So being a raver, a resident DJ @ a techno club and in the top 5 of grades in school, having never done drugs or even smoked a cigarette, what does that make me? My group of friends and fellow DJs/promoters in Copenhagen stick much more to their education, earn more in general, are much more interested in the world, and all around nicer people than the general pop listener i would meet. Each genre has their idiots, and i'm positive that it's much more widespread for trance or hardstyle folks.

You're correct, there is a large part of the anti-american / anti-western school of thought in the countries that are simply a result of not having asked for this external culture breaching a traditional society. But any rational and strong individual would be able to shrug it off and stick to the traditional values. These people don't, because their traditional values no longer really exist, seeing as their governments plainly accept the geopolitical reality today, and in many ways act against their populations. That is very often a positive thing seen from a western point of view, since quite a few dictators in the middle east are much more liberal (not democratic of course, there is a huge difference between these 2 positive elements, we tend to forget that as we have achieved one as a result of the other) than the general population, and actually strive to make a difference in terms of introducing human rights to their countries. Many terrorist attacks are within the middle eastern countries, or against muslim populations, simply because the war against the west is just one of the battles that the islamic fundamentalists are fighting against a modern way of thinking and living.

There is one crucial difference - Stalin etc did not go to war or commit atrocious acts in the name of religion or by utilizing scripture to legitimize their acts. Most of the terrorist leaders we're discussing here do, and in many ways organized religion has done this throughout history. I'm a believer, i truly believe that is a higher purpose to this life, but i simply cannot accept that a single book or a single church has an understanding of this that i don't, and i will not accept that they influence policy or public thought by misrepresenting the core beliefs of those same books. But atheism, like religion, comes in many forms, and there are few militant atheists, just like the militant religious "warriors" are really in the minority. Just do not use the argument that atheists speak as one group, the world is relative.

I get the highest score in my class, albeit in Denmark but that should be comparable, this is high school and my average is very much above average - yet i spend at least 30 minutes each schoolday doing something else on the laptop that i also take notes on. This can be hugely beneficial to the class if used right, researching background material for the discussion in history classes has been a huge boost to the lessons more than a couple of times. In all honesty the school should not punish for this, kids should learn how to properly balance these things, and the teachers should take these things into account when grading students.

Not if you close the sessions, public sessions usually do get influenced by lobby groups but closing the session and the discussions until the very final vote will prevent a large part of the lobbying activity.

More like moral nutjobs, it might be religiously based but it's more an archaic moral guideline for those politicians that might any rational argument inoperable. Religion is just an easy way to point a finger at some biblical references that mean some very good things to a lot of people, and twist them to their own means. Organized religion has unfortunately always been good at that.

An oligarchy that worked very well in old days, when leaders were respected and were seen as human beings that were above the average citizen, simply because they had a greater cause and a great knowledge. When everything became about the individual, politics became shortsighted and unable to set any clear reference points for the future.

Increased democratization leads to a more ineffective government, constitutionalism exists to remedy this problem and that is the reason why the rule of the majority will be restricted. The majority do not care about "petty details" like torture restrictions, as they can not relate to them in everyday life. Let's stop pretending that voters do not have a stake in this game, and rather face the reality that voters are quite fine as long as the promises are short-term gains.

This is the problem with politics, and as long as we keep believing that the public and the majority is right, we will keep seeing these things, and lobbyist groups will keep dominating.

See Zakaria, Tockqueville and other writers about democracy versus freedom and human rights for this.

And in terms of DRM, this is really the problem, it's a niche discussion with a major outreach, every single Windows user out there will at some point feel DRM restrictions, but seeing as they do not understand the problem they accept the status quo. If they did understand, Linux or at least another proprietary to Windows would have been the paradigm long ago.