my problem with this is that you can't even survive without being curropt and power abusive. this guy, Ted Cruz, he said he is running for elections, what chance do you think he has? assuming he is not going to get money and power and use them unethically to promote himself, he will never even be noticed in the elections. in fact i'm going to be he had to pay to be in that interview. it takes only one politican to use those illegal methods to make everyone else use them, in order to still be relevant.
Generally speaking, the problem is that we consent to giving the offices of the government so much power. The government of this country was designed to be minimalist in terms of the power that it has. What it did have authority over was to be done according to the Rule of Law - but it wasn't supposed to have the vast reaching powers that it has today.
We decided, years ago: "Hey, let's allow them to regulate our businesses to keep us safer."
Translation: "Politicians now have the authority to shut businesses down. All aspiring businessmen, become very good friends with your congressman."
"Let's say that you can't hire or fire people based on race."
Translation: "Got fired? Got passed over for promotion? File a lawsuit."
Business reaction: "Do not 'take the risk' on distinguished minorities. Lawsuits regarding hiring standards are rarely pursued and hard to throw out - but if you need to fire a distinguishable minority from a rough background - you very well may have to commit to a court battle and/or settlement."
what we need is to change the system, i don't trust humans to not cheat when they get the chance. the only solution i see is to refine the system until cheating is either impossible or not viable. but that will require us to make changes to for instance the congress that only the congress can make (and isn't going to). there is a broken system and people in power that want it to remain broken.
The problem is that we see them as having power that isn't theirs.
At any time, the people can withdraw their support of the government or the people in offices.
The power of the government is ours. We lend it to them because it lessens the burden of organization on our individual pursuits within the larger economy of society.
If they abuse it - we have not just the right, but the responsibility to our interests and those of our children, to reclaim that authority. That is why we have a second amendment.
The problem is that people have become corrupt. How many would revolt against Social Security? Against Medicare? Medicaid? Food Stamps?
It's a direct conflict of interest. People have become dependent upon those programs for all manner of reasons. Very few will give up those securities in the pursuit of -your- liberty. They are content to believe in the delusion that they are being paid what the government owes them for their contribution. They are too deluded to realize that there is no "fund" for Social Security - it is a system where the young and working are stolen from to support self-entitled senior citizens.
Our grandfathers and great grandfathers, in a time of insecurity, decided to enter into an agreement where the government would steal from their children and grandchildren in order to pay for their retirement.
They were deceived, largely - but it does not excuse or change the reality of what they did.
Now, our parents and grandparents - who have been stolen from their entire working life - feel entitled to the payments that are due on our backs. They believe there is actually money in an account somewhere that they paid into, and now they will receive.
It is easy to understand why they would fail to understand why I see the system as fundamentally evil and that it should be destroyed with extreme prejudice.
It's why groups like AARP have become so hideously corrupt.
It's not that the system needs to be 'changed.'
It's that the system needs to be completely and totally destroyed - then rebuilt based upon the principles our Nation was founded upon and the lessons we've since learned. Such as making term limits mandatory and allowing a state to recall (and ritualistically sacrifice) their representatives.
The less our national government 'accomplishes' - the better. Very little of anything they do actually improves the country. We don't want 'bipartisanship' and 'cooperation' up there. We want them to bitterly detest each other as much as Californians detest the idea of Missouri writing their laws. Only when some issue so fundamentally earth-shattering that it gets them to all agree upon what needs to be done should it happen. And even then - I would say that after each bill is passed, congressmen should be purged from life. If what they intend to do is not going to benefit what they leave behind - it won't benefit the country after they are out of office.
Generally speaking - our country is too afraid of death for it to actually attain any kind of stable democratic republic. We fear far too much - and politicians always offer security in exchange for power.
The success of the bold breeds complacency in their heirs. That complacency always gives way to fear - leading to liberties being bartered for security.