Is the Government Corrupt?

Ok so I just finished listening to a Metallica song called "...And Justice for All". And the subject of the song intrigued me a bit. See I never put much thought into the song. I just thought the guitar playing was cool and was well done. Then I decided to hear the lyrics. It talks about government corruption. They say how "Justice was *****" and how "Justice was lost". Also even the tones (which I researched the internet on) is supposed to represent the corruption. In the beginning it starts all soft and nice meaning that everything is supposed to be "alright". Then suddenly it starts all hard meaning the corruption in the government. Then halfway through the song it goes to a medium song (between hard and soft) representing the people starting to find out the truth about the government yet they say that everything is alright. I am actually surprised at the symbolism the song brings, but anyways the topic is what do you think on the government. Are they actually as corrupt as they say it is or not. Or do you just think the song is over exaggerating a bit. There is the fact that between the government the law enforcement has been know to arrest innocent people out of racism. Another thing is that Ive seen is that sometimes that the judges from court have been known to accept bribes. I saw that in a news report years and years ago. So a few questions for this would be

What would be considered corruption?
Is the person corrupt or is the government corrupt?
IF the government is corrupt can it change?

My opinion on the matter is neutral leaning on the side of of not believing the government is corrupt. My reason for this is because the government has been known to to be corrupt at sometimes. Racism, bribery, etc. But most of the time it doesnt do anything bad. Again I just wanted to see what your opinion is. I thought it would be a good topic to discuss

I think we are all corrupt in our own ways.

IMO, it's not really the government that is corrupt, but the members and the "formers" of the government that are corrupt. The government is simply an entity that is molded and shaped by it's controllers. The government isn't directly corrupt. If the members are, then it will be. If the members aren't, then it won't. It actually boils down to us. Because we elect who goes into the Big House.

*(T.R.D.S.) said:

IMO, it's not really the government that is corrupt, but the members and the "formers" of the government that are corrupt. The government is simply an entity that is molded and shaped by it's controllers. The government isn't directly corrupt. If the members are, then it will be. If the members aren't, then it won't. It actually boils down to us. Because we elect who goes into the Big House.

Click to expand...

QFT.

Hooblah2u2 said:

I think we are all corrupt in our own ways.

Click to expand...

Not relevant to the question at hand, which is asking if the government is corrupt.

If I had a nickel for every time I heard an apologist rant...

I suck at acronyms. What's QFT?

And tl;dr?

Does QFT mean quite f8cking true?

Not relevant to the question at hand, which is asking if the government is corrupt.

Click to expand...

If we are all corrupt, then the government (made of us) will obviously be corrupt. It was completely relevant.

QFT--Quoted for truth
tl;dr--Too long; didn't read.

Hooblah2u2 said:

If we are all corrupt, then the government (made of us) will obviously be corrupt. It was completely relevant.

Click to expand...

Okay, wise guy-- substantiate your claim--and please don't mention anything about God whilst doing so. I know that's gonna be a little hard for you to do, but please try.

Alrighty then, thanks.

So, uh, I don't really have anyone to debate right now.

*(T.R.D.S.) said:

Alrighty then, thanks.

So, uh, I don't really have anyone to debate right now.

Click to expand...

Don't speak too soon, we may have one...

thegreatkazoo said:

Don't speak too soon, we may have one...

Click to expand...

QFT, but tl;dr

Of course government is corrupt. It's very nature is to control and regulate life, which wants to be free. Hell, George Carlin said it extremely well "It's not the Bills of Rights; it's the Bill of Privileges." Rights are irrevocable, unlimited, and natural. Privileges are established by the government to limit what we can and can't do by defining what we can. For example, sodomy is on the verge of being completely illegal in homes, in some states. That means, if you sodomize your consenting wife or your consenting life partner, you are committing a crime. And yet, we have the RIGHT to the pursuit of happiness?

The concept that government is anything more than a device for control is a complete and utter fallacy.

Wow, that may change a few people's opinions, mine included.

So, your basic concept is that it is corrupt because it regulates our lives?

With all due respect sir, I personally believe the government doesn't controll our lives too much. If the government weren't "corrupt", then life would be riotous, and anarchy would reign. I'm pretty much neutral about the subject. The government's "purity" is, in the end, decided by we, the people.

*4-hour bump*

Come on people this should be a hotly debated subject. :V

*(T.R.D.S.) said:

So, your basic concept is that it is corrupt because it regulates our lives?

With all due respect sir, I personally believe the government doesn't controll our lives too much. If the government weren't "corrupt", then life would be riotous, and anarchy would reign. I'm pretty much neutral about the subject. The government's "purity" is, in the end, decided by we, the people.

Click to expand...

Anarchy should reign.

The Government of the US is NOT decided by the PEOPLE, but by representatives. People do not elective officials, but they vote for representatives who then select officials. If they want, they can switch votes after being selected. It happens.

The government DOES control our lives as well. Proof:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,426485,00.html

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-150467.html

These are examples of the government tapping into our lives for our "safety," when in reality they are monitoring us. Also, on the topic of regulation, regulation only works if EVERYTHING is regulated. Guns, money, health care, cars, roads, schools, EVERYTHING. None of those, however, SHOULD be regulated because we, as citizens in a free society, do not deserve government scrutiny. Unless I am physically harming someone, I should not have to deal with laws. Honestly, think of any harm this mentality would create. Robbery, murder, ****, pedophilia, and the natural taboos would be included still, but things like "treason" and "malicious intentions" would be vanquished. It is a patriotic duty to dissent.

Crimson King said:

Robbery, murder, ****, pedophilia, and the natural taboos would be included still, but things like "treason" and "malicious intentions" would be vanquished. It is a patriotic duty to dissent.

Click to expand...

Duly noted on the patriotism tip, however:

Patriotism does not oblige us to acquiesce in the destruction of liberty. Patriotism obliges us to question it, at least.

Click to expand...

When you look up the definition of treason:

In law, treason is the crime that covers some of the more serious acts of disloyalty to one's sovereign or nation. Historically, treason also covered the murder of specific social superiors, such as the murder of a husband by his wife (treason against the king was known as high treason and treason against a lesser superior was petit treason). A person who commits treason is known in law as a traitor.

Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as: "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aided or involved by such an endeavour.

Click to expand...

Yes, it is a wonderful thing to dissent. But it shouldn't be done to bring about the demise of a country, as nations should have sovereignty over themselves IMHO.

People consider the fact that many agents of the government (ie. Police officers) have been known to be racist. Many innocent people have been arrested because the police, agent, etc. was racist. An example that is still up for debate for if it was racist or not was the man that got arrested recently out of racism. I forgot the mans name but he was entering his neighbor's house. He had lost the key so he tried to enter forcibly. The neighbor called the police on this black man because he was robbing the place. When the police came the man was arrested for "disorderly conduct"(I think thats whats that called). Them police was asking for his ID and and what not but he refused. The police didnt even asked for his side of the story. Many people say that the police was not racist but others do say so.

If you wanna bump the Henry Louis Gates thread, be my guest:
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=242369

Just a quick question: What makes a government corrupt?

Didnt I ask that at the OD hooblah? You can see it right there. What is considered corrupt.

Well, I'm still pretty much neutral on this whole "corrupt" shindig. Truth is, being corrupt means different things to different people. To put it bluntly, the arrest of Henry L. Gates didn't seem corrupt at all to racists. So again, it boils down to the people, and what their definition of "corruption" means. :/

thegreatkazoo said:

Duly noted on the patriotism tip, however:



When you look up the definition of treason:


Yes, it is a wonderful thing to dissent. But it shouldn't be done to bring about the demise of a country, as nations should have sovereignty over themselves IMHO.

Click to expand...

What's more treasonous: to destroy a country that is destroying it's original intention of regulation-free freedom, or join in and modify the country TOWARDS that.

This would depend on whether or not you would believe the government has a right to regulate things.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are taking the Libertarian viewpoint on this in that government shouldn't regulate anything. Being a liberal, I would side with Government should regulate, but only within reason (viz. Guns, money, health care, cars, roads, schools). This doesn't necessarily mean that government is regulating these things well, but they have the ability to in order to make our lives better.

(Btw if I had to answer your question, I would go with the former.)

Of course the US government has the right to regulate our lives. Not to a certain extent, such as line tapping, etc., but they should be able to. If we are going to live in the country with the "corrupt" government, then we either have to deal with it, or do something. Or just gtfo. Those are really the only choices you have when dealing with the Big House. But, it's really a 50/50 battle. Without us, the government has no one to rule and becomes m00t. Without the government, we fall to anarchy, and eventually organized government again.

And that's another thing. IMO, there will be a never-ending cycle of anarchy-to-gov-anarchy, etc. We have a government. People like CK(no offense) want anarchy, and throw off the government, and a period of anarchy ensues. Then, people like me come along and start the government again, etc., etc.

But that's beside the points, I'm sorry.

*(T.R.D.S.) said:

Of course the US government has the right to regulate our lives. Not to a certain extent, such as line tapping, etc., but they should be able to. If we are going to live in the country with the "corrupt" government, then we either have to deal with it, or do something. Or just gtfo. Those are really the only choices you have when dealing with the Big House. But, it's really a 50/50 battle. Without us, the government has no one to rule and becomes m00t. Without the government, we fall to anarchy, and eventually organized government again.

Click to expand...

No. Thomas Jefferson said when the government gets too big and dangerous, we should violently overthrow it. That is the reason for the second amendment. Guns prevent the government from being our oppressors.

Government, for all of history, has never been an instrument of peace, but an instrument of war. Prior to our formation as a country, Washing, Jefferson, and many others were opposed to forming a statist government, they wanted simply capitalism to guide things, and to live as they wanted. However, as pressures from Britain became apparent, they realized forming a government was their only recourse. Thus, they formed due, in large part, to the American Revolutionary War. Had Britain granted freedom, they would have stayed as private owners.

The government does NOT have the right to regulate us. That is ridiculous. We gave them that power. The government is made up of normal people whom we have asked to go to office through our round about votes.

*(T.R.D.S.) said:

And that's another thing. IMO, there will be a never-ending cycle of anarchy-to-gov-anarchy, etc. We have a government. People like CK(no offense) want anarchy, and throw off the government, and a period of anarchy ensues. Then, people like me come along and start the government again, etc., etc.

But that's beside the points, I'm sorry.

Click to expand...

There will and there will not. As governments fall into anarchy (preferably anarcho-capitalism), more people will abstain from the future iteration of government. If the US fell into it, several states would exist in the new US's government, like Texas, New Hampshire, and Vermont. These states have had many, many, many discussions about secession, but until the Civil War's great tyrant decided to revoke the right to secede (since the constitution is an agreement, you can opt out. Since no one in the state was alive during it's inclusion, you didn't even technically agree to it), secession is seen as an ultimate evil.

Yes the government is corrupt. There is a simple answer to this question. Are there innocent people in jail, convicted of crimes that they didn't commit? Meanwhile, the real culprit is at large, killing and stealing while they should rightfully be in jail or sentenced to death. Are there murders who are given a slap on the wrist and just a couple of years in jail and then set free? Are there people that are convicted of amall crimes (nothing compared to murder), and sent to jail for life sentences? If the answer is yes for even one of those questions, then our government is corrupt. (And the answer is yes for all of them).

yes, it is corrupt. If they weren't, then we wouldn't be dealing with overt liberalism and the subtle erosion of our rights.

The politicians are not the source of corruption; they are the source of partiality. The real source of corruption comes from its federal departments heads - the people who are appointed and promoted for life and do not have to worry about getting voted out of office if they go against their word in upholding the voice of the people. Examples of such permanent corruption comes from the people who run the treasury, the FDA, the FBI, the BATFE, DHS, and a lot of the corporations that a lot of the government depends on. These people are given whimsical powers by the government that - aside from funding - basically get to make up their own rules and regulations, which they push onto us.

The only way to change this is to call for de-regulation, or actually have these departments operate directly under people who we have power over, so that way we can actually have a say in what they do. And, the only way for that to happen is to start a massive movement...or a revolution. It's a vicious cycle.