IntenseDebate - andrewclunn

16 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Will communism always ... · 1 reply · 0 points

I'm not really sure I buy that the family unit is communist in nature. It is a dictatorship in many ways, but as those in power are also those who contribute the most resources (the parents), the structure of kinship in group orientation in family units is built around relational ties, and leadership is built around leader charisma more than ideological purity, the traditional family model appears much more fascist than communist to me.

Truth be told, it has always appeared to me that the only way the communist countries have retained control and stability is by utilizing fascist tactics. Also, to be clear, I think that fascism is actually a wonderful model for building a family unit, and actually have some fascist sympathies myself (though that's a bit off topic, and please don't construe this for me agreeing with mass genocide or anything of that sort.)

16 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Will communism always ... · 0 replies · +2 points

As long as ants and bees thrive so will communism. As long as people refuse to be drones like ants or bees, communism will fail. The future and success or failure of communism is inextricably tied to the nature of human existence and whether we exist as individuals or as a collective.

16 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Are NGO's effective on... · 0 replies · +1 points

I believe that it an IGO not an NGO
http://www.imo.org/About/mainframe.asp?topic_id=1...

16 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Will the healthcare bi... · 0 replies · +1 points

Okay Jared. What college is that? We already know you're in NYC. And WHY are they for it? Are they perhaps liberal arts professors? Is their college massively subsidized by government funding or just indirectly so through massive government education grants (more of which were latched onto this bill.)

Better yet, watch this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yfk7h2TrR_s

Seriously, I'm almost contemplating applying to get into mensa (and hoping it really is different there, because if it's not then I just might cry.)

16 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Will the healthcare bi... · 2 replies · +1 points

Jared I've been trying to respond to this comment in ways that won't qualify as harassment. Let me just say that it is VERY worrisome to me that the federal law has become a means for some people to push their views on others, and even more so that people would defend their positions not with an articulated position but with the statement, "the law is on my side." as if the law exists as an absolute. This is perhaps the weaker bastard child cousin to the "strict constitutional" argument.

16 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Will the healthcare bi... · 1 reply · +1 points

I'm late to the party and Sun Tzu said everything I wanted to already.

16 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Is world peace even po... · 0 replies · +2 points

Sure there is, all we need is another world to be at war with.

16 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Will racism always exi... · 0 replies · +2 points

Yes... what you were expecting long answer?

16 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Should everyone be req... · 0 replies · +2 points

Did you know that it's actually the work of the federal government that ties your health insurance to our employer?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12288708503859334...

it's because of this that private insurance outside of employer provided plans is impossible to find. The closest you can get is an HSA (Health Savings Account) where the whole advantage of the plan is that you get to keep the money even if you lose your job and it gets around government taxation (it's what I have.)

"One of the methods used by statists to destroy capitalism consists in establishing controls that tie a given industry hand and foot, making it unable to solve its problems, then declaring that freedom has failed and stronger controls are necessary."
- Ayn Rand

16 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Does America need immi... · 3 replies · 0 points

If you accept as a premise (as I do) that an open border with Mexico and open immigration policy as a result (whether legal or virtually permissive) is a security liability, then the necessity of border controls of some type become apparent. it seems that while we both take a generally libertarian view to things, I see government management of border security to be one instance where the state is justified. This is a common point of contention between Objectivists and Libertarians.

I do not see this as a poverty issue either. I have no right to expel any member of society from it due simply to their not living by my standards or work ethic. And indeed many who inherit wealth are much more deserving of disdain than many who are poor (my opinion of course.)

I instead see 'citizenship' as something that for practical purposes must exist, and upheld. I am not saying that all people who work in a country must apply for citizenship. I am saying that all people who work in a country must either be citizens or known to be visiting said country. And so I see actions like building a large scale physical wall along the southern border as more efficient than our current approach to southern border security.

IntenseDebate Comment System

Connect with andrewclunn

People I'm following

andrewclunn