Just for the fun of discussion-
Would Pound agree or disagree?
What do you think?



    "This is the end of Democracy. If in the world of truths it is proof
that decides all, in that of facts it is success. Success means that one
being triumphs over the others. Life has won through, and the dreams of the
world-improvers have turned out to be but the tools of master-natures. In
the Late Democracy, race bursts forth and either makes ideals its slaves or
throws them scornfully into the pit. It was so, in Egyptian Thebes, in
Rome, in China - but in no other Civilization has the will-to-power
manifested itself in so inexorable a form as in this of ours. The
thought, and consequently the action, of the mass are kept under iron
pressure - for which reason, and for which reason only, men are permitted
to be readers and voters - that is, in a dual slavery - while the parties
become the obedient retinues of a few, and the shadow of coming Caesarism
already touches them. As the English kingship became in the nineteenth
century, so parliaments will become in the twentieth, a solemn and empty
pageantry. As then sceptre and crown, so now peoples' rights are paraded
for the multitude, and all the more punctiliously the less they really
signify - it was for this reason that the cautious Augustus never let pass
an opportunity of emphasizing old and venerated customs of Roman freedom.
But the power is migrating even today, and correspondingly elections are
degenerating for us into the farce that they were in Rome. Money organizes
the process in the interests of those who possess it, and election affairs
become a preconcerted game that is staged as popular self-determination. If
election was originally 'revolution in legitimate forms', it has exhausted
those forms, and what takes place is that mankind "elects" its Destiny
again by the primitive methods of bloody violence when the politics of
money become intolerable." -Spengler (1918) (2002)

Chas