-----Original Message-----


Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 8:22 PM
To:

Subject: RE: lice


ok - ill take the bait.

this is a difficult question - a variation of which is that people get the leaders that they deserve. but the heart of the question goes to the heart of democracy and freedom as we were taught to know it.

cos if u accept the simplistic assertion that people get the leaders they deserve, then democracy is alive to some extent - but that is arguably predicated upon the assumption that people vote according to their needs/desires. but at some levels, when we witness the disgusting (explicit and implicit) corruption and cronyism and nepotism that we are currently seeing, then its important to consider the gap between what people are voting for, and what they think they are voting for. if there is a gap, then there is a problem with the entire basis of democracy.

and so when u see that fox is the most popular channel and u can verify that the fox audience is the most misinformed - specifically about a) saddam/alq b) saddam 911 c) iraq/wmd - then u have to ask whether the people are really to blame - whether they get wot they deserve. do they deserve to be lied to and killed and stolen from, for the crime of trusting the president? or for trusting their media? it seems like a horrendous punishment for a presumably reasonable mistake.

it would be harsh therefore to say the americans deserve it. i think they have been duped, but thats different. and if it takes a me with unlimited time to glimpse what is going on, then i cant blame others for not getting the full picture. its more a testament to ailes and rove than a criticism of the molasses. the reason they do what they do is cos its effective. otherwise thered be no point even trying.

an alternative view is that people really do get what they deserve, *and* that u take a platonic view of the noble lie. ie the people should be lied to for their own good. if u think everyone is stupid, or uneducated, then the noble lie is arguably justifiable - but that relies on the assumption that those who *know* better, will *do* better. (as well as assuming the troublesome ability to identify the wise). do people deserve the consequences of choosing the wrong people to lie to them? praps. do they have much of a choice? can they be blamed 4 that? who knows.

a larger question politically, is whether liberal market ideology is dead. is the current us situation the pinnacle of free market ideology - is this what inevitably happens when u take a free market to the extreme? or is it possible to have a free mkt democracy that doesnt get hijacked by corruption and cronyism? is any political system which is immune from corruption and cronyism? or should we assume that corruption and cronyism are inherent elements of any social contract? praps the idea of america was lucky to live as long as she did. human nature doesnt seem to change - thats why madison et al had all the requisite protections built in. praps we should be thankful that theyve lasted so long - and now they are being systematically removed. twas nice to ye.

and deserve wotever lies they