From: JD (jd2@flash.net)
Date: Sun Oct 12 1997 - 20:26:43 MDT
At 05:33 PM 10/12/97 -0400, Dan Clemmensen wrote:
>Geoff Smith wrote:
>>
>
>This is not quite what I had in mind as a starting point. I think we
>need
>to accept that the current economic/political system exists, that it
>works pretty well, and that it has a fairly high inertia.
With a 5.6 trillion dollar debt, 26 trillion aggregate debt, two identical
"parties" pobtificating about inane nonsense like volunteerism and family
values, and Chinese communists buying a California naval base, "well"
hardly describes the situation.
Therefore, the
>most we can expect is gradual movement, except as the system is forced
>to change in response to very rapid technological change. Example:
>technology permits direct democracy and real-time access to all
>government functions, but neither is likely because the system doesn't
>require it: inertia wins.
While technology may permit direct democracy, the Constitution definately
does not.
>JD
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:45:01 MST