U.K. is a polyarchy

That right, the U.K. is a system of government maintaining the dominant positions of selected old boys

On this BBC article are two pictures demonstrating that clearly:

BBC Link

But worse than that, out of all the toffs we could have picked to run the country, we went for the moron making the 'wanker' sign.

Looks like next time we're gonna get the stoner who used to get hammered and trash pubs.

Considering our parliament masquerades as a middle class institution, and our government masquerades as the 'working class' party, how many ordinary britons were members of such 'tally-ho' clubs in their youth.

Theres only one level up from such toffery, and that's this:

Photo link

Enjoy your freedom while you're still allowed it.

It just demonstrates the benefits of a good education!

Regards

Where can you find a place where the more typical figures for ownership are reversed?

That is, consider the US of A. 10% of the population hold 90% of the wealth. Or numbers so close it is not worth the argument. Where is this not true? Or nearly so?

Look at China, the PRC. Since the 6th Congress in 1977, the Chi-coms have gone capitalists, at least in the higher echelons. Now, 300 million Chinese are enjoying the so-called Miracle, while the remaining 1 billion Chinese are getting the hind-most.

But has it not always been the same? With the possible exception of the French Revolution, 1789-1796. There at least, at last, wealth got its comeuppance.

R&F. Rich and Famous.

[edit on 3/6/2007 by donwhite]

Aye, the 'way of the world'...

Sometimes I just find it reaffirming to see something pictorial or on video that supports my view that most of us are serfs, even if we are the most financially priveledged serfs in human history.

The deep thinkers will always be unhappy, there never were the 'good old days', all the powerful prophets/revolutionaries get crucified.

Like the dog that gets fed under the table.

Originally posted by Giordano Bruno
That right, the U.K. is a system of government maintaining the dominant positions of selected old boys

Yes, Britain is a Polyarchy, but it has sod all to do with what you are on about... A Polyarchy is has seven features, as laid out by Dahl who first coined the term, I believe...

1) election of officials
2) elections which are free and fair
3) suffrage which is inclusive
4) rights to run for election
5) freedom of expression
6) alternative information - i.e. no government monopoly
7) associational autonomy - i.e. rights to join political groups etc...

You need to do some more research and perhaps look at oligarchy and / or plutocracy.

Regards

Yeah you're right, I meant Plutocracy . Oh well, the pics are good even if my brain is failing me.

Even under Communism the rulers tended to be superiorly educated, even more well connected, and generally a couple of I.Q points ahead of your average man on the street.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the same is also true in most good tribal systems, which means (as we are tribal animals) it’s a feature of human society that should be here for oh; at least the next ten, or twenty thousand years. Probably longer as I see no evolutionary incentive for it to change.

Frankly its practical that not only should the smartest, political interested, and well connected people should rise to the top of society, but also that they should rule it. Of course they have an advantages and that’s why it happens. It’s not a bad thing as long as we remain a democracy and therefore the focus of these wealthy well connected people is the greater right, the attention of the man of the street.
There are problems with our democracy but they come from within the system of government. For example it tolerates people like Rupert Murdoch controlling 174 news titles, plus 200 sky channels worldwide. It fails under (Labour or Conservative) to give very many referendums, like America it is dependant on private donations to run it’s political institutions and this creates acres more room for political corruption than it does economic, too many idiots are encouraged (at taxpayers expense) to vote; which means they can be bought of with shallow arguments like “the reason why we don’t have state funding for political parties is because it saves the average person a couple of pence a year, which with 60 million people is way less than a pound each”

Summary
Ultimately no people are equal because they are all individual.
It started when God allowed some people to born in poverty and no brains, brains but poverty, and wealth with brains. Then even within these groups you have huge ranges, not least what positive mental features one defines as “brains”.
Give a few people a million pounds each to strangers and see what they do with it. Some will spend it on booze and drugs, others will put it in property or the stock market, some would buy themselves a lifetime of power in the form of Peerages. Who knows perhaps the favours they get back in return will be worth more even more than investing it on the stock market? Well we'll see if there's any justice, or not.

Acting in self interest under the pretence of carrying out 'the public good'. The amoral, risk-averse nature of society at the present time is worrying. Islamophobia is a current fad, but at least those who believe in Shrai law have a clear set of guidelines. The theology/philosophy/morality of the 'west' is a shape shifting contortionist, operated like a business with citizens as shareholders.

I haven't got a valid comeback to 'it's the only way/it's the best there is' etc, but I feel that our current way of behaving is rich in terms of material and variety, however it is increasingly devoid of 'soul', 'spirit', whatever you want to call it.

We're ironing out the things that define us from animals based on the premise that collectively, we are no different.