Corrupt Politicians

[julianlaboy]

I do not know how many facts people know from Puerto Rico, where I live. Right now, there are many many corrupt politicians in power. Also, there have occurred more than a thousand homicides in this year alone. Keep in mind the size of the island (35 miles X 100 miles) and that of the population (around 4 million).

 

With those facts, ti immediately came to mind the following quote: "When people are hard to control, it is because of the contrivances of their governments, which make them hard to control", Tao Te Ching.

 

I usually do not participate in political activities, since I really do not enjoy such competitions and since it is not in my nature to do much about it. However, things are getting out of control and I feel like I have to contribute some good deeds. I still do not like the idea of being involved in political acts, but these are troubled times and I want everyone to just get along and live in a more harmonious and balanced way.

 

What would you do in such a situation?

[Shizukanako]

Only three things to do. Move away, endure it, or try to change it.

 

To me, becoming involved in politics at any level seems like opening a portal to someplace evil. I used to be quite a fan and follower of politics, and the whole "my team is good, your team is bad" mindset. After becoming more open to what the other side said and felt, it seemed to me that my side was just as awful, only in a slightly different way.

 

So, I removed myself from the political arena completely out of disgust. Now after several years of sitting outside of their mayhem, I can no longer tell who is who. I mean, they say completely different things, and make different promises, but it all just ends up in the same place. The type of people in power will (most likely) always be in power. To want power and hold on to power, you have to be ambitious.

 

So, now I "sit in the center while yes and no chase each other around the circumference" ( a little Chuang Tzu paraphrase).

 

To me, it seems that to involve oneself is at the risk of losing self. To merely stay and do nothing changes nothing around you. To move away, you just move to another corrupt government (but possibly one safer or more conducive to a healthy lifestyle).

 

"but these are troubled times and I want everyone to just get along and live in a more harmonious and balanced way."

 

Times always have trouble, and you can't change others. No matter what changes are made from the outside, there will still be some who want to impose their will forcefully.

 

 

These are just my observations; I don't know if they help with what you are looking for. Its hard to say what I personally would do in that situation since I am not in it. I do know that I personally will not live somewhere that I do not feel safe, or it is not quiet. I lived and played in NYC when I was younger, and I loved it. Now, reflecting back, I could never do it again, and cant see how people do it.

[julianlaboy]

You said, "So, I removed myself from the political arena completely out of disgust. Now after several years of sitting outside of their mayhem, I can no longer tell who is who. I mean, they say completely different things, and make different promises, but it all just ends up in the same place. The type of people in power will (most likely) always be in power. To want power and hold on to power, you have to be ambitious."

 

I completely understand you. I no longer see the three parties because they are just three colors that represent the same thing: people who want power and be called the majority for more and better control of everything around them. Of course, I am not saying that every person that is into politics is the same way. However, the line between people who are and people who are not like that is very, very thin. And that is because one can indeed "is at the risk of losing self", as you said. That is, a self that relates to "others" in the harmonious and balanced way that I mentioned. One loses that self to replace it with an objective self, one that only keeps in mind that "they are not" a list of things that the "others" are. This easily brings competitive thinking and that easily can bring harmful oppositions.

 

You are also right when you said that times always have some kind of trouble. It is when it reaches a certain degree that I call it "troubled times". As I said, more than a thousand homicides in this year alone. I do not pretend to change everyone or a single individual. I just feel that some kind of action is necessary so that some kind of contribution to spreading peace could be attained.

 

I understand what you say, that "No matter what changes are made from the outside, there will still be some who want to impose their will forcefully" and that "The type of people in power will (most likely) always be in power". I do plan to move away, but that is because I wanted to finish some studies in another country. But it really bothers me that these politicians, the ones that were elected by the people of their own country, get away with so much.

 

Maybe it's me that ended up being really attached to what happens here. Anyway, I will end up moving out, but not without contributing something in the field of Education. I think that the best bet here would come from teaching, from early childhood to post-secondary levels, to work for a kind of place that is worth living for. So, that will cover two of your recommended things to do (although I will have to endure it also, since I am saving up some money for the "moving out" thing)

 

Oh!, and thanks for your observations!

Edited November 28, 2011 by julianlaboy

[RiverSnake]

I agree with Shizu.

 

-Confucius never had any success in politics because he wouldn't put up with the bullshit. He ended up resigning and living a simple life.

 

-The easiest way i have devised to keep oneself safe in rough times is to possess nothing of value then people usually won't try to kill you. Note: i have not actually tryed this...just theorizing.

Edited December 3, 2011 by OldGreen

[CLPM]

I have always been politically interested, but I've found the more I've gotten involved in politics, the more harm I do myself.

 

The world of politics is one that is completely OPPOSITE of what the Tao is. The world of politics is a religion of clinging and controlling. The Tao Te Ching is political, and Taoism has a political history (as mentioned in another thread here), however, I think being politically involved can be very harmful to self development.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

"Corrupt" and "politician" go hand in hand like white on rice, or milk. or brown on mud, or choclate milk. or anything else that is intrinsic. like politics and corruption.

 

 

It's a major 'duh' moment. And people start ignoring me...... now.

[CLPM]

^ It's people who elect them.

 

Ultimately people can't blame politicians when they elect them.

Edited December 5, 2011 by CLPM

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

People dont know what they're getting into or how much the politicians are lying... you're right, "we" elect them, but "they" still lie.

 

It's both parties, but ultimately, it's the fact that peopel are too lazy/selfish/corrupt/ignorant to govern themselves. part of it is people want someone to blame, part of it is politicians are given an inch, take a mile. if they're gonna get the blame, might as well make it worth their while, right?

 

 

In the end of it all, however, it doesnt matter where the blame goes, people still have to start taking responsibility for themselves and either make elections a matter of work and effort, rather than picking one out of a lineup, or do away with large scale government all together and be responsible for themselves entirely.

 

 

There are no simple answers, or short cut solutions. that's what government is all about anyways, which is why people keep playing into it, because they DON'T want to be responsible for themselves, and in that act, dont care what ill is done to them as long as they dont have to blame themselves for it.

[zerostao]

there are no problems only solutions

 

 

Edited December 5, 2011 by zerostao

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

LOL you cant have a solution without a problem! XD how do you "solve" the problemless? you add government! XD

[CLPM]

People dont know what they're getting into or how much the politicians are lying... you're right, "we" elect them, but "they" still lie.

 

It's both parties, but ultimately, it's the fact that peopel are too lazy/selfish/corrupt/ignorant to govern themselves. part of it is people want someone to blame, part of it is politicians are given an inch, take a mile. if they're gonna get the blame, might as well make it worth their while, right?

 

 

In the end of it all, however, it doesnt matter where the blame goes, people still have to start taking responsibility for themselves and either make elections a matter of work and effort, rather than picking one out of a lineup, or do away with large scale government all together and be responsible for themselves entirely.

 

 

There are no simple answers, or short cut solutions. that's what government is all about anyways, which is why people keep playing into it, because they DON'T want to be responsible for themselves, and in that act, dont care what ill is done to them as long as they dont have to blame themselves for it.

 

I agree to an extent, however I believe political leaders do represent their people.

 

If society is greedy, then their politicians will be greedy too.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

obviously. I pretty much detailed that, didnt i? if not, i apologize. All in all, however, I'm looking for an out lol America is not to my tastes.

[julianlaboy]

I do not believe that the world of politics is a complete opposite. Nor do I believe that "politics" is a kind of synonym with "corruption". It is like a gun: by itself, it does almost nothing; it needs a being triggering (directly or indirectly) and almost always, it also needs an intention. I can open bottles with a gun or make a hole in a wall for hanging stuff. However, guns also have the capacity to kill people (I know that they were not invented for opening bottles...).

[joeblast]

I agree to an extent, however I believe political leaders do represent their people.

 

If society is greedy, then their politicians will be greedy too.

It depends on what the meaning of "represent" is. The federal government, like many other governments, is largely corrupt and comprised of people lining their pockets, just look at what happens to the net worth of a person before entering congress and after they've been there some time. That doesnt mean they all do, but we as people should be demanding some integrity from our representatives - why does a bill limiting Congress' ability to make use of insider trading fall flat on its face to deaf ears?

 

 

 

Peter Schweizer, Throw Them All Out

One of the biggest scandals in American politics is waiting to explode: the full story of the inside game in Washington shows how the permanent political class enriches itself at the expense of the rest of us. Insider trading is illegal on Wall Street, yet it is routine among members of Congress. Normal individuals cannot get in on IPOs at the asking price, but politicians do so routinely. The Obama administration has been able to funnel hundreds of millions of dollars to its supporters, ensuring yet more campaign donations. An entire class of investors now makes all of its profits based on influence and access in Washington. Peter Schweizer has doggedly researched through mountains of financial records, tracking complicated deals and stock trades back to the timing of briefings, votes on bills, and every other point of leverage for politicians in Washington. The result is a manifesto for revolution: the Permanent Political Class must go.

 

 

And of course the best way to get there is by removing any and all instances of cronyism, not give politicians a pass when they make shady real estate deals or reap millions from being on the right side of hedge fund mismanagement - and calling policies out when they are plainly shown to not be working.

[Encephalon]

It depends on what the meaning of "represent" is. The federal government, like many other governments, is largely corrupt and comprised of people lining their pockets, just look at what happens to the net worth of a person before entering congress and after they've been there some time. That doesnt mean they all do, but we as people should be demanding some integrity from our representatives - why does a bill limiting Congress' ability to make use of insider trading fall flat on its face to deaf ears?

 

 

 

Peter Schweizer, Throw Them All Out

One of the biggest scandals in American politics is waiting to explode: the full story of the inside game in Washington shows how the permanent political class enriches itself at the expense of the rest of us. Insider trading is illegal on Wall Street, yet it is routine among members of Congress. Normal individuals cannot get in on IPOs at the asking price, but politicians do so routinely. The Obama administration has been able to funnel hundreds of millions of dollars to its supporters, ensuring yet more campaign donations. An entire class of investors now makes all of its profits based on influence and access in Washington. Peter Schweizer has doggedly researched through mountains of financial records, tracking complicated deals and stock trades back to the timing of briefings, votes on bills, and every other point of leverage for politicians in Washington. The result is a manifesto for revolution: the Permanent Political Class must go.

 

 

And of course the best way to get there is by removing any and all instances of cronyism, not give politicians a pass when they make shady real estate deals or reap millions from being on the right side of hedge fund mismanagement - and calling policies out when they are plainly shown to not be working.

 

People have been screaming about the need for campaign finance reform for decades. Politicians are beholden to their campaign contributors, not their constituents. Congress deflected the challenge by putting term limits on the books, but that really didn't solve the problem. And now the Supreme Court has ruled that unlimited campaign cash is protected under the Free speech amendment. We can kiss the dream of political accountability goodbye for another generation at least.

[zerostao]

Joeblast,

you know i don't have a dog in this fight. but i do find it curious that you criticize obama and fail to mention newt romney or mitt gingrich?

gingrich who says he has never been a lobbyist but somehow managed to rake in 100 million for granting politcal insider access.

romney won't attack him or even debate him??

well he might as he is due another flip flop soon. and we do know where obama stands, with these other 2 guys its shaky at best.

scary was the word used to describe gingrich when he was forced out of congress by a 395-28 vote ,for ethics lack of, but oh , that was so last century.

speaking of last century and gingrich has tried to play himself off as teddy roosevelt. but who sounded more like dear ol' teddy just yesterday? they called teddy a socialist way back then , i look at him as a really good american.

throw them all out is a phrase from last century too, so far it hasn't happened. my guess is that it won't either.

and have you seen the new ron paul commercial? well we do know where he stands too.

can you really support any of these republicans running for the nomination?

america deserves better than this crap.

[joeblast]

Well, if the republican party writ large knew what was best for the country, "compassionate conservatism" never would have made reach of our ears, and RP would be doing far better in the current race. Romney I havent supported at all, ever, clearly the establishment and media want him to win and little else, he cant poll over 30% for good reason - he's the one we're not sure exactly where he stands. Newt advised (definitely not the same thing as lobbying) for f&f and they didnt take his advice *shrugs* I didnt think he had a shot early on, he isnt the "perfect candidate" either, and regardless of his personal issues and dumb things like sitting with Nancy on the couch, he's pretty consistently conservative, which is what the country needs - an end to the spendthrift ways of the past, to which both parties have partied hardy. I read his interview with Beck yesterday and his answers were satisfactory with regard to departures from conservative thought, e.g. support for medicare part D - ok, plenty of flaws with MpD, but the big idea with that was to begin to get medicare users ok with managing costs & "insurance" on their own, which is absolutely a good thing because the closer end users are to the money being spent, the more carefully it will be watched - it is the other half of the reason why healthcare costs have exploded, the 3rd party payer system - also the result of government tinkering, if you recall correctly. I may not know how long Newt will stay married to his current wife, but I know where Newt stands with regard to how the country should be run.

 

But like many others have said, "anybody on that stage will be better for the country than Obama," and I agree 100% - Bachmann, Huntsman, Santorum, Paul, Gingrich, Romney, every single one of them. Palin would have been an exponentially better president. Why? All one has to do is look at Obama's record - now that he has a bit of one we are allowed to look at. Social Justice, undermining parts of the constitution his ilk believe we need to move beyond, selective application of law, vicious amounts of cronyism - in fact, it is those very things why in some perverse way, Obama has been good for the country - and shown us exactly what most of us dont want for the country. All those promises of other people's money arent going to mean a whole hell of a lot when there's no more other people's money to pass out. Really, I hate to "keep making it about money" but that's part of the government's actual mandated job, not things like deciding what businesses should be invested in, what things should cost, using dubious science to justify closing down a significant percentage of the country's power generation.

 

Teddy was totally one of those haughty 1%'ers who was rich beyond most men's dreams and he was one of the beginnings of Progressive poison in the country, believing nobody should be able to make too much and if they do it should be confiscated so the government may utilize it more wisely! That was back before Progressive was a dirty word, after Wilson they just about stopped using it and had to usurp other words to identify themselves to avoid the revulsion.

 

So while one may ask the question "can I really support" this person or that person - when the time comes to vote I guarantee you that I along with a whole shitload of other people in this country will be checking the box that does not have Obama in it and that is going to be *the* main consideration. Even if it is Romney that somehow winds up getting the nom, I will vote for him a thousand times over before voting to continue our own little Bolivarian Revolution.

As usual, notta so great vs utter garbage!

[zerostao]

i kinda figured you would diss on teddy r. did you even watch Night At the Museum? teddy r is cool.

in spite of his ruff riding coolness, teddy r did not win in 1912. and a couple of years after that the world went to war.

i am not against the top 1%, it may be a tough job, but somebody has got to do it.

but billionaires with a 1% tax rate? cmon man.

doing away with the dept of education?

i can't believe how fortunate i truly am to have no need of govt, or money, well once a year i do somehow scrape up enuff to pay my

property taxes. but i sense that the vast majority of folks do depend on a govt. to serve them all not just the richest.

some days you speak of science and empirical evidence , then others days its dubious, does politics influence your view on science?

i think even huntsman has acknowledged the science in regards to global warming.

so far in my lifetime i have never found a reason to vote for any candidate or any cause. even when they had a wet/dry alcohol vote , i wouldnt vote.

but this is my view, you have yours, and of course others have theirs. i respect your view and i respect the other views.

of course gingrich and nancy were on the same couch, they both play the same game, using politics to line their own pockets.

i may not agree with sarah p but i certianly do respect her. i really do, but i dont want her as president.

but who? tough friggin question, coz imo we are at a very critical time. i just dont see republicans going out to vote for mitt or newt, to me they sound like ingredients for some witch's brew or sth.

Edited December 7, 2011 by zerostao

[joeblast]

Of course no billionaire should have a 1% tax rate - if they do, one must ask - why is this so? This is all I'm doing, whether it be regarding politics, the earth's climate, a technical conundrum, what have you. Asking simple questions, looking for the root.

 

Dept of Ed, another venture of the federal government treading beyond where it was meant to go - but such is the nature of these governmental intrusions - once these things are introduced, my god, how did we ever get by without them? You cant just take these things away! That was why I was so vehemently opposed to Obamacare, its unconstitutionality aside - it is entrenching the problem, a problem created by the government to begin with. Price & wage controls - - as if a central planner can simply wave a wand and dictate how these things progress! So what happened was they gave a tax credit to businesses for providing benefits where they mandated by law the compensation could not be done with cash, thus wrapping the umbilical cord around the head of first party healthcare insurance. So the end result is that "healthcare insurance" has gone so far beyond the nomenclature, it is really but "third party healthcare financing" with the government picking up all of the outliers. Why are healthcare expenses rising so drastically? That is culprit #1 right there.

 

Politics has no place in science - the scientific method has no agenda aside from the true happenings of reality. That some people who were very vested in having their result be "correct" they were willing to toss data and use it selectively and then take very active measures to crowd out any opposing opinion and then hide their methodology, claiming the whole issue was wrapped up and taken care of, with trillions of dollars in taxes, tarriff, regulations, grants at stake...why yes, please do...follow the money. It aint Big Oil that has poured by far the largest amount of money into this whole thing.

 

That Huntsman drank that kool aid...well, all I can say is I dont know why he's still on the stage.

 

Yes, we need to stop politicians lining their pockets...how do you think the tea party came into existence? Voters need to start demanding integrity of their elected - but for some reason even the republican establishment does not want a true conservative candidate! Yep, parts there are too interested in keeping the gravy train flowing.