Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

quaker bill

(8,264 posts)
43. There was corruption and hubris, no doubt
Thu Sep 20, 2012, 06:28 AM
Sep 2012

Neither side never got that once they could deliver 100+ thermonuclear weapons on their enemies, they were as safe as they were ever going to get with that tool, and building more of them was a massive waste of resources. Neither we nor them ever read Machiavelli seriously and came to understand that projecting military power to maintain empire was predictably unsustainable over the long haul.

The Soviets never had the natural resource and industrial base to project cold war power for very long. The US had a huge advantage having not been massively bombed in WWII and having become the allies industrial base when Europe was destroyed.

We still suffer with the illusion of control, or that we could be in control if we spent just a bit more on defense. Rmoney has used such language in his stump speech, at least when he isn't "clarifying" his latest gaffe. If we do not back away from it, the illusion will break us just the way it did the Soviets.

We have plenty of corruption and hubris here, and in the absence of a competitive somewhat egalitarian ideology have allowed our country to slip back into the gilded age for income distribution. The problem with this is that real democracy was born from the rise of a middle merchant class 300+ years ago, and it was strongest when that prosperity was even more broadly shared among the workers.

WE are rapidly heading to a place where we have hollowed out society to the point of a new feudalism. A place where there are the wealthy and those who serve them. Real democracy was not born of and will not be sustained in that sort of wealth distribution. This is not theory or speculation, there is no real democracy on the planet that has ever sustained this. There are places that have "elections" that on rare occasion change the specific group of owners running the place, but most actually exchange governments by coup. Between the coups they have rigged elections for entertainment where the owners magically get 99% of the vote.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Sadly accurate about Obama and Wall St., as well... villager Sep 2012 #1
I totally agree. Douglas Carpenter Sep 2012 #2
Dead on. aquart Sep 2012 #3
Disagree. YES vote AGAINST Romney, but still FOR Obama. Tigress DEM Sep 2012 #4
Thank you, TigressDem! Cha Sep 2012 #6
Exactly. speedoo Sep 2012 #8
No it doesn't...... daleanime Sep 2012 #9
The PEOPLE can replace Wall Street. We can run the country and the economy ourselves. Ken Burch Sep 2012 #36
Wall Street is a place of exchange. Lots of little folk are in the game now too. Tigress DEM Sep 2012 #40
I don't think it's brilliant at all. Cha Sep 2012 #5
I suppose that you'd rather people who would vote _against_ Romney just abstain then? Fumesucker Sep 2012 #11
Not at all. I just prefer people vote with the truth in mind. Tigress DEM Sep 2012 #25
Pom Poms HangOnKids Sep 2012 #29
The candidates both need to take on the bankers, instead of siding with them 7wo7rees Sep 2012 #7
Like Obama did in 2010? Tigress DEM Sep 2012 #24
On-line "activism" JNelson6563 Sep 2012 #10
You can tell people that live in blue areas.. Fumesucker Sep 2012 #12
The person who wrote the OP lives in Australia XemaSab Sep 2012 #13
I gathered that given the comment was in the Sidney paper. Fumesucker Sep 2012 #15
What? JNelson6563 Sep 2012 #39
That is true. ananda Sep 2012 #14
Well, Romney is making that quite easy. Tigress DEM Sep 2012 #26
"Because he is running capitalism" is not a criticism, it is a bit of information quaker bill Sep 2012 #16
As long as it is US Policy to represent Capitalism to the world we will have this. Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2012 #17
You would think so, wouldn't you? But the fact that we/they haven't yet makes me wonder. Egalitarian Thug Sep 2012 #20
They're getting a glimpse of it already,... Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2012 #21
Actually what we represent to the world is less important politically quaker bill Sep 2012 #23
That's the thing I mentioned before. During the Cold War America,... Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2012 #30
Damn XemaSab Sep 2012 #31
If the work ethic has gone down it's because the reward is lacking,... Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2012 #37
Precisely quaker bill Sep 2012 #45
Interesting point quaker bill Sep 2012 #41
It was also the hypocracy and the laughability of the language. Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2012 #42
There was corruption and hubris, no doubt quaker bill Sep 2012 #43
One thing you have to admit,.. Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2012 #44
post 23 and 30 PowerToThePeople Sep 2012 #38
This really is brilliant. Maybe send to Rachel, David Corn, etc.? OneGrassRoot Sep 2012 #18
Pretty stupid shit I just read there,,,, trumad Sep 2012 #19
lol... OneGrassRoot Sep 2012 #22
You miss the first three paragraphs? XemaSab Sep 2012 #28
Nope---I just hate false equivalency. trumad Sep 2012 #32
Interesting assessment. n/t porphyrian Sep 2012 #27
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Sep 2012 #33
Even were Rmoney to win, he doesn't get to change the voting system to be like that of corporations treestar Sep 2012 #34
Mitt clearly believes that "the people who OWN the country ought to govern it". Ken Burch Sep 2012 #35
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Brilliant insight buried ...»Reply #43