Alright, now that I am on the computer...
Green Party Platform critique (obviously an opinion)(link provided in OP):
- Alright, I guess. I'll just go through the things I'm meh on or against.
- I see their idea of everybody being able to subpoena everyone as being somewhat counter-intuitive, but I'd rather see it in action before I pass judgement.
- Statehood for DC... is stupid. Give all the non-Federal land back to whichever State—Maryland or Virgina—originally owned it. They're too small, in my opinion, to qualify as State material.
- Prisoners... having the right to vote... alright, these people are fucking stupid. Then again, when someone says "prisoners," I think "violent offenders," as that's more or less the only people I think worth throwing in prison.
- Whether or not felons should have the right to vote back depends entirely on what they did, in my opinion.
- No objections immediately come to mind. I'm wary of what they consider to be "encouraging non-military community service," though, as they give off a rather anti-military, peacenik vibe I don't really trust (not that there's anything wrong with being pacifist, but they don't strike me as rational or practical about it).
Free Speech and Media Reform:
- Hm... this is intriguing.
Hm. I raise my eyebrow at this because I can see the communities censoring things they deem "inappropriate" in the name of either Think of the Children!
! or for political ends. I may not be following exactly what this means, however.
- I wonder what they consider to be "promoting greater opportunity for women and minority ownership of media outlets," exactly.
- Mm... "net neutrality." That's a loaded weapon of a term.
- How would universal internet coverage work, exactly? I honestly don't know how they'd set such a thing up.
Prohibit commercial advertising targeted to children under 12 years old, as well as advertising in public places such as schools, parks, and government buildings.
While I agree
, the first half of this idea is "unenforceable law ahoy" territory...
- Ah, Green Party. You came so close, and yet landed so... so... very far away from the mark.
You dipshits, the veto isn't the problem, it's the absolute power of the veto
. Taking away the veto would just make the Security Council worse
, and in a much different direction.
...and what laws does this institution uphold, exactly? Just curious
I'll take this on its face for it's Exact Words value
Ah, yes, here
is why the Green Party is a direct threat to national security if they get anywhere within a thousand miles of DC (except, perhaps, the SCOTUS...).
Right... that sounds like it would go very poorly if, say, China dumped all its nukes and then just used human wave tactics on us. Not that such a thing is likely, but hey, you never know.
* Reverse our withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and honor its stipulations.
- End the research, testing and stockpiling of all nuclear weapons of any size.
- Dismantle all nuclear warheads from their missiles.
- Maybe (I don't know the specifics of that treaty)
- No (though I might agree to stop the testing of nuclear weapons).
- Fuck no.
We urge our government to end all stockpiling of chemical and biological weapons and all research, use, and sale of such weapons; and sign the convention that will establish the decrease and inspection of all nations' stockpiles of such weapons, which the U.S. abandoned.
...can't the cures for biological weapons also be weaponized? If so, that's a glaring loophole in an otherwise acceptable idea...
- From where?
- To verify what?
...that's probably unrealistic. Or at least, for the foreseeable future. Reducing it by a third seems more reasonable.
Close the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation, formerly known as the School of the Americas, in Ft. Benning, Georgia.
...what is this, and is it important?
The U.S. is the largest arms seller and dealer in the world. We urge our government to prohibit all arms sales to foreign nations and likewise prohibit grants to impoverished and undemocratic nations unless the money is targeted on domestic, non-military needs. In addition, grants to other nations may not be used to release their own funds for military purposes.
- No, you're fucking stupid.
The aid thing is fine, though. I can live with that.
The U.S. must not be a conduit for defense contractors to market their products abroad and must shift our export market from arms to peaceful technology, industrial and agricultural products, and education.
News flash: the American arms industry is a huge
economic boon. Though I'd prefer
that it be a public thing that we could control, I would not even consider
stopping the sale of stuff—military or non-military—to non-stupid countries that want it. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. What other nations do with the shit we sell them is not
our business, as long as it doesn't affect us, people we like, or is directly aiding in something stupid like genocide.
The U.S. must prohibit all covert actions used to influence, de-stabilize or usurp the governments of other nations, and likewise prohibit the assassination of, or assistance in any form for the assassination of, foreign government officials.
I'm going to say no to this first part, because there's all sorts of tinpot dictatorships that deserve it.
...what is this "Earth Charter," why does it sound suspiciously
supranational, and why do I not feel inclined to trust something named the "Earth Charter" out of the UN in relation to international security?
That's all I feel like writing in this particular Wall of Text
. I'll pick apart the rest later, I guess.