And as long as corporations are considered to be legal persons who can make 
unlimited political contributions and create super pacs, nothing will change.  
I believe that, unfortunately, real change will only come with tragic, painful 
crisis and perhaps "collapse" (ref. Jarred Diamond).  This was one of the 
conclusions a number of us in the UN came to and we sometimes created small  
"crises" to create change.


cheers on a snowy day, Paul



-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Roberts <d...@parrot-farm.net>
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com>
Sent: Sun, Jan 8, 2012 9:29 am
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: Winds of Change


          
Steve,
Joel Grey and Liza Minille said it all: Money money money makes the world go 
'round.  As long as our laws allow elected Congressmen to accept corporate 
lobbyist special interest bribes, nothing will change.
Sent from my Kindle Fire



From: Steve Smith <sasm...@swcp.com>
Sent: Sun Jan 08 14:11:26 MST 2012
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: Winds of Change


    Doug, et al-
    
    Despite my participation in debunking the specifics of the    chain-mail 
attributed to Warren Buffet, I am sympathetic with some    if not most of it's 
tone and message.  I believe that our political    strata, both at state and 
federal levels are generally corrupt, sold    out, or at least out of touch 
with what "we the people" want, and    the perqs of the office only serve to 
make them more apart.    On    the other hand, I have a nose for conspiracy 
theories that take any    good issue and blow it out of proportion and inject 
their own brand    of craziness.
    
    The Founding Fathers *may have* envisioned citizen legislators, but    we 
should also remember that at the time, *citizens* were defined by    property 
ownership, gender and race.   So, the "Citizen Legislators"    they envisioned 
were "landed (white) gentlemen" who were both    educated and who had 
significant vested interests in the economy...     The rest (of us?) *were* the 
ignorant unwashed masses to them, as I    fear we continue to be to "them".
    
    I love the phrasing you use here Doug, I'm suspecting you were quite    
deliberate in the allusion implied with "47% of the population    *liked* Sara 
Palin for president".    It may not be long before most    of the population 
believes that they can (and should be able to)    elect a president over 
Facebook!  I'd like to believe that 50% of    that 47% were really "liking" 
Tina Fey or Lisa Ann without realizing    that either of these *actresses* were 
not Sara herself anyway...
    
    I've always been offended by how much our election process looks    like a 
popularity contest.  Which reminds me... is anyone following    "Americans 
Elect" still?   I'm still getting their mailings... 
    
    - Steve
    
            
And how, in country where 47% of the population liked Sarah        Palin for 
president do you envision this version of Utopia        evolving, Marcus?
      Sent from my Kindle Fire
      
      
        
        From: "Marcus G. Daniels" <mar...@snoutfarm.com>
        Sent: Sun Jan 08 13:00:52 MST 2012
        To: friam@redfish.com
        Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: Winds of Change
      
      
      On 1/8/12 11:23 AM, Douglas Roberts wrote:
      
        
          
            
              
                
                  
                    
                      
                        
The Founding                              Fathers envisioned citizen 
legislators, so                              ours should serve their term(s), 
then go                              home and back to work.
                          
                        
                      
                    
                  
                
              
            
          
        
      
      I want professionals working on my behalf.   I want skeptical      
decision makers that can engage lobbyists (small and large) and      force them 
to provide public arguments for what it is they want.        I want leaders to 
be comfortable publicly _laughing at_ lobbyist      requests when those 
requests don't advance the greater good.   So      no, I don't want Congress on 
a still shorter leash.  That's the      problem in my opinion:  Congress 
typically panders to the voting      blocks that are easiest to manipulate, and 
otherwise is slave to      individuals and groups with money.   I don't see why 
short-term      representation by distracted, overwhelmed, and inexperienced    
  people will be any better.  
      
      Marcus
      
      
      
      
      
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
    
    
  
 
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

 
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Reply via email to