> Does something that I could do nothing about > automatically make me unfit to vote?
Not at all. But in that proposed system, it would. You, sir, would have been caught in the cracks. > is a soldier who did > frontline work in Korea or 'Nam automatically more qualified to make > international or national economic or trade policy than an economist or > diplomat who spent those years learning economics or international > affairs? I think the point of this proposed system (and it's purely an academic exercise!) is more of a moral one than one of technical training. It has an appeal, in that it tries to weed out the elitist types from the decision-making apparatus. You, in this proposed world, would not have been eligible to vote, but I'm not sure that would have any bearing on whether you could have been elected, or even been in the civil service. I, also, would not have been franchised. Especially disenfranchised would be that mass of people who are too frightened to actually ever _do_ anything! (Such fear-driven types would either never enlist, or would wash out in basic training. These are the types who tend to vote for the 'nanny state', against which we should _all_ be afraid.) I have no idea whether such a system would be any more or less workable in the long run than what we have, but it's interesting to think about. -- Jim _______________________________________ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
