Are we powerless?

[Tucker Case]

You're reminding me of Covey's Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. I'll bet you read the book, too. Your "We have the power to influence those within our sphere..." is right out of it. Think I'll pull it out again. Think I've read it five times.

I never read it.

 

[MaggieD]

I never read it.

Interesting, because your post articulates one of the habits. He talks about our Circle of Influence vs our Circle of Concern.

Of all the good suggestions in The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, "Habit 1: Be Proactive" is particularly useful when you feel powerless against life's forces. Covey recommends you examine what you can do instead of focusing on worries over which you have no real control. First notice all your concerns. Then, among those concerns, determine where you can take action:

Circle of Concern, Circle of Influence

 

[Ikari]

Oh, no! Don't think in this way. A good brain is always more powerful than a gun (not in every case, but in general). If you think you have gun, don't forget, they have that, too, plus tanks, missles, jet fighters, H-bomb...

A good brain and a gun are a great combination. No one said it would be easy either, but it's sometimes necessary.

 

[crebigsol]

What really IS the answer to taking back control of our government?
......
The majority of people want term limits. Not going to happen. The majority of people want a tougher stance on immigration. Not going to happen. The majority of people want the government to stop spending like drunken sailors. Not going to happen. Ad infinitum.
......
Is there an answer? Or is it hopeless?

Yes, there must be some answer, but before the true answer is allowed to be put into the reality, it is hopeless.
Americans have been educated with a very confusing ideology. For example, "The majority of people want a tougher stance on immigration"; however, they have allowed those who sell the nations' sovereignty to steal the office. Remember those days that Bush appeased the Hispanic sector to win ballots by giving a "perfect" Spanish speech? Remember those days that Clinton depicted how good the days will be ahead with a dwindling population of whites but a prolific population of the minority, which the Hispanic is the core? After taking advantage of the Hispanic population, why shouldn't they do a favor in return? For example, allowing more of their kind of people to come in, legal or illegal. In fact, both parties are fighting over for the support of these people, neither party can afford the loss of such support, although Democratic party is in a far more fuller scale in the selling and thus seems far more successful in the scheme that can be closedly termed as treason. For some temporary interest on other issues, the people voted the Bush and Clinton or the similar into the office, now we must swallow the fruit, sweet or bitter or even poisonous.
The issue can be far more complicated than what is discussed above, but then the message would be too long. get to stop here.

 

[Tucker Case]

Interesting, because your post articulates one of the habits. He talks about our Circle of Influence vs our Circle of Concern.



Circle of Concern, Circle of Influence

It's interesting that I use similar terminology in my description of the "habit", even though I know I've never read that book. I typically avoid non-fiction, self-help type books as a rule.

Although I'll have make an exception in this case because I think that the habit described is sound advice (obviously). I think that this primary assumption about life is the key to achieving prolonged happiness.

As a side note, that's twice this week someone has pointed me towards something that exists out there which mimics my personal philosophies that I was previously ignorant of. (The other one was the concept of "distributionism" which Harry pointed me towards earlier this week).

That tells me one of two things:

1. I've got to write a book about my philosophies soon before I run out of them that haven't been written about

or

2. I need to come up with a whole new philosphy of my own so I can regain my claim of being an original thinker. :lol:

 

[Hicup]

Not long ago, I came to the conclusion that "voting the bums out" was a possible solution. You know, voting against every encumbant. Not that I thought it would work, but that it would, if embraced by enough people, send a strong enough message to Congress to do some good. But it seems that we, as a people, can't really agree on anything that will make a real difference.

So we just keep doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result. According to Einstein, that's the perfect definition of insanity.

Depower the Federal government. Demand that you States representatives, and governor take back their power.


Tim-

 

[Slartibartfast]

Depower the Federal government. Demand that you States representatives, and governor take back their power.


Tim-

Why? So all the libertarians and conservatives can make the same complaints about their state goverments that they currently make about the fed?

 

[Hicup]

Why? So all the libertarians and conservatives can make the same complaints about their state goverments that they currently make about the fed?

Complaining is your right, and under this constituion it is a virtue.

The difference is in the power of your voice. When it is made "more" powerful, it carries with it, weight. The only way to do that is to lower the means of representation to the lowest practicable level. Each community is a republic, if you will, all competing against the other communities, whereby the goal is to increase your communities appeal, at the expense of other communities. The result of such a system, is innovation, motivation, and most of all accountability of the representation.

This isn't new ya know. About 230 years ago a few dudes wrote something like this down on paper.. Now what was that called?


Tim-

 

[Slartibartfast]

Complaining is your right, and under this constituion it is a virtue.

The difference is in the power of your voice. When it is made "more" powerful, it carries with it, weight. The only way to do that is to lower the means of representation to the lowest practicable level. Each community is a republic, if you will, all competing against the other communities, whereby the goal is to increase your communities appeal, at the expense of other communities. The result of such a system, is innovation, motivation, and most of all accountability of the representation.

This isn't new ya know. About 230 years ago a few dudes wrote something like this down on paper.. Now what was that called?


Tim-

Other people in your state will have comparatively louder voices too and they still have different ideas about right and wrong. So what will be accomplished?

 

[Ikari]

Why? So all the libertarians and conservatives can make the same complaints about their state goverments that they currently make about the fed?

Yup. Plus it's easier to control state and local government than it is to control federal.

 

[Ikari]

Other people in your state will have comparatively louder voices too and they still have different ideas about right and wrong. So what will be accomplished?

It will put it on the State level. Not all the States will have the same laws, it will depend on what the People of the State want. So instead of everyone being whitewashed under Federal law where we all get the same thing and no one is happy, we leave it to the States so that the people of the States can make their own laws that best suit them. Within the rights and liberties of the individual of course.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Why? So all the libertarians and conservatives can make the same complaints about their state goverments that they currently make about the fed?

For me it conjures up a Journey song.

"Don't stop complaining...woah oh woah.":2razz:

 

[Slartibartfast]

Yup. Plus it's easier to control state and local government than it is to control federal.

Honestly, I think if you move the power base, and even diffuse it, you will just move the problems with it. Companies are not going to stop attempting to curry laws into their favor, they are doing it at the state, county, and city level already.

 

[Ikari]

Honestly, I think if you move the power base, and even diffuse it, you will just move the problems with it. Companies are not going to stop attempting to curry laws into their favor, they are doing it at the state, county, and city level already.

Who ever said that the problems would go away? This is a tough system and it takes continual work by us to keep it up. It's just that it is easier to control State and local government than it is federal government. So while these companies will indeed be cozying up to State and local government, the People have better control of that government. You still have to do work, nothing's going to stop that.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Who ever said that the problems would go away? This is a tough system and it takes continual work by us to keep it up. It's just that it is easier to control State and local government than it is federal government. So while these companies will indeed be cozying up to State and local government, the People have better control of that government. You still have to do work, nothing's going to stop that.

First you say that the problems will not go away, than you say that government will be eaiser to control by the people (which is a very worthy goal). However, that was the problem I was talking about. I think if the states were the final word on more issues, you are going to see the flood of corrupting money go that direction and it will pretty much be just as hard to control by the people.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

First you say that the problems will not go away, than you say that government will be eaiser to control by the people (which is a very worthy goal). However, that was the problem I was talking about. I think if the states were the final word on more issues, you are going to see the flood of corrupting money go that direction and it will pretty much be just as hard to control by the people.

It won't be as concentrated as it is now with the federal government.
I mean the fed is huge but the legislature and president are still size ably representative of the state offices.

Diffuse, instead of, concentrated corruption and influence is easier to control.

Edit: It also allows a higher chance of representative government instead of popular government.

 

[Hicup]

Other people in your state will have comparatively louder voices too and they still have different ideas about right and wrong. So what will be accomplished?

Reconciliation from accountability to the people. For instance, say all the social programs we have, now controlled by the federal gov, were to be handed over to the localities to administer, what do you suppose would happen? Now, for the sake of this little illustration, let's say a community is the size of a small city in the USA; say oh, about 80,000 people of all shapes and sizes.

Now, your homework today is to draw up your communities social and economic policies. Have at er..


Tim-

 

[Ikari]

First you say that the problems will not go away, than you say that government will be eaiser to control by the people (which is a very worthy goal). However, that was the problem I was talking about. I think if the states were the final word on more issues, you are going to see the flood of corrupting money go that direction and it will pretty much be just as hard to control by the people.

It's not going to go away, it makes it easier to control. Listen, you can have a stubborn nut. You grab a wrench. The torque you can apply to that nut is dependent upon the lever arm. The longer the lever arm, the greater the torque. Moving things from federal level to state level increases the lever arm the People have. There will be companies trying to gain favor. It happens now, it happens to HUGE extent in the federal government. Did you ever wonder why you can't have ala carte pricing with cable companies? The point is that if that is brought down to the State level you have a much better chance of controlling it and restricting it than you do on the federal level. You can exert a much greater force, thus while the corruption will still be there you can maybe realize actual punishment, control, and oversight on the State level that you cannot achieve on the federal level.

 

[d0gbreath]

Who ever said that the problems would go away? This is a tough system and it takes continual work by us to keep it up. It's just that it is easier to control State and local government than it is federal government. So while these companies will indeed be cozying up to State and local government, the People have better control of that government. You still have to do work, nothing's going to stop that.

Speaking of work:

If most DPers spent 1/10 of the time working on government that they spend arguing on a message board, things might start to get better. I believe that the interweb's boards and blogs have been around long enough now to have fully proven just how insignificant they really are. If your name (or handle) isn't a household word, you probably aren't reaching enough people on a message board to amount to a hill of beans.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Speaking of work:

If most DPers spent 1/10 of the time working on government that they spend arguing on a message board, things might start to get better. I believe that the interweb's boards and blogs have been around long enough now to have fully proven just how insignificant they really are. If your name (or handle) isn't a household word, you probably aren't reaching enough people on a message board to amount to a hill of beans.

If we aren't able to influence through intellectual discourse with other intellectual people, it sure isn't going to happen on any other scale.

 

[Ikari]

Speaking of work:

If most DPers spent 1/10 of the time working on government that they spend arguing on a message board, things might start to get better. I believe that the interweb's boards and blogs have been around long enough now to have fully proven just how insignificant they really are. If your name (or handle) isn't a household word, you probably aren't reaching enough people on a message board to amount to a hill of beans.

Hey, I'm doing plenty. But there's only so many guns 1 man can stockpile. But as far as the boards. I don't think the boards are devices to reach people and change minds. Because most people on boards such like this have already concluded things for themselves. Here is a chance to hear out other arguments, get information and sources on other arguments, pit your arguments and proofs against others, refine your arguments with people of like mind or challenge others. It's a way to make your political arguments better so when you're out you have a better chance of presenting your political platform well and coherently.

 

[Slartibartfast]

It won't be as concentrated as it is now with the federal government.
I mean the fed is huge but the legislature and president are still size ably representative of the state offices.

Diffuse, instead of, concentrated corruption and influence is easier to control.

Edit: It also allows a higher chance of representative government instead of popular government.

Color me skeptical, but if you think it will work, go for it and if you accomplish your goal and it proves to work, I will quickly become aligned to that cause. I am all about getting more representation for actual people.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Color me skeptical, but if you think it will work, go for it and if you accomplish your goal and it proves to work, I will quickly become aligned to that cause. I am all about getting more representation for actual people.

Well there is no guarantee but I think taking significance from national politics to more local politics, will allow the development of specific local political organizations.
We see weak signs of this already.
I wouldn't consider Georgia Democrats to be the same as more national Democrats.
They are, generally, more conservative.

Not only that but there is less population which allows smaller groups to have more influence in politic decision making.
So statistically it is more likely than not.

 

[MaggieD]

Well there is no guarantee but I think taking significance from national politics to more local politics, will allow the development of specific local political organizations.
We see weak signs of this already.
I wouldn't consider Georgia Democrats to be the same as more national Democrats.
They are, generally, more conservative.

Not only that but there is less population which allows smaller groups to have more influence in politic decision making.
So statistically it is more likely than not.

Ya' know, I really have to say that that approach makes sense. Does it also make sense to start at our town halls??

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Ya' know, I really have to say that that approach makes sense. Does it also make sense to start at our town halls??

You'd have to figure out how to convince people to move national political stuff to the local arena.
UHC, SS, etc.
It's an incredibly difficult task.