Posted: Fri Jun 14, 2002 10:09 pm
@fable I am not sure thats what he means. Could you please be more specific weasel? 
The Internet's authoritative role-playing game forum.
https://www.gamebanshee.com/forums/
I can see it going both ways.Originally posted by Word
@fable I am not sure thats what he means. Could you please be more specific weasel?![]()
Factors that would lead to this development historically have been gradual and economic (the rise of other economic powerhouses to counter Britain in the late 19th century, for example), or sudden and military (the destruction of Napoleonic France in both Russia and England). I don't see either as being in place at this time. The US' position is, IMO, analogous to that of the early Roman Empire in this respect: it is riding high on the myth of its ideological and cultural superiority. For that myth to be dispelled and real change occur, global economic forces need to be at work for a long time. A couple of possibilities for the future, however, could be:Originally posted by Lazarus
What do you think should be done in the US to elevate the thinking of the masses? What would bring the government back to the people? What sort of institutional changes would you have enacted?
Would it take a "shift of balance" or a possible threat of a shift of balance?Originally posted by fable
Your question was actually, "What would bring the government back to the people? What sort of institutional changes would you have enacted?" (I quoted your questions at the start of my reply.) I went from there, since IMO nothing can be done or will be possible to change such a fundamental characteristic of the state at this time. To bring "the government back to the people" would require a set of circumstances that shift the balance of power on the world stage--hence, my coments, above.![]()
Originally posted by Weasel
Would it take a "shift of balance" or a possible threat of a shift of balance?
In other words could a group "hollar" load enough about a possible threat to shift enough opinions to want change?
@HighLordDave; I wouldn't care to guess the content of my neighbor's mind. What I do protest is the assumption on your part that my neighbor will be ruled my "mob mentality."Originally posted by HighLordDave
@Lazarus:
If you take a reasonable, free-thinking individual and put him or her in a group, it is very easy to make those people behave in a way that is neither resonable or free-thinking. It's the mob mentality. It's not that you or I or your neighbour up the street are simple automatons moving about at the whim of some indisious master plan, but that as a group, people are swayed by marketing and charisma.
The field of demography arose out of the study of group tendencies and political parties (and advertising agencies) devote a lot of time and energy into getting masses of people to vote a certain way, support a certain cause or buy a certain product.
You believe that you are an individual unswayed by advertising on TV, soundbytes on the news and capable of becoming informed of issues in the next election and getting to know the candidates. Can you say the same about your neighbours?
Are you certain that the two major parties have installed themselves in positions of power? Or have they simply given the people what they want, and therefore been GIVEN that power? Again, I put it to you that the system is no more broken than the people that use it (or don't use it), and the Republicans and Democrats are no more powerful than the people have made them. So who/what is to blame? The system or the people?Originally posted by HighLordDave Let me ask you this: do you live in a state that allows voters to vote a straight-party ticket by pressing a single lever or marking a single column on the ballot? Do you know people who vote straight-party tickets? If you don't, you are a very fortunate person.
My argument is not that third parties cannot be effective. Nor is it that individuals cannot make a difference. My argument is that the Democrats and Republicans have installed themselves in power and have made it very hard for anyone else to have a say or a share in the power. I also believe that people vote in blocs regardless of their individual beliefs and that the public is easily swayed by advertising and flashy personalities.