John Cleese's Declaration of Revocation

StruckingFuggle · Post by **StruckingFuggle** » Wed May 31, 2006 10:33 pm

I personally don't care for people calling the majority of Americans (or at least those of us not too lazy to actually go and vote) stupid.

There is so much wrong with that statement ...

Actually, who cares what you care for? Doesn't change the truth, or mean that people who vote are smart (the two aren't linked) or don't vote are stupid (the two, also, aren't linked) ... people in general are stupid, but for all of our supposed learnings and access to 'education' Americans relatively lead the pack.

Bigity · Post by **Bigity** » Wed May 31, 2006 10:38 pm

So now opinion can't be expressed unless someone might care for it?

Sure, there are smart Americans and dumb ones, and that goes for every other nation out there, or even just group of people.

Hey Somalia, I don't like that fucking warlord you let run things, so you all must be stupid retarded assholes. (That's the kind of crap I'm talking about)

Or wow Germany, your PM sure is a duchebag. You must all be emo Nazis.

If a person has a beef, take it to appropriate channels and venues. That's all I'm saying about actors. If someone won an award for charity work and went on a rant about how abortion is murder, people would be upset, and rightly so. Yet, actors can go on a tear at any old acting related gathering, and nobody minds. Bugs me, that's all.

StruckingFuggle · Post by **StruckingFuggle** » Wed May 31, 2006 10:54 pm

So now opinion can't be expressed unless someone might care for it?

That's ... not what I said. What I said was opinion has no bearing on fact. You're free to express your opinion all you want, but you're still wrong.

Bigity · Post by **Bigity** » Wed May 31, 2006 11:04 pm

That the majority of voting Americans aren't stupid? Heh ok. Stupid about some things maybe, but the point I was making is that voting can't be stupid.

Saying that because you don't like someone that someone else voted for makes them stupid is pretty damn ignorant IMO, but hey. I'm sure some random guy making up stuff on the internet like in the OP knows more about stupid then I could ever know.

adciv · Post by **adciv** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 12:10 am

[quote="thief90k";p="637603"]I'm 16. Why do I care about your government. The point is that one power hungry selfish man has the power to lead the most powerful country in the world to war against anybody.[/quote]

And, with the exception of the words "most powerful", how is this different from 90% of the other countries in the world?

Arc Orion · Post by **Arc Orion** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 1:34 am

[quote="Herr Doktor!";p="639516"]Wow. I'm suddenly convinced! How could I have been so BLIND?! (Mandatory [/sarcasm] tag).[/quote]Again, WTF? Are you a complete asshat, or do you just not realize that others might have different opinions?

StruckingFuggle · Post by **StruckingFuggle** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 1:53 am

but the point I was making is that voting can't be stupid.

What the deuce do you mean, "voting can't be stupid"?

Bigity · Post by **Bigity** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 2:09 am

How can voting in itself be stupid? There's no trick to the question or statement I made.

StruckingFuggle · Post by **StruckingFuggle** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 2:12 am

Well, for one, when people come to the decision of who to vote for, based on stupid reasons like one person "looks more presidential" or the like, without ever having seriously examined the issues or the candidates.

Bigity · Post by **Bigity** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 2:13 am

Yea, the 'in itself' part covers that. People can vote a specific way for dumb reasons, sure.

But voting is good, let's work on that, then we can work on having people form opinions based on thier own reasoning.

StruckingFuggle · Post by **StruckingFuggle** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 2:15 am

Voting is, at best, neutral. There's nothing inherently and always good about it. If you're given to vote between being eaten by sharks or eaten by snakes, there is nothing inherently "good" about the ability to vote (which is only good when there are significantly different choices to vote on, which is a mostly subjective quality), or the act of "voting" in and of itself (which can't be anything but neutral, in and of itself).

Bigity · Post by **Bigity** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 2:17 am

OTOH, not voting is apathetic. Voting is participatory.

When comparing the two, I'd call voting good. Positive anyway, not like, rescuing stranding babies good or anything.

StruckingFuggle · Post by **StruckingFuggle** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 2:30 am

When comparing the two, I'd call voting good.

Why? What about it being "participatory instead of apathetic" makes it "good"?

Bigity · Post by **Bigity** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 2:58 am

If sitting doing nothing isn't 'bad' in your mind, there's nothing I can say to make you get why I consider voting to be 'good'.

StruckingFuggle · Post by **StruckingFuggle** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 3:02 am

Such ridiculous absolutism ...

(and I'd disagree that "not voting" is "doing nothing", and even start an argument that's it's functionally impossible for a sentient being to do "nothing" via the fact that abstaining from action is, in and of itself, an action ... but that part is neither here nor there.)

Real Life Forums

John Cleese's Declaration of Revocation

Who is online