Are political forums Obsolete?

I was warned not to press my luck in this thread by a respectable mod. Incase you are not aware they are paying close attention to this thread.

 

There is no place on the web to solve anything. It's not for that, it's for corporations to make money and coverts agents to mislead, confuse and distract people, duh.

 

Are political forums Obsolete?

They evidently are for you. Why are you here?

 

To actually learn something, and to create something with meaning, all that needs to be done is post a thread where sincere Americans are asked to post their agreement and acceptance upon the fact that the purpose of free speech is to assure the unity needed to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights.

My post expelling why this is needed to bring meaning to ANY forum.

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=397142&p=1064760756#post1064760756

 

Yawn! For most of us this is just a hobby. We know that nobody is going to alter the United States by posting to a political forum. At most what will occur is that posters with a minimally open mind will gradually learn new and interesting things and perhaps even -- gasp! -- change his or her mind from time to time regarding issues and perspectives.

As for the nihilistic political screed; perhaps you are correct; in which case . . . nothing. If there is no hope then struggle is pointless. One is now and forevermore a victim. Give up, curl into a ball on the floor and cry like a baby. Or if you are correct then rant and rave and shake one's fist at fate. Because everyone is wired just a bit differently and some people are born fighters while others are meant to be doormats.

But still . . . this is just a hobby. It is therefore just as valid as anything else done for pleasure; and in this case validity is definitely in the eyes of the beholder.

 

Except for those not mislead and confused can also use it to make people aware of the truth.

 

There is lots of meaningless truth and the covert infiltrations LOVE that, while refusing to engage the other kind of truth. They also do what they can to discourage others from engaging that kind.

 

Some excellent points. Political forums have two rolls in society. One being a way for the powers that be to monitor public opinion much the same as the endless polls they use to decide the direction of needed propaganda.
Second, as a way to shape public opinion by way of paid shills who use the art of political science to persuade the uninformed that the status quo is in their best interests, usually by the constant use of logical fallacy.
That being said, they do provide a platform for those who would expose the truth and to propagate the expression of ideas and logic. Of course the discussions are often derailed when they do begin to inform the people of the truth, because the truth is the most dangerous enemy of those who seek to exploit the weaknesses of their fellow man.
If in the course of these forums, it is possible to enlighten even one other human to the truth, and thereby help them to spread that truth, then I suppose the time we spend exposing the lies and the shills is worth while.

 

Let me be perfectly frank.

I am retired and my days are split between two efforts:

I read hundreds of news and entertainment sites and enjoy sharing some of that with others.

I also spend a number of hours every day writing/editing/revising. Sometimes, what I learn from forums turns out to be very helpful in my writing efforts.

 

With this perspective you reveal yourself as perhaps more experienced than the average user of forums.

Anytime we can intervene in the deception and manipulation of fellow Americans by those against our constitution and capacity for unity in defense of it is at least worth while, if not vital.

There is actually no other political venue of open exchange of perceptions and ideas. Therefore intervention and prevention of deception is vital in my experience.

Media is completely controlled and misleading, meaning this environment is the one and only corrective mode Americans can occupy socially.

Within this, the goal of political unity is the most worthy. Overcoming the infiltrations with accurate views of reality AND the possible. My effort here is to guide and inspire that, if there are any interested.

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=397142&p=1064760756#post1064760756

 

This and another thread in the forum are intrinsically related.

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=397320&page=2&p=1064764425#post1064764425

 

Something is very wrong with the minds of people in this country. This forum has demonstrated it related to the purpose of free speech I've been pointing out EVERYWHERE.

First and most important, NO ONE has ever been able to show that the creation of unity is not the ultimate purpose of free speech.

This is actually HUGE, because it reasonably indicates that I've defined the purpose of free speech properly and NO ONE is aware of that definition. People everywhere accept it, but that's different that knowing it. Its also different from using that purpose or trying to use it.

Either we have a collective unconscious mandate to never cause any change, because the purpose of free speech will precede any real change, OR we are incredibly stupid and hypocritical people who love to spew on and on about our rights and how they are violated BUT absolutely refuse to do anything to defend them or restore them.

These threads prove this.

http://www.politicalforum.com/political-opinions-beliefs/394345-we-should-get-rid-free-speech.html

http://www.politicalforum.com/opini...assure-info-vital-life-shared-understood.html

http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...free-speech-choosing-limits-over-purpose.html

http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...ons-free-speech-inadequate-retain-rights.html

http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...privation-right-prevent-my-free-speech-6.html

When coupled with the fact not one person will start a thread using the definition of the purpose to filter out the covert infiltrations and get discussion MEANINGFUL with people that actually want it to mean something rather than anonymous agents working to prevent unity around anything meaningful.

 

Bravo sir. Bravo. That's not nearly a good enough reply, but I think exactly like you do whenever I see people arguing Republican vs. Democrat. It's all a sham. It's all fake. The Republicans and Democrats are in bed with each other. Republicans want amnesty as much as Democrats they just act like they don't to keep people complacent.

Maybe one day the average American person will realize what a sham the Republican/Democrat charade is. I wouldn't get too upset right now though. Because that's a far ways off, and you don't want to give yourself an aneurism before the day comes.

 

Message boards do not influence elections, nor do the vast majority of Americans read them, nor are the collection of posters who post on message boards representative of voters in general. It's ridiculous to think otherwise.

Get over yourselves.

 

Political forums are good fun. Like watching TV, but more interactive.

Since there are no correct answers, it's all noise. But it's interesting noise.

 

I just go on to have some fun!!!

That and making certain certain Middle Eastern Elements don't start posting pictures of kids wearing Nuclear Mushroom Clouds with the Ababic and in so cases Farsi scriptic writing that say's.....ISLAMIC BOMB.

AboveAlpha

 

I forgot one possibility, and that is that the entire membership here is actually comprised of covert infiltration, or people so influenced by that infiltration they are afraid to align with any action that would expose the infiltration.

Now, how would that fit into the first part of the above I've quoted of my earlier post? Anyone capable of going there to avoid being incredibly stupid or hypocritical? One hint, it has to do with social fears. And they are . . .

 

And to think, I'm posting for free (or am I )

 

You could prove you are a sincere, to me, 100% American by agreeing with and accepting the ultimate purpose of free speech as being to assure the unity required to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights.

 

Or maybe you're all in your head?

 

As I have children I can speak with certainty that some us fear you're a local pizza delivery person and we don't know which pizza joint you work for.

 

These responses indicate there is an opinion that free speech has no purpose, or that people here do not want to deal with defining it.

Is anyone here accountable enough to state why they think the definition of the ultimate purpose of free speech IS NOT to enable unity adequate to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights? Or why they are unwilling to agree with the definition?

 

The only logical conclusion is that posters at this site have no interest in protecting unalienable rights from government destructive to them or the constitution which prohibits that destruction.

Quite inconsistent and wholly unaccountable. A shameful disgrace of modern America and the general state of mind promoted on the internet by . . . who knows who these people are. With a lack of consistency and accountability that is unexplained, they could easily be covert agents manipulating perceptions and opinion.

 

History was always a war between the haves and the have-nots. The haves have to invent a maze of bull(*)(*)(*)(*) for the have-not's to navigate and stay loyal on some level. The have-not's are conditioned to pick a pro-wrestling stable to support: in politics, economics, and civil society, memorize the dogma of that stable and operate in that particular reality tunnel. Any alternative would involve dismantling your ego and state of being. Even if you're disloyal you will still remain loyal because you have no balls. Guns where put there for a reason. To shoot yourselves in the face because you can't change anything and never will.

http://eepat.net/doku.php?id=gramsci_and_culture

Everything is under control.

 

Meaningless in what way? The grand scheme of things? Absolutely. On a peer-to-peer basis, however, no, they are not meaningless. While a contaminated and co-opted process, it nevertheless gives some people a platform on which to speak politically, or about any topic, really. There is value in that on a personal basis, but the collective as a whole are ignorant to these platforms of communication. Political speech is heavily regulated in much of the world, and even in the Western world, political speech is usually frowned upon, like at work and depending on what is being said, the government itself.