The notion of patriotism
POSTED BY: Khyron
UPDATED: Friday, October 24, 2025 19:53
VIEWED: 8001
PAGE 3 of 10
Quote:“...we believe that power should be exercised as close as possible to the people it affects.”
Originally posted by antimason:
patriotism and nationality stand in the way of a centralized global government, so in that regard they are vital. we have the right as sovereign beings to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".. which are rights that can only be maintained among a local population; if we remove nationalism, we then get small elements of society(the elite) micromanaging our lives from some remote location, too far removed to be empathetic of ones social/geographical circumstances
Quote:Not sure about that, large bears have a way of restricting personal freedom. They have been known to enact quite repressive policies.
Originally posted by Fletch2:
The only way to achieve "personal freedom" is to not associate with other people. The moment you have to take account of other people's opinions and rights your freedom is impinged. The more people that are involved the worse it gets. AntiMason, there is a shack in Montana with your name on it, all the personal freedom you could ever need.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Frem, that's rubbish. If you walk across the road away from a crosswalk and a cop sees you then you end up in jail. The law is not a physical fence but it is enforced with physical bars, physical hand cuffs and physical night sticks.
Now a more reasonable question is why is there a law about jay walking? If I'm out here in rural Texas and I cross a local FM road on foot nobody is going to write me a ticket for Jay walking. That only happens in cities. Why? Because cities choose to put the free movement of cars ahead of the free movement of people. They don't want the flow of traffic disrupted by people crossing the road where they like when they like. So the law exists to regiment the pedestrian, forcing him to cross only where the city wants and a time the city allows. The difference is people. Crossing my rural road probably doesnt effect anyone else and if it did it might effet maybe 2 or 3 people. Cross a busy street in a city and I delay several dozen. The city determines that the 2 dozen people's right to be home 30 seconds earlier trumps my right to cross when and where I want.
That's the thing that I find interesting about America. As a European I was born, grew up and lived most of my life in far closer proximity to my fellow man. The American concept of "personal" freedom -- ie you being free to do whatever you like whenever you like is basically unknown. If the right to swing your arms ends with the other guys nose there is a lot less arm swinging going on if there are more noses in range.
I believe this also effects the voting patterns in the US. If you are rural you have to be self sufficient and you have all the arm swinging space you could want. Thus the illusion of personal freedom is common. Live in urban areas where you have to reign back on what you do to coexist with your neighbours and you end up with a more social perspective, because everything you do is impacted by the people around you you try to fix issues at a social level, wheer as folks out in teh boondocks are more free to take a personal initiative.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Not sure about that, large bears have a way of restricting personal freedom. They have been known to enact quite repressive policies.
Humm, a few years ago there was a shooting outside my office building. One guy cut another off at an intersection so the cut off guy followed him to work and shot him. I will take my chances with bears.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think ya missed the point, Fletch - all I was sayin is that the law isn't a magic bullet, just a set of rules.. words on paper, if it comes to it.
Just offering a different perspective on the real, actual limits of human behavior vesus the *perceived* limits of human behavior.
That perception gap is responsible for jackass things like restricting folks right to CCW, while largely ignored by criminals who have no respect for the law in the first place, you see ?
Just trying to illustrate a gap between perception and reality, is all.
As for Bears...
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2061209
I have several cats, heheh 
-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I get ya, Frem.
Percieved as Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
"Now a more reasonable question is why is there a law about jay walking? If I'm out here in rural Texas and I cross a local FM road on foot nobody is going to write me a ticket for Jay walking. That only happens in cities. Why? Because cities choose to put the free movement of cars ahead of the free movement of people. They don't want the flow of traffic disrupted by people crossing the road where they like when they like. So the law exists to regiment the pedestrian, forcing him to cross only where the city wants and a time the city allows. The difference is people. Crossing my rural road probably doesnt effect anyone else and if it did it might effet maybe 2 or 3 people. Cross a busy street in a city and I delay several dozen. The city determines that the 2 dozen people's right to be home 30 seconds earlier trumps my right to cross when and where I want."
It's funny, but I never saw it that way.
I always imagined that the (virtually un-enforced) laws against jay-walkers were to protect life. You know, like the law about wearing a seat-belt. The government feels the need to legislate against stupidity.
'Cause if you cross the middle of a busy road a car might make you into street-pizza, or it might swerve and hit another car and start a 15 car pileup.
To me, jaywalking isn't about convenience or minor delays. It's about turning people into paste and cars into crushed tin cans.
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I would consider that a good argument except for three facts. First the crossing time for pedestrians at controlled crosswalks is tiny compared to the time given even for protected left turns for drivers. You would imagine that if the safety of the pedestrian was a primary importance then the light would not be flashing before you got halfway across the road. Second and related, controlled crossings often share the window with protected left turns travelling in the same direction. If pedestrian safety was a primary issue their crossing time should be unique with no cars allowed right of way at that same time.
Finally, at least in this state, a driver can chose to right turn if his way is clear even if the light is red -- in effect saying he has a right of way under his discression--- where as a pedestrian can be arrested for jaywalking even if crossing does not constitute a hazard.
Since even in the case of a "legal" crossing the walker's safety is compromised in favor of traffic flow and given the brief period a pedestrian gets to cross compared to almost every other vehicle's exclusive use of the right of way, I believe the true intension is apparent.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
can you really be arrested for not using a crossing? how odd.
I don't understand patriotism, I've never really felt it and it freaks me out when I'm around it because it's often not just saying I like my country but rather my country is better or more deserving than others, and manifests in arrogance, aggression and at it's worst racism 
that's just my experience.
--------------------------------------
"I'm an artist, with an e and a beret."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:
I would consider that a good argument except for three facts. First the crossing time for pedestrians at controlled crosswalks is tiny compared to the time given even for protected left turns for drivers. You would imagine that if the safety of the pedestrian was a primary importance then the light would not be flashing before you got halfway across the road. Second and related, controlled crossings often share the window with protected left turns travelling in the same direction. If pedestrian safety was a primary issue their crossing time should be unique with no cars allowed right of way at that same time.
Finally, at least in this state, a driver can chose to right turn if his way is clear even if the light is red -- in effect saying he has a right of way under his discression--- where as a pedestrian can be arrested for jaywalking even if crossing does not constitute a hazard.
Since even in the case of a "legal" crossing the walker's safety is compromised in favor of traffic flow and given the brief period a pedestrian gets to cross compared to almost every other vehicle's exclusive use of the right of way, I believe the true intension is apparent.
1) Flashing Light: It doesn't mean 'Your time is up' but rather 'If you haven't started walking yet, you probably aren't going to make it.'
2) Protected Left Turns/Rights on Red: You are now not stepping in front of a car travelling at 40+ miles per hour. You are stepping in the path of a car that was at a standstill, and now has to execute a 90 degree turn.
Your alternative is apparently to cross wherever, whenever. I'm not sure how that's an improvement for pedestrian or non-pedestrian safety.
The reason jaywalking isn't important on remote rural roads is because there are A) few cars, B) few jaywalkers, and C) usually a long, unimpeded line of sight.
I'm not sure what kind of pedestrian/automobile relationship you see as preferable?
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
