‘>If an absolute dictatorship is such a good idea who do you suggest be the Fuehrer, or Caesar?
I never said it was a good idea; I did however imply that it might be no less a horrible an idea than our current rule-by-bureaucrats.’
So given the choice between our current status and establishing an absolute dictatorship which do you prefer? I do not wish to derive my opinions based only on an implication.
>So given the choice between our current status and establishing an absolute dictatorship which do you prefer?
That’s a tough question. As I’ve already shown on this thread the system we have now is open to arbitrary retroactive changes; furthermore in our bureaucratic-based system there is a deep aversion to personal responsibility/accountability, in this sense it is far inferior to a kingdom or dictatorship as there is no one person to whom you may seek redress.
As a personal example I have found several state/county/city laws/rules/policies which are in violation of the State’s Constitution, they concern firearms, and it seems that the only way I will be able to challenge these laws is from the inherently weaker position of violating them and then using their inherent contrariness to the State Constitution as my defense. {The matter in particular is that of firearms restrictions, so while my case is a sure-fire win based on the plain meaning of the wordings in the State Constitution I have no confidence that a Jury will not be swayed by their emotion and find against me.}
>I do not wish to derive my opinions based only on an implication.
That’s a foolish sentiment; implication is recognized as the basis for reasoning within formal logic and *is* the If-Then statement in both programming and spoken languages.