Why shouldn't the US intervene in Syria?

[DemonicAppleGuY]

As cynical as it sounds the majority of the people who are ambitious enough to seek office are exactly the types we should avoid handing any amount of power over too. It is fairly apparent that many of the people who hold office now do so for their own gains and not to help the people.

Unfortunately those who would rule "justly" rarely know how to.

If I were a politician I would hope the nationalist in me would overcome the greed.

 

[Dachs]

As cynical as it sounds the majority of the people who are ambitious enough to seek office are exactly the types we should avoid handing any amount of power over too. It is fairly apparent that many of the people who hold office now do so for their own gains and not to help the people.

The disinterested public servant is largely a myth anyway. You'd get no better results in that quarter from people who lacked interest in government, and those people would also tend to lack the political skills (and other things like telegeny) to be able to be successful anyway.

 

[Murky]

Unfortunately those who would rule "justly" rarely know how to.

If I were a politician I would hope the nationalist in me would overcome the greed.

The disinterested public servant is largely a myth anyway. You'd get no better results in that quarter from people who lacked interest in government, and those people would also tend to lack the political skills (and other things like telegeny) to be able to be successful anyway.

So what then should we do? Keep electing narcissistic Machiavellian types?

 

[Dachs]

So what then should we do? Keep electing narcissistic Machiavellian types?

You're exaggerating how bad most politicians actually are. Almost nobody actually acts like Frank Underwood in real life.

 

[DemonicAppleGuY]

So what then should we do? Keep electing narcissistic Machiavellian types?

Well basically. Best we can hope for is that they're happy with the power and don't use it to illegally help themselves.

You can always vote for me to be president.

DemonicAppleGuY2036!

If you can't wait that long for my glorious rule come vote me in for governor of Ohio in 2018. Doubt a college kid would make it though...Next time.

You're exaggerating how bad most politicians actually are. Almost nobody actually acts like Frank Underwood in real life.

That too. Politicians are generally good. They do it because they want power, but they aren't necessarily bad.

 

[Dachs]

That too. Politicians are generally good. They do it because they want power, but they aren't necessarily bad.

I don't know if we can say "generally good". They just are. Can anybody really say that the politicians of one country or region or continent or whatever are more venal/corrupt/evil than those of another with any degree of proof? I don't see how.

 

[DemonicAppleGuY]

I don't know if we can say "generally good". They just are. Can anybody really say that the politicians of one country or region or continent or whatever are more venal/corrupt/evil than those of another with any degree of proof? I don't see how.

I would wager politicians in some countries are more corrupt. Not because there are worse people in that country, but because punishment for corruption is not often carried out, so there is less reason not to bend the rules.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

Whereas in the US, corruption IS the system. Hence, when Union Carbide kills tens of thousands of Indians, no prosecution.

No system is without corruption, it us just not always rewarded.

With capital come capitalists -- you just have to reign them in.

Cuba -- the Cuban system is totally democratic. They are the least corrupt I have seen.

 

[DemonicAppleGuY]

Whereas in the US, corruption IS the system. Hence, when Union Carbide kills tens of thousands of Indians, no prosecution.

I'm not sure what that has to do with corruption.

Cuba -- the Cuban system is totally democratic. They are the least corrupt I have seen.

There is no way you can actually believe this.

Find me a reputable article stating how Cuba is not corrupt. Sure many find less corruption than in most other Latin American countries, but the Western World has far less of it than Cuba.

 

[Murky]

Isn't Cuba a communist dictatorship?

 

[DemonicAppleGuY]

Isn't Cuba a communist dictatorship?

Well, sort of. RT has a hard time faulting countries that share his ideology though.

Luckily most of them tarnished their reputations plenty fine without outside help.

 

[Traitorfish]

So what then should we do? Keep electing narcissistic Machiavellian types?

It's not self-evident that we have to keep electing anybody.

Isn't Cuba a communist dictatorship?

One-party state, but not really a dictatorship. Even when Fidel was running things, his personal authority was exaggerated by both supporters and opponents for ideological reasons.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

@DAG: go visit Ask a Red III and IV. Legal observers from the "West" have observed the system as the most corruption-free.

And which of my sources are not "reputable," oh ye of wikipedia-land?

Isn't Cuba a communist dictatorship?

Dictatorship of the Proletariat, yes. No Communism can exist while there are still class divisions. 500 years of colonial subjugation are not undone in 54 years. And the US with a Naval Base ON THE ISLAND can't even get rid of Castro either. And, yes, they have tried.

Whereas 50 years of Saddam rule can be undone in less than 3 months, seems the US can't unseat the "unpopular" Assad government with all the CIA gear it can smuggle in, so I think I can rest my case with.he whole "corruption" argument. Or do I need to quote Will Durant on THIS thread, too.

Thought not.

 

[Murky]

It's not self-evident that we have to keep electing anybody.

If we don't then someone else will given that most people aren't anarchists.

One-party state, but not really a dictatorship. Even when Fidel was running things, his personal authority was exaggerated by both supporters and opponents for ideological reasons.

Isn't that essentially what North Korea is, except maybe without the prison camps?

 

[Traitorfish]

If we don't then someone else will given that most people aren't anarchists.

They probably will. That says nothing about whether they have to.

Isn't that essentially what North Korea is, except maybe without the prison camps?

North Korea is pretty much run by the military, at this point, far as I can tell. The Workers' Party was less powerful than most CPs to start with- the leadership were all WPK members, but few held authority in their capacity as party functionaries- but it seems to have been almost totally hollowed since the crises of the early '90s.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

No system is without corruption, it us just not always rewarded.

Exactly. This is the bugbear that all those "human nature" types seem to forget. It's not about whether we are capable of becoming 100% altruistic and never selfish, it's not about whether we can force people to think and behave as we wish. It's about whether social structures exist that reward those behaviors and mindsets. In capitalism, greed, selfishness, and corruption of all kinds is rewarded with greater material power, which is the basis for power and security in our system. Or as Lord Beckett put it in Dead Man's Chest, "currency is the currency of the realm.
In socialism people could still be selfish and even corrupt, but there would be no system for rewarding it, and so it would be an individual affair.

I'm not sure what that has to do with corruption.

Executives are responsible for their careless policies. Even when their cost-cutting leaves tens of thousands dead and nearly half a million wounded, none were prosecuted for such an appalling crime.

For reference, this is what RT was referring to. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster

There is no way you can actually believe this.

Or maybe this 45 year old man knows something your teenage mind does not?

Find me a reputable article stating how Cuba is not corrupt. Sure many find less corruption than in most other Latin American countries, but the Western World has far less of it than Cuba.

Why don't you explain how it is more corrupt than the United States?

 

[Alassius]

Exactly. This is the bugbear that all those "human nature" types seem to forget. It's not about whether we are capable of becoming 100% altruistic and never selfish, it's not about whether we can force people to think and behave as we wish. It's about whether social structures exist that reward those behaviors and mindsets. In capitalism, greed, selfishness, and corruption of all kinds is rewarded with greater material power, which is the basis for power and security in our system. Or as Lord Beckett put it in Dead Man's Chest, "currency is the currency of the realm.
In socialism people could still be selfish and even corrupt, but there would be no system for rewarding it, and so it would be an individual affair.

No, in any historical system that was neither capitalism nor very small scale society in a very limited span of time, greed, selfishness, and corruption of all kinds was rewarded more than in capitalism. Not always in money, but certainly in inequality of power. Money means only as much as the power it can buy. Capitalism did not increase the inequality of power. Rather, it made the inequality more transparent by giving it a measure.

You cannot meaningfully claim that the ruling class in, say, Cuba, has less relative power than the ruling class in America. Nor can you claim the average citizen in American has less relative power than those in Cuba.

There has never, ever, been anything that actually happened on a large scale that is better than welfare capitalism.

Depending on what you mean by "socialism". If it's led by a vanguard party, then the party controls power and there is your system for rewarding it.

If it's not, well, that sort of system never, ever happened before in any meaningful scale. And communists, including you guys, readily admit you don't know what that system would look like in practice. Which means you cannot assume "there would be no system for rewarding it".

 

[ReindeerThistle]

No, in any historical system that was neither capitalism nor very small scale society in a very limited span of time, greed, selfishness, and corruption of all kinds was rewarded more than in capitalism. Not always in money, but certainly in inequality of power. Money means only as much as the power it can buy. Capitalism did not increase the inequality of power. Rather, it made the inequality more transparent by giving it a measure.

You cannot meaningfully claim that the ruling class in, say, Cuba, has less relative power than the ruling class in America. Nor can you claim the average citizen in American has less relative power than those in Cuba.

There has never, ever, been anything that actually happened on a large scale that is better than welfare capitalism.

Depending on what you mean by "socialism". If it's led by a vanguard party, then the party controls power and there is your system for rewarding it.

If it's not, well, that sort of system never, ever happened before in any meaningful scale. And communists, including you guys, readily admit you don't know what that system would look like in practice. Which means you cannot assume "there would be no system for rewarding it".

No assumption necessary.

I work with organizations run by and for low/income workers, and my role as a leader is only as good as I can get people to follow. We have a benefit system, run by the workers, that organizes resources for people who need food, clothing, legal advice, a trip to the doctor, advocacy for paying overdue bills.

They are not Communist orgnizations, but there are communists in then. We are teachers and trainers, but because NO ONE in these organizations is paid, we attract those sincere about wanting to improve their lives and the lives of others.

This also attracts students, business owners, professionals of all kinds.

On our system, when someone tries to take advantage at the expense of the others, they stand out and the members deal with offenders based on agreed-to rules.

No corruption stands or is allowed to. It's built OUT of the structure.

Call it what you want, but itbis NOT welfare capitalism. The members treat their organization with respect, because without it we are nothing.

 

[REDY]

Heh Cuba not corrupted? Its directly opossite to things which were described by tourists on czech portals. Cuba is given as example of totally corrupted country and its took lot of shame and desbelief that in corruption rankings lists we are about same.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

I would be interested in this supposedly ubiquitous Cuban corruption, and in which definitions of corruption that people are using.

Although I am not surprised that it is people who generally support free markets that consider the Cuban system to be corrupt, and the American system so much less so. They are also generally not American.