Should the US have a third party?

ZenGum · 11-03-2011, 09:07 PM

(ETA: was a reply to SamIam)

I recently watched (much of) a fascinating documentary series called Watched Over By Machines Of Loving Grace. It was mostly about how machine technology has affected our thinking.

At one point it discussed the counter-culture movement of the sixties and the communes they formed. These were deliberately designed to be de-political. There was to be no leader, no council, no alliances; just individuals interacting as individuals.

They all failed. Some lasted up to three years, most less than six months.

Turns out some people are stronger, smarter, more ruthless, more confrontational, less sensitive, etc than others. With nothing to restrain this, these "stronger" ones became dominant bullies. Constant intimidation and fear killed the communities.

Modern communes and "intentional communities" have recognisable power structures - usually some kind of group meeting or seniors committee - which has the power to uphold group standards. The weak band together to restrain the strong.

Turns out, to make a community anything more than a tyranny, some kind of government is necessary. That does lead to politicians (and is why extreme libertarianism is untenable).

Politicians are a necessary evil.

This is not to say the situation cannot be better than it is now. Politicians could be a lot better behaved than they are. IMHO, lobbyists and massive "campaign contributions" are a much better target for massive restraint.

View Poll Results: Does the US need a third party?
Yes, anything is better than the two we have now	6	33.33%
No, the Democrats and Republicans were good enough for grandpa, and they're good enough for me	0	0%
Nice thought, but impossible to implement for a variety of reasons	7	38.89%
No, what we need is a revolution	3	16.67%
Huh? Who me? I dunno	2	11.11%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 18. You may not vote on this poll

11-03-2011, 09:07 PM	#11
ZenGum Doctor Wtf Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Badelaide, Baustralia Posts: 12,861	(ETA: was a reply to SamIam) I recently watched (much of) a fascinating documentary series called Watched Over By Machines Of Loving Grace. It was mostly about how machine technology has affected our thinking. At one point it discussed the counter-culture movement of the sixties and the communes they formed. These were deliberately designed to be de-political. There was to be no leader, no council, no alliances; just individuals interacting as individuals. They all failed. Some lasted up to three years, most less than six months. Turns out some people are stronger, smarter, more ruthless, more confrontational, less sensitive, etc than others. With nothing to restrain this, these "stronger" ones became dominant bullies. Constant intimidation and fear killed the communities. Modern communes and "intentional communities" have recognisable power structures - usually some kind of group meeting or seniors committee - which has the power to uphold group standards. The weak band together to restrain the strong. Turns out, to make a community anything more than a tyranny, some kind of government is necessary. That does lead to politicians (and is why extreme libertarianism is untenable). Politicians are a necessary evil. This is not to say the situation cannot be better than it is now. Politicians could be a lot better behaved than they are. IMHO, lobbyists and massive "campaign contributions" are a much better target for massive restraint. __________________ Shut up and hug. MoreThanPretty, Nov 5, 2008. Just because I'm nominally polite, does not make me a pussy. Sundae Girl.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)