Censoring mobiles and the net: how the West is clamping down (http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/censoring-mobiles-and-the-net--how-the-west-is-clamping-down-20110815-1itsx.html)

It was only a matter of time before governments decided that the ability of their citizens to use electronic media to organise themselves was a freedom too far. I can hear the screams about freedom of speech now, but what about sedition, which takes precidence the freedom of speech or the crime of sedition?

Se·di·tion   /sɪˈdɪʃən/ Show Spelled[si-dish-uhn] noun
1. incitement of discontent or rebellion against a government.
2. any action, especially in speech or writing, promoting such discontent or rebellion.
3. Archaic . Rebellious disorder.

Often sedition laws are used to muzzle political opposition. When /where is the line crossed ?

Often sedition laws are used to muzzle political opposition. When /where is the line crossed ?

Well Tom I would say the line was crossed in UK when people were organised to riot, raid shops and apparently attack members of the public thus the intent to shut down the means whereby they can organise by calling on others to support them in what will ultimately become racially motivated disorder

In Iran they have effectively shut down the green revolution by taking down social media networks and are now removing sat dishes off rooftops .
APA - Iranian police launched special operation to dismantle satellite dishes ? <font color=red>PHOTO </font> (http://en.apa.az/news.php?id=153136)

I think you have made my point, trogladites, but it is sad to see it happen in an advanced society although the Brits have been becoming more Orwellian for a long time now.

Again ; when is the line crossed ? I don't know. Our 2nd President John Adams tried to stifle political opposition with a sedition act . Woodrow Wilson again introduced them during WWI... and at various times we've had sedition trials... mostly during war times .

I don't know the law as it is applied to Great Britain. Generally I think err in favor of free speech.

Hello clete:

The airways don't belong to the government.. They belong to the people. But, if the people LAY DOWN for the government, as they are when they let the NSA spy upon them, then why wouldn't the government feel as though it could BLOCK the public airways??

Guard your rights, America, or they will soon be gone.

excon

yeah of course it stands to reason that the NSA listening in on jihadists call into the US would next shut down social media to repress domestic opposition .:rolleyes:

Who knows exactly what happens even in the US, when the news is. How many of us have been at events that happen, of know of soldiers who were at events in war, and when they heard of the official version or the news account it was nothing like what really happened.

Yeah who knows ? But there have been plenty of recent examples where if the government were going to shut down social media for things like wilding and flash mobs they could've made a case for it.
Ex is going a step further and saying that we should not even use the technology the enemy is using to combat them by listening in.

Of course the left never shys away from advocating the shut down of information organizations they disagree with ;or subjecting them to 'fairness doctrines '... or liberally identifying hate speech(or anything they define as hate speech ) as a crime. So I can see where a left leaning government like GB would not shy away from shutting the net down .

Of course the left never shys away from advocating the shut down of information organizations they disagree with ;
There are plenty of left leaning people here who would never advocate shutting down information organizations they disagree with, so there goes that theory.

So I can see where a left leaning government like GB would not shy away from shutting the net down .

Strange I had the distinct impression this UK government was on the right of the spectrum, I think your bias is showing

The spectrum is relative . The conservatives in GB are pretty much on board with the nanny state... they just think they can run it better.

the spectrum is relative . .

So where would you place Ahamadjihad then, to the left of the Republicans?

If you put liberty to the right and tyranny to the left then yes... OBL is a leftist.

If you put liberty to the right and tyranny to the left then yes.Well that quote pretty displays a warped view of the world.

http://www.americanthinker.com/Muller%202.JPG

Yes, I see where you got that image: American Thinker (http://www.americanthinker.com/) I'm sure they represent your points of view perfectly.

Interesting political spectrum I don't see republicanism or Islam on it anywhere. Perhaps they are off the chart.

Where I come from Liberal or liberalism is equated to conservative and certainly free but with a social conscience yet your ideas suggest it lies just short of totalitarianism you also suggests that conservative and libertarianism lie in the same plain. You forget that to the far right also lies totalitarianism

Hello again, tom:

Draw all the lines you wish..

If you call letting the NSA listen to your phone calls, and read you email, FREEDOM, and you call being the worlds LARGEST jailer FREEDOM, then I'd hate to see how free we're going to be when you get some more control.

you call being the worlds LARGEST jailer FREEDOM
Yes, I never understood that. Plus a lot of people aren't even free to travel.

Hello again, tom:

you call being the worlds LARGEST jailer FREEDOM, then I'd hate to see how free we're gonna be when you get some more control.

Yes, interesting isn't it that the one who touts freedom the most also restricts it the most. And what are these people being locked up for? I think it demonstrates that the jail model isn't working, but it must keep the unemployment statistics low and someone very busy

Yes, I see where you got that image: American Thinker (http://www.americanthinker.com/) I'm sure they represent your points of view perfectly.


Yes, very much an over simplification. Unfortunately, it is not that simple.

Fascism can cover both the left and right side of the spectrum. Same with Libertarianism. There can be both left wing and right wing Libertarian positions.

Tut

Yes, very much an over simplification. Unfortunately, it is not that simple.

Fascism can cover both the left and right side of the spectrum. Same with Libertarianism. There can be both left wing and right wing Libertarian positions.

Tut

Watch those splinters Tut

So where would you place Ahamadjihad then, to the left of the Republicans?


Hi Clete,

I would say that it is a Theocracy. Again, it is an over simplification to say it is left wing. It does have some similarity with Fascism and Totalitarianism.
In other words, it could be left or right in the political spectrum. It's uniqueness in the modern world makes it difficult to place.

Tut

Hi Clete,

I would say that it is a Theocracy. Again, it is an over simplification to say it is left wing. It does have some similarity with Fascism and Totalitarianism.
In other words, it could be left or right in the political spectrum. It's uniqueness in the modern world makes it difficult to place.

Tut

Tut I would have placed it in the Fascist camp on the far right

Tut I would have placed it in the Fascist camp on the far right

Hi Clete,

I'll go along with that.

Tut

Fascism and communism are both on the socialism wing ;the totalitarian wing... that would make jihadists perfect bedmates for that wing..

If you call letting the NSA listen to your phone calls, and read you email, FREEDOM, and you call being the worlds LARGEST jailer FREEDOM, then I'd hate to see how free we're going to be when you get some more control.


Nonsense hyperbole. I'm more concerned about politicians censoring content and controlling the means of dissent . You are afraid that the government will read the content .
There is nothing wrong with legitimate law enforcement . Document for me the number of domestic political prisoners in our jails . If you can find any at all it's a rare exception. If you argue we should not lock up as many non-violent offenders ;and end mandatory minimum sentences I'm on your side.
But if you are comparing us to nations that have large sections of their territory that are lawless then you distort the reality. Or maybe you are comparing us the nations that lock up political prisoners and make them disappear. Again you distort the facts. China alone has hundreds of thousands of people held in "administrative detention," re-education camps that don't get reported in the stats.

fascism and communism are both on the socialism wing ;the totalitarian wing... that would make jihadists perfect bedmates for that wing ..

Hi Tom,

As I said before this is an oversimplification. Fascism can be both right and left wing. If you don't believe me then Google it yourself.

Clearly this is an attempt to funnel anything extreme down to the left wing, i.e. communism, fascism totalitarianism and theocracy. That is a nonsense.

Tut

I don't agree with the classic linear spectrum (or any linear spectrum of political philosophies) which in itself is an over simplification .It gets used to smear legitimate forms of political philosophy . It is offensive to me to be compared to a fascist so I return the favor.

The truth of the matter is that fascism is a form of socialism.. That is just an undeniable fact. So to put it on the same side of an artificial linear spectrum as people who oppose socialism distorts the political philosophies. The spectrum I posted is closer to reality in my opinion than the text book left right spectrum.

The truth of the matter is that fascism is a form of socialism.. That is just an undeniable fact.
Nah, that's just plain wrong.

Fascism: advocates the creation of a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through indoctrination, physical education, and family policy including eugenics

Socialism: is an economic system in which the means of production are publicly or commonly owned and controlled cooperatively, or a political philosophy advocating such a system. As a form of social organization, socialism is based on co-operative social relations and self-management; relatively equal power-relations and the reduction or elimination of hierarchy in the management of economic and political affairs

I realize that it serves your end to make the word socialism a pejorative but that's not the case either, it's just another form of econimic system. YOu have some socialistic aspects in the US political economy of course and survey after survey reports that the happiness and standard of living of socialist-leaning countries are greater than in the US.

I don't agree with the classic linear spectrum (or any linear spectrum of political philosophies) which in itself is an over simplification .It gets used to smear legitimate forms of political philosophy . It is offensive to me to be compared to a fascist so I return the favor.

The truth of the matter is that fascism is a form of socialism.. That is just an undeniable fact. So to put it on the same side of an artificial linear spectrum as people who oppose socialism distorts the political philosophies. The spectrum I posted is closer to reality in my opinion than the text book left right spectrum.


Hi Tom

Well, if you don't agree with the linear spectrum of politics why did you post it in the first place? Isn't the spectrum you posted a classical one dimensional left-right representation. Perhaps I need to go back and have a look at it.


Fascism as a form of socialism? You could argue that, but I think you would be struggling. It is possible, but it is far from undeniable.

What exactly are legitimate forms of political philosophy?

Tut

Fascism is a totalitarian form of state socialism.. communism is a totalitarian form of international socialism . Both are collectivist/totalitarian philosophies.
Fascism: The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics | Library of Economics and Liberty (http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Fascism.html)

Nonsense hyperbole. If you argue we should not lock up as many non-violent offenders ;and end mandatory minimum sentences I'm on your side.Hello again, tom:

Hyperbole?? I think not. While I appreciate your liberal attitude, it's YOUR party who brought us mandatory minimums and supports locking up NON violent offenders... The LEFT WING doesn't do that.. They don't sound like freedom loving people to me.

In fact, the righter we go, the LESS free we become! Oh, I know you TALK a good game about freedom... But, what about your LISTS of people who DON'T qualify for Constitutional rights?? I don't have a list. EVERYBODY qualifies for Constitutional rights, in my book.

Who sounds like he supports freedom MORE??

excon

But, what about your LISTS of people who DON'T qualify for Constitutional rights??

That would be foreign enemies at war with the country. It's a very small list.

fascism is a totalitarian form of state socialism ..communism is a totalitarian form of international socialism . Both are collectivist/totalitarian philosophies.
Fascism: The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics | Library of Economics and Liberty (http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Fascism.html)


Hi Tom,

The way you have set out the above seems to warrants another look. Especially the conclusion you have drawn. Yes, I know I am an nitpicker.

That aside, I agree with the article, but it is important to keep in mind the author is talking about the similarities of fascism and socialism in economic terms. No one is denying there are some similarities but socialism is more than an economic theory. It is just as much a political theory as it is a social theory as it is a moral theory.

To argue they are one and the same based on economic similarities is trying to assert the impossible. It is a bit like saying that it is an undeniable fact that fish are the same as whales.


Tut

That would be foreign enemies at war with the country. It's a very small list.Hello again, tom:

Let's talk about YOUR list... You bandy about words like "foreign enemies", but you're only guessing... Some of the people we're going to keep FOREVER, haven't been found to BE an enemy by having a trial... No, Sir. It's only been SUGGESTED that they're enemies. Somebody TOLD us. They got snitched on... You believe it.. I don't know why.

Certainly, if you're really a freedom loving guy, you'd WANT something MORE than a mere suggestion before you lock somebody up FOREVER...

Plus, you DO know too, that Barack Obama can unilaterally DECLARE YOU to be an enemy combatant, don't you? You know that you wouldn't have ANY Fifth Amendment rights to challenge him, don't you? Does that bit of Patriot Act sound free to you??

I'm glad that you TRUST the government NOT to abuse the authority you gave them, INCLUDING the authority to SPY on Americans... Personally, I DON'T trust the government... I didn't think right wingers did either... Oh, that's right... You trust the COP side of government... The side that wants to take care of sick people, you don't. Doesn't that make you feel schizoid?

excon

PS> What about people who want the same marriage rights you have? Are THEY on your list? I think so. You don't believe they should HAVE the same right's you have. How free is that?

Certainly, if you're really a freedom loving guy, you'd WANT something MORE than a mere suggestion before you lock somebody up FOREVER...

Nope... I want tribunals conducted asap. Who's preventing that ? The freedom loving lib in the White House.


PS> What about people who want the same marriage rights you have? Are THEY on your list? I think so. You don't believe they should HAVE the same right's you have. How free is that?


My position is clear. Given the complexities; the government should not be in the marriage business... just the contractual side of which I am for full rights for all. No one should be penalized for the rights bestowed on couples by the State... but it isn't marriage .

They still have the same rights as I do regarding marriage . Marriage is between man and woman and everyone who wishes can marry if they find someone from the opposite sex to agree .

I think you miss the point far right or far left they both have the same characteristics,; totalitarian, state control, mobilisation of the population, slavery, limitation of political activity

What we have here is an attempt to say that these things are the characteristics of the left alone

I think you miss the point far right or far left they both have the same characteristics,; totalitarian, state control, mobilisation of the population, slavery, limitation of political activity

What we have here is an attempt to say that these things are the characteristics of the left alone

They are... that's why I disagree with the classical left /right spectrum. Under the classical spectrum the more you go to the polls ,the more oppressive your philosophy making some centrist marshmallow non-committed philosophy the most free ? BS .

They still have the same rights as I do regarding marriage . Marriage is between man and woman and everyone who wishes can marry if they find someone from the opposite sex to agree .Hello again, tom:

So, they can't CHOOSE who they want to marry?? Doesn't sound FREE to me...

I understand.. You believe in FREEDOM, all right.. But, ONLY for YOURSELF and your friends. The OTHER guy need not apply.. That isn't freedom. It's not even close.

excon

PS> What about the 12 million illegal immigrants? Are they on your list? I think they ARE.

Illegals have all the rights that illegals have under the constitution. Since they are foreigners subject to the legal jurisdiction where they are ;then yes ,they actually do have some constitutional rights.

My solutions to the problem is a lot less severe than some. Yet ,in my view ,they are still foreigners invading by another means.


So, they can't CHOOSE who they want to marry?? Doesn't sound FREE to me...
They can choose anyone from the opposite sex, and are free to do so , if they want to call it a marriage. I deny them nothing regarding rights.

Hello again, tom:

We can go on and on, as we have over the years... However, it'll do no good.. After pointing out that you have a LIST of people who DON'T qualify for freedom in your book, you STILL have the gall to say that YOUR party is the FREEDOM party, when I've shown time and time again, that you're not.

I see that my work here is NOT yet complete.

excon

I said nothing about 'Party' . I am unaffiliated .

Now you've gone from 'constitutional rights' to 'freedom' . Make up your mind. BTW.. I said nothing of 'freedom 'either... I said liberty.

I said nothing about 'Party' . I am unaffiliated . Really :D

BTW.. I said nothing of 'freedom 'either... I said liberty.

Liberty - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberty)

the quality or state of being free:

What's your definition?

Read some Thomas Hobbes, John Locke ,John Stuart Mill .That will give you a better idea of liberty than Webster.

So we must always assume you are using connotations instead of the usual denotations?

They can choose anyone from the opposite sex, and are free to do so , if they want to call it a marriage. I deny them nothing regarding rights.Hello again, tom:

They can choose from a list of people that you APPROVE of. If they DON'T pick somebody from YOUR list, they get NO rights..

So, they're free all right - to do what YOU want them to do... That ain't freedom. It ain't close. It ain't liberty either.

excon

Why ? Have I outlawed their behavior ? No . Do they get the same cohabitation rights as any other couple ? Under my plan yes.

Just to get us back on theme, the spooks will now help the police find the organisers of the UK riots
MI5 called in to find organisers of riots (http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/mi5-called-in-to-find-organisers-of-riots-20110816-1iw8r.html)
Seems it takes some experise to break through the encription of our more up market devices and so the full force of the state is used to spoil the fun of the rioters. Just how much will they spend to find that 12year old

They are .... that's why I disagree with the classical left /right spectrum. Under the classical spectrum the more you go to the polls ,the more oppressive your philosophy making some centrist marshmallow non-committed philosophy the most free ? BS .


Hi Tom,

I think I get it.

You see the classical left/right spectrum as having fascism on the right side. I think you want it on the left side along with totalitarianism, theocracy, socialism and communism.

On that basis there is no such thing as right wing theism, right wing totalitarianism and right wing fascism? If this is the case then there needs to be a rewriting of history and political science books.


Tut

Tut ;let's start with a less linear spectrum... that may do well for elementary understanding of history but is completely inadequate for understanding politics beyond a basal level .

Clete ;the State is going to use the same technology used by the thugs to track down the ring leaders and agitators. Excon thinks the state is oppressive if it does so . My position has been more nuianced so I ask again... When /where is the line crossed ?

Tut ;let's start with a less linear spectrum....that may do well for elementary understanding of history but is completely inadequate for understanding politics beyond a basal level .

[/I]

Hi Tom

It seems to me your political analysis fits very well into a linear representation. Isn't that why you posed such a representation in the first place?

Adding further axes to the spectrum would only serve to support my position. That is you cannot represent politics as a one dimensional representation.

Tut

Clete ;the State is going to use the same technology used by the thugs to track down the ring leaders and agitators. excon thinks the state is oppressive if it does so . My position has been more nuianced so I ask again... When /where is the line crossed ?

It is hard to know when the line is crossed Google (gmail)was just used to track down the hoax bomber here as was security cameras, so a crime was committed and a criminal found, even though he had fled to the US, but what we are speaking about here is something preemptive, police hanging out on Facebook, etc looking for a possible flash event, so they need some sort of alert mechanism unless they are targeting a particular individual and that makes whatever they are doing presumptive. Their software will be the sort used by national security services to search for particular word associations. Twitter should be very concerned because this strikes at the very heart of the service they provide and provides a net which might trap innocent individuals who will have to prove their innocence. This is not France, we have the right of the presumption of innocence

There are people here who claim Lincoln abused executive powers even as rebel armies were threatening to invade the Capitol.

Under classical liberal philosophy (Locke) sometimes the executive must exert authority in meeting
'exigencies' or “emergencies” for which the legislative power provided no relief
Or existing law granted no necessary remedy. He did not regard this prerogative as
Limited to wartime, or even to situations of great urgency. It was sufficient if the
“public good” might be advanced by its exercise. Here in the US it is called 'implied powers' of the President .

That's OK by me in a nation that can hold the executive accountable. But the same procedures you say the Brits will use has been practiced by the Iranian regime to dismantle a legitimate revolution against a real tyranny.

Hi Tom

It seems to me your political analysis fits very well into a linear representation. Isn't that why you posed such a representation in the first place?.

Adding further axes to the spectrum would only serve to support my position. That is you cannot represent politics as a one dimensional representation.

Tut

No I posted it to dispute this outrageous contention that national socialism has anything in common with a 'conservative' (ie classical liberal ) philosophy.

No I posted it to dispute this outrageous contention that national socialism has anything in common with a 'conservative' (ie classical liberal ) philosophy.

Hi again Tom,

If you reject the simplified linear representation for a 'complex' representation then you would have to support the idea that national socialism has at least a limited amount of things in common with the conservative position. This type of approach is reflected in the article you posted in relation to the economic similarities of socialism and fascism. That is the nature of the multiple axis model, which I agree is more accurate.

However, you can't assign a separate category for conservatism because you feel it is somehow different. You can do this in a one dimensional representation.

Tut

If I'm going to post a linear spectrum then I'm going to assign polls that I think are more accurate.
If liberty is defined in the amt of control the government has on the individual then I would place conservatism on the end that reflects more liberty... and socialistic models ,that concede liberties to the state ,on the other side of the spectrum .

if I'm going to post a linear spectrum then I'm going to assign polls that I think are more accurate.
If liberty is defined in the amt of control the government has on the individual then I would place conservatism on the end that reflects more liberty ...and socialistic models ,that concede liberties to the state ,on the other side of the spectrum .

Hi Tom,

If that is what you are trying to demonstrate then the linear model serves that purpose well. I think most people would agree that conservatism reflects more liberty.

A complexer model demonstrates the similarities and differences found within the varies ideologies.

Tut

I think most people would agree that conservatism reflects more liberty.Hello again, TUT:

No, they don't!

Let's talk about liberty ON THE GROUND instead of the highfaluting rhetoric going on here. Besides, I don't even know what a troglodyte is.

Although the attempt behind the Patriot Act was to "protect" America, it TOOK AWAY civil rights that we had. Conservatives did that... Even though Gitmo was supposed to PROTECT Americans, it TOOK AWAY our Fifth Amendment right to due process of law. Conservatives did that. Even though preventing gays the right to marry supposedly preserves American values, it DENY'S rights to a MAJOR portion of the American population. Conservatives did that. Even though allowing the government to READ our email and LISTEN in on our phone calls is supposed to make us safer, it is NOTHING like liberty or freedom in my book. Conservatives did that...

On the other hand, it IS true that the socialistic fire department that we all depend on, TAKES away the rights of the PRIVATE fire department's to find work. That's not freedom for them. It IS true that black children who were forced to learn in segregated classrooms were FREED by LIBERALS... Conservatives didn't like that.. In fact, they'd LIKE to go back to that era...

I could go on, but you get my drift... Conservatives LOVE freedom - for THEMSELVES, and THEMSELVES ONLY.

excon

It IS true that black children who were forced to learn in segregated classrooms were FREED by LIBERALS... Conservatives didn't like that.. In fact, they'd LIKE to go back to that era...


The race card you carry is so big it doesn't fit in your pocket. Your narrative suffers however from historical inacurracy even as it has become a well polished slander.

I remind you that the god of the American liberals Roosevelt appointed KKK'ers into SCOTUS like Hugo Black and segregationists like Jimmy Byrnes (ultimately becoming one of Roosevelt's top advisors) . The libs for years returned KKK'er Kleagle Robert Byrd to the Senate. Governor and later Dem Senator Senator Ernest Hollings was a proud segregationist.
Among the Dems during the very "liberal" Johnson era were liberal Dems who very much opposed the 1964 Civil Rights act including :
J. William Fulbright,a man Bill Clinton considers his mentor ;- Albert Gore Sr ,father of the Goracle ;Sam Ervin of Watergate hearings fame ;Richard Russell ,who's name is used for the Senate office building .
40% of the House Democrats VOTED AGAINST the Civil Rights Act, while 80% of Republicans SUPPORTED it.
It was a Republican President who sent Federal troops to the South to enforce desegregation as it was Republican adminstrations after the Civil War that used Federal troops during the Reconstruction era .

40% of the House Democrats VOTED AGAINST the Civil Rights Act, while 80% of Republicans SUPPORTED it.Hello again, tom:

You are correct. But, the Democrats who voted against it became the new CONSERVATIVE Republican majority in the south.

I repeat. Black children were freed from segregated schools by LIBERALS. Ending segregation was opposed by CONSERVATIVES..

excon

You can have your false narrative of history . You would have to bring more to the table to prove the outrageous assertion that conservatives today want to return to the days of segregation.

you would have to bring more to the table to prove the outrageous assertion that conservatives today want to return to the days of segregation.Hello again, tom:

The Wake County, N.C., school district has dismantled its integration policy. (http://www.theroot.com/buzz/did-koch-brothers-bankroll-neo-segregation-wake-county) A new conservative school board took over, filled with Tea Party members who decided to abolish initiatives to integrate schools along racial and class lines.

Charles and David Koch, billionaire brothers and Tea Party backers bankrolled the local Tea Party candidates.

Anything else?

excon

Forced busing proved to be a colossal failure wherever it was tried in the past ;especially in liberal Boston. Doing it under a different name produces the same failures. I'll argue that the money wasted on busing programs would be better spent in improvements in the district schools .

Are the parents given a choice ? No . I'll believe the parents want their children bused to other schools when a system of vouchers is initiated where the parent indeed gets to choose which school their children go to.
You proved nothing in this example. I'll point to the Orthodox community near me that has a majority board membership in a diverse community who consistently vote in their parochrial best interests. Does that make them racists ? If you are telling me that schools within the same district were getting unequal funding and resources then you may have a case. But no one has made that claim.
Edit :
How did busing work out in liberal Seattle ? Well ;turns out it was a 2 decade nightmare.

Initially limited to a few thousand middle school students, by 1981 nearly 40 percent of all the district’s students were being bused for racial reasons. School officials defended busing against several legal challenges but gradually scaled back the program in response to waning public support. The district’s own data showed that busing disproportionately burdened children of color, undercut academic achievement, inhibited parental involvement, contributed to so-called "white flight,” and did little to reduce racial isolation in the schools. By 1999, when race-based busing finally ended in Seattle, it was widely regarded as "one of those well-intentioned social experiments that don't work"
HistoryLink.org- the Free Online Encyclopedia of Washington State History (http://www.historylink.org/index.cfm?DisplayPage=output.cfm&File_Id=3939)

I'll argue that the money wasted on busing programs would be better spent in improvements in the district schools Hello again, tom:

I got it. It's CHEAPER to keep the niggers down on the farm, huh? I'll bet that was the SAME argument the Tea Party School board used when they TOOK AWAY the RIGHTS of the little black children.

Like I said above... Conservatives LOVE freedom for THEMSELVES, and THEMSELVES only

excon

For Ex so we can get this thread back on theme. Ex you say you don't know what a trogladite is. Let the urban dictionary help you, by the way the other descriptions were unprintable
Trogladite
From the prehistoric insects that lived in caves, troglodite is someone who is "out of it," or not "up" on pop culture.
Trogladite
A female who has been generously whipped with the ugly stick.
Trogladite
A mutant creature so vile, its very presence causes famine, slavery and apartheid. Extreme cases result in genocide.

We were discussing the attitude of the UK PM who wants to shut down social media to prevent urban violence

we were discussing the attitude of the UK PM who wants to shut down social media to prevent urban violenceHello again, clete:

I appreciate your attempt to keep the thread on point.. However, I'll answer as I please.

excon

Hello again, clete:

I appreciate your attempt to keep the thread on point.. However, I'll answer as I please.

excon

Don't be a trogladite Ex by the way here's an example closer to home
We'd shut off mobiles again, says US transport official after protest (http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/wed-shut-off-mobiles-again-says-us-transport-official-after-protest-20110817-1ixh9.html)

You want to discuss racial issues let's have a new thread.

Don't be a trogladite ExHello again, clete:

If you could keep up, you wouldn't have to call names.

excon

Hello again, clete:

If you could keep up, you wouldn't have to call names.

excon

Why should I slow down for you Ex be careful you are not being lapped

If you think that my opinion that spending money to improve schools is the equivalence of saying " keep the niggers down on the farm" then that is a discussion ender. I'm not going to waste my time responding to that.

Like I said you have a convenient race card in your pocket that most libs use when they can't forward a debate . It will only work on me if I take the bate... I won't . Think of me as you will . It's the patronizing liberal attitude that thinks a Black child can't learn unless they sit next to a white student .
Busing has a record of failure .It failed to achieve it's goals and it diverted resources to improve schools . It led to a continued decline of the inner city schools .


The record of our education system's decline with decades of liberal policies is a matter of public record. You as a proponent of progressive policies own that record not me. It is across the board liberal policies that have hurt the prospects of African-Americans in this country . Your own Seattle school district saw busing as a bad idea and abandoned it. Most districts in the country have followed suit .Wake County is late to the game .
From the article I posted :

By the late 1980s, the voices of dissent were coming from all sides, including some of the same white liberals and African Americans who had originally endorsed busing. Critics complained that the Seattle Plan unfairly burdened children of color; contributed to a widening achievement gap between white and minority students; undermined public confidence in the schools, particularly among middle-class parents; left some schools under-enrolled while others were over-enrolled, and was too costly and complex.
By the early 1990s, some of the most vocal critics of mandatory busing were African Americans, including the charismatic John H. Stanford (1938-1998), superintendent of Seattle schools from 1995 to 1998. In a key presentation to the School Board in November 1995, Stanford said the data showed that low-income students who attended schools outside their neighborhoods scored lower on achievement tests than low-income students in neighborhood schools. Furthermore, parental involvement in the schools was lowest among bused students, who often needed it the most.Stanford also noted that about one-fourth of Seattle's school-aged children were enrolled in private schools, a far higher percentage than in comparable cities without mandatory busing. In some white, middle-class neighborhoods in Seattle, only about half the children were choosing public over private schools, compared to 90 percent of those in racially mixed, poorer neighborhoods. Stanford urged the board to put more emphasis on the quality of the education in the classroom and less on the color of the skin on the students. "I don't have to sit next to someone of another color to learn,"he said, in an oft-quoted remark (Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 1999).

Hello again, tom:

Bussing doesn't work in the long run. It was a short term solution in the hopes that full societal integration would follow. It happened here. That's why bussing ended. If it didn't happen in NC, there were other considerations at work. Maybe there is a flavor of racism there that's absent here.

I really don't know.. What I DO know, is that integration works even if bussing to achieve it, doesn't. So, instead of throwing up their hands and going back to the way it was, the school board should have made OTHER attempts to solve the problem. The key here is that they WENT BACK to the way it was.

Now, I don't know if the school boards action reflects the wish's of the Koch brothers, but I can put two and two together.

excon

I don't know the Koch Bros. All I know about them is the harping the left does about them . I know no one who takes their marching orders from them . I heard of the policies that have become the platform of conservatives and the TP long before I heard of them . So at best they've identified a group of people who are like minded and they have $$ to contribute.
It's a much a waste of time to hold the Koch Bros responsible for TP positions as it would be for me to try to make the case that Soros is a puppet master to the progressive movement. I know what organizations he funds .It would be silly for me to say that Soros predates the progressive platform.

So what do I know of the TP and conservative platforms ? We believe that the best way to advance education is to give parents choice through charter schools , vouchers ,and tuition credits ,teacher accountabilty which includes merit pay for outstanding teachers .
If the Koch Bros support that then I'm happy they are funding groups to advance it.

Clete the debate is happening here although flash mob violence has not escalated to the degree that it has in the UK... yet.

Cameron has not suggested a wholesale shutting down of access to social media ;but is considering the possibility for anyone suspected of using it for criminal activity.

Here during a 4th of July celebration a violent flash mob in Cleveland "spontaneously " erupted . That prompted the City Council to pass a measure (eventually vetoed by the Mayor ) that made it illegal to use social media to incite violence.

You cite the BART example . They went too far. In that case it was to protest against alleged police brutality .

In LA a DJ sent out a twitter message that had possibly thousands converge on Hollywood Blv. The crowd became rowdy . The city ;caught unaware ,had to waste valuable resources to crowd control. Such a demonstration would require obtaining a permit under normal and reasonable times . The DJ should be given a bill for the service the authorities were forced to use for the stunt.

Near-riot in Hollywood: Tourists caught up in 'Electric Daisy' chaos - latimes.com (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/07/electric-daisy-carnival-hollywood-kaskade.html)

Hi Tom

We see this sort of thing with gate crashers at parties, it hasn't become particularly violent but it wastes police time, like dealing with a 1,000 people crashing a party. I would not like to see Cronulla or Redfern again with an escalation of rabble rousing on social media, it was used relatively ineffectively then. What I don't want to see is police powers which can shut down communication networks and that is what is at the root of the UK proposals, and unfortunately bad ideas have a habit of migrating

and unfortunately bad ideas have a habit of migrating
Especially when the voice of the free world is mute when real tyrants employ those methods.

Voice of the free world. Likely to be the first to implement the methods. Free is a much overused concept.

More proof that the trogladites are here in force.

Police scramble to fight flash-mob mayhem - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/08/18/flashmobs.police/index.html)

Kansas City sets youth curfew after weekend shooting | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/19/us-kansascity-curfew-idUSTRE77I0DR20110819)

Kansas City sets youth curfew after weekend shooting | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/19/us-kansascity-curfew-idUSTRE77I0DR20110819)I'm OK with that one. It's not really the kids that are the problem, it's the failed parenting of the previous generation.

And how did they fail karma? They were set up by their parents who thought it was a great idea to party

That's the fail.

It's fostering an entitlement mentality in the population.


Rioting in London and flash mobbing in American cities have raised another paradox: Does contemporary looting and violence follow from physical deprivation or from a boredom, envy, and anger caused by too many subsidies and too little personal initiative and self-reliance? We know that the more we ensure that young people have generous unemployment insurance and government money for housing, food, and education, the more they are likely not to get up at 6 a.m. and take an extra class or look for a job. And yet the more we provide such bread-and-circuses dependencies, the more it becomes dangerous to question such life support. Ask the Emperor Justinian, who cut back on a bloated civil-service and entitlement bureau — and earned the Nika riots, which almost toppled his regime. So even as we suspect that the welfare state is unsustainable, we are told that it alone can prevent social unrest — which we suspect is currently brought about by the welfare state.

We worry about our youth, citing high unemployment among those under 25, a $16 trillion debt bequeathed to them, a bankrupt Social Security and Medicare system propped up by a shrinking and poor youth cohort working for an affluent and long-lived aging generation. But we also fret that young people are not quite suffering in Depression-era style, but instead are hooked on iPhones, iPads, iPods, DVDs, and video games. A new profile of the stay-at-home, electronics-laden, late-20-something-year-old suggests that millions are earning just enough for entertainment, car payments, and gas, subsidized by mom and dad with free rent, food, and laundry. Are today’s students saddled with the highest per capita student-loan debt in history, and at the same time more pampered and learning less than any previous generation?

VDH's Private Papers::Obama's Paradoxes (http://victorhanson.com/articles/hanson081911.html)

Are today's students saddled with the highest per capita student-loan debt in history, and at the same time more pampered and learning less than any previous generation? The previous generation made this generation.

And the generation before who thought it was a good idea post WWII to create the nanny-state.

Are today's students saddled with the highest per capita student-loan debt in history, and at the same time more pampered and learning less than any previous generation?Hello tom:

It's true. It's a result of a gift the right wing made to the banksters.. Oh, that wasn't the ONLY gift. It was just the beginning of the greatest transfer of wealth from the middle class to the WEALTHY that we've experienced over the last decade or so.

Let's see how the right wingers PROTECTED their banksters... They made SURE that students couldn't discharge their loans through bankruptcy, and they made SURE the government backed the loans... Yup, WE got screwed, and we're STILL getting screwed.. They make ALL the profit and we take ALL the risk. The students get SCREWED in either case.

And, the right wingers are STILL carrying their water because they don't want to raise taxes on the banksters. They think lowering them is good.

Excon

Is bankruptcy the way you normally settle a loan ?

is bankruptcy the way you normally settle a loan ?Hello tom:

Fortunately, I've never taken advantage of the bankruptcy laws.. But, SOME people need to. That's WHY the bankruptcy laws are there. We BELIEVE in giving a person a second chance. But, whether you believe in them or not, doesn't change the fact that banksters made SURE that their loans won't be discharged in bankruptcy.. They got their friends in congress to pass that loss on to the OTHER creditors...

So tell me. Why should a bank be PROTECTED from THIS particular loan?? I thought you were a FREE market kind of guy, but I see you want to PROTECT the banksters... How does a free marketeer justify PROTECTING the banksters??

excon

As you well know ,I've never been in favor of protecting banks . I have not had the time to research the history of student loans . But my best guess is that the government took it upon themselves to subsidize a large percentage of them somewhere in the 1960s.

The question really is why has the cost of higher education gone up so much ? I suspect ;based on my experience ,that colleges are run like a 4 year Disneyland /Animal House.

But my best guess is that the government took it upon themselves to subsidize a large percentage of them somewhere in the 1960s.Hello again, tom:

Subsidizing student loans is GOOD. It protects the STUDENT... It shifts some of the costs onto the taxpayer. That's good for the country. I don't mind my taxes going toward public education.

But, somehow, the banksters got their friends in congress to SWITCH it around so THEY were the ones who got PROTECTED, and the STUDENTS got screwed... That's BAD for the country.

excon

and the generation before who thought it was a good idea post WWII to create the nanny-state.No I think it has a LOT more to do with the sifting of the American Dream to the "appearance of wealth" as the ultimate goal. The parents are so focused on money and acquiring goods that parenting took a back seat.

Hello again, tom:

Subsidizing student loans is GOOD. It protects the STUDENT... It shifts some of the costs onto the taxpayer. That's good for the country. I don't mind my taxes going toward public education.

But, somehow, the banksters got their friends in congress to SWITCH it around so THEY were the ones who got PROTECTED, and the STUDENTS got screwed... That's BAD for the country.

excon

Yeah I know... you would make college education an entitlement fully paid for by the taxpayer .

So Sen Durbin wants to restore it to the way it was before the 2005 change where the Government loans were exempt from being subject to bankruptcy laws ;but students were enabled to renege on private loans. Why doesn't Sen Durbin et al go the additional step and remove the prohibitions about defaulting on the gvt loans ? Why even have provisions for students to pay them back ? It's only greedy "banksters" after all that were providing the financing for the students education. The President would gladly cut out the middle man.

Why doesn't Sen Durbin et al go after those greedy ivy covered institutions they graduated from for fleecing the students with way out of proportion to the benefit education costs ? The students after all are shmoozed with this fradulent promise of a higher paying career at the end of their time in these institutions . If anyone's perpetrating a fraud it's the colleges.

BTW... Student loans were dischargeable in bankruptcy prior to 1976. With the introduction of the US Bankruptcy Code (11 USC 101 et seq) in 1978, the ability to discharge education loans was limited. Prior to this legislation, education loans were dischargeable in bankruptcy without any exceptions.
It was Democrats that began the changes... Not "right wingers".

Yeah I know.....you would make college education an entitlement fully paid for by the taxpayer .

It was Democrats that began the changes .... Not "right wingers".Hello again, tom:

Couple things..

YES. I believe that's what state university's were all about - FREE education. And, YES again, I think they MORE than paid for themselves... That's the difference between INVESTMENT and idle spending. You guy's CAN'T tell the difference..

Second thing.. I didn't say there weren't some Democrat right wingers... How do you account for Joe Lieberman? But, I don't disagree with you about the influx of congressional right wingers from BOTH parties... Ever since Citizens United, they know where their bread is buttered.. It's WITH the moneyed interests. I call 'em banksters, but we can include corporations too.

excon

FREE
Bread a Circuses ;the hallmark of the nanny state and decline of great nations .
Anyway it's not the pampered middle class youths that are flash mobbing (except the thrill seekers or the impov kabuki dancers ). I can assure you that many if not most of them could easily pay back their student loans if it weren't for those greedy phone companies (phonesters ?)who charge them a fortune to text.

So Tom you think it is the poor and underprivileged who are responsible for flash mobs? Did you notice who were among the mob in Britain? The people came from both rich and poor.

This is a fad like slabbing is a fad, give them some new gadget and they will forget it altogether. What I say is no one under 21 should have a moblie phone then the problem is solved.