Quote:
Originally Posted by Cimarron29414
Really? Do you not see the irony in this statement? I'm sorry but I have to call you out on this. Every policy I have ever seen you support has concentrated power in the government and away from individuals. Now, because that government misuses the power you so willingly handed them (well, not you because you are not an American, but would have done it had you been one) you bemoan that the power is no longer in the individual?
|
Where power is concerned, we cannot so easily pin responsibility on the level of the individual. This is because power isn't concentrated in individuals so much as in groups or organizations, both political and nonpartisan.
Yes, I believe in a strong central government, but I also believe in a certain level of individual power. Unfortunately individual power is limited, which is why we give power to larger groups. It's an intricate social system that, with hope, will work to ensure the fair treatment of individuals, in addition to ensuring the rights and freedoms of individuals. This is what I mean by power being concentrated more in groups rather than the individual.
If an individual wants to make changes, said individual won't go far on his or her own. This is a reality when working within a society.
My comments referred to the problem of not being able to pin blame or responsibility in cases where it could be said that a group is responsible. Blame Bush? No, blame his administration; blame the Republicans; blame complacent taxpayers. See, you don't get very far.
This is why systems of power require systems of checks and balances to ensure empowered groups are subject to the rule of law. I'm more familiar with the Canadian government system than I am with the American system. You want to know what happens when the shit hits the fan here? Depending on the situation, there is a vote of non-confidence. And when opposing parties/members get enough votes for that? Goodbye government. It gets flushed and we head to the polls to get the public's opinion how the new government should be made up.
We also have several arm's reach bodies that act as watchdogs on the various offices of government. The Members of Parliament can use the information reported therein as material for their proceedings in the House. It's a matter of public record. Even matters that aren't for public record, you can be sure the government is going to be held accountable when it comes to light that the government has done something untoward.
But that's Canada. I don't see this kind of thing happening much in the U.S. Maybe I'm missing something. What recourse does the American public have?
EDIT: And what roachboy said, especially the part about the fiction author/failed philosopher Ayn Rand.