From: Brett Paatsch (paatschb@ocean.com.au)
Date: Sun Mar 23 2003 - 17:32:48 MST
Mike Lorrey writes:
> --- Brett Paatsch <paatschb@ocean.com.au> wrote:
> > Mike Lorrey writes:
> > > I hear lots of europeans and others claim they love
> > > Americans but hate our government's policy. Turns out
> > > that 71% currently support Bush's policy and 78% think
> > > the UN is a failure. Our government's policy is our own.
> > > We own it. Get it?
> >
> > Does the government own your judgement on all matters because
> > there was an election some time ago?
> >
> > When you say "we" and presume to speak for a group how many
> > proxies are you actually holding?
>
> Perhaps you are not getting what I am saying.
Perhaps. But I think I did get it. What I did not do, was exerpt, all
the parts of your post which caused me to ask the above questions
and so it seems that you haven't understood why I asked what I did.
In that same post that the above excerpt is from you state.
> > > If a nation is democratic, and lives by a majoritarian tyranny
> > > system of government (as France is), it's leaders are acting
> > > EXACTLY as their constituents want them to."
The USA is ALSO a democracy (at least, in the sense that you
seem to be using it when you are referring to France). I therefore
wondered if you applied your notion to yourself as citizen of the US,
hence my question:
"Does the government own your judgement on all matters because
there was an election some time ago?"
I was pretty sure I knew what the answer was, I still am.
The other question I asked because you seemed to be presuming
rather a lot on the basis of a poll that you did not cite. You used the
term "we".
So I asked "When you say "we" and presume to speak for a group
how many proxies are you actually holding?" I think it is a common
mistake, especially in emotionally charged discussions, for people to
get excited and to presume they are speaking for more people than
they are. Sometimes spokespersons do speak quite legitimately for
more than themselves but sometimes some people just presume to
speak for other people and they are not actually authorised to do so.
Also the use of the word "we" when the referent group is unclear is
also quite confusing in some cases. On this list to say "we" might
mean you and I. It might mean "we" (extropians). It might mean
"we" Americans. What is actually meant by "we" is often genuinely
unclear.
BTW: You have quite rightly pointed out that I made some spelling
mistakes. This is completely fair comment on your part and I will
try to do better. I do have spell checking turned on but it doesn't
pick up bad grammar etc. (I am a poor "speller" and I will try to
improve).
I think clear communication is important Mike. Obviously so do
you.
Thank you
Brett Paatsch
---------------------------------------------------------------------
[Note to newbies]: The views above are only the views of this poster.
For a statement of Extropian Principles see:
http://www.extropy.org/ideas/principles.html
Other documents worth a look:
The Constitution of the United States of America.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.overview.html
The Charter of The United Nations.
http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/index.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Mar 23 2003 - 17:13:46 MST