Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

["Don Rua" <drua AT fullseven.com>]

Much of the debate over the Bush family wealth and it's relation to politics seems somewhat irrelevant or directed at scrutiny of the wrong underlying principles at work.

What does a finite definition of wealth in dollars, such as "..Bush family worth $300M...." have to do with Dubya being president?

- Are we suggesting he can buy the presidency with that much? If it was that simple, Gates would buy Balmer a seat, and let him do the monkey dance on the DOJ. Or Forbes would have bought himself in, or the Rockefellers, or Buffet, etc. $300M is paltry at the uppper end, and last I checked they did not expend that economic power, as by definition it is what they have now, not a measure of what they've spent.

- Dubya had much more than dollars, he had clout and pull in many directions. Politics is a much more complicated (corrupt?)animal than just a financial spreadsheet. It's about power, not just oil money, or tobacco money for Gore, or union money for Clinton, etc. It's about power, and this is the country constructed to allow the most people to garner it. If we take away the ability to build power honestly, we take away a critical freedom.

- Does economic power = polital power? Power is power, and can be transferred, as well as built using a variety of materials and tools. I'm sure there are a few physics students here that are totally under-whelmed by a revelation that money can buy political clout. You do not destroy power, you can only diffuse it. If there were a way you could guarantee someone politcal power without any pre-existing economic power, they would inherently gain economic power at every rung of the political rise. It is transferable, and also magnetic, attracting opportunities for transference. If there was a great minister that held psychological or spiritual power over millions in America, then they could indeed leverage that power for political or economic power, as we see in the rise of Islamic law in some countries. Where's the mystery or debate? We don't begrudge matter for it's reaction to gravity?

- If people or groups want political clout/power, then what are they willing to do to obtain it? The beauty of USA is in giving so many the ability to accumulate power, which can then be trasferred as desired. Are you part of a grass roots org that wants more power? Are you willing to work the 18 hour days for several years to grow your organization's power just as an entrepreneur would do to start an oil or publishing business? Are you willing to continue the long hours for ten to thirty years to perhaps make a political movement as a businessperson would put in to begin a dynasty? Are you training your children to take up the same cause to build your power base greater over generations?

- Not happy that some individual or group has power? What are you willing to sacrifice to build your own opposing power structure? The laws of physics should apply. A movement in motion tends to remain in motion until opposition/friction by a sufficient force is applied. Too often people spend their energies bemoaning the object in motion, instead of paying an equal price to oppose it. Stopping a movement that 2000 people have spent much of their lives to build, should be done by a similar expenditure of effort, not on the half-time efforts of ten people over four years. There's a balance of work, effort, sacrifice, etc., which will obey the will of humans if they acknowledge and use them, instead of spending energy complaining and wondering why they are powerless and others are powerful.

- Of course, there are also laws/principles in place that pulls those who love power to work to gather it; just as those who love debating are lured by venues for those efforts.

- History's most important lesson is the reciprocal relationship of freedom and equality. -Will Durant. We are created equal, with the freedom to become unequal. Why then do so many complain about the inequality that results from the freedom we fought for?

- Bonus question: will the internet's ability to aggregate and track the actions of millions help to develop a rudimentary beginning to the study of PsychoHistory?

Asimov bless the USA................Don