@shavixmir saidNo, it's a Republic.
It is a democracy though, isn’t it?
Yes, yes it is.
Stop peddling this spoon-fed rubbish. A republic can be a democracy. And that is what the US is.
And that is my point, subtle lies here and there and when I point it out correctly you still insist on repeating the NPC news.
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
@moonbus said1) How "well informed" do you believe the public truly is; and yet the cogs of the machine keep on turning...how strange?
Agreed. Moreover, continuous vigilance is required to maintain a well-informed public.
List of fake news web sites:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fake_news_websites
2) You're not the least bit unsettled about the "Borg like" response seen in the video across virtually all the mainstream media networks? Where do you suppose the statement was formed? It's very disturbing to me.
08 Nov 18
@joe-shmo saidI think you are missing the point.
I think your missing the point. In order for the masses to be predictable and readily socially engineered the electorate need to be "well informed" by the traditional mainstream media. This fact should be clear to you from the video, and the 2016 election. Verbatim phrases repeated over and over, across independent corporations, as if divined by a Bureau of Adjustments. Unfortunately, the unpredictability of the electorate is the real threat to "democracy".
If ALL News agencies report the FACTS then they will all report the same news.
You cannot have "alternative facts" just to please your agenda.
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
08 Nov 18
@wolfgang59 saidYou believe that because it was a factual statement - (its actually not, its just an opinion) that there is only one sentence structure that exist in the English language to accurately state it?
I think you are missing the point.
If ALL News agencies report the FACTS then they will all report the same news.
You cannot have "alternative facts" just to please your agenda.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
@shavixmir saidIn fact, a democracy that is not a republic is a period of short-lived chaos preceding an inevitable military coup, in any body larger than, say, a monastery.
It is a democracy though, isn’t it?
Yes, yes it is.
Stop peddling this spoon-fed rubbish. A republic can be a democracy. And that is what the US is.
@joe-shmo saidIt is perhaps an unfortunate coincidence that an opinion and a factual assertion can take the same grammatical form, and that so few people nowadays seem to notice that there is any difference between an opinion (vehemently asserted) and a factual assertion.
You believe that because it was a factual statement - (its actually not, its just an opinion) that there is only one sentence structure that exist in the English language to accurately state it?
Of course, it is a fact about someone that he holds an opinion, but that doesn't make the opinion true, however vehemently he asserts it.
One is reminded that Trump stated that Saudi Prince Salmon had "strongly denied" any knowledge of the whereabouts of Jamal Khashoggi for several days after his disappearance and that Trump gave every impression that he (Trump) accepted that the statement was true simply because Prince Salman had strongly asserted it.
08 Nov 18
@js357 saidA short period of anarchic democracy is preferable to a long Spanish Inquisition.
In fact, a democracy that is not a republic is a period of short-lived chaos preceding an inevitable military coup, in any body larger than, say, a monastery.
@joe-shmo said1) I do not know how well-informed the American public are in general. One thing I am sure of is that quite a few people are living in filter bubbles, and that Donald Trump is one of them. Filter bubbles are a recent phenomenon, an unintended consequence of search engine algorithms: they tend to feed a person more and more of whatever he looked at before, creating a feedback loop. Unwary people are then liable think that that is how things really are, since anything else gets filtered out. It's like wearing rose-colored glasses all the time and not even knowing it.
1) How "well informed" do you believe the public truly is; and yet the cogs of the machine keep on turning...how strange?
2) You're not the least bit unsettled about the "Borg like" response seen in the video across virtually all the mainstream media networks? Where do you suppose the statement was formed? It's very disturbing to me.
The cure is to consult different news sources on different (non-electronic) media, such as print media, to get a) other stories, and b) other perspectives on the same story.
I suspect that many people nowadays neglect print media, and that is a real impediment to maintaining a well-informed populace. Print media are held to a standard which has been ignored or, in some cases, outright flouted, by Internet sites. Print media editors are personally responsible for what their papers and magazines publish; slander and liable are crimes, punishable by large fines. Not so web sites; hence, all manner of falsehoods are propagated on the Internet and many are fooled into believing complete bosh. Until recently, no one dared to challenge the Internet's big movers, such as FB; I hope this changes.
2) "You're not the least bit unsettled about the "Borg like" response seen in the video across virtually all the mainstream media networks? Where do you suppose the statement was formed? It's very disturbing to me."
How many thousands of hours of nightly news reports did someone cull to paste that video together, I wonder. I suspect that if you videoed 50 nightly weather reports, they would sound monotonously similar; certainly the radio shipping news for the British coastline is famously so. The official response to the all-too-frequent mass shootings in America has become stereotypical: "Our hearts and prayers are with the families…" When a bus goes off the road in So. America, it never does anything other than "plunge." No, the robotic phrasing doesn't bother me nearly as much as the fact behind it, that too many people are shot in America, that too many people are getting their news from within filter bubbles and are too lazy to do reality checks.
09 Nov 18
@joe-shmo saidThis is extremely dangerous to our democracy, Faux news mantra...
I hope this video of journalist all over the nation parroting the same lines about the dangers of getting your news on social media gives pause, and the nauseating feeling it gave me.
Enjoy!
[youtube]Bfu_RIdGT2A[/youtube]
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12466
09 Nov 18
@shavixmir saidCorrection: a republic can be a democracy, and that the USA isn't democratic is not because it's a republic.
It is a democracy though, isn’t it?
Yes, yes it is.
Stop peddling this spoon-fed rubbish. A republic can be a democracy. And that is what the US is.
@kazetnagorra saidNo, no, not a democracy of sorts.
You do have a democracy, of sorts, although not for long if you and your ilk continue casting their incorrect votes.
R-E-P-U-B-L-I-C
Say it with me. REPUBLIC!!!!
You can do it, I have faith in you.
But alas, the goal of the Dims is mob rule. Tear up the Electoral college, end state power, and put everything to a national mass vote so that demagogues can easily full the half witted masses.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12466
09 Nov 18
@suzianne saidPrecisely. The mass media are hardly perfect, especially in Murdoch-ridden countries like the USA and Australia, but they're not nearly as abysmally anti-reliable as 'social' media like Tumblr, 4chan, Facebook, Twitter and Mumsnet. Anyone who believes that the 'journalism' and 'research' found on the latter amounts to more than "I want this to be true, therefore I will assert it to be true and that will make it true" is deluded, and wilfully so. (In fact, it's frequently even worse than that.)
Yes, getting your news from social media is dangerous to our democracy.