you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]philandy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So are there good uses for supporting the dialectic? Also, besides intentions and actions, a politician's record, money, cliques, and clout are equally important.

A more recent example of record is Mitt Romney, who claims to be conservative yet has no solid record of anything. A more recent example of money and clique is Hugo Chávez who had everything and lost it all, and ascribed an entire country to fairly strong socialism. A more recent example of clout is Kim Jong Un, while dictating a country considers himself a deity. Obviously, all countries have such examples like China who is rolling out a social clout economy of all things.

On leadership, why does there have to be any today? There's toolings for most anything, and platforms for most anything else. Sure leadership can be useful, however it's being used to a fault.

On a republic, I disagree. Republics don't work; Equity does. Capital "E" because that's what the US Bill of Rights leverages, as in prescient. Why has the US fallen into the trappings of a Republic, laws, when it has the foundations for a full nationwide Chancery Court? Two terms: checks and balances, leading to what equality really is about.

Perhaps the concept of a person in power is broken, as it is up to their whims that things are taken care of.