I dont understand it...


PDA






KriegHund
August 9, 2005, 11:40 PM
How can a place like New York, where this nations very existance began, can turn into such a place as it is now? Same with washington! The place where the republic is quite literaly housed is turned into a major anti-gun area. Its disguisting.

I would expect things like this to happen in the newer states, yet ironicly it is the oldest colonies that turn on their rights!

If you enjoyed reading about "I dont understand it..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
beerslurpy
August 9, 2005, 11:43 PM
I asked myself the same question for 18 years in NY, another 6 in Baltimore and another 3 in CA. After having tasted flyover country, I never want to go back.

Marshall
August 9, 2005, 11:47 PM
Who knows, thankful to live where I do though.

Standing Wolf
August 10, 2005, 12:00 AM
How can a place like New York, where this nations very existance began...

New Yorkers may think the nation was begun there, but they're mistaken.

KriegHund
August 10, 2005, 12:26 AM
I was more referring to the original 13 colonies. New york played a big part in it, as did the other 12 colonies, but new york is the one with the most left-ism.

NMshooter
August 10, 2005, 01:06 AM
As most of the ornery liberty loving folks left Europe for America the first chance they got the same thing happened when the west was opened up after the war with Mexico.

When it becomes possible to travel to other star systems the same thing will happen to Earth.

I hope I am still alive then, as I intend to be one of them! :D

Graystar
August 10, 2005, 01:12 AM
How can a place like New York, where this nations very existance began, can turn into such a place as it is now?Reductio ad absurdum

Werewolf
August 10, 2005, 11:06 AM
NMShooter +1

Basic human nature - as it was, is and always will be.

VARifleman
August 10, 2005, 11:11 AM
This nation began in VA, plain and simple. All them yankees trying to claim fame for something they didn't do, and the public schools do enough brainwashing with the focus on the Mayflower and those puritan heretics who were coming over for "religious freedom". It makes me want to puke how many lies are seen as truths these days. :fire:

petrel800
August 10, 2005, 11:14 AM
I believe you answered your own question . . .

The place where democracy is quite literaly housed is turned into a major anti-gun area.

This founders never intended on this country becoming a democracy. In democracies, rights are easily stolen by the "majority." Individuality can only be destroyed by mob mentality.

Tory
August 10, 2005, 01:18 PM
"How can a place like New York, where this nations very existance [sic] began, can turn into such a place as it is now?"

By whoring out our birthright for the illusion of "safety," exactly as Franklin warned us against. For another such city, come to BOSTON, the self-styled "Cradle of Liberty." :barf: :barf: :barf: It had FAR more to do with the Revolution than New York, and is almost as bad.

"This nation began in VA, plain and simple."

You engage in jingoistic self-delusion, "plain and simple." Rather like Texans who still claim they can become an independent state at will. :rolleyes:

I love The Old Dominion and grant it all due respect (Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson, The Virginia Resolves, etc.), but the Revolution BEGAN in Massachusetts with the Suffolk Resolves, the Boston Tea Party and the repulse of British forces intent on seizing militia arms by those militia at Concord Bridge. Ever hear of it? :scrutiny:

READ some history before lecturing us on it.

cuchulainn
August 10, 2005, 02:21 PM
but the Revolution BEGAN in Massachusetts with the Suffolk Resolves, the Boston Tea Party and the repulse of British forces intent on seizing militia arms by those militia at Concord Bridge. The fighting began in Massachusetts, no doubt. But that's happenstance. The first skirmishes could have occurred elsewhere. The locations of the first fights are no more meaningful than the fact that Cornwallis surrendered on Virginia soil -- geographic coincidence of where the British sought to apply force, and little more.

The revolution began equally in Massachusetts, Virginia and Pennsylvania. And it began a long time before the first skirmishes.

The nation began in Virginia through the intellectual contributions of Jefferson, Monroe and Mason and the leadership of Washington. The United States of America -- with a Constitution written primarily by Virginians and a Bill of Rights modeled on the Virginia Bill of Rights -- would not and could not have existed without Virginia.

Massachusetts, on the other hand, played merely a peripheral role in the formation of the resulting nation's character -- no more than did New York. In fact, Pennsylvania has more of a right than does Massachusetts to claim a primary role in developing the nation. I'd rank it Virginia #1, Pennsylvania #2, New York and Massachusetts tied at #3.

Me? I'm originally from Maryland (haven't lived there in 30 years). Maryland was a hanger on, nothing more.

HankB
August 10, 2005, 02:54 PM
You control who wins in a democracy by controlling who counts the ballots.

Art Eatman
August 10, 2005, 03:18 PM
Initially, the malcontents who started the country were pretty much "into" such philosophical ideas as personal sovereignty and liberty. As more and more people came here, a lesser number of comparative malcontents moved westward.

As people crowd up and generations pass, it's common for economic security to become a dominant factor in life. This creates a need for "order" of all sorts, whether anti-trust laws or crime control.

Again, the more "rugged individualist" sorts move away. Those who stay behind become rather collectivist in their attitudes.

The west coast has become much like the east coast, and the major cities of the interior can be included in today's "Old World" of a large amount of collectivism or statism, a term I prefer. Factor in today's hedonistic society in those areas, and you can visualize some of the social forces involved.

Today's rural and small-town people are required to a much greater degree to be self-reliant in many parts of their lives, which--IMO--makes them more independent. It need not be wilful and deliberate; it comes naturally to those who aren't in the habit of picking up the phone to hire help as needed.

Look at one of those blue county/red county maps, and ask yourself how those folks got there and why are they there--and what sort of people are they.

I dunno. I don't think it's important as to Massachusetts or New York or Virginia. There was a general commonality of thought throughout the area. The changes since then, IMO, are a fairly natural progression in socio-economics and social order. Coupled with the 1797 comment about a democratic system being the best until people learn they can vote themselves largesse from the public coffers.

Art

Pilgrim
August 10, 2005, 03:51 PM
I was more referring to the original 13 colonies. New york played a big part in it, as did the other 12 colonies, but new york is the one with the most left-ism.
I believe New York remained a Loyalist stronghold right up until General Cornwallis' surrender at Yorktown.

Pilgrim

cuchulainn
August 10, 2005, 03:56 PM
Art is correct that it's more of an urban-rural differeance than a regional difference. There is more in common between New York City and Dallas/Denver/Albuquerque, etc. than there is between NYC and rural New York counties.

However, I'm not sure of the cause and effect Art offers ("aren't in the habit of picking up the phone to hire help as needed").

It's a chicken and egg question. Are they more independent-minded because they live where they have to do more things for themselves, or do they live where they have to do more things for themselves because they're more independent-minded? I can't say. Probably a little of both ... and vice versa for the cities.

And let's not overstate the need for independent action among rural people in 2005. The majority of rural people do, in fact, hire others to do work for them on a regular basis, be it putting on a new roof, producing food or generating electricity.

Indeed, most farmers primarily eat store-bought food produced by others.

Anyone want to discuss the social-welfare benefits accepted by our ruggedly-independent farmers?

wingman
August 10, 2005, 04:06 PM
Again, the more "rugged individualist" sorts move away. Those who stay behind become rather collectivist in their attitudes.


Bingo:!

MechAg94
August 10, 2005, 04:11 PM
When it becomes possible to travel to other star systems the same thing will happen to Earth.

One of these days. :D

cuchulainn
August 10, 2005, 04:12 PM
I'll also suggest that the Puritans are the direct philosophical ancestors of the Northeast liberals.

That can be funny because the Northeast liberals like to call the Religious Right "Puritans." But other than the sex stuff, it's the Northeastern liberals who are more like the Puritans. You'll note that nearly every social-control movement -- good (abolition), silly (temperance) and bad (income redistribution) -- began in the same region: Philly to Boston.

There's a direct evolutionary line from Puritans to abolitionistists to temperance to American Socialists (er, "Progressives") to gun control.

RaggedClaws
August 10, 2005, 04:25 PM
Sorry in advance for the thread drift...

Art, is Terlingua in Brewster or Presidio County?

Brewster County, TX:

53% Bush
46% Kerry

Presidio Country, TX:

61% Kerry
38% Bush

Interesting, hunh? :o :D

Remember folks, it's easy to make generalizations about the rural/urban divide, but the percentages in this past election were relatively close, in both environments. So 4 out 10 people voted for Kerry in one county, and 6 out of 10 voted for him in another county. That's not much of a difference when it comes right down to it.

Along those lines, not everyone that lives in a city is a welfare-suckling statist cry-baby bliss-ninny...

TallPine
August 10, 2005, 04:51 PM
Anyone want to discuss the social-welfare benefits accepted by our ruggedly-independent farmers?
I have neighbors on both sides of that divide...

Our dear friends "two doors down" (about 4 miles) have never taken a bit of govt assistance and are fiercely proud of it and are critical of those who have. They don't have the newest equipment and fanciest houses, but they pay cash and don't owe a fortune. They are indeed ruggedly-independent farmers (more like ranchers in this case). The elder has lived all of his 85 yrs right here on the ranch.

OTOH, I know others in the opposite category. Good people, but definitely on the govt teat (CRP and other programs). And they are the ones who at the end of their working careers owe 100's of thousands of $$$$ :rolleyes:

If you enjoyed reading about "I dont understand it..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!