Did Dr Sowell distinguish a Republic vs a democracy? We if we were a Constitutional republic, then a president would not have the fate of our lives in his hands.[edited for Kindle crazinesness]
That's because our [used to be] Constitution is just a museum piece. The laws are loosely based on precedents and more so on the whims of the judiciary and their bosses. Then all of the above is followed by selective enforcement.
Over too many years, Old Dino has watched control freaks puff themselves up and proclaim "Rule of law!" or "It's the law of the land!" Looking at a little brown paperback book on my desk that contains the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, I recall how a former Klansman names Byrd would whip out such a book from a coat pocket to defend some libtard crap.
Nothing ever changes, does it? At least decades ago there was some decent education that could have been had by those that wanted it; now, generations are programmed to follow the Party.
I still teach the truth. My students read the Declaration, Preamble, Gettysburg Address, Ayn Rand's Anthem as sophomores. As seniors I teach Austrian economics and we read Atlas Shrugged and Capitalism. But, I am an artifact.
Lysander, I sorely wish I'd had you as my teacher when I was growing up. Unfortunately (fortunately?), I found Ayn Rand and the writings of the founding fathers after I'd graduated from high school, finished my tour in the Army, and was back in college; over the next several decades, I uncovered those missing links on my own.
I didn't take Sowell's piece as an endorsement of establishment candidates. I took it as an admonition to pay careful attention, inform self to the greatest extent possible and think before voting. As to whether or not there are any substantive choices between candidates is a whole other discussion. As is discussion of to what extent elected politicians and lawyers appointed to SCOTUS have eroded what was originally intended to be a Constitutional Republic.
Unfortunately, he glosses over the fact that the "outsiders" are leading, precisely because the so-called establishment Republicans are doing NOTHING. What's been done since 2012?!? We have both houses of congress, and Obama hasn't even been slowed down. What's it going to take?!?
Possibly, but I haven't noticed much increase in the wisdom of the electorate recently. But then I think the entire process is rigged, so the electorate's wisdom is irrelevant; it's the electorate's naivete that is being preyed upon. So, yes, I agree with the title of this topic.
i have read everything Mr. Sowell has written...very knowledgeable...problem today is that we have a democracy and not a republic...it is now (and will be until it collapses) tyranny of the majority...and the govt education system makes sure that they are dumbed down to the lowest level...
to enhance your position. We were living in a democratically (direct vote) system of selecting representatives or delegates to local government and some of those delegates were charged withe responsibility of selecting a Republic form of government. (Democrat or democratically is not part of the basic documents it's found in some of the writings about them not that I've been able to find any way.) Notice the use of small d and r versus large D and R.
Were as in no longer we are not a Democracy in the sense of democratically elected government. There is no direct vote and certainly the candidates are not democratically selected. One has to dig way deep down to township level for anything like that.
With the winner selected from a very small - number of choices at the federal level two offices only - take all rules we are even less able and wrong to claim status as a democratic nation and are increasingly not a Republic.
I thought about your last sentence and initially believed you were correct . It used to be a tyranny of the minority. Then I thought about it again. All the power is now safely concentrated at the top. The New Establishment to use a quick phrase, is a tyranny of the minority with and I'll grant you this one, a quasi approval whether they voted that way or because their votes went to the highest vote getter.
The real power is a minority called the electoral college who are given two pre-selected choices with zippo difference between them. Too much in name only and cross or bi-partisanship which in the end means give in to the other side.
I want to see a good old fashioned slug fest and don' t care if anything is done. Couldn't hurt and might help considering the alternative.
I would have awarded three thumbs up but it's not allowed.
Yes, most people are so totally brainwashed that they cannot and do not think for themselves. I don't know of any candidate who is either willing or able or even have a plan to End the Force.
I always voted over my entire long life, during which time I've seen nobody win anything but more tyranny. No more.
Dr. Sowell is a rational man. But is he effective in leading others to be rational as well? They say that in the valley of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. But, in the valley of the crazies, the sane man is devoured. I hope that Atlantis comes to be -- but it may need to be very heavily armed.
"An election is not a popularity contest, or an award for showmanship. If you want to fulfill your duty as a citizen, then you need to become an informed voter. And if you are not informed, then the most patriotic thing you can do on Election Day is stay home."
Well said and I completely agree.
Of course, if this were the case we'd only have a few hundred people voting each year. ;) The upside is that we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now!
We elected a bunch of so-called conservatives to congress in 2012, enough to be able to take over both houses. Please explain to me how they got so bamboozled that, rather than Obama needing to get a 2/3 majority to pass that Iran abomination, we need to get 2/3 to stop it?!?!? If that's the level of talent that we're voting in, then a showman can't do much worse.
Yes, but they are still a minority within the party which is evidenced by Boehner and McConnell getting selected as the leaders in their respective Congressional houses. Until they get replaced, the fresh faces are going to continue to get misled.
Thumbs up to that. Or maybe it would mean we wouldn't get the same old prevarications of the unadulterated truth each year. Why pay attention when it's all BS. Still as you said better to stay at home than see your vote given to the candidate you were trying to defeat. Gotta love these leftists If they can't buy it they'll steal it. Rinos to DINOS to CINOS and our new term HINOs -:))
The problem is that people don't realize that they are not informed enough. Everyone has an opinion and thinks it's right, so they smugly exercise their right to vote and view it as doing their civic duty.
How would you go about getting the uninformed to stay home, though? Just announcing what you wrote in quotes won't do it -- I know all kinds of people whose attention span is one sound bite slogan, but who are convinced that I'm the ignoramus because I don't follow their slogans.
Sad to see Sowell dismissive of Trump because of the hoopla, at this time in the process. On Trump's website, he has only one position (immigration) posted at this time. There will be more at which time, the "informed" will be able to judge Trump more comprehensively. I'll wait until then to see if the bombast matches policies.
Sowell writes: "The very fact that the voting age was lowered to 18 shows the triumph of the vision of elections as participatory rituals, rather than times for fateful choices. If anything, the age might have been raised to 30, since today millions of people in their 20s have never even had the responsibility of being self-supporting, to give them some sense of reality." With THAT, I agree.
While I do understand where you are coming from, it is hard for me to agree as a military member. I do see the merit in only allowing contributing members of society to have the vote. What I disagree with is the parameters of age being the guidelines for who gets the vote. I think we had some semblance of a system back when property owners were the only ones who were allowed to vote. Although I am not advocating that we go back to the same system, I do think something similar could be devised where those that are not making meaningful contributions to society would not be allowed to cast the ballot.
As to the "age" issue, it's not so much age as maturity. It's a fact that we all learn something new every day and those of us with more days, by default, know more. I have 26,280 days versus an 18 year old's 6,570 days. But, as we know, those who vote for a living are on the verge of outnumbering those who produce for a living and, typically, the older voters are the ones producing and creating wealth. They should have a larger say in voting.
Mamaemma, I understand your stand, but could I suggest considering instead to write in on your ballot the name(s) you'd vote for as conscious choice to protest your stand. I do this all the time so at least then I have the right to complain that our government is not representing me or other individuals.
We live in a "Being There" world. "I like to watch TV" was Chance the Gardner's view of reality. Whether this is intentional or just the inevitable result of technology that provides an alternative to thinking is open for debate. Either way the end result is a dramatic reduction in the population of people that are willing to think. This is the way the world ends, not with a bang but with a whimper.
What makes our government so pathetic today is it's international weakness, and the blatant disregard for the law. Trump is appealing to people who want a leader who will use the power of the nation in our interests, and isn't beholden to a poisoned political system. I think Sowell is dead wrong when he mistakenly attributes the rise of the outsiders to an uninformed voter populace. I've been very studious of national issues all my life, and none of the usual political figures running this time around have gained my trust. When I listen to the outsiders, and research their personal history of accomplishment, I have some faith they'll be a better bet than those spit out by the political machine. I haven't decided which I favor, but I'm darned sure going to vote.
Disregard for the law is a symptom, not the disease. When so much is criminalized that shouldn't be, disregarding the laws (but not natural rights) doesn't make you a bad person.
It's not individual disregard of law that disturbs me, but a government that not only decides which laws it chooses to enforce, but also treats rules, regulations, and executive orders outside of federal established law as laws to be enforced on the public.
Looking at a little brown paperback book on my desk that contains the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, I recall how a former Klansman names Byrd would whip out such a book from a coat pocket to defend some libtard crap.
I agree wit Sowell.
Were as in no longer we are not a Democracy in the sense of democratically elected government. There is no direct vote and certainly the candidates are not democratically selected. One has to dig way deep down to township level for anything like that.
With the winner selected from a very small - number of choices at the federal level two offices only - take all rules we are even less able and wrong to claim status as a democratic nation and are increasingly not a Republic.
I thought about your last sentence and initially believed you were correct . It used to be a tyranny of the minority. Then I thought about it again. All the power is now safely concentrated at the top. The New Establishment to use a quick phrase, is a tyranny of the minority with and I'll grant you this one, a quasi approval whether they voted that way or because their votes went to the highest vote getter.
The real power is a minority called the electoral college who are given two pre-selected choices with zippo difference between them. Too much in name only and cross or bi-partisanship which in the end means give in to the other side.
I want to see a good old fashioned slug fest and don' t care if anything is done. Couldn't hurt and might help considering the alternative.
I would have awarded three thumbs up but it's not allowed.
I always voted over my entire long life, during which time I've seen nobody win anything but more tyranny. No more.
Well said and I completely agree.
Of course, if this were the case we'd only have a few hundred people voting each year. ;) The upside is that we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now!
Sowell writes: "The very fact that the voting age was lowered to 18 shows the triumph of the vision of elections as participatory rituals, rather than times for fateful choices. If anything, the age might have been raised to 30, since today millions of people in their 20s have never even had the responsibility of being self-supporting, to give them some sense of reality." With THAT, I agree.
As to his one policy posted on his website
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/position...
I can find nothing in it with which I disagree.