Well it just goes to show that a piece of paper does not a journalist make. I would have thought that reading comprehension, attention to detail, objectivity and a ruthless testing of you own arguments would all be tools they should have drilled into to you in journalism school.
You did not listen to what Ron Collins was saying. Instead you answered what you wanted to have heard, based on nothing but your own tunnel visioned preconceptions. A journalist needs to engage in robust exchanges with those with different, unconventional and completely opposing views. Above all a journalist needs to listen before they speak. When you confine yourself to echo chambers you pretty quickly just turn into another echo.
And most of all you must address the point, not the voices in your own head: Ron was clearly not asking for a say in how anything is governed. He is apparently wise enough to understand that very few people actually get a say at all and it matters little whether a country calls itself “democratic” or not. All he was really doing was expressing his own view; not demanding anything except maybe that governments, bureaucrats, do-gooders, self-appointed experts, and shysters selling snake oil in bottles labelled “democracy,” just leave him the hell alone.
But let me give you one example of attention to detail and objectivity being trumped by unthinking ideology.
You claim that because Ron doesn’t pay taxes, then he does not have the right to a say in the matter of governance of a democracy of a federal republic. Do you believe therefore that anyone who does not pay taxes should be disqualified from voting? That would after all be the logical conclusion. And you know I imagine that the elites you despise would be quite happy to go along with that. Many of them do not pay taxes either but their money gives them a say. But many of the poorest people in the country also do not pay taxes, and I imagine those elites may benefit from disenfranchising the poor. Do you wish for freedom in the form of hands-off governance as Ron does; or do you simply demand a different stifling bureaucracy, run by different elites in different coloured hats?
You follow up by claiming that the United States is not a democracy or a federal republic: It is debatable that any country ever has been. But if the USA isn’t, then wouldn’t that mean that by your own logic, Ron does have a right to a say?
I’m confused by your contradictory logic. I am surprised that someone bragging about their journalistic qualifications could be so cluelessly off point. But given that this kind of emotional and contradictory word-salad is what seems to pass for journalism today, I am not surprised that main stream journalism is falling off a cliff.
I am also surprised at the fact that someone who is 49 years old, has not grown out of babbling abstract and entirely meaningless utopian clap-trap about “building bridges” and taking countries back, while contradicting themselves in every second paragraph.