The 2012 election is in November, as we all know. As such, the candidates are falling victim to all sorts of political mudslinging as they do. But I got to thinking...why aren't the voters themselves subject to those same standards?

Let's look at it this way: I am a Socialist. I believe in government regulation and publicizing industry. I believe in giving the government power. This goes against what many Americans stand for. It goes against what the US Constitution stands for. If I were to vote, I would be vying for the option that goes against the overwhelming majority. Therefore, is it morally right for me to pursue voting?

As someone who is "Anti-American," should I be allowed to vote in the American Election?

I think that every American should be allowed to vote, no matter their personal preferences. If you're truly going for the option that goes, "against the overwhelming majority," then your vote won't affect much anyway. Of course, that majority has to be based on voters rather than just citizens, for not everyone votes. Either way, your preferences are part of what makes you a person, and they don't change the fact that you're a citizen. In the end, if the majority /is/ on your side, then the country would change. It's not like the country was made as a base for what the people think; rather, the country was made based off of what the people think. There is always a possiblity of something changing without it no longer being, "America."

... This seems like a silly question, kolly. What is an "anti-american"?

A nation is only as strong as those who live in it. If you live in America and you vote, then you are an American voter. The nation is not inhabited purely by those who think one way, and as such, the nation itself is not one which purely functions one way. This means your vote, and your sentiments, are no less American than the next person's.

Regardless entirely of who is in the majority or not.

Our system of government is (arguably) Democracy. This means that the nation will elect its leaders based on how they think leading should be done best - This means, by extension, that should a portion of our nation believe in socialism over capitalism, it is simply another facet of our nation, not something anti-nationalistic.

Even though money is a large focus of our government lately, it's bad to confuse governmental policies with economic policies. The government oversees the economics, not vice-versa.

Believing in a socialist economic viewpoint, and voting towards such, would be utilizing democracy (our government), to alter our current capitalist (our economic policy) mindset. It wouldn't be in opposition to the government itself what-so-ever, but would be looking to alter how the government oversees the economics, which is in turn the exact reason democracy is used - So the nation can have a say in how it's government oversees it's policies.

Pure capitalism as "the american way" is a fanciful notion that hasn't been true for years now. It's logical that how our economy is run should change with the circumstances we find ourselves in, as no economic policy is completely fit for all situations.

To be an "anti-american" voter, you would need to be seeking to change the governing style, not the economic one. Which would... imply you wanted to democractically vote America into not being a democracy/republic hybrid thing.

Just to fully illustrate how silly that is - It's like

I tried to think of an example above, but all I could think of were Magnificient Bastard moments where someone abuses a system to completely shut it down and seize control abruptly.

-well. The point is that an "anti-american" voter is a hypocriticial and contradictory idea. One does not vote to stop voting.

--------

As a personal note, bringing up the constitution is something that irks me lately. As a moral guideline, it is a fine article - However, it is not infallible. It has amendments for that very reason.

Further more, it was written and forged a great deal of time in the past, when the world was different and the men who signed it had vastly different circumstances than the ones who abide by it today. In my opinion, it is quite simply... Outdated.

Archaic, even.

It serves as a moral compass, and a reminder of what our nation was forged on - It should never serve as a text to be taken literally, or to be applied through blind faith or nostalgia towards the circumstances of today. It is no Word of God (which I also have problems with), and it certainly not something towards which infallibility or concrete reasoning can be laid claim to.

It is a guideline, most aptly for morals, nothing more.

>>3 In certain company, what you said would get you run out of town. Sad truth. The way I see it, the term "American values" refers mainly to the traditional values this country was built upon. Governmentally, it's a Federalist system with powers expressed through our Constitution's seven articles and the original Bill of Rights (certain additional amendments may be included, such as the 13th-15th, for obvious reasons). Economically, it's the Lassiez-Faire mindset coined by Adam Smith. Religously, it's Lutheran Christian values (though I won't go into that subject).

In the part of the country where I live, traditional values dictate what applies and what does not. Many are conservatives who have the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" mindset, and that's just fine. However, the problem arises when changes occur to their way of life. As the Federal government has asserted more power, the people have fought to maintain the status quo, so to speak. Are they right in doing so? And if so, does that make me a bad person for trying to catalyze that change?

Aya, you and Barabi are looking at this from a predominately legal point of view. I'm trying to look at it from a philosophical point of view. Of course I have every right to vote. But should I vote if it's to usurp the lifestyles that people have come to know and love? Would it not be easier and more proper to just move to a country where Socialism, the socioeconomic system I prefer, is the status quo?

>>4

Well, moving from a legal point of view to my own more personal, philosophical point of view, let me rephrase my sentiment.

Ahem.

Fuck them.

I'll vote the way I feel like voting, to support the shit I feel like supporting, and if I end up as the majority and accidentally bring about change, then people who can't adapt can quite simply kiss my ass.

"If ain't broke, don't fix it" only applies if something is working. Our current standard is apparently not working, if increasing debt says anything, and so logic then dictates "If it's broke, fix it".

Keeping it the same just because they're comfortable with it that way is called Traditionalism. Last I checked, America did not advertise itself as a traditionalist country - Our country was born with the sentiment of "fuck you, world. We'll do it our way", and has continued to exist in that manner since.

I feel entirely justified, following that logic, to say "Fuck you, people. I'll vote my way", and if America follows me, and they don't feel like changing... Well, fuck them.

Nothing survives in stasis. The world does not run in a vacuum. Ignorance and denial will not cause problems to be alleviated. You acknowledge problems, you objectively weigh your pros and cons, and you adapt.

If you do not, you deserve the slow and pitiful death you will get - Be you as a person, or as a country.

And so, I reiterate, with the purely American philosophy that this country lives and breathes.

Fuck them.

I see your point. I may have a change of heart and vote in this year's election. But I dunno.

>>6

Well if you don't, at least you'll have a better reason than countless other people who don't vote because they don't feel like it.

Though since the end result is not voting, the reason behind it - be it laziness or moral/ethical quandaries, don't even really register as a negligible amount of worth to me. Regardless of reason, your voice isn't being heard.

So really, taking the high-ground and deciding to turn the other cheek in order to maintain the comfy life-styles of those who disagree with you is about as effective as forgetting to vote, or being too lazy to walk up to a ballot and punch some buttons in. For either side of the issue.

The reasonings, in the end, will be known to no one but yourself. Whether you made some self-sacrifice for the supposed "greater good" or not. And if your sacrifice isn't known to everyone for praise or what not, then it's just something you yourself would know. A personal thing.

Which is great, and I support and understand that... When you, yourself, are sure it's what you want to do. You seem undecided, so what I'm getting here is that you're just unsure morally as to whether it's something you should do.

If you decide to take that personal accomplishment, knowing you sacrificed your voice (along side the countless other lazy people with no real reason) to make others happy, then you'd best be damn sure it's what you want to do and approve of doing.

If you end up doing it and still aren't sure if it's the right thing you should have done, personally, then really there's no hope for it. I'd call you stupid for taking the easy way out.

So whether you decide to vote or not vote, just make sure it's something you believe is worth doing. A half-hearted action is a waste.

Not to interrupt but..
Some random jerk-offs might take your voting spot anyways, because that kind of thing happens.

I believe that America, even with all its faults, is a nation where you can say what you think, and you don't have to care about what other people think. If you have an opinion you want to voice, go ahead and voice that opinion! I do not believe it is morally wrong to voice your opinion.

I see this topic the same way I see many other controversial topics. "You can do whatever the fuck you want as long as you don't go against common human morals such as rape, murder, stealing, etc."

That was my first opinion on the first controversial idea that I was forced into making a choice for. In case you were wondering, the first time I've had to choose a side in a controversial issue is when one of my friends came out. I thought it was gross, but I didn't see why I had to give a fuck and stress myself out about it. If a guy likes it up the ass or a girl likes boobs and pussy, then that's their problem not mine. I refuse to shorten my life-span by giving a fuck and stressing myself out over something, so I rarely debate and choose a side in any of this.

I personally vote for whoever is smart enough to pull our economy up and keep it there. I don't give a fuck about what party they are in. I don't give a fuck on their view of gay-rights. I don't give a fuck on their religion. I don't give a fuck of their race. Any personal issues I have with them will be dealt with after they get a position in office. That's when I begin pushing my beliefs on them. If I can get a large majority of the population to believe in my cause, then it doesn't fucking matter what they fucking president, governor, or whoever thinks. If they want to get reelected, then they better fucking go with the fucking majority.

I know that that the end of the last paragraph is the complete opposite or the first paragraph, so let me better explain this.

I refuse to stress myself to the point of not eating, sleeping, or living simply because someone doesn't believe in the same thing I do. I strike. I will not stress, but I'll be laughing the whole time. Why will I laugh? Because I know I will soon see them fall. They have their views, and nothing to back them up. They are the most hypocritical people out there. Most of them are the most fucking stupid idiots around. What's not to laugh about? You know you'll win when it's you vs and idiot.

Yes, I have a pride complex. I'm a narcissist. I'm an egotistical bitch. I will not deny any of that. That doesn't make what I say any less true though. When you see someone standing for something with no grounds to prove their point on, you can't help but laugh. You know when you're going to win.

Okay, before I completely derail this thread. I say that you do what I do. Vote for whoever you think will improve the country and keep it in shape. Don't let this controversial issue stress you out. As long as you're voting in hopes of improving the country and not for a stupid controversial issue such as racism, sexism, gayism (that's not a word, but you get my point), or anything like that, then I support you 100%. I may not agree with you, but I will support anyone who has the ability to use basic intelligence and ability to not let controversial matters get in the way when trying to do what's right.

>>10

So, I read your post.

I'm not entirely sure how most of it relates to the topic at hand, and there seemed to be gratuitous swearing where it really wasn't needed. It didn't really emphasize a point. Swearing should be used as a motif, or to emphasize a specific point or angle of your topic.

On the note of points, it seemed to... lack them. Or perhaps it was like a circle, and just had far too many so it appeared as if it lacked them. It exploded outward in many directions at once, but never really expanded on any of them - Making a little progress in multiple directions is not the same as making complete progress in a single, or perhaps two, directions.

You clearly had an opinion, and thoughts to back it up, but the execution is sloppy enough that any informative value is lost. While your grammar and syntax are both very well utilized, the actual transitions in content that help the reader adequately tie it together are sorely lacking and in some cases, non existent. It leaves one wondering "what did I miss?" when they go from one paragraph to another, re-reading it to try and understand how they skipped from one topic to another. It's wholly disconcerting.

Overall, I give it a 4/10. There's potential there, but we're going to have to work harder to bring it out.

>>11 Since, based on what I've seen you write and have heard many other people say good things about you, I kind of respect your opinion. The fact that you chose now to review my post, and this being one of the times I didn't really put much effort into making a good argument, I'd like to try again. Would you mind reading a post where I actually try, instead of just say whatever the fuck I think and jump around?

Assuming you say, "Yes," I'll try again.

_____________________________________________________________________________

I view this topic the same way I view many controversial topics. You can do whatever you want as long as it isn't against human morals, which would be rape, murder, stealing, etc.

The main reason why I I believe this is because I believe it was the idea that our founding fathers had in mind when creating America. They had freed the colonies from Great Britain because they were taking away their rights. They had created the Bill of Rights and the amending process to make sure that we'd keep our rights. The whole idea that the people had back then was that they get to do what they want and they get a say in how their life is run. This is the idea that our country was created upon.

Just because the others may say you idea is "Anti-American" doesn't mean that it is. If anything, they'd be "Anti-American" for not giving you the right to your own opinion and the right to voice it. You have these rights as they were stated in the Bill of Rights. You have freedom of speech. You are allowed to think what you want and say what you think. You should take advantage of that, for our ancestors didn't have that privilege.

Before our modern times, most of the countries wouldn't have a democratic system where you are allowed to think what you please. If you thought in the same way that the ruler did, it'd be considered treason and you'd be hung for it. The only way that you could get any change was to stay in hiding until you cold get a large enough group together to overthrow whoever ruled you. The fact that we have come into modern times where you are allowed to feel what you want and say what you want is a blessing. It's a blessing that you should take advantage of.

The best way of taking advantage of this blessing is by voting for who you want to be in power. You vote for whoever you think will do the best job at keeping our country the amazing place it is. You vote for what you think is right. If everybody else disagrees with what you think is right, then you ignore them. You are your are exercising the freedom handed down to us by our founding fathers. You're exercising the blessing that our solders are dying to protect. You have a right to vote for who you think will improve our country, and if you think it's better in goverment hands, then you vote for that. The only "Anti-American" thought in this thread was the thought that any American should not be allowed to vote. America was built on freedoms, and the people who are "Anti-American" are the people trying to take those freedoms away. As long as we are free, we are Americans.

____________________________________________________________________________

Okay, the thought of Ayanavi possibly reading this made me really nervous, so I hope I did good. I kept it on one track, took out anything extra. No cussing. Each paragraph is connected, and it had an ending that summarized my whole post and idea. The only thing I really have to complain about it my opening paragraph. I clearly had a thesis statement. I just didn't think through well enough to make a good opening paragraph. This is organized well though with each paragraph having a different thought that was clearly part of the thought before and after it, as well as part of the over-all idea. I hope you like it!

>>12

tl;dr at the bottom.

Much better, it was a pleasure to read. Your thoughts came together well, every paragraph led into the next, and your over all point was well explained and executed.

My only complaint is that it felt like an essay - From your Post Script, you had mentioned a thesis statement, and the ending paragraph being organized as a kind of summary.

Each type of writing has it's own purpose: An Essay is an exercise in learning how to condense and organize your information for the best flow. And from the point of viewing this as an essay, you did a wonderful job.

But this is a forum, so we aren't really trading essays to each other - Each post is what you're saying to the other participants, or readers. Essays are rarely meant to be read aloud as a response, which means the format used in essays will feel awkward when done so.

So from there, it's just a matter of taking the lessons learned from writing essays (information transitions, organization, etc) and applying them to something like public speaking, or perhaps debate. Which you choose depends on what you want to accomplish.

But the point of that is those two formats in particular are designed specifically for speaking directly to other people. It's the difference between leaving an essay as a complete thought that is fully fleshed out, and leaving either an input or challenge that has information or opinions backing it.

The main reasoning for this is simple: Essays are finished. Input/challenges are open ended.

After reading your post, once I had gotten to the end, I felt I fully understood your stance on the matter, and the reasons you explained behind your stance. I also felt as if that was the end of the matter, you had dropped in once, explained your reasoning, then left. Any further input or debate would come across as something tacked onto the original post as an after-thought, or perhaps a second edition, rather than a continuation.

Since most of us on BBS are somewhat friendly with each other, any debate or conversation we have in a thread would naturally consist of multiple posts back and forth, this is why it's good to make sure your thoughts are left on a somewhat open ended outlet - And if some idiot happens to come out of nowhere and wants to stubbornly argue, it's also important to be able to effectively chain your ripostes together into a solid link of rebuttal.

All of this probably sounds like it's complicated or tedious, but it's really just a matter of mixing together what you learn from various writing exercises into your everyday speech. Like most things, the individual formats are useful on their own - But you can screw with them and personalize them into your life to make them extremely effective regarding how you want to use them, as opposed to how other people want them used.

As a final note before the tl;dr, I hadn't actually expected you to rewrite it just because I critiqued it. I'd seen you do better before, so I was more or less just poking fun at you for being lazy. Take what I say with a grain of salt, it's not like you're gonna get a grade or fail BBS forever. There's really no reason to try and improve or alter how you write/communicate unless you just feel like doing it for fun.

TL;DR:

Good job fixing everything, but we're not after essays. Try to make it a little more open ended so it would fit more smoothly into a conversation, and you can continue to chat off the end of it. You don't need to condense all of your thoughts into a single post, because you'll probably never really condense all of your thoughts into a single paragraph or sentence in a conversation. Let yourself be open for expansion and continuation.

>>13 I wanted to know your opinion of how I posted though. I want to improve, and the best way to improve is by getting feedback from people that do well. I shall take you advice into consideration when I post on another topic!

No

The fuck is Anti-American?
Fuck America.
Fuck what people think is/isn't American.
Waaayyy back when, being American, simply meant you declared independence from Great Britain.
Today, you have to own acres of land, listen to country music, drink bud light and own a chevy.
America is nothing but a capitalistic venture.
Nothing about this shithole is patriotic.
Everything around you is to generate revenue and deceive.

So, please tell me, what exactly is an "Anti-American..?"
Someone who doesn't vote republican?
Someone who believes the system is fucked?
Someone who wants no system?
Who?

The system is flawed anyway.
Until the powers of the government are returned to the people, America will continue to run on the way it always has.
In corruption.

>>16 You just got 20% cooler :3

>>12 You too.

...hmmmm no, neither should republicans, democrats, blondes, brunettes, and people who like the color orange.
(sarcasm if you haven't figured it out)
a persons opinion may change over time, and you can't really ban anyone based on their own opinion. If someone's "Anti-American" then chances are they won't vote anyway, because that's an idea that America is based on, thus making them hypocrites. lol

I'm not entirely sure what "Anti-American" means, but a citizen of the United States who is against the United States cannot be good. It's one thing if they do not support the current ways of the government and wish to fix it, but it's another thing if they are a domestic terrorist.

I believe a literacy test should be required to vote. I also believe that presidents should be elected by more of their intelligence, honor, and experience rather than their economical status, race, or religion.

BUMP THIS SHIT.

Heres the thing, and you said it yourself: You are in the minority. So, in the actual scheme of things, even though you voted, it doesn't affect anything. Majority rules. Also, if it comes to the point where those who wish for socialist/ Communist/ Facist/ Ect Cetera. Take the majority lead, then it really would nt matter if they were Pro American or not, because the Constitution would become a paradoxical impasse, unable to keep virtue to all its values. So honestly, it doesn't really matter who votes in the long run, as the majority will always rule the minority of votes. That's how the country was built, and that's how it's going to continue to survive.