How do we reform the US political system to put leaders in office

  • News
  • Thread starter Skyhunter
  • Start date
  • Tags
    System
NOT take up a function in the government. In summary, the conversation discusses the cycle of institutions and how they can become dogmatic and corrupt. The idea is proposed to change the system of suffrage and make it a privilege earned through service, in hopes of motivating individuals to serve their communities and have a say in the election of leaders. There is also a discussion about the flaws in the current voting system and suggestions for reform.
  • #106
What's the difference between Capitalism and what you call "law of the jungle?"
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #107
Smurf said:
What's the difference between Capitalism and what you call "law of the jungle?"

Physical violence. You do what I say because otherwise I beat you up and I am stronger, or have friends which are stronger than your friends. I can even kill you, I only need to find the way to do so. Your friends might then try to kill me - or not - depending on what they think is more advantageous for them. Nowhere to complain, no judges, no laws, no police. The natural way of things.
 
  • #108
vanesch said:
Physical violence. You do what I say because otherwise I beat you up and I am stronger, or have friends which are stronger than your friends. I can even kill you, I only need to find the way to do so. Your friends might then try to kill me - or not - depending on what they think is more advantageous for them. Nowhere to complain, no judges, no laws, no police. The natural way of things.
How is that any different than any state on earth? I could kill you Vanesch, I just need to find a way to do it. That, and I'd need to want to in the first place.
 
  • #109
Smurf said:
How is that any different than any state on earth? I could kill you Vanesch, I just need to find a way to do it.

Well, my main motivation not to kill others is that it would put me in trouble with justice. Without a state, there is no justice department, there are only those who cared about the one I'd kill, and if I esteem that not much of a problem, I can go ahead and not be disturbed.
 
  • #110
So, here is how 'we' of the also on average, average populace, fix this; 'we' magically warp into an informed, educated, intelligent, reasonable electorate, as oppoised to an 'average' electorate, and we insist on populating not only the top spots, but every level of government with only the best and the brightest and the most capable. We will create the raw fodder for this miraculous transformation of government by demanding more of our kids when we expensively send them off for a free education, so when they emerge, they will form not only a broad foundation to people this massive government that some believe can bandage every skinned knee imaginable under any scenario, but form that informed electorate as well.

Of course, until we do that, we get what we get; on average, some tiny fraction of a led around by the nose electorate playing their part in our silly assed Circus elections, anointing some poor bastard to ride around in the bullet-proof limo and manage a massive organization of 'on average' human beings, subject to the same distribution of corruption and incompetence and indecision and fear and ineptitude as the population at large.

Who the Hell are we kidding? When was this not ever so, and when will it not ever be?

Politics in this nation has seldom elevated itself above the absurd, and we will always pay a price for that. Indeed, even if we could agree on that non-partisan statement, our politics immediately prevent us from agreeing on the fundamental 'why.'

You see, way more than just half of us fundamentally believe that the solution just waiting around the corner is 'the' ultimate leader who will show up and ride around in that bullet proof limo and magically, maybe with a handful of his closest cronies, run the world in such a manner that we can do whatever the Hell we want to do and still never suffer from so much as a skinned knee.

In fact, sadly, the number is probably much higher than 50%, and increasingly spans both parties of power. The only difference between these two competing camps of children looking for a Maximum Daddy is whether they want a GOP Daddy or a Democratic Daddy.

Somewhere out there, lost in the wilderness of irrelevance, is some tiny fraction of folks who still see this Universe as a place that requires constant uphill strain, and the best source of power for that constant strain is always close at hand and not somebody else's job, and certainly not in the singular set of hands of whoever is riding either the local, the parish, the state or the federal version of the bullet proof limo. It doesn't need to be everybody, because everybody never happens, but if enough folks had enough of that inside them, then no matter if they found themselves staffing some bureacracy in a city, a parish, a state, or federal government, they would not be frozen by an overbearing pall of safely waiting to be told what to do by Daddy, where real people are overwhelmed by the Universe and its sometimes too much to bear local gradients. You see, by definition, if we had enough of that kind of energy and initiative, then the gov't that we say we want to primarily depend on would be able to direct its massive resources in an effective manner, and could weather greater events without being overwhelmed.

The majority will win the shaping of this debate, and we will all live or die with their decision. If the net result of this cataclysmic event is, "we must demand/rely even more on a centralized gov't to save every rainy day," and we do so without providing the fodder to feed such a miraculous bee colony plan of action, then IMO, we will experience ever more grinding of gears/failures of the Grand Plan with every succeeding generation, as unrealistic expectations fuel an ever more disgruntled electorate, waiting for someone to show up and be their Daddy, and not only ytell them what needs to be done to wrap their World in Nerf, but actually do it for them.
 
  • #111
Zlex said:
So, here is how 'we' of the also on average, average populace, fix this; 'we' magically warp into an informed, educated, intelligent, reasonable electorate, as oppoised to an 'average' electorate, and we insist on populating not only the top spots, but every level of government with only the best and the brightest and the most capable. We will create the raw fodder for this miraculous transformation of government by demanding more of our kids when we expensively send them off for a free education, so when they emerge, they will form not only a broad foundation to people this massive government that some believe can bandage every skinned knee imaginable under any scenario, but form that informed electorate as well.

Of course, until we do that, we get what we get; on average, some tiny fraction of a led around by the nose electorate playing their part in our silly assed Circus elections, anointing some poor bastard to ride around in the bullet-proof limo and manage a massive organization of 'on average' human beings, subject to the same distribution of corruption and incompetence and indecision and fear and ineptitude as the population at large.

Who the Hell are we kidding? When was this not ever so, and when will it not ever be?

Politics in this nation has seldom elevated itself above the absurd, and we will always pay a price for that. Indeed, even if we could agree on that non-partisan statement, our politics immediately prevent us from agreeing on the fundamental 'why.'
The purpose of this thread is to offer solutions to the problems you are describing. Most on this forum already realize the dysfunctionality of our political system.

What I am looking for is ideas, not rants. Jeez, I have enough of my own I don't need yours as well. :wink:
 
  • #112
Skyhunter said:
What I am looking for is ideas, not rants. Jeez, I have enough of my own I don't need yours as well. :wink:

The rant was well-written, wasn't it ? I enjoyed it. But it also contains a "solution". Hey, boys and girls, that's the way things are, and will always be, so why not just accept that and move on ? I am in fact a strong supporter of that stance...
 
  • #113
Skyhunter said:
The purpose of this thread is to offer solutions to the problems you are describing. Most on this forum already realize the dysfunctionality of our political system.

What I am looking for is ideas, not rants. Jeez, I have enough of my own I don't need yours as well. :wink:

You know what couldn't be worse? Repopulating the highest levels of elected government randomly from the phone book; a draft.
 
  • #114
Zlex said:
You know what couldn't be worse? Repopulating the highest levels of elected government randomly from the phone book; a draft.
I would prefer going through it alphabetically and rotating every 3 months, but its your country.
 
  • #115
Zlex said:
You know what couldn't be worse? Repopulating the highest levels of elected government randomly from the phone book; a draft.
:smile: I suggest we at least try it. :smile:
 
  • #116
Great post Zlex ! :approve:
 
  • #117
Astronuc said:
I nominate Russ Watters for President of the United States!

Go get 'em Russ!
Hey there's still time for 2008! :biggrin:
 
  • #118
Relevant to the OP - I listened to an interview with Cal Thomas and Bob Beckel this morning on the local NPR station. I found it interesting and timely. I'll certainly be reading their book.

Common Ground: How to Stop the Partisan War That Is Destroying America (Hardcover)
by Cal Thomas and Bob Beckel
Beckel and Thomas, political analysts and columnists for USA Today, examine the problem of political polarization by asking, Why are you reading this book? The answer: Bottom line... you are ticked off at politics. Rigid partisan beliefs, they think, have become more than a product of opposing ideologies—they have created an environment for the sole purpose of retaining political power, raising money, or making more money... benefit[ing] a few at the expense of many. Using a mix of arguments and anecdotes, Beckel and Thomas (a liberal and a conservative, respectively) assert that polarization creates conscientious nonvoters and congressional roughhousing and deceit. The book's ultimate purpose is to disarm partisan warfare by encouraging voters and candidates to align themselves with principles that directly benefit the largest possible number of citizens. The lucid political discussion between a conservative and liberal is refreshing, but their proposals are too utopian to realistically be widely embraced. Their proposition that independent thinking can be more effective than an adversarial pack mentality is a step in the right direction, though. (Oct. 9)
from Publisher's Weekly

I disagree that the proposals of Thomas and Beckel are necessarily too utopian - although they are certainly idealistic. Nevertheless, this is the direction we need to move if we want a better society, which ensures more opportunity and justice for all - not just the few who have close ties to the party controlling the government.

Throughout, Thomas and Beckel explode conventional wisdom and offer surprising new conclusions:

- The Red State/Blue State divide: Myth!
- A "common ground" presidential candidate can win in 2008: Reality!
- "Polarizers" like Ann Coulter and Michael Moore are the future of political debate: Myth!
- Major-party politics faces extinction: Reality!

These guys should know. For years Beckel and Thomas contributed to the climate of polarization in Washington . . . and they admit it. "We're two guys who spent a lot of years in the polarizing business, but on opposing sides," they write. "We helped write the game plan, and we have participated in everything from getting money out of true believers to appearing on television to help spread the contentious message. In many cases, we wrote the message. We know the gig, and it's just about up."

Thomas and Beckel discussed the media's role in promoting divisiveness in the country. They make a lot of money because of it. The media promotes confrontation and that contributes to the degradation of the political process.

Well enough is enough - and for me - it's gone too far!

As soon as the interview is posted, I'll add a link.

So in 2007 and 2008, third party and independent candidates do stand a much better chance of being elected.

Be informed - be involved - and get out and vote.
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
29
Views
10K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
117
Views
14K
Replies
38
Views
6K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • Poll
Replies
8
Views
5K
Back
Top