Quote:
Originally posted by unregistered
the group of 180 that you refer to, I call the conspiracy of tyrants
each is free to abuse their chattel so long as they don't inspire other's to revolt or interfere
...
when I was a child I collected stamps and the USA had a series called "Champions of Liberty": Simon Bolivar, etc.
then
I watched the abortive Hungarian Revolution on TV and was stupefied - we did nothing at all !
what did all these words mean ?
and I came to an understanding (later somewhat validated by Ayn Rand) that government, any government,
and ALL governments, are the enemies of all free men
because governments serve themselves first
(I know, anarchy is no better as all must be rational - and all are not)
but I at least do not accept this 'social contract' swill
governments buy time so they may have their turn at the trough
I find nothing "barbaric" with the concept of accountability
on the contrary, I find it sadistic that victims and non-victims alike should have to pay (for) the victimizers
what misguided fool thought that one up ? why ? for whose benefit ?
-> and the social ‘GOOD’ performed by a prison is ? ? ? ?
you familiar with Churchill’s comment about prisons ?
such a notion 'flies' only due to fuzzy/non-thinkers being unable and unwilling to 'bite the bullet'
do you know from whence that expression came ?
if you want to make things grow, fertilizer is used
and so we have social scientists, clergy, and other collected idiots promoting violence by failing to address its cessation
a handgun, approprially used of course, can deliver accountability
EDIT: (for those with training wheels)
- Winston Churchill said (paraphrased I believe) "To see the worst elements of our society, visit a prison - and look at the wardens."
- "bite the bullet" was a technique used when operating without anesthetic
|
You hit the nail on the head, sort of.
There is indeed no accountability to anyone, as far as the 180+ government (in various forms) are concerned. The closest thing that exists today, is the United Nations, and the Human Rights advocates, but they have little power. In that light, one starts to realize that our society is not as advanced as it can (should?) be.
Is it something to gripe about, or is it just the reality of our world as it is today?
Where is it said that the government is "by the people, for the people"? Is the US democratic system good, or does it have its failings? Can it be improved, or is it doomed to failure in a hundred years or so, as has been predicted?
I missed the Hungarian revolution (a failing on my part?), but have seen many cases in the world of human rights abuses. If by "we did nothing at all !" you mean that the USA did not intervene, I've got a few thoughts on that.
It's been pointed out earlier that the European/Canadian mentality differs from the USA. Maybe it should be looked at, from the other side: why do Americans think differently than the rest of the (so called) civilized world?
It's only when you look at the USA as the youngest of the civilized nations, and use a family unit analogy, where the USA is the young-but-tough brother, that one can see perhaps a little bit more clearly, what is behind some of its actions. This "big bully" that the USA has been accused of being, is quite real. The wise man would take the time to ponder the question, to come up with the appropriate course of action, but the USA is in a hurry to squash Saddam Hussein, because it's more important that no further harm is done, rather than making sure that any of this never, ever happens again, in a consolidated effort. Why? Is it best this way? If the end result is pretty much the same, why would we even care?
Accountability is most definitely essential. It is only recently recognized that the victims of a crime extend even beyond the immediate victim, to friends and relatives. There is much to be done there too.
As for the good of prisons, I see one major flaw: a prisoner is bound to be respected fully as the constitution dictates, just like any citizen. I will advance the idea that a criminal has, in fact, abandonned some of his constitutional rights, and the medical/scientific fields should be able to experiment with behavior modification therapy on those prisoners, for the purpose of creating a proper rehabilitation process, which is the essence of what a prison is really meant to be. It certainly has a more powerful effect, as a deterrent. If you act against a society, then you forego some of your rights as a citizen. That's the problem with wardens, IMO: they are powerless to act, and they have no mandate.
Some governments have seen fit to use this idea, and use torture methods. That's not what I mean.