Hugo Chavez's implosion continues in Venezuela!

[Xavier_Onassis]

No they didn't.....most Cubans probably were not even alive when Castro took over.

======================
NO Americans now alive were alive when the Constitution was written, so that is a bit of a bogus argument, isn't it? Every generatuon is obliged to follow the rules that were in existence when they were born, or to change them if they can.

The US Constitution has not been put to a vote, ever, by the way. A few old White guys wrote it and voted on it, that's all.
A higher percentage of Cubans probably followed Fidel in 1958-59.

[sirs]

No they didn't.....most Cubans probably were not even alive when Castro took over.
======================
NO Americans now alive were alive when the Constitution was written, so that is a bit of a bogus argument, isn't it? Every generatuon is obliged to follow the rules that were in existence when they were born, or to change them if they can.

Except you're ommitting the one grand canyon of a difference, that of freedom, that of the opportunty, we as Americans, can vote for our representatives, can amend laws, can "change the rules" that were previsously in existance, if they choose to.  No gunshot need be applied, nor some violent revolution, if that were even possible.

A DISTINCT difference, thus not bogus in the least

[Michael Tee]

<<You haven't been paying much attention at all have you ?>>

Huh?  Whutzat?  I haven't been paying who for what?

<<Communists and Socialists are indeed allowed to offer themselves as canadates but those choices bear precious little appeal to the common man.>>

Is THAT your answer to the allegation that American "elections" are phony charades between Tweedle-Dum and Tweedle-Dee candidates who are both servants of the same special interests?

<<Scientific polling has allowed the major partys to understand very well what the people care about and don't. Both partys are busy trying to lead while they also follow these polls. >>

Isn't your explanation above (which I accept, BTW) perfectly consistent with my theory that the "elections" consist of two phony "candidates," each one roughly equal to the other in his acceptability to the special interests that are the real government, vying with one another for the privilege of nominally leading the nation for a limited term of four years?  Obviously neither "candidate" has any real program at odds with the goals of the special interests and is concerned primarily with crafting a pitch to the approximately 50% of the electorate who are dumb enough to get involved in the charade in the first place that will enable him to beat out the other "candidate" and be permitted to "represent" the nation for the next four years.  Otherwise, why bother with finding out in advance what the dumb schmucks want anyway?  Why not just stand for election based on a published party platform and let the idiots decide howsoever they choose to decide?

<<The government is constantly copeing itself to the will of the people . >.

That is 100% bullshit.  They are promising the people what they believe the people want, they are presenting to the people the image that they think the people want to see, but once the election is over, the winner continues the policies of the last government in all important matters, since all the participants in the charade, including the outgoing administration, are the tools of the special interests that really govern the country.

<<If this is bad it is the fault of the people who seem to demand nothing less.>>

The "people" don't demand jack-shit.  Half of them, knowing all too well the futility of the exercise, don't even bother to vote.  The rest of the schmucks can vote any way they want, but in the end, they'll get what the special interests have already decided they can get.  Nothing more and nothing less.

[Xavier_Onassis]

American elections are more about marketing than actual democracy.

The Netherlands has 22 million people and there are eleven parties represented in Parliament, and a number that did not make the cut.
The Dutch government is generally regarded as efficient and orderly. And it is certainly more democratic than the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_the_Netherlands

[sirs]

American elections are more about marketing than actual democracy.

Regardless of the rationalization, it's STILL democracy, it's STILL we voting for who we want.  No gun is required, no blood need be shed, no revolution is required to change anything....at least not yet

[Plane]

No they didn't.....most Cubans probably were not even alive when Castro took over.

======================
NO Americans now alive were alive when the Constitution was written, so that is a bit of a bogus argument, isn't it? Every generatuon is obliged to follow the rules that were in existence when they were born, or to change them if they can.

The US Constitution has not been put to a vote, ever, by the way. A few old White guys wrote it and voted on it, that's all.
A higher percentage of Cubans probably followed Fidel in 1958-59.

All of the writers of the constitution were dead by the time the 14th admendmendment was written.

All of the writers of the 14th admendment wre dead by the time the ERA was offered as an admendmendment.

The US constitution had no force of law untill most of the states had ratified it , which was a process of public inspection and elected state reps voteing on it.

the Constitution has a built in process of change which the people can avail themselves of by referendum, or by representative voteing at the state level.

The ERA came within two states of being ratified , it seemed like a bad idea to me and I beleive it has lost the popularity it once had , but it failed in due process.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The point is that the Cuban Revolution may nor now be the will of the Cuban people because those alive have not voted for it, but again, the US Constitution is no more the will of the American people by the same standard.

So saying that the Cuban Revolution is invalid on those grounds is a feeble argument.

I would be for everyone voting on a Constitution every 30 years or so. But being as it is all controlled by marketing now, perhaps that problem would need to be addressed if this were done.

[Plane]

The point is that the Cuban Revolution may nor now be the will of the Cuban people because those alive have not voted for it, but again, the US Constitution is no more the will of the American people by the same standard.

So saying that the Cuban Revolution is invalid on those grounds is a feeble argument.

No , it is a very strong arguement because the Cubans haven't got anuy way at all to tolerate a loyal opposition , they don't seem to get the idea. It need not be the same process we use , but they have nothing at all which there is no excuse for.

I would be for everyone voting on a Constitution every 30 years or so. But being as it is all controlled by marketing now, perhaps that problem would need to be addressed if this were done.

Admendments show up at about that pace and an admendment has the strength to reverse any clause of the constitution. ON the theroy that anyone chooseing not to decide still has made a choice , not admending the constitution is a vote in favor of it. People who want an admendment lobby and agitate for one almost all of the time. Eventually one of these is going to gain the populartiy it needs to become a real change. Do you suppose that the next one will take longer than thirty years?


Is marketing a problem or a sophistication?

[Michael Tee]

<< . . . because the Cubans haven't got anuy way at all to tolerate a loyal opposition >>

ROTFLMFAO.  In Cuba, there  IS no "loyal oppposition."  Either you're for the Revolution or you're against the people.


<<Is marketing a problem or a sophistication?>>

Obviously it's a problem.  Particularly when you've got an ignorant electorate and a huge disparity in marketing funds available between the ruling classes and the workers.

[sirs]

The point is that the Cuban Revolution may nor now be the will of the Cuban people because those alive have not voted for it, but again, the US Constitution is no more the will of the American people by the same standard.

Not even close.  The will of the Cuban currently does not exist.  It exists at the whim of the dictator in charge.  There is no means of "changing" that, without an armed revolution.  Grasping the difference, yet, between the will of the Cubam people and the will of the American people?  Hint, it has to do with Freedom, AND a Constitution

I would be for everyone voting on a Constitution every 30 years or so.

We already have a means of amending it, when the will of the people so desires to.  Again, no gun or revolution is necessary

[Plane]

<< . . . because the Cubans haven't got anuy way at all to tolerate a loyal opposition >>

ROTFLMFAO.  In Cuba, there  IS no "loyal oppposition."  Either you're for the Revolution or you're against the people.

if England or the US exiled their loal opposition would we be better off?
Cuba cut itself off from a rich resorce this way. It is as if they loved their right arm so much that they amputated the left.

<<Is marketing a problem or a sophistication?>>

Obviously it's a problem.  Particularly when you've got an ignorant electorate and a huge disparity in marketing funds available between the ruling classes and the workers.

It is a sophistication, the alternative is a government controll of enforced ignorance.

[Michael Tee]

<<if England or the US exiled their loal opposition would we be better off?>>

Tough question, I really gotta think this one through . . .   hmmm, if the Party of Tweedle Dum exiled the Party of Tweedle Dee, would England or America be better off?  Geeze <sound of wheels turning, gears meshing>>

<<Cuba cut itself off from a rich resorce this way. >>

Never heard of the enemies of the people being described as a "rich resource" before but, uh, my gut feeling is that the Cubans will somehow manage to survive without them.

<<It is as if they loved their right arm so much that they amputated the left.>>

LOL.  plane, if the gusanos are their left arm, I think they're gonna be just fine as amputees.


<<It [political marketing]is a sophistication, the alternative is a government controll of enforced ignorance.>>

What political marketing is, is a mechanism for the oligarchy to make sure that no ideas hostile to the oligarchy ever reach the broader public, which in turn ensures that the entire political process can be safely left in the hands of play-actors who all serve the same basic oligarchical principles.

[Plane]

<<if England or the US exiled their loal opposition would we be better off?>>

Tough question, I really gotta think this one through . . .   hmmm, if the Party of Tweedle Dum exiled the Party of Tweedle Dee, would England or America be better off?  Geeze <sound of wheels turning, gears meshing>>

<<Cuba cut itself off from a rich resorce this way. >>

Never heard of the enemies of the people being described as a "rich resource" before but, uh, my gut feeling is that the Cubans will somehow manage to survive without them.

<<It is as if they loved their right arm so much that they amputated the left.>>

LOL.  plane, if the gusanos are their left arm, I think they're gonna be just fine as amputees.

They are not tho are they ?

<<It [political marketing]is a sophistication, the alternative is a government controll of enforced ignorance.>>

What political marketing is, is a mechanism for the oligarchy to make sure that no ideas hostile to the oligarchy ever reach the broader public, which in turn ensures that the entire political process can be safely left in the hands of play-actors who all serve the same basic oligarchical principles.

Ogiarchy again?

Is Cuba so much better off with a single ogilrchy than we are with dozens?

The Cuban government rations information to its people because it fears the power of the people who know the truth.

Marketing is persuasion , the alternative to government by thuggary.

[Michael Tee]

<<Is Cuba so much better off with a single ogilrchy than we are with dozens?>>

I think so.  How many Americans have free medical care and free education from pre-school to grad school?  How many Americans are guaranteed jobs and housing by their government?

<<The Cuban government rations information to its people because it fears the power of the people who know the truth.>>

"The truth" being the lies of the scum-of-the-earth Cuban exile community in Florida?  They ration information and so does the U.S.A. ration information.  They do it through the corporate-controlled MSM, Cuba does it through the Communist Party of Cuba.

<<Marketing is persuasion . . . >>

That's a very naive view of it.  If I'm allowed to saturate your information landscape and my opponent gets in one appearance for every 100 of mine, that's not "persuasion," it's brainwashing.   The alternative to marketing is equal access to the media for all candidates with none of the candidates being permitted to have anyone else coach  him, script his utterances or write his material.

[Plane]

<<Is Cuba so much better off with a single ogilrchy than we are with dozens?>>

I think so.  How many Americans have free medical care and free education from pre-school to grad school?

most

  How many Americans are guaranteed jobs and housing by their government?

all

<<The Cuban government rations information to its people because it fears the power of the people who know the truth.>>

"The truth" being the lies of the scum-of-the-earth Cuban exile community in Florida?  They ration information and so does the U.S.A. ration information.  They do it through the corporate-controlled MSM, Cuba does it through the Communist Party of Cuba.

enforced ignorance as I said. But do you really think that there can be enforced ignorance in the USA? You are very lop sidedly wrong on that, in Cuba there is a ogliarchy  monopoly in the US you can buy any magazine published on the earth , tune in any website your computer can handle . In Cuba the Government is suspicious of the people and controlls them , in the US the Peopel are suspicious of the government and controlls it.

<<Marketing is persuasion . . . >>

That's a very naive view of it.  If I'm allowed to saturate your information landscape and my opponent gets in one appearance for every 100 of mine, that's not "persuasion," it's brainwashing.   The alternative to marketing is equal access to the media for all candidates with none of the candidates being permitted to have anyone else coach  him, script his utterances or write his material.

And what prevents equal access to the public?

Marketing does ! Ha!

Marketing produces access to the public.