@Bobby9 In regard to America. Its built on the premise of white privilege and power and to keep that position at all costs. Just being white doesn't mean that you understand this, but the root of the country and its constitution is for only the elite white man to reign over it and to fight back and keep down anyone else who might want to gain power, such as women and black people. They fear their overtaking the country. Its a mental game, a dynamic that is prevalent on many levels of relations, narcissists vs codependent, bully vs timid, etc. Its just on a larger scale.

@Bobby9 I'm talking about the forefathers of the country. You weren't one of the forefathers. My take on the constitution is that it was written only for those who wrote it and signed it and why only a small percentage continues to control it. I really tried to make that point...

@Bobby9 We The People (fore-fathers) In Order to form a more perfect "union"... I may sound naive (the words of children are usually true), but it may also be that my perspective is a more simple one in that simply... the forefathers took the land and wanted to secure it in words (the Constitution), so that it could not be taken back. Hence the laws they put into place, securing their right to their property, women, and slaves. I think about what they were thinking about during that time and therefore the real root of the Constitution. The root being as I mentioned is why no matter how hard women and black people fight it, and even though its amended, the root of it keeps rejecting them and therefore a re-write is needed.

@Bobby9 Or maybe you don't... Keep in mind we have all been brainwashed to believe in the existence we live in. That includes accepting the attitudes that we are against each other and therefore are unable to see eye to eye. We are all humans on planet earth. The most important thing is the survival of our race and our planet, everything else is a complication to that. The questions we should always ask ourselves are, Is it good for the planet and is it good for the human race (meaning, does it disrupt our peace individually and or as a group)

@Bobby9 and yet every reply you made within this thread reeks of the conditioning of perception management. Not once did, or could, it seems, you use any part the Constitution, you seemingly feel to know so well, to provide Conversational a rebuttal offering her a reason to challenge her opinion. Everyone has a sense to view matters differently including the Constitution. To attempt to suggest your view is the only view in challenging others is ludicrous.

While she provided you an elegant means of critical thought, directing her comments towards significant aspects, quite adequately I'll add, you provided negativity and direct attacks on her. Even her own admission of facing brainwashing didn't faze you towards a critical free thinking thought process. Anyone who believes they managed to avoid and or escape the entire scope of propaganda being thrown at us all their lives and have managed to come out unfazed is a total fool. Quite frankly, you just seemingly might be swimming in it.

Your written piece on your profile speaks volumes of you explaining everything.

I can only offer you the same I often offer here in the group. A total exodus of the 2 establishment parties. Our society must collectively face the obvious that both these parties are owned and operate solely for the function and benefit of corporations and the ruling class. We must unite under a party in a mass effort to vote them out of existence. My personal choice is the Socialist Equality Party. I would however be willing to join a movement within the Green Party if a majority were to go that path. But I have little faith in the Green Party.

@Bobby9 "and limits what that Gov can do"

How has that been working out for us? And you call me ignorant. You're insane. History is on my side Bobby. It's a rather sad reality that you live in their delusional reality. As you claim you've avoided their brainwashing.

Practice this one in the mirror ---- You mistakenly believe I or my arguments must be structured to please you.

@Bobby9 I don't like wasting my time. Especially when one keeps using arguments with no substance that one should also be presenting to themselves. I've already used that observation on you. My statement above is so obviously correct from history's stance it's sad you even have to ask me to provide examples. Enjoy your delusional reality. I'm done with you.

@LetzGetReal Sanders even proven himself to be more disappointing this round. But the agenda worked better this time than in 2016. I'll repeat myself here again on Sanders and 2016. I strongly believe the democratic party thought Sanders and his socialist tag would be the perfect lone puppet to place along side Clinton and a sure early to mid drop out. Martin O'Malley didn't have a chance beside Clinton and Sanders was going to be window dressing towards an easy socialist kill. But the poor imagination of the democratic party didn't have a clue how many people within the country with a socialist minded endeavor being here. They actually thought they have beaten the majority of socialized thinking out of us over the decades. They only beat a majority of us into silence.

I hit facebook hard in late 2015 in all the main political groups advocating for Sanders and seen many from all walks of life, both establishment parties, and independents seeking information and means to change party affiliation to vote for him in the primary. I chatted with many and advised them how to do so. Even if it took me looking up their state rules and finding them their state election board websites. I spent every spare moment I had on Sanders. I use scores of information and facts debunking Clinton supporters rhetoric, her and Bill's past policies, that helped draw in more support than Sanders himself. That asshat didn't even scratch the surface of potential information to debate Clinton on TV. It became apparent to me he was in on the fix during the second debate. I even criticized Hedges and Nader who did a discussion on how Sanders would fall to the DNC in April of 2016 I think it was. But Sanders did exactly what they said he would do almost to the tee. Then he joined in on the bullshit after the election like a lap dog on the bullshit Russiagate. And his/the beloved Nina Turner went onto every news program and entity she could for a week doing the same. While totally ignoring the fact that the primary was obviously fixed against him/us.

The pain is only because the masses of our citizens are conditioned from the propaganda of the establishment and their media that a 3rd party can't win. That's why Sanders, even though he owned the DNC nothing for rigging the primary against him, didn't take Stein up on her offer. It would have staunchly propelled the Green Party into existence and into national recognition. Later placing it into the national debates. There's no reasonable argument Sanders can use as that being a means to lose his placement in DC. It would have actually propelled him into the highlight of national recognition which he was already combating that his supporters were at the time providing for him. His crowds only kept growing larger! Grassroots did this, not his campaign. But that could not be tolerated by the establishment. They had to kill the sleeping giant they awoken. 2020 is the year both parties declared war on socialism and a new cold war had to be established. Sanders needs to just retire and go build a new house on Vermont's recently shut down nuclear plant and die with it's nuclear waste that will sit there for decades to come.

@LetzGetReal O as far as Hedges. He feels he can do more with his show than what he could do in congress. I can relate to that, for now. He would just be another mouth piece on the floor reaching no one like Sanders was. We really need a group of these type to be heard more often. If only people would watch more RT programming and become better educated to reality.

Sorry, what makes you think that the Green party has joined forces with conservatives in all other countries? They have not done so in Australia.

@Jolanta well I do a lot of political reading from around the world. I did a search before replying to your message and it doesn't seem the Greens in Australia are fairing all that well. I don't know what Australia considers the right to be, but here in the states we call the majority of the right the conservative party. In which your Green Party has literally went to bed with the right.

[theguardian.com]

And 2 other articles I skimmed through suggest this party also has much the same problem as the US has with a fake socialist DSA group of attempting to change the democratic party from within, they suffer the same results. Getting very little to nothing done during long periods of time. Agendas collaborate with corporations and willingness towards privatizing projects. Seemingly a long history of failures within the climate issue reaching over 20 years alone.

This seems to be correlated to the very issues I've read about throughout Europe.

@William_Mary The Green party in my state is okay.

@Jolanta that basically relates to my initial post as far as the US goes. The party within a singularity like mode from state to state, county to county, can't manage to find unification on a spoken platform. And when each, or certain, arenas are tweaking and implementing their own ideology of a party existence to any such given candidates endeavors you send mixed signals. I'm not that aware of how Europe Greens go, or in your country as to this, but in the case of the US, the Greens will constantly be running up hill if they never find a unified platform trajectory.

As some candidates have managed to take an office throughout the country, they also limit their success of remaining the incumbent without the support of the party as a whole, due to the fact they separated themselves from the party in some cases to a degree. If the local supporters don't stay tuned in that incumbent loses support if he/she doesn't managed to create a generating amount of noticeable recognition in the public sphere of benefiting social works. This is also the cause as to why so many lose. It's hard enough for the national party as a whole to draw in monetary support, but if local or state candidate goes outside in such a manor it becomes even harder to reach the success of a certain Seattle council woman who ran as a socialist, for example. Who has managed to keep her seat despite Amazon spending 1.5 million attempting to oust her. That's 1.5 million to oust a city council seat! She was the leading factor to bringing a minimum wage of $15 an hour to the city that has been a great success, and other social changes. You have to manage to make significant changes to keep such support. And this woman has the power structure coming from all angles to get rid of her. Even Wikipedia. Despite the fact that she is still currently hold that seat, and has been since 2014, they don't recognize that in her bio on the right. One would see this and think she only held the seat for a year if they didn't actually read the entire page. Yet here in 2020 she still holds that seat under horrific challenges from the establishment and the corporations that own them. The Greens need to be able to hold a candle to the nature of this.

[en.wikipedia.org]

[seattlepi.com]

The Green Party basically becomes another Independent party by nature. Where anyone from the establishment parties go to when they feel they can interrupt a candidate they lost to in a party race or tend to lean to one side of the fence to the other to sway ideology in a given direction through deception.

The Green Party's last presidential group here in the US was made up of several people all with their own ideology of what they were running on. Almost none of them shared a spoken platform that resembled what the party line tends to be based on. It was a who's who's like arena made up of seemingly various independents, libertarians, and various light socialist. This simply is not a supportable structure for a national party in long terms.

@William_Mary Small steps, especially in a place like the US who is so afraid of socialism, who is so incredibly uneducated about social democracy, who doesn't understand the difference between communism and democracy or even freedom.

@Jolanta small steps of this manor don't achieve mass awareness within society though. In your country and in Europe the Greens are well known and given a significant amount of more thought and consideration. In other words. It can win and does win, receives noticeable and favorable percentages when it doesn't. You can build on that when they are always in the news.

In the US the establishment and media have managed a false narrative on the public that the Green Party as a 3rd party can't win. That is the top reasoning given when attempting to discuss them with most voters. But this is also true for other more united parties that I feel would be better. Well one of them anyways. While voters here can seemingly only grasp that their support can take an establishment party to victory, the propaganda and suppression tactics have stupefied voters into a conditioning that they lose sense of that same reasoning when it comes to an outside party. The number of times I've heard someone claim they like the platform and policies of, but that party can't win, is uncountable. When all it takes is the same type of support one would give an establishment party. So they'll go vote for their establishment choice even if it means that candidate isn't what they prefer. Shouldn't prefer!

This irresponsible logic is also what kept Sanders from blowing Clinton out by a landslide in 2016. Although I believe Sanders most likely won the popular vote if that primary would have been ran honestly, if we didn't have this irresponsible logic engulfed on voters there would have been a much more noticeable indication Clinton didn't have a chance long before the convention. They seen the crowds he was pulling in compared to Clinton. The money we raised for him. All tools of the establishment were used against this social desire for change. Including his own servitude to the establishment. They fell behind the conditioning of disdain for the moniker of a socialist instead. I argue this was the going agenda of the DNC when they conned Sanders into standing beside Clinton as an opponent for an easy win. Ignorant of the sleeping masses waiting for their moment in US history. Now we have created a new cold war and a war on socialism that has been raging for 4 years. You're dead right!

@William_Mary Rome was not built in a day and neither will the awakening of the American people be.