11/24/2011

The End of Democracy

As we all watch Europe teeter on the edge of solvency one is left to wonder if this does spell the end of democracy. Ok the title has to be catchy so maybe it's just the end of democracy as we know it.

This editorial from Kelly McParland of the National Post demonstrates how elections are won in a democratic state.

This is not an Ontario phenomenon, this happens the world over. This is how the USA winds up with a 1.5 trillion dollar annual deficit.

Politicians borrow money to buy our votes.

We, the huddled and stupid masses, fall for this every election. Actually I'm not sure fall for it is the right wording, we demand it in every municipal, state, provincial, county, and federal election the world over.

For decades and decades.

We are so stuck in our government must provide everything for us even if they have no money that we, being Greece, are willing to riot and die in the streets to try and make sure it doesn't change.

Did I mention humans are stupid?

To stupid to govern themselves?

The evidence would suggest such.

What do we do?

We have a seat belt law in Alberta, if you get caught driving without wearing your seat belt you are fined. If humans were not stupid we would not need such a law.

We have to enact financial stupidity laws in all levels of government. Or should that be anti stupidity laws?

We have to make it against the law for our government to spend more money then they take in.

Maybe a caveat for war and national disasters, but that's it.

I'm not sure what it will take for us to wake up. The Ontario election just ended a few weeks ago. All they talked about was spending money they don't have while Greece was literally burning in the background.

America, Italy, Portugal, Ireland, Spain, France, and now Germany, all in a financial mess. Those are just the ones currently in the news, are there any countries that are not "broke"?

The Americans just ended their "super committee" on how to fix it by not fixing it.

I can only assume from the evidence in front of us all that there is nothing that will make us act.

We just won't do it.

So then, what happens?

I guess we're going to find out.

Oh, and Happy Thanksgiving. LOL

9 comments:

YM-Trader said...

The problem, as stated, is too far along for it to be reversed, or even barely slowed. I think its an evolutionary thing that all democracies go through. The only question to be asked now is, "How hard will the landing be?" Decade long recession? Depression spurred my millions of government employee layoffs? Oh, one other question.."What can we do individually to save our own skin, if that's even possible?" It's every man for himself, and politicians are best at playing that game.

Solfest said...

Pay off your debt and buy gold.

Or ammo.

longandwrong said...

It all started in the 18th Century with the enlightenment and the myth of progress.

We expect our lives to get better yet there is very little evidence to support this. This used to be about improvements from one generation to the next, now it is about one decade to the next.

The myth has simply got too expensive. The only uncertainty is where the savings are made and who they hurt the most. Unfortunately the UK has a right-wing government that will target the poor before anyone else, because the poor will never vote for them. Which is back to where your argument began.

Solfest said...

LW I think this has to go way beyond targeting this group or that group.

We as citizens need to re examine what we want our government to do.

Find the base level we all can live with, determine the cost, and then share that cost amongst all taxpayers.

Daniel Bones said...

"WITH" on that trade.

Solfest said...

Say what?

Solfest said...

Did I mention people are stupid?

http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/11/25/twenty-injured-after-woman-pepper-sprays-l-a-black-friday-shoppers-in-act-of-competitive-shopping/

Oh ya, I did.

longandwrong said...

> then share that cost amongst all taxpayers

But 'sharing' isn't value-neutral, it always targets someone. Often someone who won't vote for you.

There is of course the idea of 'each according to his ability to each according to his need' but I think that idea has been discredited. :-)

Sub said...

Quite aggressive but like it!