[MD] Contents of Moq_Discuss Digest, Vol 21, Issue 8

[Platt Holden]

Hi Horse,

> But that's my point. You only get to elect those that are either put up or
> put themselves up for election and those that seek office are generally
> unfit for office. People who actively seek power are the worst ones that
> you could elect. In general they're bought and paid for! Candidates for
> office have to fit within a certain profile in order to get themselves
> selected or even be selectable for election.

Is this also pretty much the situation in Briton? In all Western nations?

> Why not adopt a different method of selection?
> 
> Do we even really need to vote for them? After all, when you (not you
> personally obviously) go to trial do you get to vote for the jury? Do you
> trust your judicial system? If not what would you prefer?

I don't always trust the jury system, the O.J. Simpson verdict being a 
case in point. But, I cannot think of a preferable system. 

> I'm not sure exactly how your trial by jury system works in selecting a
> jury but over here it's pretty much a process of selecting a jury at random
> from the population that are eligible to vote. They are a 'jury of peers'
> (apparently) and in general provide for a pretty reasonable system of
> justice. Not perfect by any means but pretty good.

Yes, it works the same here. And yes, I agree, not perfect but pretty 
good.

> So maybe do something along those lines because at the moment we're 
> stuck with a system which encourages the worst sort of people it's 
> possible to elect - take a good look at what we've got see what you 
> think. It really isn't looking good for the future with the current crop of
> corrupt, lying, duplicitous frauds that we currently have.

I applaud your effort to come up with a different system in order to 
assure we get good leaders. But, I don't think just a dozen or so people
picked at random from a national population of 300 million is going to do
the job. The pressure and opportunity for "jury fixing" is simply too 
great.  Nor do I think that our present system is all that bad. After all,
it worked to elect leaders like Lincoln and Churchill, to name two among
many good ones. History will be the judge of our current leaders. I 
remember well how Harry Truman was pilloried as an incompetent boob
while he was in office. Today he's considered to be one of our better 
Presidents.

> The way we elect our leaders and representatives is based on a system that
> was corrupt when it began - it's just gotten a lot worse since then.
> 
> I'm starting to think that a benevolent dictatorship is preferable.

Well, there's something to be said for that option. But, how about the 
option of weakening the power of the government  to the extent that it
makes no difference who runs it because they can't interfere with
we good people who just want to do the right thing and get on with our 
lives?

That would be my choice.

Regards,
Platt