Comment by poof131
10 years ago
Wow. Democracy can be ugly, but to look to an oligarchy for the solution? I think this is the antithesis of Russell’s thrust.
10 years ago
Wow. Democracy can be ugly, but to look to an oligarchy for the solution? I think this is the antithesis of Russell’s thrust.
Russell had no idea nor could anyone have imagined what the modern news media would turn itself into today. Which is why I posted the Taibbi piece.
I'm fairly sure Russell had heard of William Randolph Hearst.
Well, the democracy can't build nuclear power plants and fast trains, an an oligarchy can. So there's that.
But still, if you want to look for an alternative to western media, you'll need to look elsewhere - China is turning more and more free, and is becoming increasingly like the rest of the West - good and bad, the whole package.
the democracy can't build nuclear power plants and fast trains, an an oligarchy can. So there's that
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Maybe the case for fast trains stacks up (in some places), but Nuclear power just doesn't. I know some people assume that because some of the safety problems are overstated it makes it a good option, but that chain of reasoning doesn't hold.
http://www.withouthotair.com/
This book does a pretty decent and math-based argument that the chain of reasoning for nuclear energy holds up pretty well. Have there been some new developments that suddenly made it not so?
1 reply →
>Well, the democracy can't build nuclear power plants and fast trains, an an oligarchy can.
The democracy once did, and in fact, was probably more democratic when it chose to. Of course, now it chooses not to because the vast majority of the population are NIMBYs, while nuclear power and fast trains are actually supported only by a technically-educated elite (ie: us).