Go Ahead, Just Believe...

philman_36 ^ | 11-30-04 | philman_36

[philman_36]

For consideration and comment.

[iconoclast]

I agree, but you'd have to have a political party that gives a sh!t to do anything about it.

[philman_36]

I agree, but you'd have to have a political party that gives a sh!t to do anything about it.
My personal belief is that the political party in power at the moment recognizes the Bureaucracy for what it is (the true power in DC) and simply works with it.
Some of the actions of the political parties seem to be nothing more than appeasement of the beast for the moment so that it doesn't devour the party in office.

[silverdog]

Just to make sure I got it right: the actions of this huge omnipotent 'Bureaucracy" are both unified and conspiratorial?

[Izzy Dunne]

there is a movement, with all of the "each vote counts" hullabaloo and the calls for the removal of the Electoral College

The 2004 American League Championship Series was won by the Yankees:
10-07
03-01
19-08
04-06
04-05
02-04
03-10
______
45-41

The Yankees scored 4 more runs than the Red Sox.

[philman_36]

Just to make sure I got it right: the actions of this huge omnipotent 'Bureaucracy" are both unified and conspiratorial?
I see you're the designated "Scoffing Official".
Carry on...without me, of course.

[philman_36]

You've infected me.

[xp38]

Is there a union for "Scoffing Officials"?

[Copernicus]

If bureaucracy scares you think how you will feel when you study NGO's (Non Government Organizations) which are privatized outsourced bureaucracy by another name.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving, for example, is heavily funded by government grants (in at least one state-North Carolina) but operates as a private non-profit lobby for every feel good form of government management it can feasibly support.

Thus, checkpoints, seatbelt laws, child safety seats, etc.( regardless of public perceptions of their value) are all supported by a quasi-government organization lobbying government for implementation.

Any honest real market need would not require support from a government treasury not to mention conflict of interest aspects. (Should an organization which benefits from government grants be allowed to advocate positions that clearly benefit government bureaucracies?)

Best regards,

[Lou L]

that peril is Bureaucracy

Some might argue that the Founders purposely created a form of government that wouldn't be subject to the whims and mob mentality of a democracy. By doing so, they created a government that has been more or less stable for better than 225 years. How many other countries can really say that?

While I don't think the Founders had an inefficient bureaucracy in mind, the stability part is certainly there.

[philman_36]

Is there a union for "Scoffing Officials"?
There probably is. There is a union for just about everything else...

[philman_36]

If bureaucracy scares you think how you will feel when you study NGO's (Non Government Organizations) which are privatized outsourced bureaucracy by another name.
Been there, done that. The UN has the greatest number of associated NGOs working with them by far! That should give folks a clue about the UN, yet it doesn't and the clueless drive on.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving...
They're operational in Texas too. They were the big reason we got our BAC raised. Don't know about federal funding down here.
...conflict of interest aspects.
Those abound when they shouldn't exist at all.
So much for nepotism laws. /smartalec mode
Should an organization which benefits from government grants be allowed to advocate positions that clearly benefit government bureaucracies?
Rhetorical? If not...Hell NO!

Best regards
And to you as well.

[OldFriend]

Not to be picky.....but it's a representative democracy.

[philman_36]

How many other countries can really say that?
Just a guess...none? (just kidding!)

While I don't think the Founders had an inefficient bureaucracy in mind, the stability part is certainly there.
Faint comfort if all of the liberties they fought to ensure us are taken away in an endless, mindless paper trail by robotic, bureaucratic drones.

[philman_36]

Not to be picky.....but it's a representative democracy.
Show me! If the Founding Fathers created a representative "democracy" then you should have information, or should be able to show me the information.
Keep in mind that "democratic principals/elements" does NOT a Democracy make.

As an FYI, look here for The World Fact Book 2002 by the CIA. Scroll down to "Government type" and then get back to me when you finish. Be sure to pick on that as well and it will bring you to a list of countries. The US is listed as a "Constitution-based federal republic; strong democratic tradition".
Give me something, anything, from any founding documents/writings to convince me that America was established as a representative democracy!

[philman_36]

Something else to help you out, 'cause you obviously need the help in understanding this.
An Important Distinction: Democracy versus Republic
In both the Direct type and the Representative type of Democracy, The Majority’s power is absolute and unlimited; its decisions are unappealable under the legal system established to give effect to this form of government. This opens the door to unlimited Tyranny-by-Majority. This was what The Framers of the United States Constitution meant in 1787, in debates in the Federal (framing) Convention, when they condemned the "excesses of democracy" and abuses under any Democracy of the unalienable rights of The Individual by The Majority.

[AmericanChef]

Consider that those who run for office are egotistical in nature. Sure, many have hopes, but it's really a personal fulfillment thing to run for office, get elected, and weild and use power. There are no selfless beings in office.

The people (voters and squeaky wheels) naturally create the Bureaucracy from the gathering of egos. Calls of "I want this, and I want that" (shrimp museums in Kansas, a guy who sits around and knows everything there is to know about potatoes) feeds the ego of the politician ("he's a hero!"), and the expansion of the Bureaucracy in the form of new agencies and additional staff.

It's sort of a self-sustaining entity, but involves many players, not just politicians.

I'm sure that the collection of data and such was brought upon us by some sort of initial citizen's group inquiry or demand that simply grew into the monster it is today. I call it the Curse of the Ignorant Masses.

[philman_36]

There is much to consider in your response. Thanks for replying.

[silverdog]

I didn't make my point clear. You have no idea how happy I would be if gov't employees were all smart enough to operate a conspiracy to oppress the citizenry and efficient enough to keep it a secret.

[philman_36]

I didn't make my point clear.
Your point was clear. You made your disdain and scorn perfectly clear.

You have no idea how happy I would be if gov't employees were all smart enough to operate a conspiracy to oppress the citizenry and efficient enough to keep it a secret.
You miss the point in your proposed scenario. Smart employees wouldn't be wanted! Dutiful, obedient, mostly ignorant employees would be wanted. Only a few need to be smart, and those would be needed in the topmost positions of authority and power. Even then, if there were "a conspiracy" (which I never implied yet which you're trying to insinuate I did) they might not even know about it as they could just be a dutiful, obedient, mostly ignorant employee as well.
Besides, as an example think of Winston Smith in 1984. He was a nobody employed inside the Ministry of Truth. When he got "too smart" he got "fixed" and was left crying in his beer.