Where Did We Go Wrong?

[pljames]

Where did we as a nation go wrong to allow our government to be we the government and not we the people? I see our democracy crumble and our elected official just talk and we are going down the tubes. The sad thing is we all will go together good and bad like it or not. What happen to morality caring rules and of course respect? Paul

[LaurieAG]

Where did we as a nation go wrong to allow our government to be we the government and not we the people? I see our democracy crumble and our elected official just talk and we are going down the tubes. The sad thing is we all will go together good and bad like it or not. What happen to morality caring rules and of course respect? Paul

It's not just the US Paul.

 

It's to do with the separation of the powers and electing too many trained amoral agents for third parties (Lawyers).

[Kriminal99]

For one we went wrong by not stamping people's IQ's on their forehead. Second we need to identify what it is that causes certain people to amass much more knowledge for the same level of IQ, and put those people in charge of everything. I know the solution to every problem in law, economics, government and just about anything else you put in front of me. I can mathematically prove that these solutions are correct, and convince anyone who doesn't use debate fallacies or other forms of passive aggressiveness that my solutions are correct.

 

But when I try to explain them to anyone or do anything about it, every idiot thinks they are on equal ground with me and that since they don't know everything I don't either. They decide this means they don't even have to listen to people like me.

 

In the US especially, there is mass denial on the subject of intelligence. When we don't pretend that IQ doesn't matter at all, we are making up fake measures like EQ to justify why people with lower IQs might be able to compete at the same level.

 

The end result of this is that incapable people are chosen to be arbitrators of knowledge for the general populace. People who are genetically inferior, and lack the reasoning skills to ever figure out anything, solve anything, or introduce genuinely novel knowledge. It's in government, it's in academia, it's everywhere.

 

The most effective form of government is benevolent dictatorship. You want to check and balance that? Easy. Allow the rest of the government the ability to unanimously decide to assassinate the dictator.

[Buffy]

Oh there's no guarantee with IQ. I know it's your thing Krim, but lots of smart people screw up badly.

 

Just look at Robert McNamera: Harvard grad who brought in a bunch of top flight MBA's to run the Vietnam war:

McNamara was the original bean-counter — a man who knew the cost of everything but the worth of nothing.

 

History is full of jerks and saints with high-IQs that couldn't manage or govern their way out of a paper bag.

 

Now at the same time, you want to compare Obama's IQ to Dubya, be my guest, and I'll agree with the IQ/Governance tie there, but correlation isn't causation.

 

Unfortunately the real argument against an oligarchy where only "qualified" people can vote is that they do in fact exploit those who are disenfranchised: the "benevolent" part of "benevolent dictatorship" rarely lasts.

 

And that brings us back to the OP: what's gone wrong is that we do in fact have such an oligarchy of the moneyed classes who have managed to equate dollars with influence as a legitimate method of governance, and letting corporations act as people.

 

Jefferson's notion that we should educate everyone so that they can participate intelligently in our governance has thus become a key stealth issue of right-wing ideology: school vouchers are an insidious mechanism to weaken public education and thus reduce or eliminate the influence of the lower classes on governance. It also ends up keeping the high IQ folk in the lower classes from advancing to become influential.

 

 

If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator, :phones:

Buffy

[lawcat]

The root cause of all problems is slavery in the USA. That's where it all went wrong and we are suffering the after effects to this day. Here is the reasoning:

 

The closer the representative gvt is to people, the more fair it is. Thus the smaller the governed unit, like neighborhood, village, city, the more fair the govt is because it better connects with, and represents the will of the people; the less it deals with and thus there is less at risk, it also poses a lesser threat.

 

To that end confederacy in the USA is the right system--it is closer to people, there is less risk of abuse, there is less danger. But that all fell through in 1861 when North attacked South. Any freedom to political self determination of people and States was crushed in 1865 when North defeated South. Political will of the people was crushed by force, and today no State in the USA is politically free--it is simply an administrative unit of the fed govt.

 

And all that happened because of the slavery and racism. If it was not for slavery and racism, North would have no ideological or moral grounds to crush the political right to self determination of the South.

 

Now we are stuck with a huge federal bloated government that gets more money than god, that is a danger domestically and internationally, and no one can do a darn thing about it cause no one is free anny longer.

 

And they are creating the same monster in Europe, one govt, bypassing the referendums and will of the people, having appointed unelected officials pass laws and regulations for all of Europe, and herding everyone under one umbrella.

Edited January 25, 2013 by lawcat

[pljames]

Kriminal99,

In history past has there ever been a benevolent dictator? And does most folks under that dictator agree or disagree with his policies? Even Lucifer disagreed with God and most dictators are killed because of the disagreeing population? Paul

[Rade]

The root cause of all problems is slavery in the USA. That's where it all went wrong and we are suffering the after effects to this day.

If our Constitution had banned slavery from the start, the southern states in 1860's would have had no ideological or economic reason to leave the union. They would have fine tuned states rights and local government issues to advance the country as a whole.

[Rade]

In history past has there ever been a benevolent dictator? And does most folks under that dictator agree or disagree with his policies?

modified from internet.....Forty years ago Singapore had a rapidly growing impoverished population and an incredibly sluggish economy. In 1965 Lee Kuan Yew took over leadership of the city as Prime Minister using the government model of benevolent dictator. By 1985 the economy grew eight fold, per capita income grew fourfold, and the percentage of those living in poverty dropped to low 0.3%. He saw the problems his country faced and he passed the legislation necessary to instigate positive change. He cracked down on drug trafficking by making the offense punishable by death. He could do these things because there were no other voting bodies with the power to stand in the way."

 

From what I read the benevolent dictator government approach of Lee Kuan Yew had both supporters in Singapore and those that disagree with some policy, but overall the support was positive.

[arkain101]

For one we went wrong by not stamping people's IQ's on their forehead. Second we need to identify what it is that causes certain people to amass much more knowledge for the same level of IQ, and put those people in charge of everything. I know the solution to every problem in law, economics, government and just about anything else you put in front of me. I can mathematically prove that these solutions are correct, and convince anyone who doesn't use debate fallacies or other forms of passive aggressiveness that my solutions are correct.

 

But when I try to explain them to anyone or do anything about it, every idiot thinks they are on equal ground with me and that since they don't know everything I don't either. They decide this means they don't even have to listen to people like me.

 

In the US especially, there is mass denial on the subject of intelligence. When we don't pretend that IQ doesn't matter at all, we are making up fake measures like EQ to justify why people with lower IQs might be able to compete at the same level.

 

The end result of this is that incapable people are chosen to be arbitrators of knowledge for the general populace. People who are genetically inferior, and lack the reasoning skills to ever figure out anything, solve anything, or introduce genuinely novel knowledge. It's in government, it's in academia, it's everywhere.

 

The most effective form of government is benevolent dictatorship. You want to check and balance that? Easy. Allow the rest of the government the ability to unanimously decide to assassinate the dictator.

 

 

IQ is entirely relative to your sense of self-esteem. Stability. Security. Physiology. And so forth.

 

Anyone with a high IQ can make mistakes that lead to experiences of trauma that leave them being observed as having a low IQ.

 

True we need knowledge to test IQ.

 

But my point is this.. IQ fluctuates.

 

The Ego world is out of control.. and people worry about having open minds, when we also need to learn to have open hearts.

Edited January 27, 2013 by arkain101