From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 17 19:52:35 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9B2216A4CE for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 19:52:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from clunix.cl.msu.edu (clunix.cl.msu.edu [35.9.2.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 133C543D4C for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 19:52:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jerrymc@clunix.cl.msu.edu) Received: (from jerrymc@localhost) by clunix.cl.msu.edu (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.11.7) id j2HJqXP04586; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 14:52:33 -0500 (EST) From: Jerry McAllister Message-Id: <200503171952.j2HJqXP04586@clunix.cl.msu.edu> To: mweg@sympatico.ca ("Marco Greene (ML)") Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 14:52:33 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <004901c52b27$371b1d90$24c8a8c0@snowy.meadow> from "Marco Greene (ML)" at Mar 17, 2005 02:26:26 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Stupid ASCII loader prompt X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 19:52:35 -0000 > > > > We live in a day and age where it is politically incorrect to > > take pride > > in anything, and it shows. > > Well, by now we are gleefully off topic for this list, so... > No, not at all. The right-wingers take lots of pride in successfully > being able to destroy ANWR for example. > > More accurately, the United States has a political system that is > suceptable to control by minorities, and every once in a while the > right-wingers who are a minority in the country, manage to seize > control until cooler heads prevail. We are in one of these times. The USA system attempts/purports to _protect_ the minorities. This exists because supposedly the system tries to protect everyone, not specifically the minorities. It is only an artifact that sometimes minorities find themselves able to use the system to influence some outcome. They do not seize control. They wield whatever poser/influence they can muster, but they do not seize control. > Don't forget the same thing happened with Prohibition. You and I wern't > alive then, but the ultraconservative christians managed to take control > then also, and the result of that failed attempt was the Mafia. First, that wasn't such a minority or untraconservative outcome as you might think. It had next to nothing to do with Christianity although some churches and church people got in to the fray. It was mostly more an unholy alliance of women activists and those who were discovering the concept of social engineering. It initially enjoyed widespread support -- as well as widespread grumbling. Most who apposed it, presumed they could just ignore it which is what they did. Next, it was not exactly a failure. The use of alcohol went down very significantly. Finally, it was not the Mafia that gained power, but the Chicago, Detroit and Galveston based bootlegger gangs. They weren't Mafia related for the most part and probably actually cut in to Mafia power during their brief reign. > I am afraid that a political system where the minority never gets a > chance of control is much worse than a political system where the > minority gets control every once in a while. So enduring these periods > of time is I am afraid, one of the payments that we must make. It is more that we need to discipline ourselves to protect everyone and when we begin to fail in that, some corrective events begin to happen. Some of those corrective events can actually be disastrous. > Also remember if you examine the core of the ultraconservative beliefs > that they do not have suppression of individual liberties in those > beliefs. So, any time the ultraconservatives get control they cannot > help being hipocrites, and thus their movement carries with it the seeds > of it's own destruction. Don't forget what took down Newt Gringrich. > All ultraconservatives are hipocrites when they attempt to apply their > philosophy, thus the movement carries an automatic self-limit. Sure, each 'ultra' group contains the seeds/tools of its own destruction. So, lets leave this topic at that. Either the ultra-anti-beastie or ultra-pro-beastie movements will destroy themselves. ////jerry > > Ted >