Democracy as it is currently managed is headed for conflict

We can all vote and most of us do.  And, I suppose, that’s a good thing.  Democracy. Wahoo.  But, bear this in mind; 10 million people CAN be wrong and, if you had any doubts, look south of the border.  10 million people supporting Trump ARE wrong.  But they are doing it mostly because they are angry.  So, this is a bit of a revolution by the blue-collar poor, no?

Trump has emerged as the dark horse and, for that alone, he has to be admired.  And, on the surface, he did it is his way.  He LOOKS like a revolutionary.  He has the hair.

Or is he?  Democracy now needs dough to work.  Seems you can hardly get elected dog-catcher in the US without a wad of cash behind you and so Democracy as it is currently practiced is really like Thoroughbred racing. Appaloosas, Bays, Roans, draft and 1/4 horses need not apply.   The race is reserved for those ‘thoroughbreds’ with big money behind them.  Trump may be an outside breeder but he is a breeder nevertheless.

It’s the same for all politicians.

But why would BIG DOUGH be so willing to support politicians at such a high level?  Only because supported politicians give back to BIG DOUGH so that BIG DOUGH gets bigger. And the ‘bought’ politicians do it in the form of contracts and NON enforcement of laws, regulations and monitoring.  EXACTLY as the Auditor General of BC said of the ministry of mines just last week.  Exactly as BC Hydro is being eaten out from the centre by corruption and exactly as highways and tunnels and bridges have done so for all the favourite horses in the government’s stable.

BC is corrupt.  The Auditor General said so.

Most people already know this but they continue to vote for the ideals espoused by party-marketers but which are NOT in the least present in the party getting their vote.  Why are we so stupid? TRUMP: “I am going to make America great again!”  People believe that!? Christy Clark: “We are the government for the nurturing of family and children!”. People believe that?”

But this blog is not about just another political rant.  It is about the funding of elections and politicians.  The more expensive democracy is, the more corrupt it becomes.  The more it costs a politician to get a vote, the more that politician owes the vote-getter.  We have corrupted our own system by making it too expensive for anyone but the ‘thoroughbreds’ to participate in it.

Capitalism corrupted it.

Now, take a breath….for just a minute……and think about it..….we are a society committed to Capitalism.  And we are a society committed to Democracy.  In effect, we are a committed to two incompatible ideals.  Unless there is a fire-wall separation of the two, in a formal and enforceable way, one will corrupt the other.  It always does.

If the people really had the power, they would take the BIG DOUGH away from the less than .001% so even Democracy, if it had power, would destabilize the society.  ‘Course ‘the people rarely get that chance to take the capital away.  Capital would flee.  It does all the time.  As it stands, capital has the edge.  It usually does.  Capital used to be less mobile than labour but they have fixed that.  Capital is now quick-like-bunny to run and hide.  They keep their capital liquid.

With all the stealth wealth on one side of the scales and all the increasing numbers of less mobile poor on the other, capital is making more people poor labourers (enslaving labour to house purchasing was a smart tactic by banks/capital.  That made the suckers less mobile) rather than allowing a portion to make it up the ladder to middle class or even a few making it to upper class. The inequality of wealth distribution is so out of balance now, anyone can be bought.

For anything.

Capital rules.

That attracts people like Trump.  But it always has.  The elites know how to buy power and they have done so for decades.  The last time the people had any power, it really was by way of the union movements and they squandered their power then by becoming corrupt, too.

The next time people wanted power but didn’t want to be corrupted, they went Flower-power….a weak but effective eschewing of money for health, beauty and love. And, as weak as Flower-power was, it impacted the society and the boomers went hippy. Many opted out. The 60’s and 70’s were real.

Adam Smith stated that the economy worked on capital and labour getting together.  But getting together on some kind of equal basis.  If labour is SLAVE labour, that ain’t ‘getting together’. And that is where we are quickly heading.  I think we are already there but I have an exaggerated sense of freedom so I reacted badly a long time ago and, like petulant, paranoid, sensitive-to-change-and-threatened capital, I flew quickly from the situation.

I figured, if Capital can flee, so can this dumb labourer.  So, I flew.

The point is: Capital and labour cannot be so out of balance.  But it is.  And that portends of conflict.  The inequality is HUGE and getting huger.  Does that mean the conflict will be huge?  Or simply prompt a huge exodus?  And, if it is fleeing that is the option chosen by the slaves, where do they go?  Nobody is parting the Red Sea these days.

Even with the loss of the Panama/Bahamian/Isle of Man/Swiss havens, Capital will always be welcome.  Anywhere.  But the poor?  No one wants the poor, the tired and the huddled masses anymore.

19 thoughts on “Democracy as it is currently managed is headed for conflict

  1. What type of capitalism do you mean? If you mean Turbo Capitalism then there will be conflict. “Refers to an unregulated form of capitalism with financial deregulation, privatisation and lower tax on high earners. Turbo capitalism involves:

    Absence of regulation for banking /finance system. This encourages banks to take risks and pursue profit through complex financial derivatives rather than basic principles of attracting deposits and lending.
    Less regulation on abuse of monopoly power.
    Lower income tax and lower capital gains tax giving greater rewards to high income earners.
    An unregulated labour market, where it is easy to hire and fire workers, and very limited regulation about working conditions.
    The term ‘turbo capitalism’ was coined in 1989 by Edward Lattwak, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, in his book “Turbo-Capitalism: Winners and Losers in the Global Economy“, (New York, 1999). It reflected on the changes to capitalist societies such as US and UK since 1980. The 1980s were a period of financial deregulation, privatisation and tax cuts for the wealthy. Arguably, this led to rising income inequality and also the financial deregulation played a key role in the unsustainable credit bubble of 2001-2007. Turbo capitalism could also be describe as laissez faire capitalism.


    • I think ‘turbo’ is appropriate….the de-reg’d system spun faster and heated up. Wore out faster, too. Regan, the great financial emancipator, was to blame more than anyone, I suppose. And Thatcher. But Thatcher was in response to a moribund union-bound economy that simply would NOT work. Regan was just a toady for the ‘poor’ corporate elite.
      But my point is a bit different. In Capitalism, Adam Smith’s version, Amory Lovin’s version or even the corrupt version we have all come to know, is working against the aims of Democracy. Democracy is common good as determined by the common people. But can they when they are hungry, lied to, propaganda’d and made fearful? Can they when their representatives are held hostage by their corporate donors and lobbied to death?
      The US has a choice to make. Right now crony capitalism and democracy are not on speaking terms.


  2. Smith was wrote in the 18th century a twelve volume discussion on why some nations are wealthy because they have an industrial base and laissez faire economics. They also had workhouses, people working mills or mines fourteen to sixteen hours per day(including men, women and children) the enclosure acts kicked peasants off the land, transportations for petty crimes, 220 crimes were punishable by death and an entire family working often did not earn enough for the basics of life. A widely held belief in certain sections of society believed that poverty was caused by the bad habits of the poor: their preference for drinking and gambling, for example, or through their own simple laziness. Clearly wealth was amassed on the backs of the underclass. In many parts of the world it still is. We continue to hear regulation fetters capitalism.


    • I am not a BIG fan, either. I can’t see any other way working, tho. Capitalism totally FREE reign would create Mega Trumps and more bullies than we have now. I do not know what will work but harnessing the human tendencies to ambition and status and crap seems at least somewhat ‘natural’. Organic. But then again, if we were all free, there would be no cops and such and you could just kill the local scalliwag if he got too much into the community larder. I guess what I am saying is that the first thing capital does is protect capital. That means vaults, cops, Panama, lawyers and laws. So, we are NOT free. But they are.


      • Yes you are correct, the prime directive is to create the conditions that allow capitalism to thrive. Which it has. The battle against any other economic system persists in the most developed parts of the world. An economic system that works very well is to be found in the Nordic countries. The mixed economy in those countries features free health care,free post secondary education, free day care, free elderly care, no national debt. Private enterprise is encouraged as is world wide trade. Unemployment is under 5%. What is the catch? It’s economy is regulated and the people retain ownership of the natural resources of the
        country. Taxes remain high but so is the quality of life.


  3. I agree that money corrupts.
    But the capitalist system? While far from perfect, it sure beats socialism( see Venezuala or Brazil intheir current economic meltdown). I also agree that ANY system left unchecked will corrupt but it takes funding.
    Money corrupts.
    One only has to see some of the decisions that the NDP make to know that there was a union mega fundraiser and promises made somewhere in the closet.
    Religious money corrupts politicians. Catholic churches for years, Sikh temples funding overseas terrorism. Saudi Royal family billions poured into extreme fundamentalist madrasses to tell people how to vote….or worse.
    Money has no place in a democratic election.
    Forget the fund raising. Forget the bending of rules to allow individuals to pay for commercials or air time.

    Elections should be a rational series of debates held on prepaid public televison.
    Elections should be severely limited in advertising dollars paid for by taxpayers. NOT special interest groups. Any other advertisments,ie tv, radio, etc. BANNED.
    Internet election spam should be shut down or fined.
    Elections should be no longer than 60 days. Preferably 30 days.
    Better yet.
    Why dont we just fire all the politicians (starting with the Senate FIRST) and let accountants run everything for one term….ie balance the budget, upgrade aging infrastructure, audit govt agencies YEARLY……etc etc.etc.
    and if they do ok……..
    Have a referendum to see if we want to continue….


    • How does one deal with the media? The assumption of all political parties is that the media has a bias directed towards them. How to avoid media spin!


      • The only way to deal with media spin is to have LOTS of media. Checks and balances. Like the party game where a story is passed around by whispering in your ear, all stories are biased. I have been ‘at the centre of a few stories’ and the media NEVER got it right. ‘Course, I was working with delinquent youth and skid row and refugees and boat people and the list goes on so I was always golden….but it was not true. NOT factual. They basically wrote what they saw and felt. And that will always be the case. It’s why they call it history – HIS story. The only way to handle that is to have ten or more media sources in your life. AND always pick some that you KNOW you won’t like.


    • I like our revisions. Works for me – except for the bloody accountants. Still, I am NOT against Capitalism. I am against CORRUPT capitalism. And I don’t think we have ever seen any other kind. Read Hawken/Lovins Natural Capitalism. You’ll become a fan. But it ain’t what you’ve seen so far. Still CAPITALISM, tho.


  4. On an interesting note .
    Even Ted Cruz spoke today on Capital Hill about the “Volcanic anger” he’s witnessed on the campaign.
    People in the US are PISSED at the current “system” and who knows what way they’ll vote in Nov. The 2008 economic meltdown made a lot of voters penniless and this is their time to kick some electoral ass
    I thought Hillary Clinton would mop the floor with Trump but current polls show them neck and neck…..
    5 more months to go will seem like an eternity for some.


    • No one LIKES Hillary. She has the experience. They may think she can do the job. They may think she’s the politician’s politician. But they DO NOT like her. Trudeau had nothing but good looks, a better last name and, it turns out, he is likable (to some). But smarts? Resume? Experience? Nada. So, more and more elections are popularity contests. NOT policy. NOT principles. But hair, eyes and teeth. It’s the main reason I do not run. Small beady eyes, short grey crew cut and I never smile. I look like Mike Duffy, only uglier. I wouldn’t have a chance even I was the second coming.


        • Venezuela has the highest standard of living in Latin America. Canadians are flocking there because of its cost of living which is roughly 43% of the cost of living in Canada. Canadian OAPs do well there. Beer is one dollar a bottle. Red Green


          • Hell, the cost of living in the USA is 43% of what Canadians pay……still, it is good to know. Venezuela, eh? Beer a buck, eh? So, what is the cost of duct tape, Red?


          • I’m skeptical of this categorical claim, are not Mexico and Chile included in Latin America, haven’t googled twat,,, just sayin ,,,, as jdc might say


      • So, what’s your point? No one LIKES Hillary but they think she can do the job. Everyone (well, some) LIKES Trudeau’s hair, eyes and teeth but don’t think he can do the job.
        You’ve got (some) hair, never smile (to expose teeth) and you could wear dark glasses; and everyone LIKES you. And a fence post with short grey crew cut could easily win against the current field!
        Yeh, on second thought, I wouldn’t do it either. Great reasons.


  5. Take the the power back , by first voting with your wallet i.e. don’t buy from those who find bigger profits by moving there capital away from our local economy’s. I guess what we really need is a more plugged in consumer who takes an interest in there local economies and understands the implications of their purchasing decisions. The current education system strips critical thinking skills from the masses and replaces them with the ability to memorize and regurgitate useless facts

    Decentralize power , put power back in the hands of the people in their local areas. Then your concerns you can be sure your issues will be dealt with. It’s funny our centralized system can find substantial funds for Syrians yet finds it more difficult to help those in Fort MacMurray ! I’m sure localized power would come to a more reasonable decision in a more timely manner.

    The system we call democracy is corrupt to the core and has long since been purchased by special interests of which we are not!

    Hope all is well!

    Dwayne Donald Mclean


  6. @ Anonymous at 5:55pm May 11
    “Venezuela has the highest standard of living in Latin America. ”

    A complete lie. The Hugo Chavez experiment with the socialist “Bolivarian revolution” has crushed the economy into a nightmare of hours long line ups for such basic commodities as …..toilet paper.

    “Canadians are flocking there because of its cost of living which is roughly 43% of the cost of living in Canada. Canadian OAPs do well there. Beer is one dollar a bottle.” Red Green.

    Canadians are flocking there…….stats to back this ridiculous falsehood up?

    I spoke to a ships engineer that recently spent a day in Colon before traversing the Panama Canal…….He said the city was very appropriately named.
    As for the cheap beer……thats what happens when your economy is entirely based on one export commodity….oil…..and its price falls from $140 a barrel to $40. The dictators that run venezuela are rank amateurs and thugs with not one iota of fiscal intelligence.

    Venzuela…..where the socialist thugs beat, jail and murder the political opposition all for the “greater good ” in a “utopian ” nightmare that would make George Orwell proud.

    I’d rather live in China. At least there the beer is cheaper than a buck a bottle and the communist thugs pretend to be capitalists.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.