The Necessity of Government

[brimstoneSalad]

I don't even like self identifying myself as a 'vegan atheist' I've questioned taking it off my profile but it is true, is self identifying yourself as a vegan a label or stating a matter of fact ?

This could be a label, OR descriptive. I don't have a problem with labels like "scientist" because they define process, rather than conclusions. And I don't have a problem with descriptive labels (as long as they can stay that way).

The issue with political labels, is that they're pretty much always just labels, and not really descriptive.

If you wanted to be descriptive, instead of labeling yourself, you'd talk about how you usually vote.

Like, I usually vote Democrat, because I think most Republicans are even more crazy (particularly with regards to certain progressive issues).
I'd be glad to see a socially progressive Republican so I could feel like I have a little more choice in the matter.

I don't dig too deeply into politics because I feel I have no real say in it so what's the sense of following something that I can't change? I am an American and I feel this country is too corrupt. Where is the truth in politics in America?

These days, you mainly vote with your dollars.

If some big company funds conservative or liberal candidates, and you like or dislike that, then either refuse to buy from them, or buy from them, and tell them why.

Consumer -> Money -> Company -> Lobby group -> Government

The chain may be long and strange, but there's still a link there.

You can also vote at the ballot box, but that may not make much a difference on some elections unless you're in a "battleground" state, or your state actually splits up its electoral college as it should instead of using a winner-takes-all method to draw in more campaign money.

But it does make a difference with regards to your LOCAL laws and representatives... which can go a long way in applying political pressure up the chain. The more progressives that are in office pushing local issues, the more the country can move in that direction.

[PrincessPeach]

This could be a label, OR descriptive. I don't have a problem with labels like "scientist" because they define process, rather than conclusions. And I don't have a problem with descriptive labels (as long as they can stay that way).

What about people calling themselves scientist's when they know little to nothing about the subject matter in which they're claiming to be a scientist in?
Also, what do you think about computer scientists? Computer science is pretty much knowing a combination of algorithms cool huh?

These days, you mainly vote with your dollars.

If some big company funds conservative or liberal candidates, and you like or dislike that, then either refuse to buy from them, or buy from them, and tell them why.

Consumer -> Money -> Company -> Lobby group -> Government

The chain may be long and strange, but there's still a link there.

You can also vote at the ballot box, but that may not make much a difference on some elections unless you're in a "battleground" state, or your state actually splits up its electoral college as it should instead of using a winner-takes-all method to draw in more campaign money.

But it does make a difference with regards to your LOCAL laws and representatives... which can go a long way in applying political pressure up the chain. The more progressives that are in office pushing local issues, the more the country can move in that direction.

That's the impression I've been under, I can make an impact locally but; as far as anything higher up in the chain of government it's the electoral votes that count. I live in Florida mostly republicans around here I'd love to visit the West coast I know it's more democratic, seems like the East coast and West coast of America are in two total different worlds.
Vegan's are taboo on this cost, they are hard to find. It seems like on the West coast there is bigger veg demographic.

[brimstoneSalad]

What about people calling themselves scientist's when they know little to nothing about the subject matter in which they're claiming to be a scientist in?

Well, science is something you do, so if you live your life based on scientific methodology to remove bias, and particularly are doing some kind of science generally, ignorance of fact itself is not a negation of that.

Also, what do you think about computer scientists? Computer science is pretty much knowing a combination of algorithms cool huh?

I don't think computer scientists use the scientific method much, if ever. Why, when you can just get the computer to tell you how much memory or how fast your algorithm is running?
I've found it to be the most conservative (and religious) field for science-like stuff.

It's more of an engineering field, or an application of science other people did. Usually something of a field of math, or possibly even art in some cases (particularly where it overlaps with software development, UI, etc.), neither of which are sciences.

Until you get to the really extreme levels where a few flops are crucially important, OR when computers are being used to do science.

Not to say anything against "computer science", it's awesome and important, just not really a proper science. I don't think most "computer scientists" know what the scientific method is...

I live in Florida mostly republicans around here I'd love to visit the West coast I know it's more democratic, seems like the East coast and West coast of America are in two total different worlds.

Florida is really pretty balanced, although it's easy to see mostly republicans if you compare it to California, where the big cities are almost entirely Democrat.
But the balance is what makes it such an important battleground state. A few votes can really swing the entire state one way or the other sometimes.
Your vote could literally decide the presidency in Florida, since it is so close to balanced, just a little can tip the whole thing.
Florida is one of just a few states where it's really important to vote.

[PrincessPeach]

Well, science is something you do, so if you live your life based on scientific methodology to remove bias, 'and particularly are doing some kind of science generally, ignorance of fact itself is not a negation of that.

Essentialy you could be a scientist at some degree with what ever you are actively doing, ay?

I don't think computer scientists use the scientific method much, if ever. Why, when you can just get the computer to tell you how much memory or how fast your algorithm is running?
I've found it to be the most conservative (and religious) field for science-like stuff.

It's more of an engineering field, or an application of science other people did. Usually something of a field of math, or possibly even art in some cases (particularly where it overlaps with software development, UI, etc.), neither of which are sciences.

Until you get to the really extreme levels where a few flops are crucially important, OR when computers are being used to do science.

Not to say anything against "computer science", it's awesome and important, just not really a proper science. I don't think most "computer scientists" know what the scientific method is...

I get this response a lot! It's like learning a language, and then another language, and another one, I've come to realized that all this computer crap I've learned over the years only gets me far on a computer, lol!

Florida is really pretty balanced, although it's easy to see mostly republicans if you compare it to California, where the big cities are almost entirely Democrat.
But the balance is what makes it such an important battleground state. A few votes can really swing the entire state one way or the other sometimes.
Your vote could literally decide the presidency in Florida, since it is so close to balanced, just a little can tip the whole thing.
Florida is one of just a few states where it's really important to vote.

I thought for presidency it was just the electroal votes that mattered? I just started voting democratic my father looks down at me for it but I turned 18 just a few months prior to the 2008 election and I couldn't wait to vote for Obama.

[brimstoneSalad]

Essentialy you could be a scientist at some degree with what ever you are actively doing, ay?

Yep. Although for some things it makes more sense to use the scientific method than for others.

It's very hard to use in programming, but not at all hard in UI design, and other similar matters, where you can perform experiments on humans (eye tracking, looking at response rates, clicks, etc.).

I thought for presidency it was just the electroal votes that mattered? I just started voting democratic my father looks down at me for it but I turned 18 just a few months prior to the 2008 election and I couldn't wait to vote for Obama.

It is, but Florida is nearly tied, sometimes comes down Democrat, sometimes Republican. So a small hand full of votes can potentially swing it in a lot of districts.

Living in a very solid red or blue state, it's not as important (although still important, so the parties know you're supporting them and ideally why or why not; e.g. writing congressmen, etc.).

[PrincessPeach]

Yep. Although for some things it makes more sense to use the scientific method than for others.

It's very hard to use in programming, but not at all hard in UI design, and other similar matters, where you can perform experiments on humans (eye tracking, looking at response rates, clicks, etc.).

I know what you mean, usually you are commanding a computer to do something, it's hard to ask a computer a question and get a response that you haven't already commanded.

It is, but Florida is nearly tied, sometimes comes down Democrat, sometimes Republican. So a small hand full of votes can potentially swing it in a lot of districts.

Living in a very solid red or blue state, it's not as important (although still important, so the parties know you're supporting them and ideally why or why not; e.g. writing congressmen, etc.).

I remember in 2000 it came down to Florida's vote in the election. I like that you confirmed that I can still make an impact locally, I have to remember that..

[EquALLity]

I see anarchism as a society with the least authority possible while remaining peaceful.

Actually, no. I saw it as a society with the least authority possible, and thought that if done correctly it would be peaceful. (But I realize that neither are anarchism now.)

Or you could self identify yourself as a human being, that is what you are.

That works too.
Politically, self-identity seems incredibly limited. If we don't have proof of which political process or policies are best, why would we anchor ourselves to them? It seems too much like a dogma.

Hm, interesting..

[brimstoneSalad]

Hm, interesting..

I pretty much just consider myself scientifically minded on these matters.

If somebody wants me to agree with some political position, I'm going to want them to prove it.

Most people will just say "look around, it's obvious!"
Which is to say, they can't prove it, and don't have any evidence- which is pretty much what people say about "God".

But every now and then, somebody will say "In New York when they implemented this policy, they had a 5% reduction in unemployment among the lower 10% below the poverty line in six months which correlated with a 3% drop in gang violence in low income neighborhoods, then in Washington, when they implemented a similar policy, as you can see in provision five here, they had a 7% and 2% reduction respectively; They seem to be inversely correlated, but that year they also passed a provision categorizing certain crimes, which Oregon also did, which caused a 4% bump in the numbers overnight by including in those statistics..."

And then I'll be like "OK then!"

That's one of the things that's great about a republic; each state and municipality has different laws, which seems like a pain in the ass sometimes, but it's also a giant array of social Petri dishes where you can examine what works, what doesn't, what correlates, where the causation is, and with quite exacting statistical accuracy. It's like a mutating gene pool, where successful genes (laws) tend to catch on and spread to the whole. Of course, that's only over a very long time span (like evolution is). In the short term, the idiocy of national politics and commercialized elections is very pronounced.

[CryoVirus]

Just popping In.....Had to say, I had a great read of all the veiws and opinions...I don't really get involved in polotics. So I really have no stand here.