I am enjoying a new local lefty blog, rootriversiren.blogspot.com. A recent post about Ann Rand led to this exchange:
Siren: Rand saw a centralized government as an evil thing (and don't ya imagine how being raised in Russia influenced her, I always did). I for one, don't see it as an evil or even a bad thing...but all that depends on the mechanisms for control or regulation.
Downtown Brown: Which of the following persons or people would you like to have their hands on the levers of your "Mechanism". Bernard Madoff? George W Bush?, Michelle Obama? Margaret Sanger? Just curious which one you want to turn our system over to for "Control", and "regulation".
Siren: "We The People" baby boy, of course!
Me: "We The People" and centralized government are incompatible concepts.
Siren: I don't believe that is true. A government of the people, by the people and for the people is still a great concept and a worthy goal. Your point is registered and I shall end the conversation before it becomes unbearably obnoxious. Thank you for playing.
New comments are not allowed
Notice that the Siren begged out before having to defend her(?) assertion that a Soviet style dictatorship is not an evil thing so long as "mechanisms for control" remain with "we the people." Now this is the lefts fantasy, is it not? A benevolent dictator committed to justice and equality for all. It is a dangerous fantasy that has played out repeatedly and disastrously for millions of people throughout the world.
OK then, why is she wrong? Well for starters, by definition power and influence in centralized governments are, well, centralized in the hands of a few, or, with a dictator, one. Under such governments, again by definition, decentralized/"we the people" government doesn't exist. "We the people" might however be a useful propaganda slogan for the dictator.
So what if we have no power? We finally have selected a good and fair dictator who embodies the virtues of "we the people." Well perhaps, though not at all likely, but once that selection is made, there is no going back. And you will have a succession problem to deal with. Remember, you have chosen a dictator so by definition you have given up what power you have.
It is pure fantasy to believe that it will be the good and the just that will rise to power. Just as pedophiles are drawn to the teaching or preaching professions, the power hungry will be drawn to an empowered government. And the most skilled and most manipulative and the most narcissistic and the one best at consolidating power by whatever means necessary will rise to the top. And haven't we seen this over and over again throughout history to realize that the meek and humble and the just just (just wanted to use just twice in a row for the first time ever, sorry) won't make it to the top.
But alas, even a kind and just dictator would fail to make life wonderful for "we the people." Why? Try this thought experiment. Would New York City be better off today if there was a highly competent NYC food czar with dictatorial powers or with the present, nearly completely decentralized system of food procurement? Would a brilliant, competent, kind and just dictator be able to improve on the impossibly complex and diverse system that unfailingly delivers a mind numbing menu of foods to millions of people every day without anyone in charge. Now that is the true power and brilliance of "we the people" on display.
So if a kind and humble and competent dictator can't improve the food situation in just one American city, he won't be able to control and improve the lives of Americans. This is because the collective genius of "the people" will always exceed the genius of ANY one individual.
And lastly, we have a mechanism already that empowers "we the people." It is our Constitution and it will work if we use it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
It is important to note that the 'mechanism already that empowers "we the people."', the Constitution, does not define the power to be vested in the federal government but rather defines the limits of that power. The founders knew that the more power in Washington, the less power/freedom available to "the people".
I say we bring back Stalin's USSR and let her live there for a bit.
I wonder how she like that
North Korea must be perfect then, with it's "benevolent leader" (their words).
Would that not be the embodiment of the people's dictator?
Denis,
Thank you for proving my point of the inevitable obnoxiousness of comment responses that are as long as the original post...someone eventually references Nazis (or in this case pedophiles) to flog that poor dead horse!
You are certainly a lively guy.
rootriver - it is the typical smug arrogance with which you shut that debate down ("thanks for playing"), once a logical line of debate had been established by downtown brown, that makes your blog - and you - rather ordinary. However, callin Denis "lively" is a new approach.
I looked at rootriver's blog - kind of like Kay's but less swearing and more humor and intelligence. I wonder if that's her photo -
Thanks for visiting root. Not sure what makes it obnoxious to reference pedophilia in an effort to illustrate the self selective nature of job seekers, but you are free here to render your judgement. In my growing experience in debating liberals, I have noticed a tendency on their part to flee (or change the subject, use ad hominem attacks, stamp feet etc...) when confronted by challenging arguments. Thankfully I have my own venue to point this out. I am deeply sorry that my rebuttal to your fantasy of the good dictator exceeded your average bumper sticker, but some issues require a more thorough analysis. I invite you to defend your position especially if it rests on firmer ground than pure emotion.
Carefull Denis - she (he?) might have a PhD in "Advanced Republicanology" with a Masters in "Like Totally Futuremakingly Awesome Biomedical Engineering" from Gateway Technical College".
Coincidentally, the reporter at Caledonia Patch seems to share the same views as Siren about "of the people, by the people and for the people." I certainly wish they'd go back and actually read the Gettysburg address to understand the context in which Abe Lincoln made that statement.
Wow, I had to go over and actually read Siren's blog, because I just figured she had not said anything like "a Soviet style dictatorship is not an evil thing" as Denis has dishonestly asserted here on his blog.
I was of course correct, there is NOTHING of the kind in her post or subsequent comments. This is just another example of the Con's need to twist the facts to make their arguments. If you must lie to advance your thoughts, your thoughts are not advanced.
In light of my discovery of Denis' little twist of the truth his statement in the comments above is just too deliciously hypocritical:
"In my growing experience in debating liberals, I have noticed a tendency on their part to flee (or change the subject, use ad hominem attacks, stamp feet etc...) when confronted by challenging arguments."
Note to Denis: Maybe you should keep "the subject" of your arguments REAL.
Rand saw a centralized government as an evil thing (and don't ya imagine how being raised in Russia influenced her, I always did). I for one, don't see it as an evil or even a bad thing...but all that depends on the mechanisms for control or regulation.
Nice try Sean. The above direct quote from Siren is the proof. Since she mentioned centralized government and being raised in Russia in the same sentence, followed by a sentence indicating that centralized government isn't evil or bad. What more do you want Sean? One can infer from her comments that dictatorships per se are not evil, depending on the mechanisms for control. It is clear to anyone with reading comprehension skills that I was not suggesting that Siren approved of murderous dictatorships but rather was engaging in a fantasy of a good centralized/dictatorial government. Furthermore, Siren herself has since commented and did not have a problem with my characterization of her point of view. So you are wrong again. I suggest you stick to running in circles.
Earth to Denis, we've had a centralized government in the United States since the civil war.
That hardly equates to a soviet style dictatorship with no checks and balances and government of men, not laws. Or did I completely miss that we should be mourning the sequicentential of the demise of our republic this year?
I give you 9.8 for the rhetorical gymnastics you had to go through to accuse Siren of supporting tyranny based on her comments, with a 0.2 pt deduction for not pointing your toes.
I also give brownie style points for the double twisting move embodied in his ridiculus and irrelevant expression as follows; "Which of the following persons or people would you like to have their hands on the levers of your "Mechanism". Bernard Madoff? George W Bush?, Michelle Obama? Margaret Sanger?"
Post a Comment