Democracy is the bribery of all "elected" officials to do the bidding of the ultra-rich.
If any of those officials dare to ask for twice as much, they may or may not get it.
But when they ask for 10x as much, or even when one is too principled to even entertain accepting a bribe being forced upon them, they are eliminated immediately and replaced with someone who will do the bidding of the ultra-rich.
Excellent article spelling out the dilemma of democracy. The corrupting factors are money and power. Avariciousness has overpowered rational thought.
My complaint is with the proposed solution. The idea that those who control power in the United States can be stripped of power by peaceful, non-physical means is a pipe dream. Those in control mean to continue in control, and their support teams, media, the entertainment industry, the academic industry, and all three branches of government are in it for all the marbles. There will be hell to pay.
By "nonphysical solution" I guess that you are referring to a Revolution, such as the First American Revolution (1776) was. I too have advocated for that, but I don't agree with you that it cannot also be possible to achieve it peacefully. But whatever would be needed in order to do it (achieve the switch to a 100% lottery-based , zero-public-election-based, Governmental system) I support.
My point is that the people in control of the United States have no intention of relinquishing their wealth and power. How would you subvert that position without force?
Your prior comment made clear that you believe the low average intelligence of the total population to be to blame, and not the limitless greed of the billionaires to be to blame. And you also believe that violence is the only solution. However, many revolutions have failed to produce any more democracy than before. Your thinking it too loaded with preconceptions; but, even if violence would be the ONLY way to achieve democracy, the winners afterward will need to know that public elections fail to produce democracy; and it seems you don't want them to know that. You OBVIOUSLY did not click onto the links in this article, and so you are thinking on the basis of false assumptions -- all of which are addressed in those linked-to sources. In other words: your mind was closed. Please read those linked-to sources and then get back to me, so that we can then have a productive conversation about these matters.
"Your prior comment made clear that you believe the low average intelligence of the total population to be to blame, and not the limitless greed of the billionaires to be to blame."
Not at all....it is both.
You failed to answer my question. 'How would you subvert that position without force?'
Democracy is the bribery of all "elected" officials to do the bidding of the ultra-rich.
If any of those officials dare to ask for twice as much, they may or may not get it.
But when they ask for 10x as much, or even when one is too principled to even entertain accepting a bribe being forced upon them, they are eliminated immediately and replaced with someone who will do the bidding of the ultra-rich.
Any questions?
Excellent article spelling out the dilemma of democracy. The corrupting factors are money and power. Avariciousness has overpowered rational thought.
My complaint is with the proposed solution. The idea that those who control power in the United States can be stripped of power by peaceful, non-physical means is a pipe dream. Those in control mean to continue in control, and their support teams, media, the entertainment industry, the academic industry, and all three branches of government are in it for all the marbles. There will be hell to pay.
Re. your "My complaint is with the proposed solution.":
And what, pray tell, do you criticize about "my proposed solution" and why?
"And what, pray tell, do you criticize about "my proposed solution" and why?"
Just as I said, I don't believe a nonphysical solution is viable.
By "nonphysical solution" I guess that you are referring to a Revolution, such as the First American Revolution (1776) was. I too have advocated for that, but I don't agree with you that it cannot also be possible to achieve it peacefully. But whatever would be needed in order to do it (achieve the switch to a 100% lottery-based , zero-public-election-based, Governmental system) I support.
Considering the abject stupidity of most Americans, how would a lottery improve the current situation?
My point is that the people in control of the United States have no intention of relinquishing their wealth and power. How would you subvert that position without force?
Your prior comment made clear that you believe the low average intelligence of the total population to be to blame, and not the limitless greed of the billionaires to be to blame. And you also believe that violence is the only solution. However, many revolutions have failed to produce any more democracy than before. Your thinking it too loaded with preconceptions; but, even if violence would be the ONLY way to achieve democracy, the winners afterward will need to know that public elections fail to produce democracy; and it seems you don't want them to know that. You OBVIOUSLY did not click onto the links in this article, and so you are thinking on the basis of false assumptions -- all of which are addressed in those linked-to sources. In other words: your mind was closed. Please read those linked-to sources and then get back to me, so that we can then have a productive conversation about these matters.
"Your prior comment made clear that you believe the low average intelligence of the total population to be to blame, and not the limitless greed of the billionaires to be to blame."
Not at all....it is both.
You failed to answer my question. 'How would you subvert that position without force?'