The Maelstrom of Violence

[Bob Butler 54]

(08-21-2017, 03:28 PM)noway2 Wrote:

(08-21-2017, 10:20 AM)David Horn Wrote:

Kinser79 Wrote:As for the government itself, I've long looked forward to it being burnt to the ground.  I've long advocated razing the whole rotten structure to build something else in its place.  The only difference is I'm on the right now instead of the left.

First, you design a better replacement, then you tear down the old system.  So far, no one has taken any steps in that direction.

You should read The Most Dangerous Superstition by Larkin Rose.  It will, or at least should, alter how you view government.  In short the idea that you can take a group of individuals and bestow upon them super power that the people don't have themselves is both irrational and inherently subject to corruption.  The fact that people do so, all be it, draped in all sorts of political rituals such as elections, is largely based in their belief in the need for there to be some sort of "authority" for them to obey. 

I used to believe that "government" could be a force for good, or for what is right.  I was mistaken.  Government by it's very nature will always corrupt.  The less of it, if any, the better off we will be.

Among other paths I've tread, I've chased evolutionary biology. I've felt that humans have always coveted territory, resources and power. I've always been concerned with tribal morality, where humans can feel for others, but generally feel most for those close to them. I have been concerned and agree with a notion that the practitioners of representative democracy have grown too distant from the common man to be concerned about him in any real way.

Thus, from time to time, I mention direct vote computer democracy. We have to cut out a middle man who has indeed become corrupt. Even here, where there is in theory an openness towards drastic solutions to crisis scale problem, direct vote computer democracy tends to drop out of sight without a trace.

Occasionally you see anarchy. It can be a nice dream. There was Marx, with the idea that the state would fade away. Then there is a rather infamous quote from Civil Disobedience.

Thoreau Wrote:I heartily accept the motto,—“That government is best which governs least;” and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which I also believe,—“That government is best which governs not at all;” and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have. Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient.

I view these Thoreau and Marx proclamations as 19th Century daydreams. Will mankind suddenly change to become non political? With politicians suddenly not covet power? Good luck waiting for that. It will be a long wait.

I don't see representative democracy as apt to elect men who will make good decision. Power corrupts. At best, you hope it will allow the People to kick out people who make bad decisions. By that standard, while I've grumbled about the 'see saw', the pattern of people and parties being kicked out of the White House regularly and often, the People's boot isn't a bad thing, it's democracy in action. Given a world of corruption, its the best we can expect.

When I hear from wannabe anarchists, revolutionaries and tyrants hoping humans will suddenly become apolitical, I can sympathize. I can sympathize a lot. Still, given what humans are I'm not hoping or expecting us to walk that route. We won't go that way because that's what we are. If you read history at all, it should be obvious that that's not what we are. What we need is firmer ways for the People to look at the corrupt leaders and just say no.

How do you know if a leader is corrupt?

He's a leader. He must be.