tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21503568.post5423754268062949228..comments2023-11-03T06:32:28.410-04:00Comments on Staring At Empty Pages: War and peace: the godless and the faithfulBarry Leibahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14205294935881991457noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21503568.post-2715679148521788072007-04-07T02:32:00.000-04:002007-04-07T02:32:00.000-04:00I agree with the implication that internecine bick...I agree with the implication that internecine bickering is (when it turns to warfare) counterproductive, a distraction and wasteful. <BR/><BR/>I think I also agree that it allows those in power to stay in power, but I'm not quite as certain. I do know that certain wedge issues are used to fire up the populace and distract from issues where we could make progress. And since progress is risky, and threatens the status quo, the current government is usually opposed to change that might upturn the current order.<BR/><BR/>We have a chance to change out the government (somewhat) with every election. But we should be aware of whatever it is that stays behind when the government changes (lobbyists, and any other structures and systems that remain in place). These factors stabilize the government but also act as a drag to change that might be good.<BR/><BR/>It's odd: money represents power, partly because it represents the ability to effect change. So it seems like money should be a progressive force. But like gravity, it warps the space around it; groups and individuals with money want to retain the systems that allowed them to amass their money. Thus there is a conservative force surrounding money.<BR/><BR/>Please excuse the metaphors. I'm just rambling.JP Burkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16796725364997136448noreply@blogger.com