Re: [microsound] completely OT yet so on-topic

[Jeremy Tolsma <ccws@xxxxxxxx>]

> Actually, *Ceausescu* was just an uneducated, megalomaniacal, illiterate,
corrupt
> peasant (peasants still exist in Romania, the term refers to simple people
who reside
> in the country side and are mainly concerned with raising crops and such)
who didn't
> deserve to be in the position he was in and got there through deception
and
> basically, criminal means.

Yeah and he probably collected taxes and only put enough of that money back
into infrastructure to insure that he could take loans from other countries
and corporations and generally use the state to build personal wealth.
Suharto was the same way, and Indonesia was quite capitalist.  When you're
dealing with fascist despots it matters little which ideology they pay
lip-service to.

> > However, I don't see any problem with policy implimentors having a
higher standard
> > of living than the average citizen.  It should make them less
susceptible to
> > bribery.
>
> Don't be surprised if you're missing a couple of teeth after saying that
to someone
> who lived under Ceausescu, for example.  :-)

I'm not up on my Romanian affairs, do they have democracy now?  If so, have
they voted for a communist government?  If not, then why would they be upset
about inequity?  These former totalitarian nations invariably embrace
capitalism when they receive democracy.  Well capitalism and democracy
ensures that an uneducated illiterate can rise to power through the
influence of his rich family (eg. George W. Bush).