Originally posted by KazetNagorraThere is a draft on Wikileaks you can download and read. It is not easy reading as it is in legalese and contains vast numbers of variations on each clause as various nations propose one or another formulation.
The content of the proposed treaty is, as far as I understand, not fully public, so I cannot form an opinion on it. I'm sure it has aspects I agree with and aspects I disagree with. Was there a specific policy proposal you wanted to discuss?
Originally posted by JS357Traditional liberalism is very different from today's liberalism as you point out. Traditional liberalism is an anti authoritarian ideology, as where today's liberalism is all bout power and forcing things on people.
According to some analyses, it is a neoliberal thing, which is quite different from US liberalism.
"Neoliberalism is the resurgence of ideas associated with economic liberalism beginning in the 1970s and 1980s,[1][2][3] whose advocates support extensive economic liberalization, free trade, and reductions in government spending in order to enhance the role o ...[text shortened]... conomy.[4][5][6][7] The usage and definition of the term have changed over time.[8]" (Wikipedia)
Originally posted by no1marauderBoth those on the right and left I think are trying to fight for the same things. Unfortunately, neither has any representation in the federal government.
Right wingers seek to enhance corporate power (even giving them "rights" like freedom of religion) because they are tools created and maintained by the wealthy. The defining feature of right wing ideology has always been that a few should be entitled to rule and dominate the rest. Right wingers wish to restrict government power in the US because it is ba ...[text shortened]... iting government power in other things like enforcing a dominant culture's morals and/or values.
So what is the solution? I propose Mark Levin's suggestion that states amend the Constitution and return power back to the states. I suppose your suggestion would be another political party in the current system, but I don't think that is the answer. That is because the system has been subverted and is now broken. Power has been centralized and now too easy for the wealthy to control.
Originally posted by whodeyThose of us with horrible, and I mean horrible, state governments would fight this tooth or nail. The only chance Arizona has of seeing a reasonable action by legislature is from the Feds. I'm not interested in giving this clown squadron we call our state legislature any more power, in fact I'd like to see it reduced.
Both those on the right and left I think are trying to fight for the same things. Unfortunately, neither has any representation in the federal government.
So what is the solution? I propose Mark Levin's suggestion that states amend the Constitution and return power back to the states. I suppose your suggestion would be another political party in the cur ...[text shortened]... rted and is now broken. Power has been centralized and now too easy for the wealthy to control.
1 edit
Originally posted by SuzianneThe federal government only has a 10% approval rating. I don't see how they are doing any better. I fail to see why you wish to surrender your local legislature to a group of distant corrupt bureaucrats, the vast majority of which you can't vote for or against.
Those of us with horrible, and I mean horrible, state governments would fight this tooth or nail. The only chance Arizona has of seeing a reasonable action by legislature is from the Feds. I'm not interested in giving this clown squadron we call our state legislature any more power, in fact I'd like to see it reduced.
Do you prefer tyranny?
It is interesting that you chose Arizona of all states, for it was they who tried to enforce illegal immigration laws for the federal government who have failed to do so on their own.