Totenkopf Posted June 18, 2008 Author Share Posted June 18, 2008 That's what spin doctors and lawyers are for......to obfuscate the issue and muddy the waters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mur'phon Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 I'm not saying it'll remove corruption entierly, only that it'll make it harder, especially to pull off big things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted June 19, 2008 Author Share Posted June 19, 2008 I was originally only adddressing the point that "direct participation" would not remove the corruption inherent in govt, just increase the number of players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mur'phon Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 And I argue that with more players, there are more people trying to grab cash for themselves/their projects, but those players want to make sure no-one "steals" "their" money, so less corruption. So no, I don't think it would just increase the number of players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted June 19, 2008 Author Share Posted June 19, 2008 Given human nature, I don't find that a very convincing argument. More players doesn't aximatically make for less corruption. Even with all the access to information we purportedly have today, there's abundant corruption taking place. Special interest groups alone have proliferated over time, but I think you'd be hard placed to argue that there's less corruption as a result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.