Politics
Out of context: Reply #7745
- Started
- Last post
- 33,772 Responses
- ********0
Definitly not facism. But i like your ability to throw around scary words like facism, thinking an explanation is not needed. Very bush like. But feel free to explain how it fits the facism definition, since the definition is broad and many disagree on the meaning. But its definitly not mussolini facsim.
It would be more like breaking down the monopoly of government. And the problems of large populous enslaving the smaller masses. (And monopolies are outlawed for reasons that they will be abused) All while maintaining a national defense against invading foreigners. You could look at the national military as being more like a parent. They should never have to step in unless one state tries to forcefully take another, or a foreign invader. A parent never wants their children to be harmed so would find it in its best interests to alleviate any internal disputes. It would really be no different then it is now, still one nation, just more presidents who have smaller responsibilities and will find it easyier to get things done. While each having their own seat on the national defense.
This idea is more founding fathers stuff, getting back to the basics. Fixing everythign that has been distorted, a reinstall of the OS becuase the current one is to fragged. I dont believe its an original idea. But one thing is for sure our current system is broken and more power to a single government is jsut setting us up for a bigger fall because man makes mistakes. Multiple governments makes those falls smaller when man errors, and recovery easyier and swifter.
- Now I'm Bushlike? Man, you have no idea who you're talking to boy
TheBlueOne - Was jsut thinkign its bush liek to call things terrorist to label it bad without saying whats wrong. And yes the point of doing the same thing was intended********
- of doing the same thing was intended.********
- Now I'm Bushlike? Man, you have no idea who you're talking to boy