Thanks David F and O Sung Wu for your feedback you both seem to have significant knowledge about things. Not that I would agree with you both on all things but your backgrounds and the form of your contributions mean I would value your contributions. David F's methodist politics (probably law background) and O Sung Wu's criminal law cover a wide swath of the subject matter inherent in the North/ South America issues.

Myself generally more of an empiricist but found that the existentialist position (truth is subjective) related well with the US democratic principle- government of the people. To advocate that some authority knows better than the people and therefore should have primogeniture over that of the people sounds like tyranny. Over a period of many years organisations such as ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union- was mentioned previously in this thread), ADL (Anti Defamation League), SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center) have established themselves as authorities on Social Policy and as a "Social Good". Perhaps their position as a "social good" needs to be analyzed in more detail. Though some care may be required to avoid a defamation case by these organisations that are very active in bringing opposition to court. In much debate it appears to influence politics (and apparently as court "impartial" advise) much is done to demonize opposing views. An NGO can present an argument but claims of impartiality are questionable- in the end the democratic mandate should decide.

Evey Hammond: Artists use lies to tell the truth, while politicians use them to cover the truth up.

The contemporary policy battleground of debates appear to be localists verses globalists.

On a somewhat related topic- demonizing opposing views- There are a few terms that are used in public debate- Racism, Fascism. These pejoratives of course are designed to demonize certain perspectives. George Orwell commented on the misuse of the term Fascism. There was an interesting episode of Q&A recently when an eminent panelist mentioned that everyone is "ethno-centric"- I think it was lost on many. There was one young woman that insisted on labeling ex-Prime Minister- Tony Abbot as Racist. Racialism, and Ethno-centricity are often conflated with Racism. Anyway there are some controversial terms that probably shouldn't be used in a mature discussion as it shuts down the inquiry and makes us less wise as a community. Edison had to try hundreds of designs to come up with the light bulb- it's usually necessary to view a situation from many perspectives to create a baseline to use to find a solution.

* Sometimes those that are educated or experienced can come across as pedants but this doesn't necessarily invalidate their views. I'm often amazed at the interesting contributions of the 4th age quartile of the community.