Some political notes.
|
INTRODUCTION
|
I’ve written this webpage on politics
only to help people think through their political issues
so that they can then move on, to eternal ones.
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
If people tend to remain focussed on this webpage I’ll delete it.
(This is the only webpage I might delete.)
|
.
|
In this section I use the word communism
differently from the way most people use it.
I think I use it in its purest sense.
|
.
|
POLITICS
|
Democracy = every person rules.
Dictatorship = one person rules.
Democracy is more socially complex than dictatorship.
Hence democracy is better
than dictatorship.
,, ,, See earlier
section: GOOD & BAD, RIGHT & WRONG.,,,,,
,, ,, Proportional Representation is more
democratic, by the above definition,
,, ,, than First Past The Post. Perhaps see: Electoral Reform
Society. ,,,,,
|
A
hypothetical, tiny, island nation
that’s so richly blessed
that it doesn’t need money,
cannot have capitalism or
communism.
But it will still need either
democracy or dictatorship.
,, ,, To get agreement on: marriage laws, behavioural laws,
festivals, etc.
This shows that:
Democracy &
dictatorship are about people,
the power structure.
Capitalism &
communism are about money
(which does not
necessarily mean power).
This shows that the two
pairs of mechanisms:
capitalism &
communism
&:
democracy & dictatorship,
can be separated.
This helps to define them.
|
.
|
Capitalism =
everyone can keep all they’ve made.
Communism =
everyone must share all they’ve
made.
Democracy = every
person rules.
Dictatorship = one person rules.
Hence there are four
possible extremes:
democratic communism
democratic capitalism
dictatorial communism
dictatorial capitalism.
All nations fall within these four possible extremes
(like four corners of a table).
|
|
.
|
Or, more
simply:
|
|
The data for the above, abbreviated, charts
is from:
,, ,, Our
World in Data / Democracy index
,, ,, and:
,, ,, Heritage / index
of economic freedom. ,,,,,
You may disagree with Norway’s position
(I certainly do)
but I just stuck with the data in the above two links.
Perhaps someone else can make a better(?) chart.
|
.
|
Capitalism =
everyone can keep all they’ve made.
Communism = everyone must share all they’ve made.
Capitalistic mechanisms produce wealth.
But communistic mechanisms then give that wealth a human face.
That’s why every civilised nation
has both mechanisms, at least to
some degree:
capitalistic mechanisms
,, ,, ,, o,, Free markets.
,, ,, ,, o,, Anti-monopoly laws.
,, ,, ,, o,, Property rights.
and communistic mechanisms
,, ,, ,, o,, Unions (though they’re needed less as the
economy grows).
,, ,, ,, o,, Tax-paid-for, needs-tested, &
means-tested, free:
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, basic housing,
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, healthcare,
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, education,
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, unemployment money,
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, disability money.
,, ,, ,, o,, Government imposed limits on private rents.
,, ,, ,, o,, Consumer protection laws.
,, ,, N.B. People’s actual needs are finite.
,, ,, So, the richer a nation gets
,, ,, the less it will need:
,, ,, ,, ,, the above communistic mechanisms
,, ,, ,, ,, and big government.
|
Why does capitalism, much more than
communism,
produce wealth?
Because, even if you are:
a completely selfless person
who lives only to help others,
you would still have:
structured your life
around yourself
(because you control only
yourself
and because you need
resources to function).
God designed
the material of the universe, hence of nature:
& hence the flesh &
souls of animals
& hence the flesh &
souls of humans
, , (though not the hearts/spirits of
humans)
to have concentric circles of selfishness:
inner
circle an animal you
midway circle related animals your family/friends
outer circle pack/flock/herd your group/nation/bloc.
Perhaps
see earlier webpage: The design of everything . . .
and earlier section:
THE ORIGINS OF: PAIN & PLEASURE AND FEAR & ATTRACTION. . . .
|
.
|
Capitalism = the
production of wealth – good
regardless
of its uneven distribution – bad.
Communism = the even distribution of
wealth – good
regardless of who produced it – bad.
These goods and bads are impossible to measure.
Hence it’s impossible to measure which is best
between capitalism and communism.
Indeed, it’s pointless to speculate about which is best
since both are needed.
|
.
|
We grow up gradually:
1. First needing supervision (child).
2. Then
needing only advice (teen).
3. Finally
becoming autonomous (adult).
We grow up gradually,
from:
at home, everything’s paid
for
, , So you’re free to be passionate about justice.
to:
you’ve left home, so you pay
your own way.
, , So you’re free to be whatever you can manage to be.
We grow up gradually,
hence the saying:
“If a person hasn’t voted
left-wing
by the time they’re 25 – they’ve got no
heart.
If a person hasn’t voted right-wing
by the time they’re 40 – they’ve got no
brain.”
|
.
|
Youngsters
have always tended to be communistic.
But, these days, in the West,
most teachers, by far, are communistic too.
Hence youngsters’ education today
is particularly politically imbalanced.
See: YouTube: – “They’re Lying About Your History” – Rafe
Heydel-Mankoo.,,,,,
I suggest balancing it by
using Wikipedia.
, , Wikipedia: is (or should be) unbiased, and has got to give its
sources.
Also, when you’re on YouTube
etc,
often search for the opposite
of what you’d normally
search for.
That will stop the
algorithms
from keeping you in a
left-wing echo chamber.
This applies to people who
are stuck in
a right-wing echo chamber as well.
, , Actually, YouTube algorithms struggle with this.
, , So perhaps look on two, unlinked, devices.
, , Or, better still, find a sensible person,
, , but with opposite views to you,
, , to have face to face discussions with.
, , Perhaps also see earlier section:
, , THINKING
TOOLS THAT I USED. . . .
, , Perhaps see
, , YouTube: – Jonathan Haidt on the Mental-Health Crisis
,, ,, and
Smartphones | WSJ News. ,,,,,
|
.
|
Left-wing and
right-wing are, or should be, limited to:
capitalistic mechanisms
& communistic
mechanisms.
Unfortunately however:
parties wanting
to increase their votes
and causes
lobbying one party or the other,
result in all sorts of
issues
wrongly becoming party
political.
Some of those issues might
even be:
national (e.g. immigration)
or
international (e.g. global warming).
This means that issues that
need resources
may not consistently get
them
as parties go in and out of
office.
,, ,, N.B. (Industrialised) nations that go green
are economically disadvangated
,, ,, making global economic co-operation vital
if global warming is to be tackled.
,, ,, But, perhaps discerning weakness,
dictatorships are, instead,
,, ,, arming themselves against democracies.
|
.
|
THE WEST
|
The West,
particularly the USA, was founded
mostly on Protestant Christianity.
I write ‘mostly on Protestant Christianity’
because slavery was one of
the foundations of
early America. And
slavery is, obviously, anti-Christian.
Wikipedia:
William Wilberforce. ,,,,,
Wikipedia:
Slavery. ,,,,,
Hence Western culture is
currently:
tolerant,
caring,
even balanced
(i.e. feminine to a degree),
relative to the other world
cultures.
|
You may say:
“That the West is tolerant
& caring
is nothing to do with its
Christian past.”
I reply:
“It would be improbable for
all the nations
that were morally
characterised by Protestant Christianity
to now be relatively
tolerant & caring
for some other, un-obvious,
reason.”
|
.
|
WESTERN
COMMUNISM
|
What I call Western communism
is commonly called
diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Wikipedia:
diversity, equity, and inclusion. ,,,
Western communism only ever occurs
in ex-Protestant-Christian democracies:
Democracies where:
Christians had
been the majority.
Hence that
majority loved everyone
because God
caused them to.
But where, now:
Unbelievers are
now the new majority.
Unbelievers
who:
Reject the:
God
component
of Christianity.
But keep the:
people love people
component
of Christianity.
|
Hence the mechanisms:
diversity, equity, & inclusion,
were built in:
USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, UK,
but not in:
China, India, the Middle East,
Africa, etc.
Hence, also, the mechanisms:
diversity, equity, & inclusion,
are powered by:
laws,
rather than by:
love,
e.g. by people saying: “I’m sorry” and: “I forgive you”.
,, ,, ,, ,, Perhaps see
second row (starting Dead religion)
,, ,, ,, ,, of earlier
section: GOOD RELIGION
& BAD RELIGION.)
|
.
|
We are made of the same material as animals.
Yet we are eternal.
Hence:
we added: justice
to: the
law of the jungle
to make it: the
ways of the world.
The ways of the
world are everywhere.
And they eventually need,
& so also eventually produce:
capitalistic mechanisms
&:
communistic mechanisms.
,, ,, See earlier
cell, starting Capitalism = everyone.,,,,,
Communistic mechanisms, because
they are everywhere,
are in Western nations.
The Western nations’ left-wing
then combined:
communistic mechanisms
with:
people love people
to make:
Western
communism,
DEI, diversity,
equity and inclusion,
the legislation of love.
|
The trouble is, – love cannot be
legislated.
,, ,, Legislating love
produces fake love.
,, ,, (See: 1 Cor c13
NIV for a definition of real love.)
Hence Western communism lacks
the communistic mechanism equal income.
,, ,, Many of its advocates
are rich – and intend staying that way.
|
.
|
However, Western
communism, or DEI,
still consists of yet three more mechanisms,
a) b) & c). (See next three
cells.)
DEI is not entirely good:
a) is good, b) is good, & c) is only partly good.
,, ,, See earlier
section: GOOD & BAD, RIGHT & WRONG.,,,,,
Unbelievers tend to idolise good things
hence some Western
non-Christians idolise DEI.
,, ,, See earlier section: IDOLATRY, and its subsections.
When idolised, DEI becomes a
dead religion.
, ,, Compare left and right
cells (starting Dead religion)
of earlier section: GOOD RELIGION & BAD RELIGION.
|
a) Equal social acceptance
of people of different cultures
(i.e. different: ethnicities, classes, religions, opinions,
etc).
,, Inner qualities.
N.B. Some pairs of
cultures
have parts
that are incompatible
with each other.
In which case the only
practical answer
is to value:
the West’s
overarching acceptance culture
even more than you
value:
the individual cultures it accepts
(even if that
includes your own culture).
Hence the maxim:
I disapprove of
what you say.
But I will
defend, to the death,
your right
to say it.”
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Voltaire, via Evelyn Beatrice
Hall. . . .
Notice
that Voltaire’s maxim has
an implied condition in it:
I disapprove
of what you say.
But
I will defend, to the death,
your
right to say it
as
long as your words are not attacking
someone
else’s right to say
what they
want to say.”
|
.
|
b) Equal social acceptance
of people of different:
colour,
body shape,
ability,
age,
gender,
sexual orientation,
etc.
,, Outer qualities.
|
.
|
c) Equal educational outcomes & work outcomes
for all people:
,, Dynamic qualities.
This can only be done
by restricting the more
able’s applications
so as to increase the
success of
the less able’s.
This last mechanism is
the one that’s only partly good:
It’s
good. But it’s also bad.
Some
gain. But some lose.
|
.
|
I reckon people crave to see equality of
outcomes because:
They don’t see only
people.
They see also the world & its hierarchy
and strive to correct
it.
The world values people according
to what they can do.
God values people. They don’t have to do anything.
Luke c15 NIV.,,,
|
You may say:
“This
place makes me think that God does not
value people.”
I say:
“This place is a only a bin:
a bin from which
God will one day rescue us
,, ,, ,, ,, See earlier
cell (starting: This place is merely temporary)
,, ,, ,, ,, and the
links within it.
,, ,, ,, ,, (This link
does not open a new tab.)
,, ,, ,, ,, See earlier
webpage: We choose where we go,,,,,
,, ,, ,, ,, and the
links within it.
,, ,, ,, ,, (This link
does not open a new tab.)
and a bin in which God equips
those who believe
in him.”
,, ,, ,, ,, See: C.S.
Lewis: Enemy-occupied territory. ,,,
|
.
|
c) Equal educational etc does not clearly improve
democracy & economy.
a) Equal social etc is, already, a vital part of
democracy.
But b) Equal social etc clearly
improves
democracy:
This is because, in a democracy:
minority groups
will always fear the power of,
always be at the
mercy of, the majority group,
(human rights
laws partly correct this, but not fully).
I reckon quality communication is the answer.
Or, to be precise, quality old-school communication
is the answer.
(Algorithms have discovered,
for themselves,
that outrage & echo
chambers get the most clicks.)
Or, to be precise, quality old-school communication
is only part of the
answer.
The rest of the answer is either:
love, or laws.
However, laws
that favour minorities,
that super-support minorities,
that compensate for their democratic
weakness,
especially if
imposed undemocratically,
or even if
imposed democratically,
cause the same
kinds of problems that they solve.
So the only
answer left is love.
|
To conclude:
In order to
clearly improve democracy,
b) Equal social etc must be added.
And that can only
be done by:
o quality old-school communication
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Interviews, logic & science, documentaries,
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, films & plays, talk shows, comedians, etc.
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Perhaps see my own
contribution:
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, GOD’S WORDS ON SIN down to
TRANSGENDERISM.
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, (Bear in mind that I
wrote that webpage for Christians.)
o and love.
Admittedly love is not a
mechanism
that politicians (or anyone)
can readily control.
But that’s as good as it
gets.
|
.
|
PRIORITIES
|
The main task
of a democracy
is to make a dictatorship as difficult to form as possible.
Hence the components of,
say, the United Kingdom
are as overlapping as
possible.
It’s a nation where:
anyone can do anything they
want
providing it doesn’t break
common law
which grew over time
according to individual
cases
often reported in the free
press
which can be sued, if it’s
wrong, by ordinary citizens
who can vote politicians
into, or out of, office
who can make big changes to
everyone’s lives
but who are under the same
laws as everyone else,
etc.
So that no one person is in
power.
Or, conversely, everyone is
in power.
,, ,, N.B. Laura
Spinney writes, in her interesting article
,, ,, Reimagining Democracy, in New Scientist
magazine 5th Oct 2024,
,, ,, that the
UK’s [& similar nations’] democracy
,, ,, could be
greatly improved by using digital technology.
|
However, if a
party, left or right,
ever values:
its policies
more than it values:
democracy
then it’s a disaster waiting to happen:
They’d be thinking:
“We can see that our policies
are the best ones
for our nation.
So, next time
we’re in office,
let’s tweak
things
so that we’re
never out of office again.”
|
Satan loves
dictatorships:
“So few words.
So much effect.”
|
.
|
Home
page
|
End of site.
|