3 ms·

I agree about computers, and here's what I would add: I'd want people to understand that politicians are not leaders - they are servants of the public. They ar

I agree about computers, and here's what I would add: I'd want people to understand that politicians are not leaders - they are servants of the public. They are elected to represent the citizens of the country and make decisions that the citizens want, not which they believe would work or worse, which fit their own needs. They're not leaders in a league of their own who have followers, those times have past. That's why they must be held in check, not left to do whatever they want - that's how you end up with having to take your shoes off and being patted by some stranger at an airport, while they fly first class or charter with their envoy without even going through a metal detector (just an example).

jakeonthemove 15y ago
Please share your thoughts on why I'm wrong or you don't agree with me - I always try to see things from as many points of view as possible. Thank you!
praxeologist 15y ago
I think it is naive to think that politicians are "servants". If you take a critical look at it, politicians don't "represent" you in the same way I would "represent" you when you hand me $5 to go down to the corner store and get a soda. See here for more details, The Indefensibility of Political Representation : http://mises.org/daily/3383 http://mises.org/daily/3383 I actually agree with the OP in a minor way, that "there are also really good reasons why it lasted 300 years", but has the US government lasted ~250 years in anything near the same form? No, it started much closer to an anarchic Hanseatic League. Some days now, it looks more like Communist China. The way "the code" is written leads to continual aggrandizement of power. If it is really true that "Elections and the regular change of power allows governments to be wrong and adapt.", why not have elections every 6 months? There isn't enough value in the average person fighting the legislation which affects their lives in minor ways relative to that obtained by lobbying interests.

jakeonthemove 15y ago

Please share your thoughts on why I'm wrong or you don't agree with me - I always try to see things from as many points of view as possible. Thank you!

praxeologist 15y ago

I think it is naive to think that politicians are "servants". If you take a critical look at it, politicians don't "represent" you in the same way I would "represent" you when you hand me $5 to go down to the corner store and get a soda. See here for more details, The Indefensibility of Political Representation : http://mises.org/daily/3383 http://mises.org/daily/3383 I actually agree with the OP in a minor way, that "there are also really good reasons why it lasted 300 years", but has the US government lasted ~250 years in anything near the same form? No, it started much closer to an anarchic Hanseatic League. Some days now, it looks more like Communist China. The way "the code" is written leads to continual aggrandizement of power. If it is really true that "Elections and the regular change of power allows governments to be wrong and adapt.", why not have elections every 6 months? There isn't enough value in the average person fighting the legislation which affects their lives in minor ways relative to that obtained by lobbying interests.