in order to avoid unintentional offence - a few Qs:

(mini-Miranda: all responses will be recorded - but not passed on);

Do you wish to remain anonymous? (y/n)

If 'n,' real name? (in header to any comment.)

1(+). Are you awed by the approaching perfection of 'the Enlightenment,' as typified by "Liberté, égalité, fraternité, etc." (nowhere that I know of actually on current 'democratic' offer) OR

1(-). Are you blinded by a weird, irrational belief in some phantasmal, conjured 'deity(ies)?'

[phantasmal -> phantom -n. 1 ghost, apparition, spectre. 2 mental illusion. -attrib. adj. illusory. [Greek phantasma][POD]]

2(h-). Are you a tyrannical capitalist, ripping sheople off at every turn, an administrative/managerial lackey of such, oppressing any/all associates/employee/serfs, OR

2(h+). Are you a 'salt of the Earth' worker, without whom we'd have no flush-torlets, sealed roads or airports for the fat-cats to land their obscenely profligate executive-jets upon?

[profligate -adj. 1 recklessly extravagant. 2 licentious, dissolute. -n. profligate person. profligacy n. profligately adv. [Latin profligo ruin] [POD]] - also applicable to ever-more fossil-carbon burning causing an ever-less avoidable climate-change catastrophe.

3. Do you support a) 'red in tooth&claw' economic Darwinism, ruthlessly exploiting all resources viciously to exhaustion, OR b) considered sustainability with progressive taxes supporting universal-human-rights utilities (water, sewage etc.) & critical services, i.e. Medicare (aka socialised medicine), elec., roads & other communications? Note that this is not a 'political' question, since (3a) has almost universal 'bipartisan' support; kindly note that bipartisan = un- and anti-democratic, since it offers the electorate *zero* choice.

4. Pro- OR anti-peace, i.e. what of the current Anglo/Judaic (US+Z) illegal, invasive murder-for-spoil attacks morphing to brutal occupations in the ME?

5. Pro- OR anti-justice vis-à-vis hapless mainly Arab/Muslim ELO/Os (Palestinians, Iraqis, Afghans, Pakistanis...), say?

6. Pro- OR anti-truth? (*Nothing* worthwhile needs the attempted 'camouflage' of deceit.)

IF I survive the above asking, THEN we can probably chat...

(And as for me (if any doubt remains), I'm looking/agitating for 'the Enlightened' fair & just solution.)

-=*=-

2nd round: Most significant -ves since '65 = US&Z (continuing) depredations, democracy failure, corrupt & venal MSM/TV (propaganda/lies).

Intermediate: Fall-of-the-wall was not an unrelieved good; a) nice for so-called 'freedom' but sad that b) the commies failed, sadder still that c) 'the East' gave themselves up to capitalism (carpet-baggers plus neoliberalism), which then oh, so cynically stripped them bare. But Q: Did they learn? A: By their voting (still more for 'Westernisation'); so far not - more MSM info-failure.

What (if anything) has improved (significantly)? IMHO: 1) Medibank -> Medicare (but under continuous attack), 2) PCs/Internet and 3) (marginally) mobiles. Disclosure: I blog for truth and justice and I iPod (mostly skiing), but I do not smart-phone (only as far as qwerty), nor do I tweet or facebook(?) and I barely ever 'do' TV (video etc.) except for some 'news' (+ F1.)

-=*=-

Musing: I find it uncanny, that a) the electorate breaks about 50:50 on most Qs, even stranger that b) the 50:50 break can be quite different, depending on the actual Q. Implication: At the best after the above questionnaire, I could get along comfortably with perhaps *half* the target audience, at v.worst as low as a 1/64th!

Not so BTW: The *differing* 50:50 splits constitute *ultimate proof* that no two-party system can 'satisfy' an electorate; *only* (fair, fully-informed & de-dumbed-down) referendums ever could.

-=*=-

Fazit: I counsel enlightened altruism; see side-panel 'musing; morals.'