FREE TAPATALK APP

marplots · 22nd May 2012, 09:45 PM

What I don't understand is which side, the Nazis or the anti-Nazis, was supporting Man U?

Roboramma · 23rd May 2012, 03:39 AM

Originally Posted by sadhatter

That is a bit on the wrong side of things.

IF we did not hate the beliefs, and actions therof of the Nazis, we wouldn't have fought the war, we wouldn't have won the war, and we'd be speaking german with a few million less jews right now.

I suspect you're wrong about that, at least with regard to the beliefs. World War II wasn't a war over belief systems. Britain and France didn't go to war because they hated the beliefs of the Nazis, they went to war because Germany invaded Poland.

It was, as you say "the actions thereof of the Nazis" that led to the war, not their beliefs.

I don't have a problem with violence in defense of violence or in reaction to, well, various different sorts of actions. I do have a problem with beating people with baseball bats based on what they believe.

Quote:

Its all well and good to try and seem like the least violent person on the internet, hell its kind of a theme around here. But to try and paint the real world in colors that say that standing in direct opposition to certain beliefs , opposition so extreme it requires violence , is never the answer, is simply burying one's head in the sand.

I'm not trying to seem like the least violent person on the internet, nor do I suggest that violence is never a good idea. I support having a police force. I think that the military is necessary, and in some circumstances think war is necessary as well. That I don't think that beating people who have no power to do harm to our society in response, not to their actions, but to their beliefs, is not "burying [my] head in the sand", it's understanding the the world is not made of "us vs them".

NoZed Avenger · 23rd May 2012, 03:40 AM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

With all that clubbing that you have pointed out is delinquent, I suspect I might get some serious repetitive strain injury trying to help us all get caught up, and Advil ain't gonna cut it for pain medication.

You have anything stronger?

Steel baton?

erlando · 23rd May 2012, 04:12 AM

Originally Posted by autumn1971

I disagree. As long as someone is willing to face the consequences for their behavior, (not to say that these offenders will be, but I can hope,) sometimes violence is the proper answer. What they did was illegal, but absoloutly morally correct.

"Democracy". Look it up.

ponderingturtle · 23rd May 2012, 04:18 AM

Originally Posted by erlando

"Democracy". Look it up.

Yep so as long as a majority of people support it, it is ok. There seem to be many supportive people here so we should really put it to a vote.

P.J. Denyer · 23rd May 2012, 05:56 AM

Originally Posted by MG1962

You just stepped over the mark there

Yeah well after all the pussy footing on this board about 'soft' subjects like god, gay marriage, nazism ect, I thought it was about time to introduce some real controversy!

P.J. Denyer · 23rd May 2012, 06:04 AM

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

Yep so as long as a majority of people support it, it is ok. There seem to be many supportive people here so we should really put it to a vote.

I may be misinterpreting you (and if so I apologise), but are you really equating believeing that people have a right to hold an unpleasant, even bigotted, opinion without being subject to random assault with supporting those opinions?

AvalonXQ · 23rd May 2012, 06:33 AM

The bottom line -- this was terrorist behavior.

I hope the so-called "anti-fascists" who did it are all found and locked up for a very long time.

Redtail · 23rd May 2012, 07:29 AM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

What Nazis need to be met with is laughter and outing.

Exactly. In my mocking, I like to use this...

Nothing says "Ha-Ha!" to neo-nazis like a picture of a kid who's related to Adolph Eichmann & a Tuskegee Airman.

MattusMaximus · 23rd May 2012, 08:44 AM

Originally Posted by Redtail

Exactly. In my mocking, I like to use this...
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting...f74f0dfd17.jpg

Nothing says "Ha-Ha!" to neo-nazis like a picture of a kid who's related to Adolph Eichmann & a Tuskegee Airman.

Nice one

Moss · 23rd May 2012, 08:56 AM

Rotfront und SA trennt nur der Bordstein.

ponderingturtle · 23rd May 2012, 08:56 AM

Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer

I may be misinterpreting you (and if so I apologise), but are you really equating believeing that people have a right to hold an unpleasant, even bigotted, opinion without being subject to random assault with supporting those opinions?

My point was that democracy is not what protects minorities. It is strong rights and so on.

Chris L · 23rd May 2012, 09:11 AM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

What Nazis need to be met with is laughter and outing.

This. One of the best ways to defuse the power of a bad idea is to point out how stupid it is with humor. Ridicule is a very powerful weapon.

Chris L · 23rd May 2012, 09:26 AM

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

My point was that democracy is not what protects minorities. It is strong rights and so on.

Actually it's laws that protect minorities. Thugs with bats only protect minorities as long as they don't encounter other thugs with better weapons. That's why we need laws.

We as a society (through that whole democracy thing) get to decide how people with different opinions (and skin colors and religious and sexual orientations) are treated. Those decisions are then turned into laws. Those laws then get enforced by the power of the state. Nowhere in that path will you find room for people deciding on there own that people they don't like should get beat up. I don't think you'd really want to live in a society where that is allowed, though I suspect the Nazis would be more than comfortable with the idea.

RandFan · 23rd May 2012, 10:11 AM

Originally Posted by Chris L

We as a society (through that whole democracy thing) get to decide how people with different opinions (and skin colors and religious and sexual orientations) are treated.

Actually no. In principle we do not get to democratically dictate rights. See tyranny of the majority. America is a republic that elects its leaders democratically (though we have direct referendum that citizens can participate in at state and other local levels). To further protect against tyranny of the majority we have a judiciarry that can nullify laws that otherwise would take away the fundamental rights of minorities.

AvalonXQ · 23rd May 2012, 10:42 AM

I hope the victims pull a chapter from the SPLC playbook and take the ARA to court.

RandFan · 23rd May 2012, 10:49 AM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

I hope the victims pull a chapter from the SPLC playbook and take the ARA to court.

Though as much as I hate Nazis, I agree.

Xulld · 23rd May 2012, 11:17 AM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

When was there ever a right to plot mass murder?

. . and there is evidence that these specific people were doing that? If so why not just inform the authorities . . . that kind of behavior is considered illegal.

IDB87 · 23rd May 2012, 11:35 AM

Originally Posted by bonzombiekitty

Meh, I wouldn't classify the ARA people I've met as skinheads.

Maybe not those people that you knew, as I think any one can be in ARA, but the ARA started as a splinter group of NY SHARP. The Minneapolis Baldies (who founded ARA) were definitely skinheads.

WildCat · 23rd May 2012, 05:46 PM

Originally Posted by Redtail

Exactly. In my mocking, I like to use this...

Nothing says "Ha-Ha!" to neo-nazis like a picture of a kid who's related to Adolph Eichmann & a Tuskegee Airman.

Is that the little Eichmann Ward Churchill was talking about?

Redtail · 23rd May 2012, 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

Is that the little Eichmann Ward Churchill was talking about?

Yes but just a lil one.

(I had a good Packers-Bears joke but my wife just informed me that he's not related to Paul Hornung.)

RandFan · 23rd May 2012, 09:31 PM

Cartman is the ultimate little Eichman.

Ferguson · 23rd May 2012, 11:25 PM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

I'm still trying to figure out what the hell the Supreme Court was thinking when they decided that a movement which advocates mass murder and the overthrow of civilization has a right to assemble and recruit people to the cause.

I'm not sure what "overthrow of civilization" means, or if that's even possible, but that sounds more like you want to crack down on anarchists than nazis...
The word "nazi" will mean different things to different people, and apply to a wide range of groups, many of which are probably not violent. Throw in every other group identifying with an ideology that's advocated murder or had members that advocate murder (or made statements perceived as such), then throw in every religious sect that's guilty of the same....
Where do you draw the line? How do you outlaw ideas? Sounds like most of the new "criminals" would merely by guilty by association. And even if you could, do you really want a government with the power to do so? The pendulum swings both ways...

I'd also like to reiterate that I think vigilantism is stupid. First, you lose legitimacy and sympathy. Once you're engaging in violence you're just another gang/terror group and your reasons are mostly irrelevant to the public. Second, you give your enemy a legitimate "war" to engage in and militarize against. Third, you create martyrs that legitimize their cause. It would just take one "nazi" getting burned alive in his house with his family, or beaten to death by some "anti-fascist" in a black mask and suddenly your hydra's sprouted a hundred new heads.

To a much lesser degree I think the "Sea Shepherd" guys are doing just that, they're just lucky they haven't killed anyone.

Foolmewunz · 24th May 2012, 12:51 AM

Derail: Demographics.
Damn, that's one WHITE community! Are there any burbs in Chicago quite so pale? I'd think that more blacks would've moved there, if only by accident of boundary lines. Can any of you Chicagoland residents confirm - this is one of those "escape the inner city" 'burbs that the previous couple of generations of immigrants migrated to starting in the 60s?

tomwaits · 24th May 2012, 03:46 AM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

I'm still trying to figure out what the hell the Supreme Court was thinking when they decided that a movement which advocates mass murder and the overthrow of civilization has a right to assemble and recruit people to the cause.

Gee, if only they had written some kind of opinion explaining why they made the decision that they did. Too bad.

Chris L · 24th May 2012, 07:37 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Actually no. In principle we do not get to democratically dictate rights. See tyranny of the majority. America is a republic that elects its leaders democratically (though we have direct referendum that citizens can participate in at state and other local levels). To further protect against tyranny of the majority we have a judiciarry that can nullify laws that otherwise would take away the fundamental rights of minorities.

You are correct Sir. The Founders were very wary of mob rule (pure democracy) and did their best to design a system that could keep the mob at arms length. It's the legal protections inherent in the Constitution that keep the 51% percent from voting to rape the 49%.

ponderingturtle · 25th May 2012, 03:57 AM

Originally Posted by Chris L

You are correct Sir. The Founders were very wary of mob rule (pure democracy) and did their best to design a system that could keep the mob at arms length. It's the legal protections inherent in the Constitution that keep the 51% percent from voting to rape the 49%.

Yep, for example they knew that only the wealthy should vote, hence the property requirements on voting.

luchog · 25th May 2012, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by Tsukasa Buddha

And of course it would happen at an Irish restaurant...

What better place for a punch-up? Aside from a pub or football stadium, of course.

22nd May 2012, 09:45 PM	#81
marplots Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 5,645	What I don't understand is which side, the Nazis or the anti-Nazis, was supporting Man U?
marplots Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 5,645

23rd May 2012, 03:39 AM	#82
Roboramma Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shanghai Posts: 7,131	Originally Posted by sadhatter That is a bit on the wrong side of things. IF we did not hate the beliefs, and actions therof of the Nazis, we wouldn't have fought the war, we wouldn't have won the war, and we'd be speaking german with a few million less jews right now. I suspect you're wrong about that, at least with regard to the beliefs. World War II wasn't a war over belief systems. Britain and France didn't go to war because they hated the beliefs of the Nazis, they went to war because Germany invaded Poland. It was, as you say "the actions thereof of the Nazis" that led to the war, not their beliefs. I don't have a problem with violence in defense of violence or in reaction to, well, various different sorts of actions. I do have a problem with beating people with baseball bats based on what they believe. Quote: Its all well and good to try and seem like the least violent person on the internet, hell its kind of a theme around here. But to try and paint the real world in colors that say that standing in direct opposition to certain beliefs , opposition so extreme it requires violence , is never the answer, is simply burying one's head in the sand. I'm not trying to seem like the least violent person on the internet, nor do I suggest that violence is never a good idea. I support having a police force. I think that the military is necessary, and in some circumstances think war is necessary as well. That I don't think that beating people who have no power to do harm to our society in response, not to their actions, but to their beliefs, is not "burying [my] head in the sand", it's understanding the the world is not made of "us vs them".
	__________________ "... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together." Isaac Asimov

23rd May 2012, 03:40 AM	#83
NoZed Avenger Bitter Whiner Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 11,313	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor With all that clubbing that you have pointed out is delinquent, I suspect I might get some serious repetitive strain injury trying to help us all get caught up, and Advil ain't gonna cut it for pain medication. You have anything stronger? Steel baton?
	__________________ [This Space Available. PM for Rates.]

23rd May 2012, 04:12 AM	#84
erlando Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Denmark Posts: 1,016	Originally Posted by autumn1971 I disagree. As long as someone is willing to face the consequences for their behavior, (not to say that these offenders will be, but I can hope,) sometimes violence is the proper answer. What they did was illegal, but absoloutly morally correct. "Democracy". Look it up.
	__________________ "If it can grow, it can evolve" - Eugenie Scott, Ph.D Creationism disproved? Evolution IS a blind watchmaker

23rd May 2012, 04:18 AM	#85
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Tarrytown, NY Posts: 26,558	Originally Posted by erlando "Democracy". Look it up. Yep so as long as a majority of people support it, it is ok. There seem to be many supportive people here so we should really put it to a vote.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

23rd May 2012, 05:56 AM	#86
P.J. Denyer Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 1,185	Originally Posted by MG1962 You just stepped over the mark there Yeah well after all the pussy footing on this board about 'soft' subjects like god, gay marriage, nazism ect, I thought it was about time to introduce some real controversy!

23rd May 2012, 06:04 AM	#87
P.J. Denyer Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 1,185	Originally Posted by ponderingturtle Yep so as long as a majority of people support it, it is ok. There seem to be many supportive people here so we should really put it to a vote. I may be misinterpreting you (and if so I apologise), but are you really equating believeing that people have a right to hold an unpleasant, even bigotted, opinion without being subject to random assault with supporting those opinions?

23rd May 2012, 06:33 AM	#88
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	The bottom line -- this was terrorist behavior. I hope the so-called "anti-fascists" who did it are all found and locked up for a very long time.
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853

23rd May 2012, 07:29 AM	#89
Redtail Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 9,398	Originally Posted by BenBurch What Nazis need to be met with is laughter and outing. Exactly. In my mocking, I like to use this... Nothing says "Ha-Ha!" to neo-nazis like a picture of a kid who's related to Adolph Eichmann & a Tuskegee Airman.
Redtail Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 9,398	__________________ AVENGERS!!!.. Turn off the dark!

23rd May 2012, 08:44 AM	#90
MattusMaximus Intellectual Gladiator Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the midst of a vast, beautiful & uncaring universe Posts: 14,204	Originally Posted by Redtail Exactly. In my mocking, I like to use this... http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting...f74f0dfd17.jpg Nothing says "Ha-Ha!" to neo-nazis like a picture of a kid who's related to Adolph Eichmann & a Tuskegee Airman. Nice one
	__________________ Visit my blog: The Skeptical Teacher The Times They Are A-Changin'

23rd May 2012, 08:56 AM	#91
Moss Dramatocrat Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Heiligsblechle country Posts: 3,229	Rotfront und SA trennt nur der Bordstein.

23rd May 2012, 08:56 AM	#92
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Tarrytown, NY Posts: 26,558	Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer I may be misinterpreting you (and if so I apologise), but are you really equating believeing that people have a right to hold an unpleasant, even bigotted, opinion without being subject to random assault with supporting those opinions? My point was that democracy is not what protects minorities. It is strong rights and so on.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

23rd May 2012, 09:11 AM	#93
Chris L Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 1,160	Originally Posted by BenBurch What Nazis need to be met with is laughter and outing. This. One of the best ways to defuse the power of a bad idea is to point out how stupid it is with humor. Ridicule is a very powerful weapon.
Chris L Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 1,160	__________________ "The lie is different at every level." Richard C. Hoagland

23rd May 2012, 09:26 AM	#94
Chris L Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 1,160	Originally Posted by ponderingturtle My point was that democracy is not what protects minorities. It is strong rights and so on. Actually it's laws that protect minorities. Thugs with bats only protect minorities as long as they don't encounter other thugs with better weapons. That's why we need laws. We as a society (through that whole democracy thing) get to decide how people with different opinions (and skin colors and religious and sexual orientations) are treated. Those decisions are then turned into laws. Those laws then get enforced by the power of the state. Nowhere in that path will you find room for people deciding on there own that people they don't like should get beat up. I don't think you'd really want to live in a society where that is allowed, though I suspect the Nazis would be more than comfortable with the idea.
Chris L Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 1,160	__________________ "The lie is different at every level." Richard C. Hoagland

23rd May 2012, 10:11 AM	#95
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Originally Posted by Chris L We as a society (through that whole democracy thing) get to decide how people with different opinions (and skin colors and religious and sexual orientations) are treated. Actually no. In principle we do not get to democratically dictate rights. See tyranny of the majority. America is a republic that elects its leaders democratically (though we have direct referendum that citizens can participate in at state and other local levels). To further protect against tyranny of the majority we have a judiciarry that can nullify laws that otherwise would take away the fundamental rights of minorities.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

23rd May 2012, 10:42 AM	#96
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	I hope the victims pull a chapter from the SPLC playbook and take the ARA to court.
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853

23rd May 2012, 10:49 AM	#97
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Originally Posted by AvalonXQ I hope the victims pull a chapter from the SPLC playbook and take the ARA to court. Though as much as I hate Nazis, I agree.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

23rd May 2012, 11:17 AM	#98
Xulld Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Jacksonville, Florida Posts: 1,233	Originally Posted by leftysergeant When was there ever a right to plot mass murder? . . and there is evidence that these specific people were doing that? If so why not just inform the authorities . . . that kind of behavior is considered illegal.
	__________________ "Natural justice is a symbol or expression of usefullness, to prevent one person from harming or being harmed by another." -Epicurus

23rd May 2012, 11:35 AM	#99
IDB87 Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: In the Grass Posts: 3,451	Originally Posted by bonzombiekitty Meh, I wouldn't classify the ARA people I've met as skinheads. Maybe not those people that you knew, as I think any one can be in ARA, but the ARA started as a splinter group of NY SHARP. The Minneapolis Baldies (who founded ARA) were definitely skinheads.
	__________________ It's guaranteed I'm overreacting.

23rd May 2012, 05:46 PM	#100
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,471	Originally Posted by Redtail Exactly. In my mocking, I like to use this... Nothing says "Ha-Ha!" to neo-nazis like a picture of a kid who's related to Adolph Eichmann & a Tuskegee Airman. Is that the little Eichmann Ward Churchill was talking about?

23rd May 2012, 08:58 PM	#101
Redtail Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 9,398	Originally Posted by WildCat Is that the little Eichmann Ward Churchill was talking about? Yes but just a lil one. (I had a good Packers-Bears joke but my wife just informed me that he's not related to Paul Hornung.)
Redtail Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 9,398	__________________ AVENGERS!!!.. Turn off the dark! Last edited by Redtail; 23rd May 2012 at 09:02 PM.

23rd May 2012, 09:31 PM	#102
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Cartman is the ultimate little Eichman.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

23rd May 2012, 11:25 PM	#103
Ferguson Muse Join Date: May 2009 Location: Lansing, MI Posts: 852	Originally Posted by leftysergeant I'm still trying to figure out what the hell the Supreme Court was thinking when they decided that a movement which advocates mass murder and the overthrow of civilization has a right to assemble and recruit people to the cause. I'm not sure what "overthrow of civilization" means, or if that's even possible, but that sounds more like you want to crack down on anarchists than nazis... The word "nazi" will mean different things to different people, and apply to a wide range of groups, many of which are probably not violent. Throw in every other group identifying with an ideology that's advocated murder or had members that advocate murder (or made statements perceived as such), then throw in every religious sect that's guilty of the same.... Where do you draw the line? How do you outlaw ideas? Sounds like most of the new "criminals" would merely by guilty by association. And even if you could, do you really want a government with the power to do so? The pendulum swings both ways... I'd also like to reiterate that I think vigilantism is stupid. First, you lose legitimacy and sympathy. Once you're engaging in violence you're just another gang/terror group and your reasons are mostly irrelevant to the public. Second, you give your enemy a legitimate "war" to engage in and militarize against. Third, you create martyrs that legitimize their cause. It would just take one "nazi" getting burned alive in his house with his family, or beaten to death by some "anti-fascist" in a black mask and suddenly your hydra's sprouted a hundred new heads. To a much lesser degree I think the "Sea Shepherd" guys are doing just that, they're just lucky they haven't killed anyone.

24th May 2012, 12:51 AM	#104
Foolmewunz Grammar Resistance Leader Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Pattaya, Thailand Posts: 20,890	Derail: Demographics. Damn, that's one WHITE community! Are there any burbs in Chicago quite so pale? I'd think that more blacks would've moved there, if only by accident of boundary lines. Can any of you Chicagoland residents confirm - this is one of those "escape the inner city" 'burbs that the previous couple of generations of immigrants migrated to starting in the 60s?
	__________________ Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele Don't you wish someone had slapped baby Hitler really really hard? [i] Dr. Buzzo 02/13 [i]

24th May 2012, 03:46 AM	#105
tomwaits Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Chicago, IL, USA Posts: 2,289	Originally Posted by leftysergeant I'm still trying to figure out what the hell the Supreme Court was thinking when they decided that a movement which advocates mass murder and the overthrow of civilization has a right to assemble and recruit people to the cause. Gee, if only they had written some kind of opinion explaining why they made the decision that they did. Too bad.

24th May 2012, 07:37 PM	#106
Chris L Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 1,160	Originally Posted by RandFan Actually no. In principle we do not get to democratically dictate rights. See tyranny of the majority. America is a republic that elects its leaders democratically (though we have direct referendum that citizens can participate in at state and other local levels). To further protect against tyranny of the majority we have a judiciarry that can nullify laws that otherwise would take away the fundamental rights of minorities. You are correct Sir. The Founders were very wary of mob rule (pure democracy) and did their best to design a system that could keep the mob at arms length. It's the legal protections inherent in the Constitution that keep the 51% percent from voting to rape the 49%.
Chris L Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 1,160	__________________ "The lie is different at every level." Richard C. Hoagland

25th May 2012, 03:57 AM	#107
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Tarrytown, NY Posts: 26,558	Originally Posted by Chris L You are correct Sir. The Founders were very wary of mob rule (pure democracy) and did their best to design a system that could keep the mob at arms length. It's the legal protections inherent in the Constitution that keep the 51% percent from voting to rape the 49%. Yep, for example they knew that only the wealthy should vote, hence the property requirements on voting.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

25th May 2012, 03:45 PM	#108
luchog Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: The Emerald City Posts: 8,001	Originally Posted by Tsukasa Buddha And of course it would happen at an Irish restaurant... What better place for a punch-up? Aside from a pub or football stadium, of course.
	__________________ "All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams "The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf "Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon