Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog,
Democracy is for PR purposes only in corrupt neofeudal nations.
Correspondent Chris rightly critiqued me for not mentioning democracy (or the lack thereof) in my recent entry on China: Do We Have What It Takes To Get From Here To There? Part 2: China. It is indeed vital to include democracy in any discussion of corruption, for it raises this question: is democracy possible in a corrupt society?
If the citizenry cannot replace a dysfunctional government and/or limit the power of the financial Aristocracy at the ballot box, the nation is a democracy in name only.
In other words, if the citizenry cannot dislodge a parasitic, predatory financial Aristocracy via elections, then "democracy" is merely a public-relations facade, a simulacra designed to create the illusion that the citizenry "have a voice" when in fact they are debt-serfs in a neofeudal State.
We can ask this question of Greece: in a pervasively corrupt neofeudal society, is democracy even possible?
Neofeudalism is characterized by a carefully nurtured facade of social mobility and democracy while the actual machinery of governance is corrupted at every level.
This corruption may manifest as first-order daily-life corruption such as buying entry to college, bribing officials for licenses, and so on, but the truly serious corruption is the second-order variety that functions behind the closed doors of central banks and financial/political Elites.
Here in the U.S., the people elected Barack Obama in 2008 on the implicit promise that the politically dominant financial sector would be limited in some meaningful fashion. Instead, President Obama immediately nixed any meaningful reform.
Many will claim that Obama was stymied by a Republican Congress. But the primary policy framework Obama put in place -- the bailouts --took place during the transition and the immediate months after the election, when Obama had enormous leverage over the Bush administration and then a dominant Democratic Party in Congress.In fact, during the transition itself, Bush’s Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson offered a deal to Barney Frank, to force banks to write down mortgages and stem foreclosures if Barney would speed up the release of TARP money. Paulson demanded, as a condition of the deal, that Obama sign off on it. Barney said fine, but to his surprise, the incoming president vetoed the deal.
Yup, you heard that right-- the Bush administration was willing to write down mortgages in response to Democratic pressure, but it was Obama who said no, we want a foreclosure crisis. And with Neil Barofsky’s book Bailout: An Inside Account of How Washington Abandoned Main Street While Rescuing Wall Street, we see why.
Tim Geithner said, in private meetings, that the foreclosure mitigation programs were not meant to mitigate foreclosures, but to spread out pain for the banks, the famous “foam the runway” comment.
Here's how a sham democracy works: candidates are duly paraded in front of credulous voters in a "which is better, Bud or Bud Lite?" false-choice marketing blitz, while all the meaningful codifying of Aristocratic rule is directed or purchased by the financial and political Aristocracy (two sides of the same coin).
Consider the actions of the Federal Reserve, the dominant financial force in the nation. Though the Fed is nominally under the control of Congress, it is actually like an iceberg: its public pronouncements are the visible 10% above water. The real mass of the Fed’s actions lie beneath the surface, invisible to us mere debt-serf citizens.
The Fed’s public mandate, to “promote stable prices, maximum sustainable output and employment,” is solid public relations, of course (we're selflessly focused on the good of the nation, blah blah blah) but it’s also deeply disingenuous, as the Fed’s less PR-pretty agenda is rather transparently to preserve the banking sector’s profits and power at all costs.
We can find clues to the Fed’s real goals in its behind-closed-doors actions--the 90% of the iceberg that’s out of public view.
On the surface, the Fed increased its balance sheet by about $2 trillion since the 2008 global financial crisis. This electronically created money purchased about $1.1 trillion in mortgage-backed securities (MBS) to support the housing market and $1 trillion in Treasury bonds to keep interest rates low. These two goals--super-low interest rates, a.k.a. zero-interest policy (ZIRP), and supporting assets such as housing and stocks--are the core strategies the Fed is publicly deploying to boost growth and employment.
Supporting the banks is not mentioned, for obvious PR reasons. Yet a Government Accountability Office (GAO) audit found the Fed provided $16.1 trillion in “emergency program” loans to global banks from 2007 to 2010, and a Levy Institute study uncovered a total of $29 trillion in Fed support--roughly ten times larger than the Fed’s public programs. (For context, the annual U.S. gross domestic product is about $15 trillion.)
This suggests we should take the Fed’s assurances that its policies are all for the public good with a grain of salt roughly the size of the Fed’s headquarters at 20th and Constitution Avenue.
Did bailing out the banks truly serve the public good, or did it stymie a much-needed capitalist “creative destruction” of failed financial institutions that have grown so powerful that they are now “too big to fail”? How exactly did enabling the banks to draw upon trillions of dollars of Fed support, safe from public scrutiny, serve the public good?
The U.S. Status Quo is also like an iceberg: the visible 10% is what we're reassured "we" control, but the 90% that is completely out of our control is what matters.
There is another dynamic in a facsimile democracy: the Tyranny of the Majority. When the Central State issues enough promises to enough people, the majority concludes that supporting the Status Quo, no matter how corrupt, venal, parasitic, unsustainable and dysfunctional it might be, is in their personal interests.
"A pure democracy can admit no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will be felt by a majority, and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party. Hence it is, that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."
The Tyranny of the Majority is the primary topic of the
Federalist Number 10, in which Madison tackles the Achilles Heel of democracy: undesirable passions can very easily spread to a majority of the people, which can then enact its will through the nominally democratic government.
Put another way: the Power Elites of a nominal democracy can buy the complicity of the majority by showering them with government benefits and entitlements.
After including earned-income tax credits, the bottom 60% of households paid less than 1% of all Federal income taxes, and the households between 60% and 80% paid 13%.
The top 20% paid 68.7% of all Federal taxes: Income taxes, Social Security and Medicare, excise and corporate taxes. The top 10% of households paid fully 72.7% of all Federal income tax, the top 5% paid 60.7%, and the top 1% paid 38.8%.
In essence, this is a vote-buying scheme by the Status Quo: the top 1% control the policies of the State in alliance with the State's own Elites, and together they buy the complicity of the bottom 60% majority.
This is the worst of all possible simulacra of democracy. In the Wikipedia entry linked above, Mancur Olson is cited as arguing in The Logic of Collective Action that narrow, well-organized minorities are more likely to assert their interests over those of the majority.
In other words, the Financial Aristocracy asserts its interests over the 99% and then buys the complicity of the bottom 60% with largesse paid for by the top 19% of earners.
In
Who Rules America?, Sociologist G. William Dumhoff draws an important distinction between the net worth held by households in "marketable assets" such as homes and vehicles and "financial wealth." Homes and other tangible assets are, in Dumhoff's words, "not as readily converted into cash and are more valuable to their owners for use purposes than they are for resale."
Financial wealth such as stocks, bonds and other securities are liquid and therefore easily converted to cash; these assets are what Dumhoff describes as "non-home wealth" on his website "Wealth, Income, and Power in America."
As of 2007, the bottom 80% of American households held a mere 7% of these financial assets, while the top 1% held 42.7% and the top 20% held fully 93%.
In a classic "divide and conquer" tactic, the State's Power Elites have sold a slew of new taxes to fund the guaranteed-to-implode "healthcare reform" (a.k.a. increased funding of sickcare cartels) on those earning $250,000 or more.
Everyone earning 25% of that sum loudly applauds "sticking it to the rich" (the Tyranny of the Majority in full flower) while failing to note that the truly wealthy--the ones who don't have any earned income because they don't work in salaried jobs, the ones who own roughly half the nation's productive assets--pay nothing but a slice of their unearned income, much of which is protected by various tax breaks.
The State is effectively operated as a fiefdom of the Financial Power Elites--and by that I mean the people earning not $300,000, but those earning $30 million or more annually-- that buys the complicity of the lower 60% with enough largesse to keep them supportive of the Status Quo.
In this facsimile democracy, citizenship has devolved to advocacy for a larger share of Federal government swag. The U.S. Status Quo rules via the second-order corruption of financial Aristocracy and Tyranny of the Majority.
Is Democracy Possible in a Corrupt Society? No, it is not. Our democracy is a PR sham.
Things are falling apart—that is obvious. But why are they falling apart? The reasons are complex and global. Our economy and society have structural problems that cannot be solved by adding debt to debt. We are becoming poorer, not just from financial over-reach, but from fundamental forces that are not easy to identify or understand. We will cover the five core reasons why things are falling apart:
1. Debt and financialization
2. Crony capitalism and the elimination of accountability
3. Diminishing returns
4. Centralization
5. Technological, financial and demographic changes in our economyComplex systems weakened by diminishing returns collapse under their own weight and are replaced by systems that are simpler, faster and affordable. If we cling to the old ways, our system will disintegrate. If we want sustainable prosperity rather than collapse, we must embrace a new model that is Decentralized, Adaptive, Transparent and Accountable (DATA).
We are not powerless. Not accepting responsibility and being powerless are two sides of the same coin: once we accept responsibility, we become powerful.
The pilgrams were Christians, not Judeo-Christians.
I do have a small quibble here - to call what we have today "fuedalism" is to insult fuedalism. At least there they swore oaths to God and at times even tried to keep them.
Very true, Mark... Leonardo da Vinci comes to mind. I could mention many others that held their(blasphemous) thoughts, in pieces of art.
at times even tried to keep them.... Lol, thats a killer!
Paratge...but, the Popes turned against their own godlike values and became disseminators of Simony (indulgences) to finance their power and political wars (crusades), and their will to impose theocracy over kings (inquisition). It led to making both pillars of feudal order fall; feudal kings and popes. Nation states emerged.
Sworn oaths became a joke when Machiavelli's prince showed the world oaths only fooled those who believed them not who made them.
As for De Vinci, he was a humanist. Renaissance made art into the new language of God and Man. Just as Michael-Angelo its greatest proponent proved.
We need a new renaissance as our God the greenback dies and his church WS collapses.
What I would like to see is an Open Source platform that runs much like a conversion system from the old to the new. I remember when I was part of a team to take an ES9000 off-line including transferring all the software systems to a distributed network. So we brought the distributed network up in parallel with the mainframe. Once things were running smoothly on the new system the old one was taken off-line. So why not bring up a network of distributed democracy that is run by referendum and all components of supplying bills and taxes would be implemented within the new system mirroring the old. All the 9000 page legislative papers submitted to congress could be broken down and voted on by the mock-up system and voted on by the constituency of the project. Of course there would be no centrally controlled Congress or Senate and no three branches of Government although checks and balances would be included in the new system. The new system would be distributed P2P and could operate in a small community but be scaleable to include populations of greater than 10 billion people. That way if the SHTF and this old dinosaur of a system, that we have now, collapse we will have an opportunity to lay the old system to rest once and forever.
Technologically this is possible now. It would also give a consensus to push the existing system to make the right choices.
It is beyond me but would make a nice project should someone take the interest. Programmers are like musicians. They are compelled to do what they do.
Since the first written words communicated knowledge until now change has continued to accelerate. In the beginning was the Word and the Word was God. I think we may be software that has given rise to the greatest of uncertainties. Let's make things certain again.
Interesting and entirely reasonable.
Would your system be entirely democratic, or would there be elements of AI that prevented "hijacking" of the system by vested interests? Very interesting though, and although potentially massive, the individual elements need not be particularly complex.
I think we may be software that has given rise to the greatest of uncertainties.
Whilst it would for some be a less than palatable concept, there is no reason why this should not be the truth. There is no reason at all why our "reality" is nothing more than a sophisticated suite of programs run on some machine(es) "external" to our "Universe"
Neither is this necessarily a limiting view - there could be an indefinite hierarchy of such "simulations running as modules within higher-order simulations".
Not at all scary, but certainly a "different" reality.
the only thing certain in a world of mortals is the uncertainty principle.
If you want political certainty you need dictatorship; aka the philosopher king that Plato pleaded for, under control of an enlightened oligarchy, "aeropage" of notables and open debate to resolve the societal dialectic.
Democracy, born with the notion that the individual is the deciding element in society and his free will determines the course of events if taken as an aggregate, has complicated the game. It has introduced MORE uncertainty. And this has been understood right from the beginning. Since Athens was born as first model of western society.
Plato recognised that. Arsitotle proposed that beyond the ideal world of principles lay reality and we should account for it constantly in feed-back loop called political analysis.
Primacy of fact over-ruled principles of ideality. Now the model moved not to a concerted aeropage trying to find ideal synthesis around philosopher king, but to antagonistic left-right type political divisions bitterly defending their interpretation of "reality". We now needed separation of powers for balance in bitter dissension.
Basically we are still there in our current society; the gender equality now imposed in the 20 th century adds another twist to the debate, as does the principles of universal human rights that have politically effaced all notions of race, creed, gender and socio cultural origins from the global debate. The nation state is now at odds not only with supranational entities but with the all powerful transnational corporate juggernauts that run the world economy and influence its politics.
Its the US nation-state model of open markets and democracy, imposed on a universal basis (UN and all those other towers of Babel), that runs the world today officially since 1945, with DC/WS as the home of dominant corpo-capitalism. Whereas in reality its the transnational corpo-oligarchy of industry and FIRE economy that pulls the levers of power, from their off shore bases where they stash their cumulative wealth of 25-30 T leaving the nation states wallowing in debt for the 99%. The US nation state model is now subservient to the transnational corpocracy that it has spawned.
So democracy is no longer the spring of human resolve, its now the expression of muted serfhood, as the neo-feudal structure of elitist oligarchy is very much in place.
But this model is unsustainable. Like all empires. And these oligarchy empires will shrivel and die in the inevitable fall out.
Just as examples : Exxon will lose its power as extractive empire when the US nation state that supports its hegemony will lose its gunboat diplomacy power. Same thing is true for the WS financial cabal when the USD falls and WS loses it annointed place as world financial church. Same thing is true for Facebook and Apple. The home market and the home political base is vital to the expansion of these corporate behemoths to impose a world wide supremacy. If the political hold dies the commercial and financial holds die too. Its never the other way round. Thats the lesson of history. Culture always follows the power construct. And commerce benefits from control of both. Just look at TV, Hollywood and Internet dissemination. Its 80% US input worldwide.
The centre is the core root, and the political construct is the sap of life that irrigates the power trunk and branches of the imperial tree.
If you want to use technology to make an open society it will first have to define its political and social values for it to survive. If you do it in the current context you just create new, more efficient MEANS to achieve current AIMS of the power construct in place; aka Google.
Nothing is permanent and nothing grows in a vacuum. Technology has to have an AIM, like a philsophical and political construct. We don't have a political model for the world but the Oligarchs have laid the seed by inverting the pyramid in their runaway, exponential greed; inverted totalitarianism and monetary fascism conundrums could plant the seeds of a new Renaissance.
the citizenry cannot (fill in the blank) via elections
Here's a crazy idea then Citizen Hugh-Smith: how about going cold turkey on elections? Maybe voluntary trading, private property rights, arbitration courts, insurance company security services would work just fine without politicians helping us to pillage our neighbors? I know it's crazy, right?
But isn't repeating the same thing over and over and expecting a different result each time even more crazy?
Democracy works if it operates primarily from the locus of the individual.
An individual who is self-sufficient yet charitable in anonymous giving to the needy.
A government that does only what little is necessary to protect the industry and capital of these individuals.
A society where the rule-of-law holds most sacrosanct the individual, and pursues with most vigilance the legerdemain of two or more people together who conspire to defeat the individual.
If you lose any of these precepts you do not have a democracy.
History shows no one has yet found a form of government or lack thereof to work in practice because of corruption. Well, maybe a few times, there existed a benevolent king. Jews wait for their messiah, and Christians wait for Kingdom Come....which will be a Theocracy.
Iceland, 9th-12th century. Essentially anarchist.
Worked fine until Norway destabilized it.
Let me get this straight. Rich people pay 80% of the taxes and that proves they are in control.
In Bizzaro World maybe.
Try starting with a factual premise, or at least one different than "all rich people are bad".
Well, it's like Ladies night at a bar:
The Women don't pay a cover charge but get screwed, and the Men pay a cover charge and get screwed too.
The U.S. is a Republic, not a Democracy and I'm afraid we have not kept it as mentioned by Ben Franklin.
Our founding fathers chose a republic over a democracy as they understood the historical failures of democracies and that mob rule did not work in the long run.
Not only have we failed to keep it, most don't even know what it is. Even though nearly every politician, teacher, journalist and citizen believes that our Founders created a democracy, it is absolutely not true. The Founders knew full well the vast differences between a Republic and a Democracy, and they repeatedly and emphatically said that they had founded a Republic.
A Republic is representative government ruled by law (the Constitution). A democracy is direct government ruled by the majority (mob rule). A Republic recognizes the inalienable rights of individuals, while democracies are only concerned with group wants or needs (the public good).
Lawmaking is a slow, deliberate process in our Constitutional Republic, requiring approval from the three branches of government, the Supreme Court and individual jurors (jury-nullification). Lawmaking in our unlawful democracy occurs rapidly requiring approval from the whim of the majority as determined by polls and/or voter referendums. A good example of democracy in action is a lynch mob.
Democracies always self-destruct when the non-productive majority realizes that it can vote itself handouts from the productive minority by electing the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury. To maintain their power, these candidates must adopt an ever-increasing tax and spend policy to satisfy the ever-increasing desires of the majority. As taxes increase, incentive to produce decreases, causing many of the once productive to drop out and join the non-productive. When there are no longer enough producers to fund the legitimate functions of government and the socialist programs, the democracy will collapse, always to be followed by a dictatorship.
Article IV Section 4, of the Constitution "guarantees to every state in this union a Republican form of government"… Conversely, the word Democracy is not mentioned even once in the Constitution.
(The Federalist Papers were written and published during the years 1787 and 1788 in several New York State newspapers to persuade New York voters to ratify the (then) proposed constitution. In total, they consist of 85 essays outlining how this new government would operate and why this type of government was the best choice for the United States of America. All of the essays were signed “PUBLIUS” and the actual authors of some are under dispute, but the general consensus is that they were Alexander Hamilton (wrote 52), James Madison (wrote 28), and John Jay contributed the remaining five.)
Military training manuals used to contain the correct definitions of Democracy and Republic. (Training Manual No. 2000-25 published by the War Department, November 30, 1928.) The manuals containing these definitions were ordered destroyed without explanation about the same time that President Franklin D. Roosevelt made private ownership of our lawful money (US Minted Gold Coins) illegal. Shortly after the people turned in their $20 gold coins, the price was increased from $20 per ounce to $35 per ounce. Almost overnight F.D.R., the most popular president this century (elected 4 times) looted almost half of this nation's wealth, while convincing the people that it was for their own good. Many of F.D.R.'s policies were suggested by his right hand man, Harry Hopkins, who said, "Tax and tax, spend and spend, elect and elect, because the people are too damn dumb to know the difference".
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Democracy Is Not Freedom, by Rep. Ron Paul, MD
loup, thanks for adding all the additional info, I would have included it in my post last night if I had not been so exhausted. Yours was an excellent post, thank you for taking your time to educate!
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/6125-proposed-regulations-and-notificati...
6,125 Proposed Regulations and Notifications Posted in Last 90 Days--Average 68 per Day
(CNSNews.com) – It’s Friday morning, and so far today, the Obama administration has posted 165 new regulations and notifications on its reguations.gov website.
In the past 90 days, it has posted 6,125 regulations and notices – an average of 68 a day.
Libertards are sad little nerdy men. When things go their way they think the system is good (as with Reagan), when things don't go their way they want to cheat by changing the system (which would require a violent Coup or revolution, itself in violation of their non-agression, contractual principles, but you can't expect libertarians to be coherent).
Every four year, the American people remind you how much they DO NOT want to have anything to do with your fucked-up ideological system and economic thoeries. Every four year, they inflict a total, radical and humiliating defeat on libertarian candidates, and cry out for more socialism, more social justice and more and more State control of the economy. It has been this way for decades now. And yet you persist in wanting to impose your convictions on them. I fail to comprehend. Leave us alone. Get a life.
Weak
Are you talking about you and your fellow libertarians, the sad whiny and dishonest men who condemn democracy because the results don't please them?
The Founding Fathers, who have always espoused the principles of democracy against tyranny and one-men-dictatorships, would very much spit on your face. I can guarantee you that.
I knew the original Harry Wanger troll, I argued with Harry Wanger, I exposed Harry Wanger, and you, sir, are no Harry Wanger.
This has to be one prominent troll to inspire copycats.
Aside from the trolling, there is interesting thing here.
"when things don't go their way they want to cheat by changing the system" "if you didn't vote, don't complain" Damned if you go for violent revolt, damned if you advocate non-compliance, damned if you just vent discontent - only permissible options are playing the Masters' game and adhering to its rules. It's not even a question, not an assumption. School tells us to do it, all the wise tv sages tell us to do it and our beloved leaders tell us to do it. Only a crackpot would even consider anything outside the (ballot) box. It seems like such a cliche - walling people in a mindset - trap so simple that absolutely could not work ... and yet it works so well.
Happy cow can graze wherever she likes and even get a little sun, but there better be milk by the end of the day.
Thought you died and reincarnated as Harold Wang. Good to see you back Hamy. Two of the down arrows were mine.
His Presidency Barack Obama
Popular vote: 62,088,847
Percentage: 50.6%
Do you understand yet? The voice of the people (i.e. universal democracy) has spoken, deal with it.
The MSM keep saying it's a ``clear mandate``... LOL OH REALLY??? (especially when 16 million less people voted than in 2008... which ended up with about 66% voting rate total... or 34% of eligible voters voted for Obama if you believe the numbers)... real fucking mandate.
If you could stop referring to it as MSM, and call it Pravda, it would make a whole lot more sense.
Population of the Untied States of Amurka: 314,750,000.
Popular vote from this election: 62,088,000... Oh, and those 847.
Percentage of ALL Americans that cast an affirmative vote: 19.7% and change.
Not only is it NOT a majority, it's an underwhelming one-in-five. On the face of it 'majority rule' is an idiotic proposition, essentially a derivative extrapolation of might is right, e.a., if a majority of people will agree on a bad premise, it can't be all that bad. This idea is only slightly less farcical. You pretend your minority is a majority for the sake of validating your claim. In both instances it is wrong.
One man and courage, make a majority. And yes, often the majority is wrong. Think of USA designed products as a 6 million dollar man. We made them (our product design) to break, so YOU can rebuild him and make him better. Think fridges, tv's, motor vehicles, scooters, tillers, the military, list is as long as your arm. All the while proclaiming to it's citizens the United States is the super power of world, there is no better alternative or competitor to our country, we are the best or you be damned. This illusion is a bad premise in so many ways that by the time you have investigated one or two, one or 2 more pop up and the Lame Stream Media picks up on it and runs for a short while until the money never stops for them. So debt and denile are the one and only answer to the mountain of lies and trickery and he will only promise more of the same because its what, As boner Boehner stated "it's what everyone wanted". No its not pal, its what you and your like minded bozo's agreed upon doing or sending everyone else down the highway.
Can someone Post Voting age population out of the total population, and how that stacks up with this past election?
I'd also like to see Registered voter numbers. I'd look it up but am not sure where the better / more credible info is would be? Can you also source it so that we can do the work next time / follow up?
thanks in advance- I do want to understand the election statistics in context.
It is the rule of the majority as 'americans' want it to be.
You know, 'americans' usually start their demand for adhesion by a thick lie.
They know that their proposition of majority rules does not exist. But 'americanism' is all about submission.
'Americans' introduce a big thick lie to part people in two: the with them side and the against them side.
It is how it works.
'Americans' who choose to support the claim that majority rule over the minority know it is wrong. But it might be an efficient lie to congragate people around so they can defend it.
The criticism of America has always been a bit infantile. One is familiar with the theory from psychoanalysis, when people talk about transference, or when suppressed feelings or emotions are overcome by projecting them onto others. It may work for a while, improving one's feeling of self-worth by devaluing an imagined adversary. But it always falls short. Which is why the ritual must be constantly carried out anew.
I demand adhesion!
It is the mattering thing, the crustiest bit, very much something.
Democracy is ten retards and an Einstein figuring on E=MC2. Five of the retards don't get it, three don't care and two hate Jews. Tyranny is when one of the retards owns a shotgun and it's his way or the high way. A monarchy is the retard with the shotgun happens to be descended from a long line of shotgun wielding retards. A plutocracy, or feudalism, is when a few of the retards conspire together to make sure they own the whole thing no matter which way it goes, with shotguns. It's been said that of all of these democracy is the most preferable because, even if we get it wrong in the end, fewer of us get shot. There actually is a political system adaptable to the premise that complex problems can be figured out correctly by the group to the benefit of all... the Einstein pitches his premise to interested parties who invest in the idea... The hypothesis is worked into a marketable product. Consumers, investors, shareholders, stakeholders, workers, share their energy, effort, intellect to the degree it interests them and if in the end it proves to be true, all benefit to the extent they contributed to it. If it turns out not to work, no one buys the thing, the investors dump it and it's back to the drawing board for Einstein. That system might be called a 'market economy.' Hahahaha.... Just kidding!!! Hey, next election, don't forget to vote, because your vote _matters_.
Addendum... I usually don't write much on these fora cause it's a complete waste of my fucking time, but I'll invest a few more minutes because I know I can articulate the relevance of this idea to at least one or two like-minded individuals. Herein lies the problem... For 50,000 years it really didn't matter which political system we had running roughshod over us. Resources were abundant, stupidity was endemic and there was ample room for error. Owing to the magnificent natural affluence of this planet, and the resilience of our species, our numbers multiplied and we somehow arrived at our current state, in spite of ourselves. Ah, but there's the rub. We are hurtling toward an Event Horizon that by all current calculations will result in an Extinction Level Event. In short... While our numbers were fewer and resources ample, there was room for error. Now our numbers have exploded resources are dwindling, the margin for error is rapidly narrowing. At some point in the near future, there will be no more room for error. We either get it right, or we're fucked. This is why I equate our problems to a mathematical proof. 'Politics' will very soon fail to be the social model at correctly resolving complex societal issues. What we 'like' or 'hope for' will be completely out the window. Things will _have_ to be resolved _correctly_, or kiss your butt goodbye. Energy, water, food. The basics. At this point, I don't expect the herd to grasp the relevance of this. High on Hopium. But it's at our doorstep. Prepare accordingly.
your surmising in four words : Peak self destructive humanity.
Stop aiding Al Gore's Carbon Tax Earth Idol Pimpdom
The worst possible case is probably more like a mass die-off rather than mass-extinction. In the end, Darwin's law will rule, and it will be survival of the fittest. The intelligent, hard-working, industrious, innovative, resourceful, and fore-sightful will find a way to survive while the rest die or kill each other off. There won't be many humans left, but the ones who survive will be as good a group as any to start things over.
Politburo defn - Chief Political & Executive Committee of the Communist Party of the USSR
Politburo on The Potomac (aka Congress & Whitehouse) defn - Chief Legislative & Executive Organs of the Wall St Kleptocrat Party of the USSA.
http://www.examiner.com/article/citizens-15-states-file-petitions-to-sec...
delete, sorry
Excellent 'american' article.
'American' economics is all about consumption.
So here's a book, $24 at a discount (just for one week though) that claim to deal with problems.
But as expected from an 'american', the problems do not exist.
So one has here is the opportunity to buy a book that might offer to efficient ways to tackle fantasical problems.
The funniest part is that the production of the book is the result of the tyranny of the 'american' consumers who want to see their fantasies reported in a book.
So funny.
It is an 'american' world and a US world order.
.
The funniest part, the matteringest bit, is your thinly veiled jealousy because your Ministry of Truth bosses won't let you write a book filled with your fantastical claptrap and crackpottery. That's exactly that.
Chinese citizenism night train.
The quest for symetery leads AnAnonymous on unbelievable paths. Those paths all lead to much laughter.
Bear with it.
Democracy is merely the system that gives freedom the best chance of survival. When people stop caring about freedom, when they forget what it is, when there is a generation or two that never learned about it, or never thought about it, or never sacrificed anything for it, there is no system in the world of systems that will save them from tyranny.
"We're thrilled that our shared goals aligned such that Clif Bar was prepared to make this significant commitment,"The Conservation Alliance,north face berkeley which makes grants to grassroots organizations working to protect wild lands and waters throughout North America, aims to grow its grant fund to $2 million by 2014. "We're thrilled that our shared goals aligned such that Clif Bar was prepared to make this significant commitment,"The Conservation Alliance, which makes grants to grassrootsnorth face outlet locations organizations working to protect wild lands and waters throughout North America, aims to grow its grant fund to $2 million by 2014.