I just left a stultifyingly boring, state-required American Government class. The instructor started with the question Whoe says the Pledge of Allegiance? (the law mandates that it be said in schools, but individual students needn't take part). I found that I was one of 2 in the class of 19 who dod not, and this gave rise to a long invective about the wonderful things about America that should make us proud to live here blah blah blah. I listened in my normal bemused fashion, and then realized, wonder of wonders, that I did not want to floor the bastard with pointed questions, or argue at all. I realized something.
I take more pride in my Pawn Star than I do in my US passport. I am more proud to be a member of the Freethinker's Clan than I am to be an American citizen.
Some quotes from/about Freethinkers, all from these forums:
The Freethinkers are fools.
I consider this a very important question in the Freethinkers against Religion debate.
However, I wish more clans would use their websites to turn up the taunts, goads and ridicules as the Freethinkers and Apostles have done.
Of course, Freethinkers would share the following characteristic:
One who forms opinions on the basis of reason independently of authority; especially one who doubts or denies religious dogma.
It may be more proper to call this a common methodology than a common viewpoint.
(3) Ideological compatilbility. This is not required, but I think it would provide for a more rewarding experience if the applicant were at least sympathetic to the Freethinker's viewpoint.
please behave in a manner befitting a literate and rational person, and goddamit stop embarassing the Freethinkers
Two freethinkers have dared to venture into territories that before would be a shaming experience.
By using the scientific method, the Freethinkers are able to discard an obsolete hypothesis for a more accurate one.
I chose the name Freethinkers because it seemed the most inclusive of the terms I introduced in my original post.
It behooves a Freethinker to get clear on the actual views of others prior to subjecting them to condecension and criticism.
End Quotes
Whatever their motives, or contexts, one thing is clear. These quote represent the fact that to be a Freethinker involves certain expectations and responsibilities of a serious and deep-rooted nature. A Freethinker is expected to conduct him/herself with absolute intellectual integrity and humility, and to maintain and argue his beliefs in a rational way. Clearly, we all fall short, but as these quotes indicate, our Freethinker brethren intervene and bring us back up to our own standards through sharp but just rebukes. This is indeed a clan united by a common approach. Those who joined did so because of their fundamental method of dealing with life, and a great community has sprung up as a result.
A country, on the other hand, should not be a source of pride. It is merely the place where circumstances have dictated one lives. If a person violates the rules that underpin a country, he may or may not be punished, but he won't ever have entered into a bond of like-minded people. The variety is too great.
The Freethinkers have a strong and effective leader who attempts to conduct himself in his dealings with the rest of us in accordance with the methodological beliefs of the clan.
The USA has a government with no idealistic aspirations, which is in power for its own political and economic gains.
The difference is clear. A group united by intellectual bonds should always attract a healthier, less seriously nationalistic loyalty than a group united by happenstance and power.
Just a thought.
Mark,
Big, long post there. Much to think over. I'm just going to hit you with a few of my first impressions concerning...
You say "A country, on the other hand, should not be a source of pride. It is merely the place where circumstances have dictated one lives. If a person violates the rules that underpin a country, he may or may not be punished, but he won't ever have entered into a bond of like-minded people. The variety is too great. "
first impression... be careful of such broad brushes. A country is the people first, the laws it supports second and it's current govenment third. It should be viewed in it's historical context, never in the current moment. I am proud of fighting to be free of Georgie Porgie. And for helping defeat facism and the USSR. I'm proud of Lincoln and the men who fought to maintain the union. I'm not so proud of many other things. Don't you think that many people are willing to climb into a rust-bucket ship and voyage half way around the world to escape the government of Viet Nam means anything? It definitely does to them and the thousands of Chinese who try to escape china each year.
More later...
Concerning joining the freethingers... ahem. Not to presume that i would be allowed into such an august body.😕 I would never think of joining because it's members are too dogmatic. 🙄 It would take three days to get this out right, so you will just have to accept my evaluation that for me, personally... not speaking for anyone else or about anything in particular, I could never be bound by the dogma of "freethingerism".
Concerning government in General and the US govt. in instance...
It should be all of our sworn duty to minimize government in all of it's forms. And fight nationalistic dogma. A small RESPONSIVE government must be the goal in all cases. Only a small tiny little bugger will be frightened enough to respond. Like a well trained BEAR. Large government hates freedom. By it's very nature. You stated it well. So we all should join together to strangle the bugger before it eats us. A government SHOULD exist to serve the people. In actual practice, people DO EXIST to serve the government.
Post Script... Once you get the bugger [govt.] almost dead... Let it up, give it a drink of water and use it forever to build roads, provide military strength and nothing else.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyPeople first. Agreed. However, this really has nothing to do with the country. People vary, and should be judged as individuals. However, everyone on earth has a few basic goals in common, and in response to certain situations would act in very similar ways. Thus it is foolish to say "I am proud to be American/Chinese/Pakistani and not Russian/Korean/Indian because my people are so great.
Mark,
Big, long post there. Much to think over. I'm just going to hit you with a few of my first impressions concerning...
You say "A country, on the other hand, should not be a source of pride. It is merely the place where circumstances have dictated one lives. If a person violates the rules that underpin a country, he may or may not be punishe ...[text shortened]... ly does to them and the thousands of Chinese who try to escape china each year.
More later...
Laws it supports. Fine. I consider the principles supported by the Freethinkers to be more valuable than those supported by the documents underlying the way the US is run. Certainly they agree on a lot of points, but in places they differ (many, many things said by Americans, and justified as "rights", would result in disdain if uttered by a Freethinker).
Current government. The current government of the US leaves a lot to be desired. It also has a vastly harder job than Rwingett does with the Freethinkers, in part because we're so cool and agree on principles, in part because there are MANY more Americans than FTs. On the other hand, Rwingett handles government much more responsibly than the current administration does.
Based on your criteria, I should value my FT status above my passport.
State run education should end when a student masters the art of reading. Period. A standard test of ability and comprehension given at age 12. If a student doesn't pass then school continues until age 18 or the student learns to read, whichever comes first. Special education or needs are excluded of course. But for non-challenged students... what else do you need to educate youself the rest of your life? You can read? Here's the libraries of the world. Have fun.
After the "reading proficiency" is passed ,apprenticeships , specialty schools, institutes of higer learning, internet courses and business/corporate partnership contracts should fill all education needs. Do away with the current stodgy state run universities. It is such a scam that there is prolly no way to ever do it though.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyHear hear!
State run education should end when a student masters the art of reading. Period. A standard test of ability and comprehension given at age 12. If a student doesn't pass then school continues until age 18 or the student learns to read, whichever comes first. Special education or needs are excluded of course. But for non-challenged students... what else ...[text shortened]... dgy state run universities. It is such a scam that there is prolly no way to ever do it though.
Originally posted by royalchickenI am not comfortable with that. Maybe it's because I am old. I have friends who have died fighting for the "ideal of freedom". I owe them my loyalty. I have uncles who died in WW2 and one who was a POW for most of the war. I owe them loyalty. It is a personal thing with me. I have to honor their lives by respecting that which they died for. They all were volunteers, and wrote extensively about their conscious committment to the ideal they were fighting for.
Based on your criteria, I should value my FT status above my passport.[/b]
If you don't feel that, then maybe you are right. If so, i can't help but feel you are missing out on much pathos that is at the root of being human. Bad as the world is... bad as the US is... why not stick it out and try to make it better? Can't do that except by unrelenting effort to keep the good and dispatch the bad. Keep the baby. Change the water and hope for better times someday.
Originally posted by royalchickenYou are definitely letting the Clinton years wear on you too much. Just because we have a couple of amoral <edit>holes in office in consecutive terms is no reason to give up on next time. Besides... people might wake up and start dismantling the government to get it back to being "for the people".
The USA has a government with no idealistic aspirations, which is in power for its own political and economic gains.
[/b]
<Edit>
Mark... Thank every [non-existent] super dude in the universe that what you say is correct. "The USA has a government with no IDEALISTIC aspirations." No Dogma. Good, Right? Do you want a government that is "idealistic"? Whose ideals? Isn't that what differentiates the US from Korea, Cuba and China? THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT IDEA POSTED IN THE FORUMS IN WEEKS.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyI was merely drawing a conclusion from what you said. I know a few people who volunteered to participate in wars, and I have mixed feelings. Certainly, I respect personal sacrifice. The fact that someone sacrifices themself for something they respect is admirable...I just don't admire the act because I don't respect their ideals. I don't feel I owe loyalty to, for example, my grandfather who was in the Navy during WWII for that reason. I owe him respect because he is a really excellent person. I respect the fact that a poor kid joined up so he could go to college. But I don't respect any motivations like "I am defending what it means to be an American" because I don't agree with a lot of those things, and I am, for better or worse, and American.
I am not comfortable with that. Maybe it's because I am old. I have friends who have died fighting for the "ideal of freedom". I owe them my loyalty. I have uncles who died in WW2 and one who was a POW for most of the war. I owe them loyalty. It is a personal thing with me. I have to honor their lives by respecting that which they died for. They all ...[text shortened]... he good and dispatch the bad. Keep the baby. Change the water and hope for better times someday.
I think that when you revere sacrifice for the sake of "ideals" in a government military, when there is no serious threat to the civilian population, you are contradicting much of what you have previously said. Certainly, when armed people pull a submarine up on Kennebunk Beach near my house and start raping and pillaging, I will shoot them. Not for any ideals, but for my own personal defense.
I think we all diagree too much about the good and the bad for any significant and sweeping improvement. Every time I try to improve things to my standards, I get ridiculed or punished.
Long rant. Apologies.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyMaybe when George III takes power, we'll overthrow him like we did last time 😛
You are definitely letting the Clinton years wear on you too much. Just because we have a couple of amoral <edit>holes in office in consecutive terms is no reason to give up on next time. Besides... people might wake up and start dismantling the government to get it back to being "for the people".
Originally posted by royalchickenIf...Big "IF" i had said that I revere "sacrifice" then you would be correct. I said i revere those people and their views. Big difference. I respect the "ideal" of "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness". You don't? Do you respect any "ideal"? Ideal in this context would be "desirable goal or position, worthy of attainment through effort"?
I think that when you revere sacrifice for the sake of "ideals" in a government military, when there is no serious threat to the civilian population, you are contradicting much of what you have previously said.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyYour editing of your previous post really takes a chunk out of this position.
If...Big "IF" i had said that I revere "sacrifice" then you would be correct. I said i revere those people and their views. Big difference. I respect the "ideal" of "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness". You don't? Do you respect any "ideal"? Ideal in this context would be "desirable goal or position, worthy of attainment through effort"?
Certainly we all respect ideals. However, I don't think it is ever reasonable to give up one's life or one's liberty to pursue one's happiness. I'm a bit more likely to adhere, in a sort of ascetic way, to Maslow's architacture.
Originally posted by royalchickenThis is copied from the "Not Again!" faction of the pre-ww2 effort to keep us out of the war. Right? It sure looks familiar. Most of the movements leadership were republicans. Careful there ... you are aligning with some strange fellows. Eisenhour also sat on Viet Nam from 54' to 60, quite content to "let them rot on the vine", [ the corrupt regime's in South Viet Nam] "Idealism" of Kennedy's guys got us into it at any rate.
Certainly, when armed people pull a submarine up on Kennebunk Beach near my house and start raping and pillaging, I will shoot them. Not for any ideals, but for my own personal defense.
[/b]
Back to your point. So you would be happy if all the jews, blacks and non-arian's in africa, asia, europe... everywhere except america were gassed and dead. You would not care if the chinese massacre by Japan that started in 31' were still going on today. Hmmm....
Originally posted by royalchickenYou'll have to remind me... What edit? The one you are subscribing has zero edits... some other post of mine?
Your editing of your previous post really takes a chunk out of this position.
Certainly we all respect ideals. However, I don't think it is ever reasonable to give up one's life or one's liberty to pursue one's happiness. I'm a bit more likely to adhere, in a sort of ascetic way, to Maslow's architacture.
You sound like you wouldn't be willing to defend anyone except yourself. Is that a good policy? I mean, all of Oregon,Washington and California are to that stage now. What if they are attacked. Should we watch them being slaughtered or should we (conservative middle america) send troops? Same for communist new england from what we see in the papers. Defend them or let them become happy "citizens"?