In charge - means job needs administration and management.
Privileged people are more suited for the job.
I understand Privileged means they have connections to get the
job done, can delegate the work and are able to make hard decisions.
Educated people should be consulted to make decisions.
It also depends on person to person. You don't want corrupt and
selfish people at the top. And educated people with potential may
not deliver. QUICK_EDIT
History has shown that no matter who is in charge they will ultimately become corrupt or engineer inequalities into the system they preside over, leading to abuses of power and unfair accumulation of wealth. There is no solution to this except constant change/renewal the old fashioned way, pitchforks and torches...
Every political system is fundamentally designed to give a certain group of people power over others, and then justify means of protecting that power. That power creates unequal opportunity at the least, and total cultural/economic/social distortion, but the reverse can also be true, where wealth alone creates the political power by its ability to undermine or influence civilians and leaders alike.
The media is supposed to be the third eye of sorts, the disinterested other party in search of the truth, but that gets captured almost immediately by moneyed interests or co-opted by the very powers they should be criticising. Only independent journalism maintains any semblance of fairness or honesty, because the barrier to entry is so low, that there's very little leverage that can exerted on them by those in power as a whole.
All successful political systems over the long term must resemble the family structure, where there are divisions of power, clear loyalties, and a bond that goes beyond circumstance. Any system that deviates from this has a limited lifespan, and/or requires massive amounts of cruelty to maintain. _________________ http://www.moddb.com/mods/scorched-earth-ra2-mod-with-smart-ai QUICK_EDIT
You know it's fucked when I have to agree with g-e. That aside, he is actually right this time. All systems breed corruption for those in power, and it doesn't need a long period of time for this to happen either. A simple refresh of the system, however, isn't usually enough to stem corruption's grasp. There's not really a solution since humans themselves are, by and large, shitty. _________________ Discord: princess_marisa
Steam QUICK_EDIT
A simple refresh of the system, however, isn't usually enough to stem corruption's grasp.
I will use the analogy of hoarding wealth here, when wealth is physical (as it was until very recently in history) there was always a location for it, and to some extent an obviousness to it. This always meant that a population knew where that wealth was concentrated, and if sufficiently pissed off, could raise a feeding frenzy army of the poor to sack them. This would then redistribute the wealth downwards, not necessarily fairly or equally, but it would be more fair and more equal for a moment, and importantly would stimulate the local economy.
Political power can be viewed in a similar way in monarchial or presidential countries with broad executive powers, one only needs to depose the president or pseudo-king to distribute the power back to the people temporarily. During the period between rulers the power vacuum allows the people to quickly accumulate a little buffer, or get things done they couldn't under a formal regime. People learn how to live in the cracks, just like they did under communism. _________________ http://www.moddb.com/mods/scorched-earth-ra2-mod-with-smart-ai QUICK_EDIT
mm, I'd have to disagree with power distribution. It won't work as well as you might want. The people to whom you'd return the power are the same place politicians came from. Ignorant, greedy people product ignorant, greedy politicians. The same stupid bullshit would simply cycle again and nothing of value would actually improve.
Maybe I'm just too goddamn cynical but I don't believe in humanity to do good things regardless of who the leaders are or... are not. _________________ Discord: princess_marisa
Steam QUICK_EDIT
History has shown that no matter who is in charge they will ultimately become corrupt or engineer inequalities into the system they preside over, leading to abuses of power and unfair accumulation of wealth. There is no solution to this except constant change/renewal the old fashioned way, pitchforks and torches...
Every political system is fundamentally designed to give a certain group of people power over others, and then justify means of protecting that power assurance obsèques. That power creates unequal opportunity at the least, and total cultural/economic/social distortion, but the reverse can also be true, where wealth alone creates the political power by its ability to undermine or influence civilians and leaders alike.
The media is supposed to be the third eye of sorts, the disinterested other party in search of the truth, but that gets captured almost immediately by moneyed interests or co-opted by the very powers they should be criticising. Only independent journalism maintains any semblance of fairness or honesty, because the barrier to entry is so low, that there's very little leverage that can exerted on them by those in power as a whole.
All successful political systems over the long term must resemble the family structure, where there are divisions of power, clear loyalties, and a bond that goes beyond circumstance. Any system that deviates from this has a limited lifespan, and/or requires massive amounts of cruelty to maintain.
Power, maybe, but we must not forget that it is the people who hold it. The chosen one is only a simple performer. QUICK_EDIT
I actually used to be against the idea of 'government(s)', a land-leader without ministers is much better (in that case, it was the same system of leading a country from the ancient age such as ancient egypt and greece, there was nothing and even almost exactly like a 'government' that time.
Well, the idea was started by the so-called 'great' britain several centuries ago (no more than 5-7 centuries ago). _________________ If you are a MetalHead (Heavy Metal Fan) and don't want to be a metalhead, Just remove your metal ball from your head. �:p .
QUICK_EDIT
Yeah, feudalism was great. (sarcasm) Common law amognst lots of lower class people is good, it protects us because there is power in numbers. Having a system where local land owners have control is terrible and lead to all sorts of abuse throughout history. QUICK_EDIT
History has shown that no matter who is in charge they will ultimately become corrupt or engineer inequalities into the system they preside over, leading to abuses of power and unfair accumulation of wealth.
Monarchy is the most efficient in the basic functioning of govt, and least prone to being co-opted by a non-state oligarchy/plutarcy (aka internationalists/globalists)...
The situation we have right now in the west, isn't whether we have democracy or rights, but that there is an entire class of elites, many of whom either don't live in the country, or don't pay much in the way of taxes there, who have immense influence over both what laws are passed, and what social direction the country takes. The elites congregate in groups like the CFR to maintain institutional dominance, and hide their own complicity, as well as work in a team to be more effective.
Consequently this is why the cabal loves brutal dictators, and hates good leaders, it's the level of influence they have. It's a demonstration of their frustration to manipulate them. _________________ http://www.moddb.com/mods/scorched-earth-ra2-mod-with-smart-ai QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 Location: North America Posts: You cannot comprehend...
Posted: Sun Sep 29, 2019 2:24 am Post subject:
Re: Should privileged people be in charge or educated ones?
Quote:
This topic has nothing to do with Royalty Systems
I made this topic not to go against Royalty Systems
The Windsors are both privileged and educated. But they're also satanic pedophiles. They've been in charge for generations. They don't let commoners take charge, so your thread is kinda moot. _________________ Destroy to create. All for the hunt to dominate!
In charge - means job needs administration and management.
Privileged people are more suited for the job.
I understand Privileged means they have connections to get the
job done, can delegate the work and are able to make hard decisions.
Educated people should be consulted to make decisions.
It also depends on person to person Impression autocollant Antibes. You don't want corrupt and
selfish people at the top. And educated people with potential may
not deliver.
You may be right, but sometimes you have to bribe a little to achieve your goals. QUICK_EDIT
people that mirrors the will of the people should make decisions, that is predicated on the notion that a country belongs to its citizens, and whatever good and bad consequences will be enjoyed/suffered by them; therefore it is a self learning process. In ancient times it was loosely enforced by the ruler adopting the pure spirit, or patreon god of its people; it was an imperfect solution however _________________ Did you know that if you have 2 apples and you eat 3 you get an IE and all the universe explodes? QUICK_EDIT
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
Should privileged people be in charge or educated ones?
