OT: protectionist practices?

[Darrin Chandler]

On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 04:00:05PM -0700, Fritz wrote:
> Darrin Chandler wrote:
> > I learned from science teachers, science books, and systems analyst
> > consultants that the value of a model is not how close it is to reality,
> > but how well it can be used to predict behavior.
> >   

> I'm not so sure about that.  For example, if your model strays too far
> from reality and assumes that water flows uphill, it probably isn't
> going to predict anything too useful.

Read the above again until it makes sense or until you find something
wrong with the reasoning.

> > The reality is that there's no such thing as "The Government" since it's
> > merely a collection of people, with individual motivations,
> > proclivities, strengths and faults. Not just politicians, but staffers
> > and civil servants.
> >
> > However, it is extremely useful to think of government as an actual
> > entity in severeal ways. Notably, it tends to fight to keep power it has
> > gained and keep control over resources (money) it has gained.
> >   
> Since we're a computer group, how about we adopt the following analogy?
> 
> Government is like a computer system consisting of software (laws),
> hardware (buildings, roads, tanks, fighter jets, etc.), and system 
> administrators
> (politicians, judges, appointed positions, etc.).  Okay, for now?
> 
> We all know how computer systems can go wrong, e.g. they can be hijacked
> and turned into "zombies" by compromising the software, crashed by
> malicious/incompetent sysadmins, etc.

Sure, but that doesn't mean the computer or operating system isn't at
fault. That's one of the many reasons to use Linux or BSD rather than
WIndows, isn't it?

But "the government" is not an inanimate object. It's a bad analogy.

> > I don't agree. While corporations and other lobbying groups have
> > influence, and interests diverging from mine, I have trouble holding
> > them culpable.
> Even when they break the law?

No.

> >  I hold the government accountable (through my
> > representatives). The government is not a "gun" being wielded by others.
> > It's a system meant to represent us and act in the interest of the
> > public good.
> >   
> As you say "It's a system meant to represent us and act in the
> interest of the public good." that is correct.  However, as we all know,
> how a system was designed to work and how it actually works are
> sometimes two very different things.

You have feedback into the working of the system, and should use them
whenever possible. The alternative is revolt or vigilantism.

> > We have means of influencing the government and holding it accountable.
> > That certain groups seem to have disproportionate influence is merely a
> > reflection that MOST people DON'T BOTHER to exercise their right to
> > vote, or to write to their representative / senator / governor /
> > president.
> >   
> Let me give an example of an issue that I took a personal interest in.
> Remember a few years ago, there was the issue of "media consolidation"
> before the FCC?  The FCC solicited public input and about 10,000
> citizen comments were received: 9,995 against further media consolidation,
> 5 for allowing it.  (These numbers may not be exact, but they should be very
> close.)
> 
> Then FCC Chairman Michael Powell basically thumbed his nose at the
> citizens and said he was going to ignore the public's comments.
> 
> Sometimes the system *IS* broken!  You can see why people sometimes
> feel hopeless and frustrated when competing with large corporate
> interests.

Is the FCC chairman an elected official?

I agree that things within the system can be broken. More, I suggest
that a great many things are, in fact, broken. However, I'm not yet
ready to participate in open revolt. I think there's still value in
working within the system.

> > Thinking of the government as a mere "gun" means it is only a tool in
> > the hands of someone else. 
> Yes, .......... that's correct.
> > That absolves them of all wrongdoing. Since
> > we are able and meant to control our own government, this also absolves
> > US of all wrongdoing. It's shucking our responsibility, and it's
> > nonsense.
> >   
> "Black Box" voting w/o a paper trail? Purged voter lists?
> Darrin, are these examples of governmental incompetence
> or strategies for rigging election outcomes?

So, if the people have no voice at all, then what are the options left
to we citizens?

> > If every angry talk show caller and every irrate mailing list / web
> > forum participant actually wrote to their representative and voted then
> > our government would be a lot different than it is.
> >
> > I know that some of you DO actually do these things. Good for you, and
> > keep at it!
> >   
> 
> Yes! People need to stay involved.

I'm glad we agree on this. I'd like to see more people show a little
backbone and take just a little time and effort for what they believe
in. The world would be a better place!

-- 
Darrin Chandler            |  Phoenix BSD User Group  |  MetaBUG
dwchandler at stilyagin.com   |  http://phxbug.org/      |  http://metabug.org/
http://www.stilyagin.com/  |  Daemons in the Desert   |  Global BUG Federation