We can't let morons be in charge anymore!!!!

Town Heretic

Out of Order
Hall of Fame
The average Joe [was that a pun on your part? "Joe Dredd"?] is not qualified to rule.
Almost always and says you, a fellow who likely would never have been afforded the opportunity for the education that affords him the vantage point from which to condescend but for a revolution sustained and accomplished at the hands of average men.

Or to borrow from a certain Bailey, this rabble you're talking about... they do most of the working and paying and living and dying in this world. Well, is it too much to have them work and pay and live and die without treating their lives as though they were a contemptible inconvenience to you?

Furthermore, even if he were qualified to rule, the average Joe is not equal to any other average Joe in his capacity. Some people are more qualified, more skilled, more knowledgable, more virtuous, etc. than other people.
Of course. We're equal in right and standing before the law, not in our particulars. Some men are smarter, some taller, some more compassionate, decent and possessing a greater humility than others. Any number of differences between men. And how we value the difference and the distinctions speaks to our understanding in a broader sense.

If you tell me that such people are in charge (because representative democracy), I'll tell you that they were not voted into office by such people, and they do not follow the wishes of such people, but pander to their "average" constituency.
I'll tell you that we elect men to govern who make representations of their philosophy and intent and if we aren't satisfied with how they go about the business of governing we retain the power to unseat them.

Do you want to defend democracy?
I defend the Republic, against enemies foreign and domestic, those who don't know better and those who should.

Then I'll point out to you one of the real results of democracy. Global warming is a political issue. If Judges were in charge, do you think it would be a political issue?
Who knows? I know the history of power without sufficient checks. It isn't pretty and it's hard enough to keep us in line with them.

You'll accuse me of speaking absurdly by appealing to a comic book system, but I just as easily could cite the Republic. The principle is basically the same. :idunno:
And a rape and consensual sex are essentially the same, from one perspective. But the differences are rather important.
 
Last edited:

republicanchick

New member
Oh. Then let me be more explicit. This, I say, would be a superior system to democracy (in which unequal people have an equal vote; such a system is inherently flawed...with all due respect, RC, my vote should not be equal to yours; my vote shouldn't even be worth 10 of yours. I'm much more qualified than you are), which actually would be for the people:

IMG]

not worth responding to
 

PureX

Well-known member
Almost always and says you, a fellow who likely would never have been afforded the opportunity for the education that affords him the vantage point from which to condescend but for a revolution sustained and accomplished at the hands of average men.

Or to borrow from a certain Bailey, this rabble you're talking about... they do most of the working and paying and living and dying in this world. Well, is it too much to have them work and pay and live and die without treating their lives as though they were a contemptible inconvenience to you?

Of course. We're equal in right and standing before the law, not in our particulars. Some men are smarter, some taller, some more compassionate, decent and possessing a greater humility than others. Any number of differences between men. And how we value the difference and the distinctions speaks to our understanding in a broader sense.

I'll tell you that we elect men to govern who make representations of their philosophy and intent and if we aren't satisfied with how they go about the business of governing we retain the power to unseat them.

I defend the Republic, against enemies foreign and domestic, those who don't know better and those who should.

Who knows? I know the history of power without sufficient checks. It isn't pretty and it's hard enough to keep us in line with them.
I agree on every count. And I trust the judgment of my fellow citizens, in most instances. I think the only problem we're having right now in maintaining a functional democratic republic is that we're just too big, and too complex, as a nation. We're too big for the sort of system our founders envisioned, to work. Yet even that problem could be overcome if we had a better, more thorough and articulated set of national Prime Directives (we call it the Constitution). Unfortunately, it will be impossible for us to repair that oversight, now, as there are too many factions among us pulling in too many different directions for us to reasonably reassess such a fundamental document and determine a cohesive set of directives to follow for the future.

I do believe that humanity has stumbled on the solution, however, and it is a democratic republic, being held in check by a set of unbreakable principals guaranteeing rights and liberties for all, and limiting power to any.
 
Top