If representatives narcissists, why equitable legislation?
Posted: April 7th, 2017, 9:31 am
I took the following two quotes from another thread by other registered users here, (typed in different font colours) and HEAVILY edited them to make a point. Therefore please note that these are NOT straight quotes.
I've never heard a politician answer a question where they weren't lying or incorrect or else dodge the question and vehemently stress an innocent point to cloud the issue.
The popular perception appears to be that all politicians are by observational evidence either power hungry wannabe dictators, corrupt money grabbers, Machiavellian schemers, incompetent fools or mindless sheep following a party political herd. Or rather a combination of some/all of those things. It is also the popular perception that not many are motivated by a genuine desire to pass legislation which they believe will help people's lives. Popular perception is that they either have to be incompetent or Machiavellian and that those are the only two choices.
Let us ASSUME that the two above views are true for most if not for all the politicians.
My question for debate is: How is it possible, given the above, that the democratic political system favours the management of all levels of society?
I can see two reasons:
1. The politicians, notwithstanding their motives and power, do good work in order to keep their jobs. If they did a bad job, they would lose their jobs. By not getting elected or reelected.
2. The politicians, notwithstanding their motives and power, do good work because they have the insight to know that a good economy and justice system which favours all is better for all than a skewed economy or justice system which favours some and disfavours some others.
The questions are:
- Is either of my theories right?
- If both of my theories are wrong, is my assumption incorrect? (the assumption that politicians do good work that benefit all levels of society.)
- If both of my theories are wrong, and politicians still do good work, then what is the explanation YOU can offer?
- Is it possible only one of my assumpitons is wrong, the one that is described by the quotes, and is perhaps negated by the truth that a MAJORITY of all politicians are not Machiavelian or incompetent? Because in legistlation majority votes rule.
I've never heard a politician answer a question where they weren't lying or incorrect or else dodge the question and vehemently stress an innocent point to cloud the issue.
The popular perception appears to be that all politicians are by observational evidence either power hungry wannabe dictators, corrupt money grabbers, Machiavellian schemers, incompetent fools or mindless sheep following a party political herd. Or rather a combination of some/all of those things. It is also the popular perception that not many are motivated by a genuine desire to pass legislation which they believe will help people's lives. Popular perception is that they either have to be incompetent or Machiavellian and that those are the only two choices.
Let us ASSUME that the two above views are true for most if not for all the politicians.
My question for debate is: How is it possible, given the above, that the democratic political system favours the management of all levels of society?
I can see two reasons:
1. The politicians, notwithstanding their motives and power, do good work in order to keep their jobs. If they did a bad job, they would lose their jobs. By not getting elected or reelected.
2. The politicians, notwithstanding their motives and power, do good work because they have the insight to know that a good economy and justice system which favours all is better for all than a skewed economy or justice system which favours some and disfavours some others.
The questions are:
- Is either of my theories right?
- If both of my theories are wrong, is my assumption incorrect? (the assumption that politicians do good work that benefit all levels of society.)
- If both of my theories are wrong, and politicians still do good work, then what is the explanation YOU can offer?
- Is it possible only one of my assumpitons is wrong, the one that is described by the quotes, and is perhaps negated by the truth that a MAJORITY of all politicians are not Machiavelian or incompetent? Because in legistlation majority votes rule.