Tags
emperor, highest bidder, money, politics, roman empire, Rome
In 193 CE the Roman Empire was literally purchased by the highest bidder (Didius Julianus).
Thank heavens we’ve made a lot of progress since then.
Big Money in Politics
08 Friday Jun 2012
Posted in Politics and Government
Schwartz Chronicles 
The internet is the great equalizer. The truth is not always evident at first blush, but both sides of each debate are more readily available allowing people to discern the truth for themselves based on their own beliefs.
Hence why the Tea Party movement is alive and well, if only active via blogs, Facebook, and on election day.
The Democratic Party won’t be able to rely on lies, revisionist history, and misinformation to retain power. They must make some maneuvers towards freedom to remain relevant nationally.
“… allowing people to discern the truth for themselves based on their own beliefs.”
Isn’t the point to discern the truth regardless of one’s own beliefs? Which is more important, to be educated or to be validated?
Jerry, I tend to agree that the truth is the truth, but perception is reality. My point was people are now able to search out the truth for themselves instead of relying on the lies our schools and media tell us. I am cognizant of the fact that peoples’ belief systems will influence what they perceive to be the truth when confronted with it. I know that Capitalism leads to everyone being wealthier than they would have been under another system and I perceive that to be a good thing. While others may concentrate more on the disparity between the highest and lowest and perceive the disparity as a bad thing. Those would prefer a leveling of everyone even at the consequence of everyone being poorer than what they would have been otherwise.
With my scientific training, the idea that perception is reality sticks in my craw. I believe in absolute truth, even if the absolute truth is that some question is undecidable.
As far as bypassing the media and the schools, and informing oneself from the web, there is a big problem: where does the stuff on the web come from? Most of it comes originally from reporters attached to the media, or outfits like Pro Publica that some would consider biased. Only if you can find the original source material can you have any assurance that you have reached anything like the truth. (There are many victims of photo retouching that would argue that point.)
Once you get to a second, third, or fourth generation you are in deep trouble. Each generation potentially loses information and introduces bias. I’m sure you’ve seen things like this:
Interviewer: “What’s your opinion of fruit”?
Interviewee: “I love oranges.”
Interviewer: “What about apples”?
Interviewee: “They’re okay, too.”
If you find an original transcript, you have the truth: the interviewee loves oranges, but thinks apples are okay, too.
By the time it makes it into somebody’s blog, it can easily turn into
“Interviewee dismisses apples, says oranges are the only fruit worth eating! He wants to force us to give up our beloved apples.”
I’ll address capitalism in another blog post.