Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!hplabs!ucbvax!brahms!weemba
From: weemba@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU (Matthew P. Wiener)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Criticism of America :re to critics
Message-ID: <12636@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Tue, 25-Mar-86 01:36:30 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.12636
Posted: Tue Mar 25 01:36:30 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 29-Mar-86 09:16:26 EST
References: <1025@whuxl.UUCP> <3630074@csd2.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: weemba@brahms.UUCP (Matthew P. Wiener)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 37

In article <3630074@csd2.UUCP> sykora@csd2.UUCP (Michael Sykora) writes:
>>/* mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz) /  4:48 pm  Mar 17, 1986 */
>>But then your division of power into political and economic is sadly
>>flawed, as they are interconvertable and blend imperceptibly one into the
>>other.  Marcos provides a fine example of conversion in one direction:
>>converted the money into economic power by investing in a host of
>>corporations that satisfy consumers.
>
>I can't comment much on this, since I don't know the deatils of Marcos'
>abuses.  Nonetheless, I maintain that in a free society, economic
>power and political power are separate, by definition.  Since
>Mracos' Philipines was not a free society, I don't see how the
>criticism applies.

Look around you, then.  Read newspapers and history books.

Just because 'economic' and 'political' have distinct definitions does
not mean 'economic power' and 'political power' are separate.  Mike did
not claim they were identical.

In an intelligent and well-informed society run by an honest government,
the two powers would be completely distinct.  But in our 'free' society,
the electorate is easily influenced by advertising, which costs money,
and members of the government can easily abuse its powers to gain personal
wealth.

>>  And surely examples of economic
>>power being converted to political power are abundant in the USA:
>>such as the Rockefellers, Kennedys, etc.
>
>Why didn't the people of the U.S., thru the electoral process, put an end
>to such abuses?

What does your question tell you about the power of the people?  Can they
via the electoral process end such abuses or can't they?

ucbvax!brahms!weemba	Matthew P Wiener/UCB Math Dept/Berkeley CA 94720