extremism in opinions

[Ron Texas]

look, we have the European elections, but we're talking more about coalitions, people at local level and parties at local level; Europe (institution) is still a strange creature. While when it comes to the US elections there isn't a day without a debate, an article or a report on TV!!!

Remember the US constitution is fundamentally different from the parliamentary system used in most Democratic countries. Our President and the heads of the administrative agencies form a completely separate executive branch. Our executive branch can find itself with no support from the legislative branch which is the situation more often than not. There are no coalitions here, just two parties. The few who claim to be independents really aren't. There are no votes of confidence or unplanned changes of the government. It's a very different dynamic which somehow has managed to not blow itself to pieces in over 200 years.

 

[Mikig]

Remember the US constitution is fundamentally different from the parliamentary system used in most Democratic countries. Our President and the heads of the administrative agencies form a completely separate executive branch. Our executive branch can find itself with no support from the legislative branch which is the situation more often than not. There are no coalitions here, just two parties. The few who claim to be independents really aren't. There are no votes of confidence or unplanned changes of the government. It's a very different dynamic which somehow has managed to not blow itself to pieces in over 200 years.

I must tell you that our system is also quite complicated, Italy:
our President of the Republic is the Head of State and represents national unity.
He calls the elections for the new Chambers and sets their first meeting.
He authorizes the presentation of government-initiated bills to the Chambers.
He promulgates the laws and issues decrees having the force of law and regulations.
Calls for a popular referendum in the cases provided for by the Constitution.
He appoints, in the cases indicated by law, the state officials.
He accredits and receives diplomatic representatives, ratifies international treaties, subject, when necessary, to the authorization of the Chambers.
He is in command of the Armed Forces, presides over the Supreme Defense Council established according to law, and declares the state of war decided by the Chambers.
He presides over the Superior Council of the Judiciary.
He can grant pardons and commute sentences.
He confers the honors of the Republic.

Therefore he controls and coordinates the Government and Parliament, but he does not make the laws, the power of the chambers, which vote for him, and he does not have control of the executive which is the responsibility of the ministers and the Prime Minister.
we vote only for parliament, we do not have a direct election of the Prime Minister, , it is up to the winner of the elections after consultations with the President, or even the President of the Republic...

 

[pablolie]

look, we have the European elections, but we're talking more about coalitions, people at local level and parties at local level; Europe (institution) is still a strange creature. While when it comes to the US elections there isn't a day without a debate, an article or a report on TV!!!

...or a micro-second of compromise between the two polarized parties...

 

[Ron Texas]

I must tell you that our system is also quite complicated, Italy:
our President of the Republic is the Head of State and represents national unity.
He calls the elections for the new Chambers and sets their first meeting.
He authorizes the presentation of government-initiated bills to the Chambers.
He promulgates the laws and issues decrees having the force of law and regulations.
Calls for a popular referendum in the cases provided for by the Constitution.
He appoints, in the cases indicated by law, the state officials.
He accredits and receives diplomatic representatives, ratifies international treaties, subject, when necessary, to the authorization of the Chambers.
He is in command of the Armed Forces, presides over the Supreme Defense Council established according to law, and declares the state of war decided by the Chambers.
He presides over the Superior Council of the Judiciary.
He can grant pardons and commute sentences.
He confers the honors of the Republic.

Therefore he controls and coordinates the Government and Parliament, but he does not make the laws, the power of the chambers, which vote for him, and he does not have control of the executive which is the responsibility of the ministers and the Prime Minister.
we vote only for parliament, we do not have a direct election of the Prime Minister, , it is up to the winner of the elections after consultations with the President, or even the President of the Republic...

That's complicated. At least Italians have some of the best food in the world. Actually, it's complicated everywhere. All these systems of government are intended to accomplish the same end result. The important thing is to have a rule of law and not of men.

 

[Vacceo]

I must tell you that our system is also quite complicated, Italy:
our President of the Republic is the Head of State and represents national unity.
He calls the elections for the new Chambers and sets their first meeting.
He authorizes the presentation of government-initiated bills to the Chambers.
He promulgates the laws and issues decrees having the force of law and regulations.
Calls for a popular referendum in the cases provided for by the Constitution.
He appoints, in the cases indicated by law, the state officials.
He accredits and receives diplomatic representatives, ratifies international treaties, subject, when necessary, to the authorization of the Chambers.
He is in command of the Armed Forces, presides over the Supreme Defense Council established according to law, and declares the state of war decided by the Chambers.
He presides over the Superior Council of the Judiciary.
He can grant pardons and commute sentences.
He confers the honors of the Republic.

Therefore he controls and coordinates the Government and Parliament, but he does not make the laws, the power of the chambers, which vote for him, and he does not have control of the executive which is the responsibility of the ministers and the Prime Minister.
we vote only for parliament, we do not have a direct election of the Prime Minister, , it is up to the winner of the elections after consultations with the President, or even the President of the Republic...

Not too different from how the king works over here (Spain), even though its obligations are even more ceremonial. The current Spanish constitution draws elements from post-war ones, and Italy (Germany too) is one of its referents.

 

[KellenVancouver]

There does seem to have been a change in communication, and perhaps internet culture is to blame. It seems that communication today is hellbent on trying to change people's opinions. Maybe I'm old school, but I always thought the purpose of communication was to share perspectives with an underlying goal of mutual understanding. Significant difference. Forcing change on other people is not communication, it's manipulation.

 

[voodooless]

Maybe I'm old school, but I always thought the purpose of communication was to share perspectives with an underlying goal of mutual understanding.

Back in the civil days, this his how they did it:

I must say, I prefer the more modern, less definitive methods

 

[Jim Taylor]

There does seem to have been a change in communication, and perhaps internet culture is to blame. It seems that communication today is hellbent on trying to change people's opinions. Maybe I'm old school, but I always thought the purpose of communication was to share perspectives with an underlying goal of mutual understanding. Significant difference. Forcing change on other people is not communication, it's manipulation.

We who live in societies that respect basic human freedoms sometimes lack a deep appreciation of the quality of life that we enjoy. As distasteful as some aspects of the internet may be, it is a sign and symbol of the free exchange of ideas.

And ideas - extreme or otherwise - are the fertile ground which foster the growth and maturity of societies.

Jim

 

[JiiPee]

Back in the civil days, this his how they did it:

View attachment 378329

I must say, I prefer the more modern, less definitive methods

Despite its obvious problems, the old system probably had the advantage in functioning as a deterrent against verbal ad hominem attacks, as there was the fear of things escalating into a real physical ad hominem attack.

 

[Jimbob54]

Polite notice ladies and gents, discussions on forms of government and political structures inevitably lead to opinions on said forms which I will interpret as "political" in nature. One post deleted for being over that line. Lets back away from all such things please or I will have to lock the thread. Thanks.

 

[rank]

This topic is political and should be closed.

 

[KellenVancouver]

This topic is political and should be closed.

Not with that sentiment -- yet. Some folk put their toe in the water, but after jimbob's reminder I'd think trusting the members is the better course. This topic holds interest without the interjection of politics and seems relevant to this demographic given some of the extremes written about audio subjects.

 

[rank]

Truth is extreme.

 

[DLS79]

This topic is political and should be closed.

Almost any topic can be turned into a political one fairly quickly, but that doesn't mean said topic shouldn't be discussed.

 

[Killingbeans]

This topic is political and should be closed.

It's sociological and psychological. Yes, it can turn political rather quickly, but it's not a given.
Problem is, you can't really get to the core of the prevalent crazyness of this hobby without poking this particular hornets' nest.

Truth is extreme.

Truth is a man-made concept.

People absolutely love extreme thinking. It only requires a tiny fraction of the brain power you'd normally need for navigating the actual reality of things.

 

[mhardy6647]

Truth is a man-made concept.

Is it?

Did we make, e.g., "the laws of physics" -- or perhaps was it vice versa?

 

[rank]

At least in the so-called exact sciences, there is a part of truth that allows us to communicate now instead of wandering in the forest.

 

[Mikig]

I try to express a concept: you are free to change the terms if you find them more appropriate and if the concept can be shared.

man seeks the truth certified by scientific, philosophical and cultural laws to discover and establish the principles of what surrounds him. The "approved" truths remain, until new "discoveries", cornerstones. They are practically universal and general.

Then there are what I would define as hypotheses, statements that still require their total study or, if already studied, have not reached the status of truth due to lack of evidence or results that are always truthful and reproducible.

The rest is just chatter: in most cases it is not worth studying or studying them further: in some cases because an average experience is enough to discredit them, in other cases because with the same average experience it is understood that they would not bring anything new or improved to hypotheses at vetted and established truths. It goes without saying that these represent perhaps 95% of the material circulating between the media and the internet today. They are often the mother of extremist fake news and mass disinformation.

 

[rank]

1984

 

[TheBatsEar]

1984

1985!
Just saying.