tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post7977294982779470506..comments2024-03-28T17:58:56.707+11:00Comments on The Social Pathologist: Component Failure.The Social Pathologisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12927698533626086780noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-45529753259910087672013-07-12T09:03:30.753+10:002013-07-12T09:03:30.753+10:00@SP,
There is a good case for local democracy. Peo...@SP,<br /><i>There is a good case for local democracy. People tend to have a good grasp of things when they are local and immediate, and have directs consequences. ...<br />The more cognitive science I study, the more I become monarchical. </i><br /><br />You might check out the thoughts of fellow Croat John Zmirak on that. His ideal government was the Hapsburg Empire, especially in its late phase. Certainly the Czechs have not produced anywhere NEAR the level of art music that they did while a part of the A-H Empire.<br /><br />But the political system you're looking for ought to accord with your faith. One word applies here: subsidiarity. Politics has become impossible largely because the politicians are deciding things where they have no specific local knowledge, and where they rarely suffer the consequences. See Taleb's <i>Antifragility</i> for a fuller explication.ElectricAngelhttp://patriactionary.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-62148472291948665472013-06-29T03:35:43.471+10:002013-06-29T03:35:43.471+10:00@SP
"The more I think about the subject the ...@SP<br /><br /><i>"The more I think about the subject the more I feel the states power should rest amongst the bourgeois and less amongst an aristocracy or plebeian mass."</i><br /><br />And what keeps the aristocrats from buying the bourgeois? It seems like that would be the first thing done. In fact, that seems exactly like what is being done in the US. Clinton, Obama, Gingrich, etc. <br /><br />Revoking the right of the vote from the top 1% of earners affects exactly 1%. I'm not sure this is the change we're looking for; unless you're saying they shouldn't be allowed to hold office. Well, they generally don't hold office now. Like any good aristocrat, they generally hire people to vote and run for them.<br /><br />Stray thought: It would be pretty funny to see rich folks enriching a candidate as to disqualify him on the basis of wealth. "Murdoch knocks Smith out of Senate Race with $10M gift!"Cane Caldohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05086160238694226488noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-66421368332992582892013-06-28T09:51:10.161+10:002013-06-28T09:51:10.161+10:00When someone can stay in power without any real ef...<i>When someone can stay in power without any real effort or threat of removal they become complacent and put their own needs ahead of those of the people. There are uncountable examples of this throughout history.</i><br /><br />Once again, power does not need to be diluted endlessly to be limited. Nixon was only able to undercut the democratic process because the democratic process in undercutable. There is no 100% foolproof method of governance. The choice is to pick the least worst. I'm pretty confident that universal suffrage is not the best method.<br /><br />@King Richard.<br /><br />The more cognitive science I study, the more I become monarchical. Though, Monarchy has its own problems. As I see it, what matters is not who is on the top but who is in the middle. The middle moderates the excesses from the top as <i>well as the bottom</i>. The more I think about the subject the more I feel the states power should rest amongst the bourgeois and less amongst an aristocracy or plebeian mass. The Social Pathologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12927698533626086780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-41797869959839453392013-06-28T03:44:37.747+10:002013-06-28T03:44:37.747+10:00 I was working on a very similar post, even so fa... I was working on a very similar post, even so far as referencing the OODA loop!<br /> Democracy is too flawed to survive itself. Hans-Herman Hoppe pointed out the economic parallel - it is public ownership of the means of government, so it suffers from the Tragedy of the Commons. Hoppe hopes that anarcho-capitalism would somehow avoid the trap of Democracy, but I fear his arguments apply to his own wishes.<br /> What does Hoppe demonstrate is inherently superior to Democracy?<br />Monarchy.Building a Better Countryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01894692867577700734noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-9788538753685244302013-06-26T23:01:51.648+10:002013-06-26T23:01:51.648+10:00The problem with trusting Nixon to stay in power w...The problem with trusting Nixon to stay in power would be that he was not above undercutting the democratic process for his own gains. <br /><br />When someone can stay in power without any real effort or threat of removal they become complacent and put their own needs ahead of those of the people. There are uncountable examples of this throughout history.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-21920810611198183072013-06-26T13:10:08.420+10:002013-06-26T13:10:08.420+10:00SP, What would be best if people could work out wh...SP, <i>What would be best if people could work out what's in everyone's mutual interest.</i><br /><br />Good luck with that!mdavidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-5890201669086216802013-06-26T11:15:03.146+10:002013-06-26T11:15:03.146+10:00@EW
Today I thought of another group of people I ...@EW<br /><br />Today I thought of another group of people I would deny the vote to; those who are buffered from the consequences of their actions. Public servants (who are impossible to fire) trust recipients etc. Excessive wealth is just as dangerous as idiotic poverty. Too many wealthy people are protected from the consequences of the their own stupidy by the cushion of their wealth. Tenured University Professors are the same.<br /><br />The important point is that those who make the decisions must also suffer the consequences of them. Reality is the ultimate error corrector.The Social Pathologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12927698533626086780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-15829242408578156992013-06-25T23:40:58.993+10:002013-06-25T23:40:58.993+10:00@EW
I'm not so much for having some "eli...@EW<br /><br />I'm not so much for having some "elite" as much as I am for disenfranchising the obviously stupid. I'd rather have Richard Nixon have the vote than Jimmy Carter, even though Nixon was the more dubious morally. Government is a practical skill not an exercise in simple moral virtue.<br /><br />The first aim is to keep out people who can't manage their own affairs. This should be the most basic rule of government, and the obviously corrupt. Those on the government welfare, those who are criminals or insane should not have the vote.<br /><br />Secondly, some proof in being able to manage your own affairs is also necessary. i.e owning a house outright, completing a higher degree in education ( a proper degree, not some inflated trade qualification.)<br /><br />Thirdly, excluding those who have too much money, as they weild too much influence. <br /><br />What you really want is a large pool of bourgeois running the show.<br /><br />It's not going to be perfect but it will be less stupid.<br /><br />The Social Pathologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12927698533626086780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-74111477746834993382013-06-25T21:56:09.550+10:002013-06-25T21:56:09.550+10:00"I personally prefer a limited franchise, wit...<i>"I personally prefer a limited franchise, with the qualification being based on some practical practical real world test."</i><br /><br />Intriguing. What would you test? And, more importantly, who would write it, administer it, and score it?Elusive Wapitihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16825547465295622621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-38673423307224447712013-06-25T13:43:50.596+10:002013-06-25T13:43:50.596+10:00@Anon
You've got it the wrong way around.
Th...@Anon<br /><br />You've got it the wrong way around.<br /><br />The politicians all know that the key to swaying the mob is through emotion, not reason. "Hope and Change", "a better future", "justice for all" are all bromides designed to motivate the emotions whilst subduing intelligence.<br /><br />The great cultural fault line in modern Western Society is the assumption of rationality in the average man. Most men are simply not rational when it comes to big issue items because it overwhelms their curiosity or intelligence.<br />The Social Pathologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12927698533626086780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-67324353902294232542013-06-25T13:39:35.889+10:002013-06-25T13:39:35.889+10:00This comment has been removed by the author.The Social Pathologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12927698533626086780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-54805599204710280752013-06-25T13:38:18.319+10:002013-06-25T13:38:18.319+10:00Caplan has an article about how bad voters are in ...Caplan has an article about how bad voters are in a democracy.<br /><br />http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2013/06/debate_does_dem.htmlPuzzle Piratenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-62628554656386158482013-06-25T06:12:23.047+10:002013-06-25T06:12:23.047+10:00One reason so many people vote on the basis of emo...One reason so many people vote on the basis of emotion is that most politicians, encouraged by the media, make appeals to emotion and always have. Also, as Dale points out, government was much smaller and much more locally oriented back then than it is now.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-23169247697811218712013-06-24T22:20:34.992+10:002013-06-24T22:20:34.992+10:00@Kurt9
However, is there really any alternative? ...@Kurt9<br /><br /><i>However, is there really any alternative? </i><br /><br />Yes there is, I personally prefer a limited franchise, with the qualification being based on some <i>practical</i> practical real world test.<br /><br />Concentration of power is a problem, but you don't have to dilute it endlessly to limit it. Having, lets say 30% of the population as voters would limit the power quite a lot. <br /><br />Having a good intentions are not enough. Most of the Lefties are people with good intention but hopelessly out of touch with reality. Factual knowledge and understanding matters.<br /><br />Jimmy Carter was a genuinely good man and Richard Nixon morally dubious. But Carter did far more harm to U.S interests than did Nixon. <br /><br />@mdavid.<br /><br />My interest is in what makes a workable society. John Adams typically echos the Anglo mindset where political interests are adversarial. What would be best if people could work out what's in everyone's mutual interest.<br /><br />@Dale<br /><br />There is a good case for local democracy. People tend to have a good grasp of things when they are local and immediate, and have directs consequences. It's only when they have to decide on things that are abstract or remote that their cognitive limitations quickly become apparent.<br /><br />The Social Pathologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12927698533626086780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-70513847495420287232013-06-24T09:55:33.107+10:002013-06-24T09:55:33.107+10:00Of coure, the original design of representative de...Of coure, the original design of representative democracy assumed small enough districts that all candidates would be known to the voters or their close friends; with federalism allowing the same arrangement among the state leaders to pick the national leaders by personal knowledge, not the way we do it nowadays.Dalenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-34776659111380870712013-06-24T05:52:14.407+10:002013-06-24T05:52:14.407+10:00I agree with this post, but it seems unnecessarily...I agree with this post, but it seems unnecessarily complex.<br /><br />John Adams, a founder of the world's longest lasting democracy, was succinct: <i>Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.</i> He could have added "educated" to the formula. <br /><br />Franklin put it another way: <i>Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!</i><br /><br />Christians would do well to not put their faith in democracy nor politics in general.mdavidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-56072714172799609212013-06-24T01:57:20.644+10:002013-06-24T01:57:20.644+10:00What you and Mencken say about democracy is probab...What you and Mencken say about democracy is probably true. However, is there really any alternative? <br /><br />If people are by nature good, then any system ought to work. But if people are by nature either incompetent or bad, then there is no point in placing one person or group of persons in charge of all others.<br /><br />Concentration of power in any form of monopoly entity represents a form of systemic risk. The only way to reduce this risk is with as much decentralization of power as possible, which means strictly limited government. kurt9https://www.blogger.com/profile/02101147267959016924noreply@blogger.com