[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

That sounds great. In the real world, however, people are compelled to participate in "communities" with other people not of their choosing. When governments become optional organizations that you can join and leave just like you do a health club or phone company, then this "elect someone better" argument might hold water. Until then, it doesn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

So long as you continue to think I'm the one living in a fantasyland utopia, this is going nowhere.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're NOT living in the fantasyland utopia. That's the problem with your "if you don't like it elect someone else" argument.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not even sure where to place your belief, since all I see you do is bitch and moan about the government.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. All you do is bitch and moan about people who want to do things their own way without bothering anyone else.

[ QUOTE ]
My solution isn't perfect, but it is a solution. If you honestly think it is impossible to affect the outcome of a mayor's election (how many people even vote in these elections??) so that someone is elected that supports your basic tenets, or to move somewhere where that is already the case... I don't know what to tell you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said that isn't possible. But the "vote someone else in" argument assumes that it's not only easy but a decision that is entirely up to the person the argument is aimed at. It's not like buying shoes. If you don't like the shoes you have, go buy some better ones. That

[ QUOTE ]
America is a very, very diversfied country. For better or worse, you will find people who agree with what you say, almost regardless of what that is. It may mean moving to New Hampsire or Montana or whatever other forgotten corner, but that's just how it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, everyone understands "that's just how it is."

Is that really the only thing that matters to you? The status quo is the status quo, so STFU. This is the most ridiculous argument made in this forum, and it gets trotted out more frequently than almost any other, and by people who otherwise seem capable of thinking beyond that level.

Might makes right, yes or no?

If no, then you can't possibly think an appeal to the status quo gives any sort of legitimacy at all.

Go back 200 years. Slavery is legal, that's just how it is! Sure, eventually enough people will change their mind on this and the "right" people will get elected and the law will change. But that's frankly irrelevant. Do you think that while it's "legal" that there can be no meaningful examination of the law to *judge* it right or wrong?

Further, your fixation on moving and geographical proximity begs other questions. There is nothing inherent about voluntary transactions that require either

A) you be near the people you want to interact with

or

B) you interact with people near you

The fact that someone lives next door to me does not give me license to impose upon him, nor does it give him license to impose upon me.

Further, the ease of moving does not create license for any imposition, either.