It was either too hot or raining all day. I did a supply run and we want the price of a single 4x8 sheet of the cheapest grade of ¾ inch plywood. And it is $22.38. For anyone who just got here, this is the plywood it is illegal to stockpile and sell for $250 per sheet during hurricane season, a wonderful indicator of how democracy works in the state of Florida. Many don’t realize that democracy and free enterprise are neither the same thing, nor are they the same everywhere. Since it was a slow day, let me delve further into the subject. The following is totally my opinion.Democracy, while it generally allows people with talent and incentive to rise to the top, creates an enormous pool of those who have neither asset. This remaining mass of humanity is called the “majority”. In a democratic system, both groups are given the same rights, one of which is the vote. Over time, it is natural for this majority to abuse the vote by electing themselves a share of the gains made by the fortunate few, calling it the common good. This causes the motivated few to retaliate or protect themselves by acquiring “power”.
A continual struggle is in progress between these two groups, each possessing the resources to occasionally upset the balance. There have been experimental states where the masses temporarily endure (the Soviet Union) but generally, the intelligentsia seize control of the money, politics and police (Nazi Germany). Such a situation has an interesting after-effect, in that talent and incentive are not inheritable commodities. Those in power must somehow devise a system that preserves status for their offspring, but not so far as to incur the wrath of the masses. The result is what we call “bureaucracy”, where the primary qualification for advancement is the substitution of extremely expensive certifications that have priority over, you guessed it, talent and incentive.
If the logic there is not circular enough, go back and read it again. It is circular, that is how it endures. Every democratic society is subject to these rules; if you think it through, most other issues are explained by my theory. For example, what if you can’t get the money to get into school to get the degree to get the job that gets you the power? Then you decide you are a “minority” of some brand and proselytize for more “rights” and before too long there are handicapped washrooms on the space shuttle. It is all a function of your willingness to re-look at the situation.
Ah, but doctors and lawyers are not bureaucrats and yet they have power—how does my theory explain that? Easy, broaden the perspective and you will realize that those two occupations are, in fact, some of the most ritualized bureaucracies ever devised. Let me choose, say, my grade three classroom as an example. Of the 22 students, four became doctors or lawyers, another eight had some college, two others became actors and one became a rich farmer. The remaining seven (of which I was one) went to work.
While so many professionals from one group may sound like a great success rate, I would like to point out some collective facts that differentiate things. With one exception, all the graduates went directly out of high school into universities, that is, not one “worked their way through college”. Since this was once your average group of third-graders, this can only be explained by pressure from the parents, and along with that pressure comes tremendous financial support. Each of my classmates drove to university in their own car. All of them had fashionable clothes. In most cases, the parents put a down payment on a house near the university, so that student loan money was not wasted in rent. In more than one case, the parents went into near bankruptcy on the child’s behalf to get them out of the working class and into some form of position. The other group, the one I was in, lacked that support, and as I said, went to work. This work or college “choice” is normally associated with the 1800’s but I assure you, it is still around. If you wonder which group you belong to, ask yourself if you are uncomfortable with these facts.
How’s that for philosophy? No such situation is simplistic enough to describe so easily, but you get the idea. For example, in the first group, drug usage (and eventual addiction) was higher, and there was a lot of hanky-panky going on between the faculty and female students. Yet, my theory covers that, too, which I’ll leave with you as a mental exercise. Hint: each group that does not have the resources to conform becomes another “minority”. It isn’t just my rambling, this really is the longest day of the year.
