arbitrary power
Today's top BBC story is still the Iraqi constitution vote. Or rather, reactions from America. Have you noticed how power is so arbitrary? America's opinion matters because that country and its allies invaded Iraq. Previously, Saddam Hussein had power because he grabbed it and simply held it for as long as he could. Now, a constitution has been written by groups appointed by those in power, and it will be decided by arbitrary rules like how many vote for and against in how many places ("if voters in three of Iraq's 18 provinces muster a two-thirds majority against the constitution, it will fail.")
Iraq has arbitrary rules made up by whoever has the biggest guns. We can hope that the good guys win and their rules are fair, but that is only a hope. not a guarantee.
Land rent would provide a guarantee of justice. If they had land rent, wealth (and thus power) would be fairly distributed and predictable. Nobody could increase their wealth (and thus power) simply by grabbing land. It would also be a much simpler system.
posted by Chris Tolworthy at 9:17 AM
3 Comments:
Arbitrary power is fascinating and media focus is even more of a curiosity.
Yes. That is something I had to get used to on this blog. The media never looks at what I want it to look at! But the media is our main source of shared information, so I reluctantly follow its agenda.
Certainly, it is not impossible for an American to get quality news but it is darn near impossible if one only goes to mainstream sources.
After I moved back to Canada from the States I was pleased to be reminded that the news coverage contained more of a global overview. Not to mention the fact that now I had access the BBC. While the BBC or the CBC is far from ideal, at least their markets have a greater interest in other countries (less ethno-centric IMHO).
Post a Comment
<< Home