jump to last post 1-5 of 5 discussions (5 posts)

should there be such thing as carreer politicians?

  1. nightwork4 profile image59
    nightwork4posted 7 years ago

    should there be such thing as carreer politicians?

    we have many of them but do you think it's a good idea? does it add to corruption or does it help because they have experience?

  2. wingedcentaur profile image83
    wingedcentaurposted 7 years ago

    You know, I've been thinking about that. There is this political researcher called John Judge. He is co-founder of COPA (Coalition on Political Assassinations) and 911citizenswatch.org. He always cites President Washington and President Jefferson, who, according to Mr. Judge, believed that political parties, themselves, were inimical to democracy.

    In short, the reason for this is because, by definition, political parties take power from the masses and give it to the few. Judge cites Jefferson, who apparently said, that in any society you can only have two parties no matter what they call themselves: the aristocrats who want to take power from the people and give it to the rich and powerful few; and the "Democrats" who want to take power from the few and give it to the people -- but in a TRULY democratic society you don't need a Democratic party.

    John Judge says (and I think he's on to something here) that it would be more democratic if we could vote on issues instead of for this or that politician from this or that political party. We've had the technology since the thirties when radio was avaliable to have national, inclusive debate and discussion on the issues.

    Judge cites Jefferson again, who apparently said that given a choice between a government without a newspaper or a newspaper without a government, he woulld always choose the latter. The point is that Jefferson believed that information flow was even more important than the apparatus of government or those organs of the state that carry out policy.

    Take care.

  3. shynsly profile image56
    shynslyposted 7 years ago

    Wow... I know for a fact that I would be permanently bannished from HubPages if I attempted to use all the "colorful adjectives" I'd like to put in front of my simple one word answer, lol.

    But, in a word... "no".

    Not only are they corrupt beyond redemption on both sides of the aisle, but they have no reason not to be. They are so out of touch and far removed from the real world the rest of us have to live in that I don't think it's even possible for them to govern with the people or the nation's best interest at heart anymore.

    Like I said before, not only should there be a maximum two term limit on all members of Congress, but they should have to come from the civilian sector, and have to return to it after their term(s). That is the only sure-fire way to "keep them honest".

  4. Wayne Brown profile image84
    Wayne Brownposted 7 years ago

    I really do not see the value in it.  It was never designed to be either a full-time job nor a career job. It has been turned into that by those self-serving individuals who are more interested in lining their own pockets than serving their constituents.  There should be term-limits and accountability. WB

  5. profile image0
    Butch Newsposted 7 years ago

    It seems like a good idea on the face of it but it would likely breed extreme corruption, so NO to that idea.