Two Systems of Justice, one for the rich, another for the poor.

Topic: Two Systems of Justice, one for the rich, another for the poor. (Read 8809 times)

Re: Two Systems of Justice, one for the rich, another for the poor.

Reply #25 – 2025-02-08, 09:51:21

It's almost as if ersi wants you to think he knows what he's talking about...

The repetitive verbiage is a tell — in any Indo-European language. (Ask around....)

Re: Two Systems of Justice, one for the rich, another for the poor.

Reply #26 – 2025-02-17, 18:30:32

124. The Thursday Night Massacre(s)

The rule of law is already fraying. But in the words of the Trump clan, the best is yet to come.

Re: Two Systems of Justice, one for the rich, another for the poor.

Reply #27 – 2025-02-18, 10:17:10

The "poor" -as always, in Democratic parlance- means the bureaucrats sucking at the government's teats...

Until the ship is righted, swabbing the decks is not a priority!

Re: Two Systems of Justice, one for the rich, another for the poor.

Reply #28 – 2025-02-28, 08:20:13

The bureaucrats were what made the US great. All the achievements in US history from the Declaration of Independence onwards was done through superior bureaucracy. Without it the US will become just another banana republic, just a banana-challenged one.

Re: Two Systems of Justice, one for the rich, another for the poor.

Reply #29 – 2025-02-28, 09:57:30

You could start by reading de Tocqueville... But your worship of bureaucracy has long been obvious, and un-shakable: You would, no doubt, invoke the "only following orders" defense for any crime!
But -to play your game: Didn't the bureaucracy under Woodrow Wilson revive the Klu Klux Klan? (After un-desegregating...) Was that one of the "achievements" you refer to?

Quote from: jax on 2025-02-28, 00:20:13

The bureaucrats were what made the US great.

Can you give a few examples?

Re: Two Systems of Justice, one for the rich, another for the poor.

Reply #30 – 2025-03-29, 06:34:19

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2025-02-28, 09:57:30

You could start by reading de Tocqueville... But your worship of bureaucracy has long been obvious, and un-shakable: You would, no doubt, invoke the "only following orders" defense for any crime!
But -to play your game: Didn't the bureaucracy under Woodrow Wilson revive the Klu Klux Klan? (After un-desegregating...) Was that one of the "achievements" you refer to?

Quote from: jax on 2025-02-28, 00:20:13
The bureaucrats were what made the US great.
Can you give a few examples?

Good governance is the fundament on which all improvements are built. That includes the rule of law, and the rules of law, like the US Constitution, which was ahead of its time. Or the free markets, who cannot be free unless there is governance.

Now that is a bit of an imposition, as bureaucracy is usually limited to those who actually maintain and suggest improvements to those rules and workings, not those who put the rules into law, in a democracy the politicians. Then again you included police among the bureaucracy, which is another imposition.

A good bureaucracy is not a big bureaucracy, governs best who governs least and all that. And it must continuously be challenged, checked, and improved. It cannot be a world unto itself. Impartiality is a difficult requirement. Especially as a bureaucracy must be forward-looking to coming challenges.

US bureaucracy used to be pretty dynamic, except where it was designed not to be. Unfortunately for the US, there has been a growing desire among the politicians that it shouldn't be. And lately making it so unattractive to be a bureaucrat that any clever or skilled person would seek employment elsewhere. And the consequence of a bad bureaucracy is bad policy decisions poorly implemented. That will last long after Trump.

Re: Two Systems of Justice, one for the rich, another for the poor.

Reply #31 – 2025-04-01, 01:03:51

It is worth noting that OakdaleFTL, as a Q/KKK/MAGA wackadoodle, uses the term "bureaucrat" in the spirit of a Bolshevist slur: Kill 'em all! He has no idea why bureaucrats necessarily exist in every country. And when you get rid of or even destabilise them as a class, you don't have a country any longer.^[1]

More calmly, let's note that literally no single person is hired by the government institutions with the job title bureaucrat. What the term entails is a routine employee at the government. Routine employees are always the bulk and usually the most valuable even when you don't notice they are there. But you definitely would notice their absence and that would be bad, just like when trash truckers or plumbers stop working.

¹Tocqueville was emphatic in claiming how de-centralised USA was (it certainly was compared to France) while incidentally recording the definitely central/federal institutions that held the country afloat, such as the Post Office, an institution whose employees are an excellent example of necessary bureaucrats who never get enough credit and acknowledgement.↵