(1:41:27 AM) jhy: oh, and how have you been?
(1:41:51 AM) Me: I've been good. Eating, drinking, sleeping. The usual.
(1:42:08 AM) Me: Leo's asleep right now so I guess his opinion would be the sound of one hand snoring.
(1:42:13 AM) jhy: haha
(1:42:40 AM) jhy: I think this is big news
(1:42:46 AM) jhy: he predicted himself that it would happen
(1:48:12 AM) Me: Putin's just consolidating power right now.
(1:48:22 AM) Me: Just like everyone else.
(1:48:25 AM) jhy: Indeed.
(1:48:33 AM) jhy: It's scary how much it is mirrored here as well
(1:50:49 AM) Me: It's because humans run everything. People always think that changing a leader, an institution, or other form of control over themselves will inevitably and miraculously change things for the better as if with the flick of a switch. No one wants to admit the part that their own humanity plays in everything. Once people learn to live with themselves they'll realize that all the insitutions they've built up or that were put over them were and are staffed and run by people. And then they'll treat it like the rash, logical, insane, jealous, cool, controlling, mad people that we all are.
(1:57:13 AM) jhy: True.
(1:57:21 AM) jhy: Dismantle the institution?
(1:57:28 AM) jhy: I agree that current day systems do not work.
(1:57:37 AM) jhy: Total refinement needs to happen.
(2:04:47 AM) Me: It's not the institution. It's people. No matter what institution you come up with. No matter what plan it will eventually fail. Because people blame structures and organizations. They can't accept that no matter what change will occur that PEOPLE will be in charge. No real change can occur until the mindset of the entire people changes.
(2:05:19 AM) jhy: interesting
(2:05:34 AM) Me: You can look through history
(2:06:03 AM) Me: There have been countless variations of governments, companies, and various other ruling organizations.
(2:06:28 AM) Me: The problem is usually blamed on the actual organization. Not the people.
(2:06:39 AM) Me: And "people" does not mean populace.
(2:08:33 AM) Me: People fail to realize that it's a psychological thing. That if a person is placed for a long enough time in a situation where he will have to shift his perspective and start relying on a preset mechanism for observing and interacting with his outside environment he will consistantly change himself in order to work in that environment. And during that change, any particular quirks and intricacies of one's personality which usually lie suppressed become apparent and evolved and begin to play a large role in one's doings.
(2:10:46 AM) jhy: right
(2:10:49 AM) jhy: nature vs nuture
(2:14:59 AM) Me: The great flaw is assuming that there is a system that works. No system, when left to its own devices will work. The only major difference in systems (other than organization) is responsibility. The difference is not of quality. The difference between a dictatorship and a democracy is that in the former the responsibility lies on the dictator and if anything goes wrong the populace can blame the dictator. In the latter if anything goes wrong the populace can blame themselves. This happens rarely. Hence the constant push towards democracy. However the real factor in the quality of government is interaction. If one leaves a democratic government to its own devices that government will eventually become bloated and corrupt due to the fact that it is run by people ("humans" is a better term). And humans, as numerous psychological and sociological studies have shown, tend to (on average) behave in certain peculiar and regularly illogical ways. It's more apparent in a dictatorship and less apparent in a democracy. But it does, eventually, become apparent nonetheless. The difference is the rate. The system eventually begins to act like the humans running it. In a dictatorship only one human is running it and thus the apparence of it is clear and vivid. In a democracy the system is run by a group of thousands. Eventually it becomes one large warring, consuming mass.
(2:16:30 AM) Me: What is the solution? The solution is to realize that every system, left alone for a long enough time, will eventually act like an entity separate from the populace with its own needs, desires, and whatnots. The trick is to constantly disturb it.
(2:17:49 AM) Me: Not through protests or voting. One must incorporate a system that's built into whatever form of government that is established that constanly removes old laws, destroys party affiliations, and anything else that threatens to become permanent.
(2:18:53 AM) Me: The only permanent thing that should exist is a declaration of rights. However a declaration of rights is not part of a government. It is simply a reminder to the populace that if any of those rights are continuously violated that the system in place has failed completely and needs to be reconsidered. It is, in fact, a guidestick.
(2:20:46 AM) Me: A declaration of rights can not in any way guarantee one's rights. One's rights can only be guaranteed by the possession of power. One can believe that one has the freedom of speech but if one is on the wrong end of a rifle he or she suddenly finds that, although the Bill of Rights, guarantees freedom of speech the only way to truly guarantee it is to possess personal power. Hence the need for a second amendment.
(2:21:13 AM) Me: So to tie this to the situations in Russia and the US.
(2:22:19 AM) Me: Say Putin is kicked out. Say the entire system is overhauled. The only guarantee of the proper order and behaviour of whatever government replaces the previous one is constant vigilance on behalf of the populace.
(2:22:26 AM) Me: Same here in the US.
(2:24:38 AM) Me: The people who you put into office are just like the people you see everyday on the street. They may wear ties and million dollar grins and PhDs and fraternity rings but they still possess the same irrational fears, insecurities, angers, and emotions that we all do. Unfortunately their brains are linked to a structure of power and thus have a much greater chance of affecting the outside world.