Half watching the world’s rhetoric spinning against it’s axis, I ended up in a conversation with a supporter of the opposition in Trinidad and Tobago. We both agreed that the present leadership of the opposition party, the UNC, should step down, and the argument presented was that ‘we need to support her because…”
It’s a bad argument, albeit pragmatic. It’s like saying you’re going to have another drink when you’ve just dodged the barstools to get to the bar, weaving as if the entire bar were being tilted like the old pinball games. “One more drink…”
It’s a short term solution to a long term problem, and like such solutions, it generally comes with a hangover.
This same person – a friend, someone I respect – made the mistake that the U.S. Presidential debate hosted by CNN demonstrated why Biden should step down (I do not disagree) and why Trump should win. So the short term solution only applies to something he’s passionate about, but at a distance discussing another country, his argument changed. Why?
Passion disguised as pragmatism versus pragmatism.
There are so many problems with democracy that it makes young intelligent people look into other modes of government, from communism to socialism, and they’re equally screwed up at best because people are… people, regardless of what system you put them in. I’m half surprised sometimes that someone doesn’t suggest monarchies again, but then what is a dictatorship but a crownless monarchy, and what does democracy do when it wants to protect it’s interests? It embraces dictatorships with the belief that they can be controlled as much as voters think politicians can be controlled.
If you find yourself on a planet where they vote for politicians, leave. That’s my advice.
Politicians dress in whatever fabric of society is most popular, and like good marketers, sometimes they create the need to fulfill. Elected officials don’t do what we want them to do, they do what they want to do. We could simply remove them and vote on things rather elevate puppets we cannot control. You want to go to way? How much in taxes are you willing to put that way? Are you willing to go fight? To send your children to war? No? Well, you don’t really want a war.
You want to help here? Great, how much are you willing to pay in taxes to do so?
Of course, that dooms underprivileged communities, but they were doomed by the same systems that rule the world now, and no, no matter how much you protest, you’re still part of a system that allows and ignores protest. It’s not about voices, it’s about what’s trendy and popular because people don’t vote for rationality, they vote for comfort. When they get in that voting booth, all bets are off: It’s about how they feel.
And who are they most feeling about? Themselves and their circle, not some ideal that is lost when people outgrow Disney remakes of the classics. People aren’t as good at thinking as feeling.
That, you see, is how democracy died. The marketers became campaign managers, and the game is completely rigged.
Being ‘woke’ and being ‘enlightened’ are different, and are vectors, not scalars.
Authoritarianism in the coming years is the only form of government that will work. As the world’s population grows the less chance there is for any form of government to get a consensus. Failing a massive and I mean MASSIVe catastrophe control is going to be the name of the game.
We seem unable to discuss what is becoming more and more obvious, GROWTH is killing us.
I sincerely doubt the premise that authoritarianism is the only form of government that will work.
The sheep do not want the wolves ruling them overtly.
Just look around, authoritarianism is on the increase in every country in our world.
In the western countries governments know where you shop, work, bank, live and if you own a mobile phone, where you are at any point in time.
The day we become a Cashless society, we will have become just a number in the computer.
The argument that authoritarianism is on the increase in every country in the world as evidence that it is the only system that can work is vacuous. That same argument could have been made for monarchy. It does not stand an acid test.
And, for the record, I could argue that oligarchy is more prevalent than authoritarianism, the latter masking oligarchy.
The simple fact is, Monarchy and Oligarchy are forms of Authoritarianism, they are methods of CONTROL.
There can be no doubt, Authoritarianism is on the increase World Wide.