Show HN: I'm tired of corrupt US politicians, so I created this • Hacker News Board

Re: Show HN: I'm tired of corrupt US politicians, so I created this

#141

Post by toyg » Wed, Jan 25, 2012, 1:09 AM UTC

JanezStupar wrote: post #83

toyg wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bollocks. Democracy is, literally, "rule by the people"; you can twist the definition of "people", but once you do, they stop being "people" in other contexts too, and you really don't want to go there, if you really care about your fellow man (if you don't, you can pick your preferred system that favours your preferred type of assholes: with the right blood, with the right money, with the right degrees, with the rig…

But literally all historically successful democracies have limited what set of populace are the "people". I am not US citizen however I know that when the US was created "the people" were pretty much in minority. It was also expected that "the people" will respect and defend their civic freedoms. The Switzerland for example historically only allowed armed men to vote and even today if one rejects their military servi…

Well, I decide that, to fully participate in a democracy, you have to write in correct English all the time, so hey, you're excluded already, dear JanezStupar. How does that feel? Sorry, no repeated tests, once you're out it's forever.

Let's say that tomorrow that 5% of income is what makes a difference between life or death from hunger; and at the same time, (rich) "people" are proposing a law that will literally kill whoever does not pay that 5%; do you pay and vote against the law, then die from hunger, or do you not pay and die from the hand of "the people"?

"In modern west" (as opposed to "in Soviet Russia"? lol), in some countries, less than 50% bother to vote in most elections, so the "to willfully ignorant" [sic] already don't take part; it's important they maintain their rights nevertheless. How many HN readers never bothered to deal with the US Congress before SOPA was proposed? Would have been right to deny them a voice?

By now I'm pretty sure you're either trolling or a dangerous elitist, "to willfully ignorant" to be trusted with any decision on political systems.

Re: Show HN: I'm tired of corrupt US politicians, so I created this

#142

Post by jpadkins » Wed, Jan 25, 2012, 1:21 AM UTC

jmonegro wrote: post #95

vectorpush wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

dramatically limit the size of government Any specifics? "Limit the size of government" is a trite platitude that anyone could agree with on some level. Shove 100 random people in a room and you have 200 conflicting ideas about the appropriate role of government.

When I think of limiting the size of government, I don't necessarily think about capsizing the physical size of it, but limit the amount of power it has via laws. It'd be ideal if a couple of laws could be passed to limit or restrict the power of the government to regulate markets, intervene in private matters other than property rights and (to an extent) citizen protection (don't let them get as big as the TSA is, f…

We don't need new laws, we have the Constitution. It clearly spells out exactly what powers the federal government has, and everything else is left up to the states or the people.

The problem is the federal government has ignored the constitution the last 80 years. And the people/states haven't cared enough to do anything.

Re: Show HN: I'm tired of corrupt US politicians, so I created this

#143

Post by nimblegorilla » Wed, Jan 25, 2012, 4:16 AM UTC

rgarcia wrote: post #131

nimblegorilla wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would public financing solve anything? If we gave each candidate a billion dollars it seems like there would still be an incentive to raise even more money from rich corporations.

By definition public financing precludes corporate financing.

Thanks for an incorrect non-answer. The definition of public financing does not by itself preclude corporate financing.

Even if you adopted additional restrictions on corporate financing I'm pretty sure there would be all kinds of ways to shadow-fund a candidate. This creates a situation where honest candidates are unfairly penalized against candidates that still play the money game.

Re: Show HN: I'm tired of corrupt US politicians, so I created this

#144

Post by kitsune_ » Wed, Jan 25, 2012, 6:42 AM UTC

JanezStupar wrote: post #83

toyg wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bollocks. Democracy is, literally, "rule by the people"; you can twist the definition of "people", but once you do, they stop being "people" in other contexts too, and you really don't want to go there, if you really care about your fellow man (if you don't, you can pick your preferred system that favours your preferred type of assholes: with the right blood, with the right money, with the right degrees, with the rig…

But literally all historically successful democracies have limited what set of populace are the "people". I am not US citizen however I know that when the US was created "the people" were pretty much in minority. It was also expected that "the people" will respect and defend their civic freedoms. The Switzerland for example historically only allowed armed men to vote and even today if one rejects their military servi…

What? There is so much untruth in the part about Switzerland that I have to question your grasp on history and political science.

If one rejects the military service in Switzerland, he has an alternative, civil service. He also doesn't lose any voting rights. Certain communes and cantons even have given foreigners the right to vote and to be elected.

The historical situation in Switzerland can also not be reduced to "only allowed armed men to vote" since in its core, Switzerland was a confederacy. Certain cantons had strong aristocracies, others were de facto ruled by the church and so on.

Re: Show HN: I'm tired of corrupt US politicians, so I created this

#145

Post by nerfhammer » Wed, Jan 25, 2012, 8:13 AM UTC

kbutler wrote: post #138

nerfhammer wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never understood the citation of proverb in lieue of argument

It's a concise statement of a contrasting opinion, with a citation you can follow to find more elaboration of similar thoughts. It would not have been more clear to phrase it as the following: """ > It's about small government vs. large government when it should be about good government, regardless of size But the problem is that large government, by the very fact of its scope and size, involves itself too much in th…

It's a glib one-liner we've all seen 1000 times before. For lack of a better word it's a slogan.

I'd be more interested in seeing specific reasons why that sentiment would be true in this particular case, and not just statements of arbitrary opinion or faith. Otherwise it just adds noise and informs no one.

Maybe you think differently but I find that I'm not likely to learn anything from a trite aphorism and I also am inclined to believe that trading trite aphorisms is not a way to engage in discussion that will make any kind of progress for anyone involved other than a contest of which chorus can neigh and bleat the longest.

Re: Show HN: I'm tired of corrupt US politicians, so I created this

#146

Post by JanezStupar » Wed, Jan 25, 2012, 8:56 AM UTC

kitsune_ wrote: post #144

JanezStupar wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But literally all historically successful democracies have limited what set of populace are the "people". I am not US citizen however I know that when the US was created "the people" were pretty much in minority. It was also expected that "the people" will respect and defend their civic freedoms. The Switzerland for example historically only allowed armed men to vote and even today if one rejects their military servi…

What? There is so much untruth in the part about Switzerland that I have to question your grasp on history and political science. If one rejects the military service in Switzerland, he has an alternative, civil service. He also doesn't lose any voting rights. Certain communes and cantons even have given foreigners the right to vote and to be elected. The historical situation in Switzerland can also not be reduced to…

I am no historian and no expert on Swiss government. And if I got these facts wrong I apologize. My source may be bad (honestly I don't remember where I picked it up) but I am not trying to deceive anyone.

But I believe that what I said if it doesn't hold true today it did so 50 years ago, before Swiss got voting rights to women.

And yes I forgot to mention that within Switzerland things are done very differently from place to place.

On the other hand, these signs of "progress" may be the first signs of decay of Swiss democracy. Please don't get offended I am just debating and viewing the world from an unpopular perspective. As usual only time will tell where the Swiss will go.

For one I hope that Switzerland endures for another thousand years.

Thank you for your input.

Re: Show HN: I'm tired of corrupt US politicians, so I created this

#147

Post by JanezStupar » Wed, Jan 25, 2012, 9:11 AM UTC

toyg wrote: post #141

JanezStupar wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But literally all historically successful democracies have limited what set of populace are the "people". I am not US citizen however I know that when the US was created "the people" were pretty much in minority. It was also expected that "the people" will respect and defend their civic freedoms. The Switzerland for example historically only allowed armed men to vote and even today if one rejects their military servi…

Well, I decide that, to fully participate in a democracy, you have to write in correct English all the time, so hey, you're excluded already, dear JanezStupar. How does that feel? Sorry, no repeated tests, once you're out it's forever. Let's say that tomorrow that 5% of income is what makes a difference between life or death from hunger; and at the same time, (rich) "people" are proposing a law that will literally ki…

Strawmen.

The only argument I am making is that Democracy means "rule by the people", where "the people" is an arbitrary bunch. And in no way has it always meant "everybody living on this land". This populist form of democracy is an invention of 19th century.

What I am arguing is that I have noticed in historic annals that democracies that have been virtuous and didn't implode after a generation all had built in safeguards from populism. And that citizenship was never viewed as an universal right, but always as privilege that one has to actively protect and exercise else it will be taken away.

Indeed many people do not vote, however when some drastic measures need to be taken, short term sacrifices for long term gain - these people will turn up and block any hope of change.

Also I would like to remind you, that popular democracy was viewed as an instrument of change, that mass participation in political process would enable society to evolve faster into better forms. What it has proven is that rule of the mob is the best "status quo" preserving device anybody ever imagined.

You chose to attack the proposed mechanism, but I merely used it as an example. Should you read this thread, you would notice that I proposed random draw as another alternative.

All I am arguing is that some very wise people eons ago noticed, that for prosperity to happen, you need an elite.

Thats what kept Roman republic strong for so long - the balance between elite and the mob. Once the mob managed to break all the "privileges" of the elite, Rome was effectively doomed.

I am not advocating policy here, I am discussing politics and history. No need to call me names and mock me.

Thank you.

Edit: Soviet Russia (or any communist country) was not a country ruled by an Elite. One does not become Elite by killing previous Elite and proclaiming himself one. Building Elite class takes generations. What happened in communist countries is what you get when you eradicate the Elite and let inmates run the asylum.

Re: Show HN: I'm tired of corrupt US politicians, so I created this

#148

Post by kitsune_ » Wed, Jan 25, 2012, 10:04 AM UTC

JanezStupar wrote: post #146

kitsune_ wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? There is so much untruth in the part about Switzerland that I have to question your grasp on history and political science. If one rejects the military service in Switzerland, he has an alternative, civil service. He also doesn't lose any voting rights. Certain communes and cantons even have given foreigners the right to vote and to be elected. The historical situation in Switzerland can also not be reduced to…

I am no historian and no expert on Swiss government. And if I got these facts wrong I apologize. My source may be bad (honestly I don't remember where I picked it up) but I am not trying to deceive anyone. But I believe that what I said if it doesn't hold true today it did so 50 years ago, before Swiss got voting rights to women. And yes I forgot to mention that within Switzerland things are done very differently fro…

Switzerland in its current form is vastly different than Switzerland 800 years ago. Throughout its history, Switzerland was a loose conglomerate of individual sovereigns, its history is rife with religious and political struggle (Villmer wars, Appenzeller wars, Old Zurich war, Murder Night of Zurich, Fibourg-Bernese wars, an endless list, ). At various points theocratic Theocracies had emerged (Zwingly, Calvin), religious persecution was often rampant. After all, there is a reason the Anabaptists fled the Bernese Emmental and journeyed to America.

Peasant revolts were brutally smashed. Niklaus Leuenberger, a peasant leader, was beheaded with the sword, then quartered. His head was nailed to the Gallows, next to the Federal charter of Huttwil. His dismembered body was distributed on the four main roads of Bern. His brother in arms, Christian Schybi was tortured for "witchcraft" and beheaded.

In 1782, Anna Göldi, was beheaded as "Switzerland's last witch". She was a maid and her master, a judge and politician, wanted to get rid of her because he most likely had an affair with her.

So, I really think you should stop seeing old Switzerland as some kind of role model.

On another note, your "might is right" doctrine is shallow and repugnant.

Re: Show HN: I'm tired of corrupt US politicians, so I created this

#149

Post by JanezStupar » Wed, Jan 25, 2012, 10:26 AM UTC

kitsune_ wrote: post #148

JanezStupar wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am no historian and no expert on Swiss government. And if I got these facts wrong I apologize. My source may be bad (honestly I don't remember where I picked it up) but I am not trying to deceive anyone. But I believe that what I said if it doesn't hold true today it did so 50 years ago, before Swiss got voting rights to women. And yes I forgot to mention that within Switzerland things are done very differently fro…

Switzerland in its current form is vastly different than Switzerland 800 years ago. Throughout its history, Switzerland was a loose conglomerate of individual sovereigns, its history is rife with religious and political struggle (Villmer wars, Appenzeller wars, Old Zurich war, Murder Night of Zurich, Fibourg-Bernese wars, an endless list, ). At various points theocratic Theocracies had emerged (Zwingly, Calvin), reli…

Judging ancient events with modern standards I find devious in its own right.

Let me reiterate, I am not advocating any kind of policy. I am just trying to discuss history and politics. Since I like to take maximum out of a debate I approached this one from an unpopular viewpoint.

And the best you can do is list some anecdotes then call me shallow and repugnant.

The question of government is one of the hard questions. Where there are no easy answers, but a lot of hard ones. Today it seems that our populist democracies are leading us towards totalitarian government - a lot like what happened to Rome between Octavian an Caesar.

What I am trying to bring forward here is that successful republics have strived for maximal democracy, yet had to build in safeguards against populism and mob rule.

We can debate whether this was an important feature or not, but calling me names is not helping your point.

Re: Show HN: I'm tired of corrupt US politicians, so I created this

#150

Post by david927 » Wed, Jan 25, 2012, 1:00 PM UTC

anamax wrote: post #102

david927 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

businesses are subject to market forces Markets are inefficient. Many products and services are inelastic. People will consume them while hating the companies that provide them. It was government, not market forces, that forced companies to stop making kids pajamas out of inflammable material. When people heard that Ford was letting people die in its Pinto rather than recall them because it was cheaper, did people st…

> When people heard that Ford was letting people die in its Pinto rather than recall them because it was cheaper, did people stop buying Ford? Actually, they did. And, interestingly enough, the Pinto tradeoff decision in question came from a govt decision. Safety costs money. Ford asked the US govt "how much is a life worth" and the relevant design decision used a higher value. Price matters. Some folks are alive bec…

Oh but they didn't stop buying Fords -- even Pintos -- when this was happening.

But your inclusion of government raises a good point. You're right. In the US, government is really just an extension of the corporations. It stopped being true democratic government, representing the people, long ago. So why not reduce that inefficiency and just be honest about it?