Food prices

[AnalogPackrat]

Nah...

Great retort.

Even the "we're a republic not a democracy" crowd usually concedes that the government they implemented is more democratic than being rules by a monarch actoss the ocean. Unless sodderboy was literally referring to the radio show, I guess?

If you cannot fathom why direct democracy was not chosen over the alternatives (like the Republic we have), then you're lost. But your strawmen are duly noted.

Ah yes, that endless succession of revolutions in America. I forgot we rewrote the constitution in 2014 after the famous toppling of the Statue of Liberty.

First, he wasn't only referring to US history, and second, not all dangerous revolutions befin with mass violence and civil war, but they often end that way. Crack open a history book someday.

Name one person this happened to.

Gina Carano, Matthew Yglesias, Adam Rubenstein, and numerous doctors who tried to do the right thing for their patients during Covid even if it meant opposing "The Science (tm)" as wrongly espoused by Fauci, Birk, and other bureaucrats.

Off not caring I guess

Why? Because you agreed with those posters?

 

[living sounds]

Every revolution replaced one group of goons with another, eventually, ruling over a cowed proletariat.

Unfortunately, I have to mostly agree. Any long term progress is at least overlayed with a cyclical curve that

We are really living it in the states now.

There was a brief time in the postwar era when ordinary people had a non-trivial influence on the political process and got a not-insignificant share of the pie in many western countries, including the US.

That was the time of the biggest government, and "good enough for government work" wasn't ment as a joke back then.

However, the type or size of government isn't really the underlying factor. The problem is institutionalized corruption, and you get this whenever there is a high concentration of money/power and a lack of (equal application) of the rule of law and actual democratic control (in that the majority of people voting in their own interest determining policy).

It's a problem that affects every country, and it has been there throughout history.

Here in Germany the big banks and the very rich routinely get away with massive (tax) fraud, to the detriment of everybody else. And corporate lobbying creates laws that serve these special interests in many small ways, but add up to feed the wealth pump from the bottom to the top.

It's been happening in plain sight for decades, and it's been baffling to be for probably the last 20 years or so that seemingly hardly anybody in politics is truly adresssing the problem. I always think it has to get worse first, before it gets better.

But it would be nice if we could do away with all the culture war distractions and actually focus on this problem of problems... After all, it has worked before (although it tended to take a few decades).

 

[living sounds]

Ah yes, that endless succession of revolutions in America. I forgot we rewrote the Constitution in 2014 after the famous toppling of the Statue of Liberty.

Actuall, the US was pretty close to a Communist revolution a 100 years ago, according to historians. The First Red Scare was not baseless fearmongering in that respect. This actually started a longer term process of change (often out of self-interest of the elite) that lead to the liberal consensus era.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Unfortunately, I have to mostly agree. Any long term progress is at least overlayed with a cyclical curve that

The depth of the cycles can be mitigated by an informed and pro-active electorate in a Constitutional Republic with a government that is kept in check.

There was a brief time in the postwar era when ordinary people had a non-trivial influence on the political process and got a not-insignificant share of the pie in many western countries, including the US.

Speaking for the US, it hasn't been only a brief time.

That was the time of the biggest government, and "good enough for government work" wasn't ment as a joke back then.

Again, speaking for the US you would be incorrect, both by per-capita spending and per-capita gov employment.



Hard to find more recent data.

However, the type or size of government isn't really the underlying factor. The problem is institutionalized corruption, and you get this whenever there is a high concentration of money/power and a lack of (equal application) of the rule of law and actual democratic control (in that the majority of people voting in their own interest determining policy).

Size is critical. In our "checks and balances" Republic the executive branch is orders of magnitude larger than the legislative and judicial branches. Clearly these smaller branches cannot possibly check all of the unconstitutional and/or corrupt doings of the massive executive branch.

It's a problem that affects every country, and it has been there throughout history.

And it can be mitigated by keeping government small.

Here in Germany the big banks and the very rich routinely get away with massive (tax) fraud, to the detriment of everybody else. And corporate lobbying creates laws that serve these special interests in many small ways, but add up to feed the wealth pump from the bottom to the top.

Concentration of power in big banks is another problem. We used to have government that was up to the task of trust busting.

It's been happening in plain sight for decades, and it's been baffling to be for probably the last 20 years or so that seemingly hardly anybody in politics is truly adresssing the problem. I always think it has to get worse first, before it gets better.

Well, what recourse do the people have when they've allowed their government to become too powerful?

But it would be nice if we could do away with all the culture war distractions and actually focus on this problem of problems... After all, it has worked before (although it tended to take a few decades).

The "culture war" as it pertains to appropriate types, forms, and sizes of government and limits on government roles and authority is not a distraction. It is key to avoiding worse near-future events.

 

[jabe]

If you cannot fathom why direct democracy was not chosen over the alternatives

Is  that what you think his "Democracy Now!" quip was all about? So much for "clear"

he wasn't only referring to US history

Exact quote I relied to:

Every revolution replaced one group of goons with another, eventually, ruling over a cowed proletariat. We are really living it in the states now.

Gina Carano

Just starred in Terror on the Prairie released by the Daily Wire. It tanked, of course, because the Daily Wire audience thought a Western starring a women was "woke". Cancel culture!

Matthew Yglesias

Voluntarily left Vox to make a Substack.

Adam Rubenstein

Who?

numerous doctors who tried to do the right thing for their patients during Covid even if it meant opposing "The Science (tm)" as wrongly espoused by Fauci, Birk, and other bureaucrats

"Numerous"? What number would that be? Meanwhile I see you're still trying to cancel Fauci.

 

[jabe]

you're lost

Crack open a history book someday.

So much for decorum...

please avoid ad hominem which is against the rules. (#4).

JR

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Is  that what you think his "Democracy Now!" quip was all about? So much for "clear"

Exact quote I relied to:

Sure, "we are living it in the US now" does not exclude past events in other places, in fact it implies that.

Just starred in Terror on the Prairie released by the Daily Wire. It tanked, of course, because the Daily Wire audience thought a Western starring a women was "woke". Cancel culture!


Voluntarily left Vox to make a Substack.


Who?

Use the search, Luke.

"Numerous"? What number would that be?

Any number greater than zero. But you're happy with any number, apparently.

Meanwhile I see you're still trying to cancel Fauci.

Fauci voluntarily retired. That doesn't excuse him for crimes and perjury before Congress. Kind of at a different level than the cases I mentioned, dontchathink?

 

[AnalogPackrat]

So much for decorum...

An observation and a recommendation.

 

[living sounds]

The depth of the cycles can be mitigated by an informed and pro-active electorate in a Constitutional Republic with a government that is kept in check.

Doesn't work that way. People get complacent, the next generation has different goals and it's deja vu all over again.

Speaking for the US, it hasn't been only a brief time.

A few decades in the 20th century. The country was controlled by wealthy land owners and industrialists most of the time.

Again, speaking for the US you would be incorrect, both by per-capita spending and per-capita gov employment.

This is not what I was talking about. During that time the government employed the best and the brightest. Again, it doesn't necessarily have to be that way.

Size is critical. In our "checks and balances" Republic the executive branch is orders of magnitude larger than the legislative and judicial branches. Clearly these smaller branches cannot possibly check all of the unconstitutional and/or corrupt doings of the massive executive branch.

The problem is corruption of government, not by government. They special interests influence legislation, the selection of judges, the outcomes of elections. This is not caused by the size of government, but by the concentration of capital in the hands of a very small elite.

You need to look at the influence, not at the nominal position.

And it can be mitigated by keeping government small.

Haiti has a small (weak) government. Do you think that's better than the big government that drove development of computers and the internet and sucessfully sent people to the moon?

Concentration of power in big banks is another problem. We used to have government that was up to the task of trust busting.

Long time ago. Any system gets unstable over long enough time frames. But it's cyclical, so at some point there will very likely again be a government capable of doing that.

Well, what recourse do the people have when they've allowed their government to become too powerful?

Get active. It might take a lot of time, sweat and tears though.

The "culture war" as it pertains to appropriate types, forms, and sizes of government and limits on government roles and authority is not a distraction.

The "culture war" in its colloquial meaning has nothing to do with those things.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Doesn't work that way. People get complacent, the next generation has different goals and it's deja vu all over again.

Only if parents and grandparents fail to instill these values into their progeny. Of course when government helps destroy the nuclear family things tend to accelerate in the wrong direction.

A few decades in the 20th century. The country was controlled by wealthy land owners and industrialists most of the time.

According to your reading of history.

This is not what I was talking about. During that time the government employed the best and the brightest.

Did it? Or did AT&T, IBM, Hewlett-Packard, and many others employ the best and brightest?

Again, it doesn't necessarily have to be that way.

What does that mean? You want only gov to employ "the best and brightest?"

The problem is corruption of government, not by government.

It's both. And both are exacerbated by size.

They special interests influence legislation, the selection of judges, the outcomes of elections. This is not caused by the size of government, but by the concentration of capital in the hands of a very small elite.

I didn't say the cause of corruption was size, rather that increased size allows for more corruption, partly because it is impossible to monitor an organization that large.

You need to look at the influence, not at the nominal position.

And you need to open your mind to the bigger picture.

Haiti has a small (weak) government.

Haiti's history is rife with corruption and coup d'etat. It was never stable, unlike it's neighbor, Dominican Republic, which has done much better in recent decades. You might look at why that is so.

Do you think that's better than the big government that drove development of computers and the internet and sucessfully sent people to the moon?

Government didn't do those things without private companies doing most of the work.

Long time ago. Any system gets unstable over long enough time frames.

Some systems moreso than others. The design matters. The implementation and maintenance matter, as well.

But it's cyclical, so at some point there will very likely again be a government capable of doing that.

I don't buy the "it's cyclical" thing because everything has ups and downs. The causes and the mitigating factors are what's important.

Get active. It might take a lot of time, sweat and tears though.

Preventative maintenance. The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance

The "culture war" in its colloquial meaning has nothing to do with those things.

Sure it does. It's at the root of it. The undermining of the pillars of our government, our national values, and our culture are directly connected.

 

[Tubetec]

So theres a pretty clear parallel to me between post colonial Europe and USA ,
were facing an influx ,
Europe from the war torn middle east and Africa , America from its southern border ,
in both cases the scramble led to revolt ,puppet governments , then systematic stripping of resources , now they want to leave to come to the promised land .

We created ships and armies and set out to conquer the world , under the guise of saving the savages from their own devices , the reality is we systematically destroyed civilisations that were in fact sustainable and autonomous , and created a world economy teetering on the verge of collapse .
And some still have the temerity and neck to call this progress?

Id say the best bet now is if Fauci is loaded up on the Gulfstream III out of Langley and set down in the Hague , at the war crimes tribunal , crimes against humanity should be written on the charge sheet .

 

[volker]

Even the "we're a republic not a democracy" crowd usually concedes that the government they implemented is more democratic than being ruled by a monarch actoss the ocean. Unless sodderboy was literally referring to the radio show, I guess?

I always wonder at what point the penny is finally going to drop and they realize that democracy and republic are not mutually exclusive concepts.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

I always wonder at what point the penny is finally going to drop and they realize that democracy and republic are not mutually exclusive concepts.

None of us has said they were. But they are also not the same. I wonder when "they" who continue returning to this point will understand the important differences and why they exist.

 

[jabe]

I wonder when "they" who continue returning to this point will understand the important differences and why they exist.

"They" understand just fine. "They" also understand that "we're a republic not a democracy" has become a common refrain of some conservative Americans to attempt to justify unethical, undemocratic behavior. Meanwhile in general conversation, the distinction is mostly moot: Democracy or Republic: What's the difference?

I always wonder at what point the penny is finally going to drop and they realize that democracy and republic are not mutually exclusive concepts.

The thing that tickles me about the "republic not a democracy" crowd is how freely they call others communist, socialist, totalitarian, authoritarian, and so on. But if one dares refer to the United States as a democracy, suddenly labels need to have ultra-precise definitions...

 

[living sounds]

Only if parents and grandparents fail to instill these values into their progeny. Of course when government helps destroy the nuclear family things tend to accelerate in the wrong direction.


According to your reading of history.


Did it? Or did AT&T, IBM, Hewlett-Packard, and many others employ the best and brightest?


What does that mean? You want only gov to employ "the best and brightest?"


It's both. And both are exacerbated by size.


I didn't say the cause of corruption was size, rather that increased size allows for more corruption, partly because it is impossible to monitor an organization that large.


And you need to open your mind to the bigger picture.


Haiti's history is rife with corruption and coup d'etat. It was never stable, unlike it's neighbor, Dominican Republic, which has done much better in recent decades. You might look at why that is so.


Government didn't do those things without private companies doing most of the work.


Some systems moreso than others. The design matters. The implementation and maintenance matter, as well.

I don't buy the "it's cyclical" thing because everything has ups and downs. The causes and the mitigating factors are what's important.


Preventative maintenance. The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance


Sure it does. It's at the root of it. The undermining of the pillars of our government, our national values, and our culture are directly connected.

Individuals behaviour is influenced by circumstances. So bad parenting can be caused by cyclical more general generational effects (like boomers bringing up a a generation of latchkey children) and the effects of stress and immiseration. A nuclear family is not sine qua none for a functioning society, read the book "The Dawn of Everything" demonstrating the broad range of human society over millenia and even larger periods of human history.

We seem to be talking wires crossed here, with you stressing individual responsibility and me illustrating the effects of circumstances and more general trends. Individual responsibility is a very useful concept for a working society, but it doesn't have much bearing on explaining long-term causes and effects how societies develop. The interesting question is why people abdicate or simply loose personal responsibility, and "because of government" isn't an explanation for the phonomenom. But the fact that people loose their influence because of a society drifting towards inequality and instability due to the lack of negative feedback is an explanation.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Individuals behaviour is influenced by circumstances. So bad parenting can be caused by cyclical more general generational effects (like boomers bringing up a a generation of latchkey children) and the effects of stress and immiseration. A nuclear family is not sine qua none for a functioning society, read the book "The Dawn of Everything" demonstrating the broad range of human society over millenia and even larger periods of human history.

I am inclined to defend my latchkey parent (working single mother after my father died). She was a great parent while I may be biased.

I had to look up "immiseration", now I need to forget it.

In Marxist theory and Marxian economics, the immiseration thesis, also referred to as emiseration thesis, is derived from Karl Marx's analysis of economic development in capitalism, implying that the nature of capitalist production stabilizes real wages, reducing wage growth relative to total value creation in the economy, leading to the increasing power of capital in society.

We seem to be talking wires crossed here, with you stressing individual responsibility and me illustrating the effects of circumstances and more general trends. Individual responsibility is a very useful concept for a working society, but it doesn't have much bearing on explaining long-term causes and effects how societies develop. The interesting question is why people abdicate or simply loose personal responsibility, and "because of government" isn't an explanation for the phonomenom. But the fact that people loose their influence because of a society drifting towards inequality and instability due to the lack of negative feedback is an explanation.

situation normal

JR

 

[living sounds]

I had to look up "immiseration", now I need to forget it.


situation normal

JR

Looks like there's a Marxist meaning to the term, but I am using it in the sociological sense, where it describes the decline of the relative wage. Here's the statistics for the US (as can be observed, it's currently roughly at Gilded Age levels):

 

[JohnRoberts]

Looks like there's a Marxist meaning to the term, but I am using it in the sociological sense, where it describes the decline of the relative wage. Here's the statistics for the US (as can be observed, it's currently roughly at Gilded Age levels):

Promoting class enmity is a well known marxist strategy.
===
Global wealth is not a zero sum game, we have seen trade and rule of law (like property rights) create and expand wealth world wide. This creation and expansion of wealth is not smooth. Millions have been raised out of poverty. At the same time millions have lost cushy low tech jobs.

Since I have been paying attention I have seen the world's low cost factory floor move from Japan, to Korea, and then to China. Now China is getting a little expensive and manufacturing is shifting to places like India and Viet Nam, but these are like a side step. IMO the next frontier for low cost manufacturing is Africa and growth there is challenged by multiple factors, but I doubt they can resist the global economic tide for very long.

[edit- South America was predicted to be "next" a few decades ago, and multiple international companies invested there expecting the tide to come in. As I recall Alps was building pots in Brazil, etc. So far as I can see the SA wave hasn't happened. /edit]

JR

PS: I like to share how in the early days of America, we became the low cost factory for "borrowed" european IP.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

"They" understand just fine.

Apparently not given your message below.

"They" also understand that "we're a republic not a democracy" has become a common refrain of some conservative Americans to attempt to justify unethical, undemocratic behavior.

Like the Senate and the Electoral College?

Meanwhile in general conversation, the distinction is mostly moot: Democracy or Republic: What's the difference?

A better article can be found here

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/what-is-the-difference-between-a-democracy-and-a-republic.html

The thing that tickles me about the "republic not a democracy" crowd is how freely they call others communist, socialist, totalitarian, authoritarian, and so on. But if one dares refer to the United States as a democracy, suddenly labels need to have ultra-precise definitions...

Maybe if the difference were understood it wouldn't have to be reiterated so often. Tyranny of the majority is not better than what we have. Just look at what has been done to CA with it's ballot initiatives and referendum. Direct democracy is a big part of the failure of that once great state.

 

[sodderboy]

I'm trying not to veer, but jabe-muh-man, if you were a lawyer, what would happen to you if you decided to represent Donald J. Trump in any of the multitude of the State charges against him? If the IRS, your county tax assessor, "media journalists", doxing, or twitter don't finish-off you and your savings, Project 65 will colonoscopize all your past cases and report every missing comma to the FL Bar, pressure your firm, pressure your clients to cancel you. You will be lucky to get a paralegal gig in Alaska if not indicted yourself.
Would the same happen to you if you decided to represent Hunter S. Buyden in his?

Some US Americans are rotting in DC solitary without due process, their families destitute, while others, fully identified, who stood right next to them committing the same supposed "crimes", are walking free protected by the State and defended in the corrupt media. To accept this as normal "requires the willful suspension of disbelief."

here let me google that for you. . . and forget deTocqueville, read some Jefferson, bro!

"Those who do not remember the past (or are unknowledgeable of it, I will add politely) are condemned to repeat it." C. Santana

Mike