Latest Pew Study finds Republican party shifting fast to religious radicalism

[Skybird]

The rift between science and religion wins in importance to define the frontlines along which Democrats and Republicans define themselves.

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/30/p...man-evolution/

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...w-its-changed/

It seems to me that the Republicans lose members of moderate views and scientific education, and replace them with evangelicals and Christian radicals who take the Bible literally. These may be attracted by the Tea Party. The newcomers add to the Republican pool of white radical Protestants, making it the ideological harbor of those who feel threatened by the growing influence foreign ethnicities have in inner politics. The traditional concept of the so-called WASP no longer is the dominating group in America, and since quite some time already, and for the Republicans, who traditionally attracted these and had their voter basis recruited amongst these, this is a threat to their own competitiveness against the Democrats, who gain voters due to their increasingly unhidden socialist agenda that promises candy falling from heaven, and their higher attractiveness for non-white immigrants.

The deep rifts between both political dominant groups in America seem to be set for not going away soon. It seems that instead the trenches get dug deeper and deeper. And the conflict science versus religion becomes an increasingly important battlefield on which especially the Republicans define themselves. And the more they lose, the more radical they become.

[gi_dan2987]

Originally Posted by Skybird

The rift between science and religion wins in importance to define the frontlines along which Democrats and Republicans define themselves.

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/30/p...man-evolution/

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...w-its-changed/

It seems to me that the Republicans lose members of moderate views and scientific education, and replace them with evangelicals and Christian radicals who take the Bible literally. These may be attracted by the Tea Party. The newcomers add to the Republican pool of white radical Protestants, making it the ideological harbor of those who feel threatened by the growing influence foreign ethnicities have in inner politics. The traditional concept of the so-called WASP no longer is the dominating group in America, and since quite some time already, and for the Republicans, who traditionally attracted these and had their voter basis recruited amongst these, this is a threat to their own competitiveness against the Democrats, who gain voters due to their increasingly unhidden socialist agenda that promises candy falling from heaven, and their higher attractiveness for non-white immigrants.

The deep rifts between both political dominant groups in America seem to be set for not going away soon. It seems that instead the trenches get dug deeper and deeper. And the conflict science versus religion becomes an increasingly important battlefield on which especially the Republicans define themselves. And the more they lose, the more radical they become.

That's because both parties have actually united and turned the US into a nation that is actively operating as a fascist oligarchy. The republic was doomed in 1913 with the signing of the Federal Reserve Act, which turned money from value to debt, and forced people to give up all their gold and silver in exchange for worthless paper fiat currency. This took all the real bargaining power from the people, and put it in the hands of few, wealthy bankers.

The whole two-party system only serves to keep the people of this nation divided on every issue possible, be it race, religion, color, creed, or otherwise. A nation divided cannot stand, and especially cannot stand against its tyrannical government!

This whole system was designed by the elites to undermine the integrity of the American culture and system, and turn it into a bit of a cyborg controlled by the big money players, most notably known as the Federal Reserve.

The big corporates, the politicians, and the Fed are all intertwined in this system. They all work together to continuously steal from the people, all the while keeping them distracted with things like political debates, the illusion of voting, and of course, the Kardashians. The Kardashians are undoubtedly the MOST important thing in our society today, and "to hell with the loss of our personal freedoms!" Is usually the attitude that is displayed by modern Americans.

As a 4th generation German-American, I can say that a similar thing is happening in Deutschland isn't it?

Grüße aus den USA!

Anmerkung: Meine mutti's familie stammt aus Nordhein-Westfalen

Woher kommen Sie?

[Betonov]

Not much different with a multiparty system.
They just form 2 blocks that resemble a 2 party system

[Admiral Halsey]

Originally Posted by gi_dan2987

That's because both parties have actually united and turned the US into a nation that is actively operating as a fascist oligarchy. The republic was doomed in 1913 with the signing of the Federal Reserve Act, which turned money from value to debt, and forced people to give up all their gold and silver in exchange for worthless paper fiat currency. This took all the real bargaining power from the people, and put it in the hands of few, wealthy bankers.

The whole two-party system only serves to keep the people of this nation divided on every issue possible, be it race, religion, color, creed, or otherwise. A nation divided cannot stand, and especially cannot stand against its tyrannical government!

This whole system was designed by the elites to undermine the integrity of the American culture and system, and turn it into a bit of a cyborg controlled by the big money players, most notably known as the Federal Reserve.

The big corporates, the politicians, and the Fed are all intertwined in this system. They all work together to continuously steal from the people, all the while keeping them distracted with things like political debates, the illusion of voting, and of course, the Kardashians. The Kardashians are undoubtedly the MOST important thing in our society today, and "to hell with the loss of our personal freedoms!" Is usually the attitude that is displayed by modern Americans.

As a 4th generation German-American, I can say that a similar thing is happening in Deutschland isn't it?

Grüße aus den USA!

Anmerkung: Meine mutti's familie stammt aus Nordhein-Westfalen

Woher kommen Sie?

I agree that we need to get rid of the Federal Reserve and need some more 3rd parties. Problem is with that last one they won't win anything until people stop thinking that voting for one is a "wasted vote".

[gi_dan2987]

Originally Posted by Admiral Halsey

I agree that we need to get rid of the Federal Reserve and need some more 3rd parties. Problem is with that last one they won't win anything until people stop thinking that voting for one is a "wasted vote".

With our system the way it is, if everybody showed up to vote, or nobody showed up, either one of the two monkey's running for office will still get in. The rub is that you HAVE to vote for one of the two, and it's been proven that a "write in" will result in a default vote for one or the other.

Now there are millions of people in this country that could do a better job than the current cabinet, but even if they have the money, they're not even allowed to run if they don't first join one of the two corrupt parties!

I'm sorry that we disagree, but I'm going to have to stick with voting being an illusion. It may never have always been this way, and there may have been a time when each vote counted, but that was a time when a representative actually took care of their constituents. They didn't just campaign for the job, then sit around and not follow through while collecting a paycheck off the public trough!

I feel we are somewhere between the "writing, voting, and protesting isn't working anymore" and "Well now how do we solve these issues?" But the issue with that is people don't care enough to want to try. They're too busy working too much, dealing with stress at home, watching TV, or drugged up on every pharmaceutical known to man.

[NeonSamurai]

The political situation in the US continues to worsen and become more extreme in both directions, rather than being more towards the middle as it should be. It is so bad now that the parties can't even work together at all and will actively try to sabotage the other party to the detriment of everyone; cutting one's nose off to spite one's face.

This really needs to stop. The first thing that needs to happen is that districts need to be reshaped back to sensible zones based on geography, and that politicians need to loose the power to reshape their own districts. Gerrymandering needs to stop now. If you want to see what I am talking about, I mean this..

http://pjmedia.com/zombie/2010/11/11...united-states/

Anyhow here is an Extra Credits three part video that I think really do a good job explaining some of the major problems, with out delving into the politics.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Admiral Halsey

I agree that we need to get rid of the Federal Reserve and need some more 3rd parties. Problem is with that last one they won't win anything until people stop thinking that voting for one is a "wasted vote".

One easily implemented solution is to move our federal elections from a plurality system to a majority system.

I have been doing some research and I can not find any US law/regulation that mandates that elections be based on a plurality outcome instead of a majority. The only exception is the counting of the votes of the electoral college by the Vice President.

If we could start electing our congressional representatives on a majority schema, then third party votes would not be "wasted". Unfortunately, in our plurality schema, they are wasted. Especially if the voter is put in a position of voting against a candidate instead of voting for a candidate.

[Platapus]

I would also like to see members of the Senate and the House become state employees instead of federal employees. That way each state would have considerable influence over "their" representative.

[gi_dan2987]

Originally Posted by NeonSamurai

The political situation in the US continues to worsen and become more extreme in both directions, rather than being more towards the middle as it should be. It is so bad now that the parties can't even work together at all and will actively try to sabotage the other party to the detriment of everyone; cutting one's nose off to spite one's face.

This really needs to stop. The first thing that needs to happen is that districts need to be reshaped back to sensible zones based on geography, and that politicians need to loose the power to reshape their own districts. Gerrymandering needs to stop now. If you want to see what I am talking about, I mean this..

http://pjmedia.com/zombie/2010/11/11...united-states/

Anyhow here is an Extra Credits three part video that I think really do a good job explaining some of the major problems, with out delving into the politics.

What collapsed Rome was mismanagement. Too many incompetent jackwagons all trying to be the chief. As we can see with our current situation, history does truly repeat itself.

[NeonSamurai]

Originally Posted by gi_dan2987

What collapsed Rome was mismanagement. Too many incompetent jackwagons all trying to be the chief. As we can see with our current situation, history does truly repeat itself.

While I agree that many parallels can be drawn between the US and Rome (or generally any empire), it is also missing many features. We don't have exactly the same problems of a totally unstable government where the president is getting assassinated and replaced constantly, or the different armies declaring multiple presidents of their own, at the same time. The US is not as strained financially, nor at risk to the "barbarians" at the gate (rhetoric aside), nor is it trying to control more land than it could possibly maintain. It's armies are not out of control and the secret service is not trying to maintain control. The corruption is also not quite as bad (but not by much).

But I do not think that government is a bad thing, its a very essential thing to prevent corporate entities from running roughshod over the populace, and reigning in their endless greed no matter the cost. But government needs to be accountable for its actions, and I have to say I like what the videos i posted propose as ways to make politicians accountable to us and not be influenced by business or money.

Oh and here is a link to explain in detail what Gerrymandering is, and just how insidious it is. I should emphasize that both parties are very guilty of this, that this has been going on since 1812.

http://pjmedia.com/zombie/2010/11/10...mandering-101/

[Skybird]

edit: I found the English translation of the chapter that in the preivously written post was referred to. So I delete dit and copy that chapter instead.

Thematic reference of mine is to the comparison of Rome's and America's economic fall.

One either sees the actuality of what von Mises (from whose book n"Human Action" the following is taken) is summarising here, or one does not, and then all explanations by me probably would not help anyway. To me, the parallels are so obvious that they almost jump to the eye.

L.v. Mises: Human Action

XXX. INTERFERENCE WITH THE STRUCTURE OF PRICES

2. The Market's Reaction to Government Interference

------------------

Observations on the Causes of the Decline of Ancient Civilization

Knowledge of the effects of government interference with market prices makes us comprehend the economic causes of a momentous historical event, the decline of ancient civilization.

It may be left undecided whether or not it is correct to call the economic organization of the Roman Empire capitalism. At any rate it is certain that the Roman Empire in the second century, the age of the Antonines, the "good" emperors, had reached a high stage of the social division of labor and of interregional commerce. Several metropolitan centers, a considerable number of middle-sized towns, and many small towns were the seats of a refined civilization. The inhabitants of these urban agglomerations were supplied with food and raw materials not only from the neighboring rural districts, but also from distant provinces. A part of these provisions flowed into the cities as revenue of their wealthy residents who owned landed property. But a considerable part was bought in exchange for the rural population's purchases of the products of the city-dwellers' processing activities. There was an extensive trade between the various regions of the vast empire. Not only in the processing industries, but also in agriculture there was a tendency toward further specialization. The various parts of the empire were no longer economically self-sufficient. They were interdependent.

What brought about the decline of the empire and the decay of its civilization was the disintegration of this economic interconnectedness, not the barbarian invasions. The alien aggressors merely took advantage of an opportunity which the internal weakness of the empire offered to them. From a military point of view the tribes which invaded the empire in the fourth and fifth centuries were not more formidable than the armies which the legions had easily defeated [p. 768] in earlier times. But the empire had changed. Its economic and social structure was already medieval.

The freedom that Rome granted to commerce and trade had always been restricted. With regard to the marketing of cereals and other vital necessities it was even more restricted than with regard to other commodities. It was deemed unfair and immoral to ask for grain, oil, and wine, the staples of these ages, more than the customary prices, and the municipal authorities were quick to check what they considered profiteering. Thus the evolution of an efficient wholesale trade in these commodities was prevented. The policy of the annona, which was tantamount to a nationalization or municipalization of the grain trade, aimed at filling the gaps. But its effects were rather unsatisfactory. Grain was scarce in the urban agglomerations, and the agriculturists complained about the unremunerativeness of grain growing.[3] The interference of the authorities upset the adjustment of supply to the rising demand.

The showdown came when in the political troubles of the third and fourth centuries the emperors resorted to currency debasement. With the system of maximum prices the practice of debasement completely paralyzed both the production and the marketing of the vital foodstuffs and disintegrated society's economic organization. The more eagerness the authorities displayed in enforcing the maximum prices, the more desperate became the conditions of the urban masses dependent on the purchase of food. Commerce in grain and other necessities vanished altogether. To avoid starving, people deserted the cities, settled on the countryside, and tried to grow grain, oil, wine, and other necessities for themselves. On the other hand, the owners of the big estates restricted their excess production of cereals and began to produce in their farmhouses--the villae--the products of handicraft which they needed. For their big-scale farming, which was already seriously jeopardized because of the inefficiency of slave labor, lost its rationality completely when the opportunity to sell at remunerative prices disappeared. As the owner of the estate could no longer sell in the cities, he could no longer patronize the urban artisans either. He was forced to look for a substitute to meet his needs by employing handicraftsmen on his own account in his villa. He discontinued big-scale farming and became a landlord receiving rents from tenants or sharecroppers. These coloni were either freed slaves or urban proletarians who settled in the villages and turned to tilling the soil. A tendency toward the establishment of autarky of each landlord's estate emerged. The economic function of the cities, of commerce, trade, and urban handicrafts, shrank. Italy and the provinces of the empire returned to a less advanced state of the social [p. 769] division of labor. The highly developed economic structure of ancient civilization retrograded to what is now known as the manorial organization of the Middle Ages.

The emperors were alarmed with that outcome which undermined the financial and military power of their government. But their counteraction was futile as it did not affect the root of the evil. The compulsion and coercion to which they resorted could not reverse the trend toward social disintegration which, on the contrary, was caused precisely by too much compulsion and coercion. No Roman was aware of the fact that the process was induced by the government's interference with prices and by currency debasement. It was vain for the emperors to promulgate laws against the city-dweller who "relicta civitate rus habitare maluerit." [4] The system of the leiturgia, the public services to be rendered by the wealthy citizens, only accelerated the retrogression of the division of labor. The laws concerning the special obligations of the shipowners, the navicularii, were no more successful in checking the decline of navigation than the laws concerning grain dealing in checking the shrinkage in the cities' supply of agricultural products.

The marvelous civilization of antiquity perished because it did not adjust its moral code and its legal system to the requirements of the market economy. A social order is doomed if the actions which its normal functioning requires are rejected by the standards of morality, are declared illegal by the laws of the country, and are prosecuted as criminal by the courts and the police. The Roman Empire crumbled to dust because it lacked the spirit of liberalism and free enterprise. The policy of interventionism and its political corollary, the Fuhrer principle, decomposed the mighty empire as they will by necessity always disintegrate and destroy any social entity.

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by gi_dan2987

... doomed in 1913 with the signing of the Federal Reserve Act, which turned money from value to debt, and forced people to give up all their gold and silver in exchange for worthless paper fiat currency. This took all the real bargaining power from the people, and put it in the hands of few, wealthy bankers.

Amen to that .. as soon as money loses its real worth and becomes debt, it will grow by itself, the real problem then being compounded interest.

Grüße aus den USA!
Anmerkung: Meine mutti's familie stammt aus Nordhein-Westfalen
Woher kommen Sie?

Grüße aus Deutschland, meine Familie stammt aus Berlin und Detmold, ich selbst aus Lower-Saxony

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by NeonSamurai

But I do not think that government is a bad thing, its a very essential thing to prevent corporate entities from running roughshod over the populace,

And what do you call what the political paraiste do to the people? One could argue, that Bismarck introduced his social reforms (and effectively invented the social wellfare state) at a tiem when growing capitalism and the corresponding spread of wealth threatened the self-declared Fuhrer elites with a people that became increasingly free, liberal, and non_depending on politician's governing over them. Because they got lured back into obedience and submission to the state which nursed them and fed them. The same tactic as today.

That such a "freedom" can only be had at the price of Rousseau's reasoning, who wanted a total maximum of state and a total minimum of individualism, in essence declaring the state an absolute that replaced the individual freedom - that is something that many people today completely overlook, or ignore - or, if they have a heart beating strong for totalitarian collectivism, actively desire.

It's about power, Neon, and control. Not about ideals. Capitalism and free market is what emancipate people from their state masters' control and command. Non monopolised trade between free people, with no monopoles on prices or government control, robbery and power. Govenrment are unneeded parasites. Not more. There service is to suck your blood. And for that service they blackmail you for protection money. And when you pay it, they still hang on you, sucking. And send you into a war, maybe. Or a paper money currency that devalues your property. The property that you still are allowed to hold, and got not expropriated of.

Governments and politicians are as much needed and as useful as hemorrhoids in the anus. What is needed is a population educated in understand what the nature of real money is, and what economy is. With that knowledge, people can negotiate their bartering and trading, independently, freely, and self-responsibly. A nightmare for politicians. Their total uselessness and anti-social nature would immediately be so obvious for all to see . No more free ride. No more privileges for no merits. No more living by claiming to solve problems that one has caused oneself.

That's why Bismarck introduced the social wellfare legislation. Right at the time in history when Western people on a grand scale had the chance to become free from their self-.proclaimed leaders. What an unbelievable coincidence!

The main problem with Von Mises "Human action" is that its utopian dream has exactly the same flaws as Marxism.
Both claim they can take the eternally repeating fail cycle and evolve it to reach the perfect state for mankind, both ideologies fail on the very basic first step by neglecting to understand that humans are in essence rather stupid.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by gi_dan2987

As a 4th generation German-American, I can say that a similar thing is happening in Deutschland isn't it?

Grüße aus den USA!

Anmerkung: Meine mutti's familie stammt aus Nordhein-Westfalen

Woher kommen Sie?

Could it be that you are me? I agree with pretty much of what you said.

I was born in Detmold, but have crisscrossed across Germany at all four compass directions meanwhile. Münster 14 years, Berlin ten years, ten in Osnabrück, and Lübeck five years have been my longest stays in one place, with Lübeck being liked most as a place. Berlin was my teen years, so it is a hate-love, I dislike the city, but it is a known place, even if disliked, and by age those years (and the very much liked school I was at) nevertheless where the best years in my life, roughly my second decade. But at no costs I would go back to Berlin today. Divided Cold War Berlin was so much better. Must sound strange, but many Berliners who lived back then, said and say so.