we've also seen a handful of people come and go, with no explanation in most cases. Being the sensitive songwriter types, some of us have started to wonder why some people leave (sniff), and what we can or should do about it, if anything.
Now call me pessimistic but I have to think that with SOPA being a huge factor, someone went to SVSA with a ton of money to make it worth their while to create this song to Goodlatte.
As their website entails they are big on playing music. The question is.. Why in hell are they able to connect with a copyright issue that barely registers on their scale unless they've been paid to be there?
They create songs and guitars. Copyright doesn't even register on their agenda at all.
No Youtube page, nothing to say where they make money supporting the DMCA.
So I'm officially labeling them as a member of the RIAA through sub-affiliation until otherwise noted.
On the post: Reuters Sorry About Pre-Releasing Kinda Bitchy Soros Obit, Not Sorry Enough To Take It Down
Re: Seems fair to me
On the post: Former DHS Official Says Boston Bombing Proves ACLU & EFF Are Wrong About Surveillance And CISPA
Re: Re: Re:
We're dreaming if we think that these people will get out of their bubble.
On the post: Former DHS Official Says Boston Bombing Proves ACLU & EFF Are Wrong About Surveillance And CISPA
Re: Re: Re:
We're dreaming if we think that these people will get out of their bubble.
On the post: Police In Japan Are Asking ISPs To Start Blocking Tor
Japan
What IS happening is that the publishers are exerting their force disproportionately. What isn't being discussed is the rumbles of new culture that come out of this publisher battle. IE, smaller distributors are going to be rising up to oppose these things and individuals are not going to like this publisher battle.
I'm still not positive that people will enjoy not having access to 2Ch without a shitton of protest though. Something like that is going to force people to really get PO'd about a government that is only focused on the entertainment industry, similarly to how the nuclear reactor explosion forced people to ban nuclear power.
On the post: Med Express Apologies For Suing Customer, Says It Was A Mistake, But Doesn't Mention The Long List Of Similar Lawsuits
Hint: you're not a Jedi
It must be great to see the world only in absolutes...
On the post: In The Long History Of Specious DMCA Claims, This Is Definitely One Of Them
I mean, this is sharing the photo beyond the scope of the artist into a new language and new territory and this artist is so pedantic as to stop that.
I have yet to find one good reason that this infringement harms the original creation weren't the tweeter isn't even claiming ownership at all.
On the post: 'Intellectual Bulwark' Of Austerity Economics Collapses Because Of Three Major Errors
Re:
Where the math makes no sense, the punishment does not fit any crime, your public wi-fi is collateral damage, and no one benefits other than Hollywood with their mercantilism.
On the post: Flight Search Engines And The Multi-City Ripoff
Price discrimination?
I would think that people with more money want the convenience of just booking at one time rather than individual bookings. So we have a system set up to charge what the market will bear in this situation.
The smarter people are those that opt for individual tours and don't go first class on each leg.
Other than that, I can only think that it's a great scam that nets them huge profits for less work. Kind of like copyright.
On the post: The Greatest Trick The Government Ever Pulled Was Convincing The Public The 'Hacker Threat' Exists
Re: Re: Re:
The 20th century was about the systematic destruction of the groups opposing laissez-faire capitalism. Once we had those posts taken over, the government was next. Now it's the public because they shouldn't be informed of what a computer can do in finding out information.
I hate that our government has been co-opted by people with reactionary responses to issues, but it's not going to get better if people ignore the policies and politics that are in play.
On the post: New Book On The History Of Music, Copyright And Piracy Shows How Copyright Tends To Hold Back Music
Re: Re: Re:
People that are against it, would be me for the reason that it represents a mercantilist capitalism which doesn't deliver the goods for society and only supports the select few at the top of the food chain.
I think we can do a lot better without out it than with trying to reform a broken system.
On the post: Shameful: Tech Companies Fighting Against Necessary CFAA Reform And CISPA Fixes
Re:
Maybe you should look at their playbook before thinking that Congress should nuke them.
On the post: Judge To Allow More Evidence Filed Against Team Prenda, Despite Vehement Objections From Prenda
Achievements of this case
Judgement Day - Because nothing is worse than making a federal judge your worst enemy...
Identity theft - Because your legacy in history is assured when you have to rely on federal crimes to move forward.
Created here...
Hosted here
On the post: Fox Sends Cease & Desist Letters To Firefly Fans Selling Jayne Hats, Because Money
Re: Re: Re:
Next >>