What I propose is that anarchy is not freedom. Ergo, the reduction of bureaucracy is not necessarily a proportional increase in 'freedom' (whatever that is) where at the end the elimination of bureaucracy equals absolute freedom. Please do keep up. You can start by providing your own definition of 'freedom'.Originally Posted by 120mm
Freedom is a 'group thing'. Your freedom is defined in relation to others.Commie much? We had a perfectly functional checks and balances before our benign "Master Class" decided that freedom is a "group thing".
Here some of the "northing of worth" that "bureaucrats" do to "collect a check": military service, law enforcement, border security, drug interdiction, food inspection, civil aviation safety enforcement, building codes, postal delivery, scientific research, and teaching. Just because your view of politics is narcassitic and socio-pathic, it doesn't mean the world is evil."The world is more complex" is a justification for bureacrats to collect a check to do nothing of worth, and often to do evil.
And as the world has become more complex, so has the nature of the American civil service - most federal employees are older, more educated, and work in white collar position related to analysis, knowledge management, and idea generation. Even so, over the last 60 years, the ratio of population to federal employee has widened, and the role of states in local issues has expanded significantly; meaning that the "overcentralized mess" you invented doesn't actually exist. The 2008 crash hit the local and state governments hardest, since they are the "most responsive" to local conditions; in other words, a centralized federal government was best positioned to withstand the crisis and continue to provide services.
Because that worked so well for blacks in the American south for the last 300 years...Local governance, nested and embedded in a small central federation is worlds more efficient, responsive governmment compared to the overcentralized mess we are building.
Bookmarks