A modern absolute ruler probably would reply heavily on A.I. and expert systems to rule the world. Because humans could be designed from the feet up genetically someday, perhaps becoming like pets to Artificial Intelligence, it would be a good idea to have a human moderator with dictatorial power to pull the plug on the A.I. machine.
The human supervisor might need a squeal oversight committee with lots of whistle blowers to overcome the dictator’s supervision of the A.I. Like the dictators of the Roman Republic the world ruler’s term of office would be limited to a couple years (it was one year renewable in Republican Rome).
It is possible that global warming, mass extinctions and the limits of Earth’s carrying capacity will drive human civilization to select a dictator for a year to run things with heavy condign power implementation in order to survive- especially if politicians cannot even balance a federal budget or avoid deficits reaching dozens of trillions of dollars in a democratic paradigm.
In some respects the ancient political philosophy paradigms that Aristotle wrote of in The Politics haven't changed. The basic paradigm of democracy collapsing into tyranny because the voters and politicians aren't competent at public affairs remains a prospect for voters reestablishing an imperium via concentrated wealth perhaps, or simply and election.
Neither has the Republic's paradigm of ancient Rome in the Republican era lost its Platonic power. Besides being a Republic with a limited franchise that had not yet degraded into democracy with universal franchise, the Roman Republic appointed a dictator whenever existential crisis (usually war) threatened. Because the Romans appointed a Master of the Horse in addition to Dictator for a Year, the Republic resembled reasonably well the structure of the Republic of Plato. The paradigms of Dictator and Imperial Empire for the evolutionary course of a democracy are to this day live possibilities for a world incapable of ruling itself intelligently. *
Politics have evolved comparatively little since ancient times. The printing press just gradually allowed more people to read ancient political philosophy. In its absence despotism, monarchy and absolute rule to various degrees prevailed until the past few hundred years. While technology has evolve much, political thought has not. Marx's attempt at fine tuning Plebeian rights was not a significant departure from the basic Aristotelian and Platonic categories.
There are many ways to provide cheap health care for the poor yet both major American parties want to avoid that. Here is an example of a better, cheaper way…
The U.S.Government has politicians that reflect the state of greed and ordinary ignorance about government that has developed following the Reagan administration when a million bi-partisan sycophants used that administration's Cold War emergency fiscal policies as a template for the ordinary way to do business. Financial responsibility was gradually jettisoned over the side of the ship of state by Republicans and Democrats alike. Maybe they believe the global warming end of the world in 12 years will erase the national debt too.
It is the poor that will suffer most from the public debt crisis. Eventually programs that relieve them from suffering and social oppression will be cut back with rhetoric from satiated politicians that appeal to the middle class for support with welfare programs that should benefit just those poor people in need.
If everyone collects on health insurance it will work for no one. The same principle applies to social security. If everyone that pays into it draws from it in retirement it will not work. The federal social security system should pay benefits just to those that need it- it isn't a savings account or a 401K plan. That system should provide just one size payment to all that need it. Work in ten different years and meet a certain earnings threshold and have a maximum annual income and savings balance and the single payment level would be yours. The problem is that those that don't need it feel they have a right to a full refund for what they paid into it thought they don't need it. If health insurance worked that way too, health insurance would probably not work either.
If Americans did not use social security without needing it the actual payments that go in to it would be lower for everyone during their working years. Other government programs could be reformed too.
Maybe the federal government should divert a portion of present social security deductions to a floating bond program at a 50-50 ratio. If people don't need a social security check they would at least get their bond value payoff.
One may have confidence that politicians will just argue and enrich themselves (and an aristocracy) of their own disposition. One may have confidence that politicians will just argue and enrich themselves (and an aristocracy) of their own disposition. One world ruler with the appropriate tools will seem like a glimmer of hope during roilsome ecospheric and social decay that may lie ahead.
*Socialism and communism are a way of ossifying the egalitarian elements of democracy concerning economy and social status. They too however lead to collapse and tyranny; a dictatorship of the proletariat, or rather, a dictatorship from the proletariat. In other words, a dictator like Joseph Stalin arises from the insider, elite party cadre to eliminate rival cadre.
The human supervisor might need a squeal oversight committee with lots of whistle blowers to overcome the dictator’s supervision of the A.I. Like the dictators of the Roman Republic the world ruler’s term of office would be limited to a couple years (it was one year renewable in Republican Rome).
It is possible that global warming, mass extinctions and the limits of Earth’s carrying capacity will drive human civilization to select a dictator for a year to run things with heavy condign power implementation in order to survive- especially if politicians cannot even balance a federal budget or avoid deficits reaching dozens of trillions of dollars in a democratic paradigm.
In some respects the ancient political philosophy paradigms that Aristotle wrote of in The Politics haven't changed. The basic paradigm of democracy collapsing into tyranny because the voters and politicians aren't competent at public affairs remains a prospect for voters reestablishing an imperium via concentrated wealth perhaps, or simply and election.
Neither has the Republic's paradigm of ancient Rome in the Republican era lost its Platonic power. Besides being a Republic with a limited franchise that had not yet degraded into democracy with universal franchise, the Roman Republic appointed a dictator whenever existential crisis (usually war) threatened. Because the Romans appointed a Master of the Horse in addition to Dictator for a Year, the Republic resembled reasonably well the structure of the Republic of Plato. The paradigms of Dictator and Imperial Empire for the evolutionary course of a democracy are to this day live possibilities for a world incapable of ruling itself intelligently. *
Politics have evolved comparatively little since ancient times. The printing press just gradually allowed more people to read ancient political philosophy. In its absence despotism, monarchy and absolute rule to various degrees prevailed until the past few hundred years. While technology has evolve much, political thought has not. Marx's attempt at fine tuning Plebeian rights was not a significant departure from the basic Aristotelian and Platonic categories.
There are many ways to provide cheap health care for the poor yet both major American parties want to avoid that. Here is an example of a better, cheaper way…
The U.S.Government has politicians that reflect the state of greed and ordinary ignorance about government that has developed following the Reagan administration when a million bi-partisan sycophants used that administration's Cold War emergency fiscal policies as a template for the ordinary way to do business. Financial responsibility was gradually jettisoned over the side of the ship of state by Republicans and Democrats alike. Maybe they believe the global warming end of the world in 12 years will erase the national debt too.
It is the poor that will suffer most from the public debt crisis. Eventually programs that relieve them from suffering and social oppression will be cut back with rhetoric from satiated politicians that appeal to the middle class for support with welfare programs that should benefit just those poor people in need.
If everyone collects on health insurance it will work for no one. The same principle applies to social security. If everyone that pays into it draws from it in retirement it will not work. The federal social security system should pay benefits just to those that need it- it isn't a savings account or a 401K plan. That system should provide just one size payment to all that need it. Work in ten different years and meet a certain earnings threshold and have a maximum annual income and savings balance and the single payment level would be yours. The problem is that those that don't need it feel they have a right to a full refund for what they paid into it thought they don't need it. If health insurance worked that way too, health insurance would probably not work either.
If Americans did not use social security without needing it the actual payments that go in to it would be lower for everyone during their working years. Other government programs could be reformed too.
Maybe the federal government should divert a portion of present social security deductions to a floating bond program at a 50-50 ratio. If people don't need a social security check they would at least get their bond value payoff.
One may have confidence that politicians will just argue and enrich themselves (and an aristocracy) of their own disposition. One may have confidence that politicians will just argue and enrich themselves (and an aristocracy) of their own disposition. One world ruler with the appropriate tools will seem like a glimmer of hope during roilsome ecospheric and social decay that may lie ahead.
*Socialism and communism are a way of ossifying the egalitarian elements of democracy concerning economy and social status. They too however lead to collapse and tyranny; a dictatorship of the proletariat, or rather, a dictatorship from the proletariat. In other words, a dictator like Joseph Stalin arises from the insider, elite party cadre to eliminate rival cadre.
No comments:
Post a Comment