Justice in America? I don't think so.

[cc]

Canada is in the others category

Exactly



I'm unaware of any country that has "consistently" had productive and  free leadership via democracy



I can only recall a very few  brief moments / flashes in time that were quickly reversed back into a major reversal of productivity

The opposition is various degrees of the same. If I do vote in this upcoming election, it'll probably be for a party that doesn't currently have seats in parliament.

I understand why. But, however good that feels, it cannot make for a good government



The problem is that all go nowhere. One person does some things good only to see someone else take over and spend their efforts reversing it all .. and back & forth and back and forth



One only achieves efficiency when the direction remains on course indefinitely .. and that is not possible in back and forth (forward / reverse)  directions

[cc]

The real underlying problem is that it takes a person with all the wrong qualities to get elected in the first place



= Catch 22  for having good leaders



I know that as fact as I have seen many  powerful leaders closeup in our own family .. grown up with many of them .. and most of those who became successful in becoming  high office politicians   were "not nice or good" people who cared about anyone beyond themselves .. nor cared beyond obtaining and then retaining power



Thanks Blurt - You got us getting down to the nitty gritty / self-defeating underlying Catch 22 of it all

[Anonymous]

Canada is in the others category

Exactly



I'm unaware of any country that has "consistently" had productive and  free leadership via democracy



I can only recall a very few  brief moments / flashes in time that were quickly reversed back into a major reversal of productivity

The opposition is various degrees of the same. If I do vote in this upcoming election, it'll probably be for a party that doesn't currently have seats in parliament.

Ah, a protest vote.

[Blurt]

The only truly functionally efficient  system is a wise, fair and open  benevolent dictator with a hard skin



Many have suggested that I should volunteer for the role ac_smile

If you ran for dictatrix, I'd vote for you.  

[Blurt]

The real underlying problem is that it takes a person with all the wrong qualities to get elected in the first place



= Catch 22  for having good leaders



I know that as fact as I have seen many  powerful leaders closeup in our own family .. grown up with many of them .. and most of those who became successful in becoming  high office politicians   were "not nice or good" people who cared about anyone beyond themselves .. nor cared beyond obtaining and then retaining power



Thanks Blurt - You got us getting down to the nitty gritty / self-defeating underlying Catch 22 of it all

Yes, this.



I, too, have spent a lot of close quarter time with power puffers of various ilks (including ol' JT himself) and what you say rings true.



Those with the drive to govern often lack the wisdom to do so and those with the wisdom to do so often deliberately eschew politics altogether. It's certainly a conundrum.



Back in the early 2000's, I was asked more than once by local politicians to run for (municipal) office. I declined ever and always because I know for a fact that power--even on a limited or local scale--tends to corrupt. If money were taken out of the equation, it would be a different story.



You're not wrong, Ceec, in asserting that a benevolent (and wise) dictatorship would be a better option than democracy. But again... power, money, corruption will all eventually have their way (and do away) with wisdom and benevolence. It all seems like an impasse to me.

[Odinson]

If we want to get turned into emasculated cucks, lets continue present course.



The goal of the dictatorship is to make the west great again.



Independent, empowered males for the win.

[Blurt]

What's he saying? Canadians don't deserve choices because a privately owned message board doesn't have balance??

Really, Shen. You believe that's what I'm saying? Tsk tsk.

You're the one that tried making the analogy.

No analogy intended, Shen. Just a reality check.



If a political spectrum cannot see the light of day nor a marketplace of ideas be fostered on a platform where, at best, one or two dozen peeps hang out, what makes you think these desiderata are workable in a country of thirty-eight million individuals?



I'm genuinely curious here.

[cc]

The real underlying problem is that it takes a person with all the wrong qualities to get elected in the first place



= Catch 22  for having good leaders



I know that as fact as I have seen many  powerful leaders closeup in our own family .. grown up with many of them .. and most of those who became successful in becoming  high office politicians   were "not nice or good" people who cared about anyone beyond themselves .. nor cared beyond obtaining and then retaining power



Thanks Blurt - You got us getting down to the nitty gritty / self-defeating underlying Catch 22 of it all

Yes, this.



I, too, have spent a lot of close quarter time with power puffers of various ilks (including ol' JT himself) and what you say rings true.



Those with the drive to govern often lack the wisdom to do so and those with the wisdom to do so often deliberately eschew politics altogether. It's certainly a conundrum.



Back in the early 2000's, I was asked more than once by local politicians to run for (municipal) office. I declined ever and always because I know for a fact that power--even on a limited or local scale--tends to corrupt. If money were taken out of the equation, it would be a different story.



You're not wrong, Ceec, in asserting that a benevolent (and wise) dictatorship would be a better option than democracy. But again... power, money, corruption will all eventually have their way (and do away) with wisdom and benevolence. It all seems like an impasse to me.

Could not agree more, Blurt. Between us, I think we covered it. ^^



While the OP tried to put it on a place he deeply hates on, the problem / Catch 22 of democracy  is actually universal and applies everywhere



Was slow getting back as finally got off our  butts and shone up the LUV BRD .... felt good as she has become a major part of of lives / key at this point in time  to our briefly  "escaping" harsh realities

[Anonymous]

What's he saying? Canadians don't deserve choices because a privately owned message board doesn't have balance??

Really, Shen. You believe that's what I'm saying? Tsk tsk.

You're the one that tried making the analogy.

No analogy intended, Shen. Just a reality check.



If a political spectrum cannot see the light of day nor a marketplace of ideas be fostered on a platform where, at best, one or two dozen peeps hang out, what makes you think these desiderata are workable in a country of thirty-eight million individuals?



I'm genuinely curious here.

That settles it for me. Canadians don't deserve a marketplace of iodeas because there's not enough diversity on a tiny message board. Whatever you say.  

[Anonymous]

Canada is in the others category

Exactly



I'm unaware of any country that has "consistently" had productive and  free leadership via democracy



I can only recall a very few  brief moments / flashes in time that were quickly reversed back into a major reversal of productivity

The opposition is various degrees of the same. If I do vote in this upcoming election, it'll probably be for a party that doesn't currently have seats in parliament.

I understand why. But, however good that feels, it cannot make for a good government



The problem is that all go nowhere. One person does some things good only to see someone else take over and spend their efforts reversing it all .. and back & forth and back and forth



One only achieves efficiency when the direction remains on course indefinitely .. and that is not possible in back and forth (forward / reverse)  directions

In the 90's there was a consensus, that smaller government, balanced budgets, and lower taxes was better. It didn't matter which party was in power, they were all forced to live with that political reality. Think NDP premier Roy Romanow in Saskatchewan. Every party voted out of office left their province in good shape. Now, we don't even have a voice advocating fiscal rsponsibility and personal freedoms.

[Frood]

Canada is in the others category

Exactly



I'm unaware of any country that has "consistently" had productive and  free leadership via democracy



I can only recall a very few  brief moments / flashes in time that were quickly reversed back into a major reversal of productivity

The opposition is various degrees of the same. If I do vote in this upcoming election, it'll probably be for a party that doesn't currently have seats in parliament.

I understand why. But, however good that feels, it cannot make for a good government



The problem is that all go nowhere. One person does some things good only to see someone else take over and spend their efforts reversing it all .. and back & forth and back and forth



One only achieves efficiency when the direction remains on course indefinitely .. and that is not possible in back and forth (forward / reverse)  directions

In the 90's there was a consensus, that smaller government, balanced budgets, and lower taxes was better. It didn't matter which party was in power, they were all forced to live with that political reality. Think NDP premier Roy Romanow in Saskatchewan. Every party voted out of office left their province in good shape. Now, we don't even have a voice advocating fiscal rsponsibility and personal freedoms.

It's because none of the Western nations intend to ever pay off their debts....at least with cash.  

[Odinson]

I won't disagree, Ceec.



It's a perennial problem with democracy.



Government of the people, for the people, by the people, is only as sane as the people.



Even Plato saw this over 2,300 years ago.

True. Democracy does not work effectively anywhere.



The only truly functionally efficient  system is a wise, fair and open  benevolent dictator with a hard skin



Many have suggested that I should volunteer for the role ac_smile

A female dictatorship??

If Makeda  & Eva could  in effect do it .. . so can I

The queen of Sheba?





I fucked her once.



She talked about saving money for sex change operation in Thailand the entire time.



Kinda annoying.



Nice booty though and she knew exactly what I wanted.

[Blurt]

Odie, you're an enigma surrounded by a mystery wrapped in a corn dog.

[Anonymous]

We don't have a political spectrum and a marketplace of ideas in this country.

Here's a question, Seoul: do you think The Blue Cashew is a microcosm of that which you claim above?

Prog money owns CNN, MSNBC, CTV, Globull, WaPo,

NYT, TorStar, all social media plus Washington and Ottawa, but it's still not enough for them. They need TBC too.

[Odinson]

Odie, you're an enigma surrounded by a mystery wrapped in a corn dog.

She was talking about Sheba..



Or as I call her, chocolate sweetcakes.