[Cid_Yama]

Oligarchy is a form of government where political power effectively rests with a small elite segment of society distinguished by royalty, wealth, family, military powers or occult spiritual hegemony. Such states are often controlled by politically powerful families whose children were heavily conditioned and mentored to be heirs of the power of the oligarchy. This type of power by its very nature may not be exercised openly; the oligarchs preferring to remain "the power behind the throne", exerting control through economic means. Oligarchies have been tyrannical throughout history, being completely reliant on public servitude to exist.

The concept of an "oligarchic democracy" is one which some scholars attribute to Ancient Rome and the United States. Faced with the distasteful specter of democracy, they sought ways to redefine that unpalatable concept to accommodate aristocratic rule, producing a hybrid, "representative democracy," which was clearly meant to achieve an effect similar to the ancient Roman idea of the "mixed constitution," in fact, an "oligarchic 'democracy."

A number of critics argue that the United States political system is, itself, an oligarchic structure. Third party candidates stand little chance of election to national office, due to the enormous monetary capital needed to purchase advertising time and to make other key connections in order to gain sufficient attention from the electorate. Since large donors fuel national political races, expecting due compensation in return for funding the winners' campaigns, it is difficult to distinguish between the current situation and societies most commonly recognized as oligarchies. It is, many feel, a return to aristocratic rule, in which the common people have little control over their political fate; feelings of being "sold out" frequently lead to apathy, now recognized as the most common problem in American politics.
link

[RdSnt]

I agree, certainly the US is a blatant example, with dynasties ruling the political domain. The Bush family being the most recent and consistent success story.
Yet, other first world nations offer a similar trajectory, Canada included.
Sadly, the internet has acted as an accelerant for the advent of a public aristocracy that no longer needs to hide in the shadows.
We are serfs, working away in our cottages, beholden to an elite which appears to own and control everything. Mostly that control is a smokescreen of pointless complexity and specialize languages. It is the artificial equivalent of illiteracy.

Still, the oligarchs dream of unfettered global commerce, that would free them of national responsibility, has reached its "Tower of Babel" zenith and is collapsing, ( with the helping hand of Peak Oil).

[vtsnowedin]

You bring this up one week before the inauguration of Barach H.Obama? What powereful oligarch family does he own allegiance to.? And consider Bill Clinton Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagon, D.D. Eisinhower, and H.S. Truman. If an Oligarchy controlls elections in the USA they arn't doing a very good job of it.

[Tyler_JC]

8) You bring this up one week before the inauguration of Barach H.Obama? What powereful oligarch family does he own allegiance to.? And consider Bill Clinton Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagon, D.D. Eisinhower, and H.S. Truman. If an Oligarchy controlls elections in the USA they arn't doing a very good job of it.

Adding some more presidents to that list. Richard Nixon, whose father owned a small grocery store, was unable to get a scholarship to Yale or Harvard and instead attended a local Quaker college. He became a lawyer, then joined the Navy, then ran for Congress and won. He became famous in Congress for helping in the Alger Hiss spy case.

That gave him enough national spotlight and credibility to take out a sitting Senator. More importantly, it gave him a spot on the 1952 ticket as Eisenhower's VP.

Did ANY of that have ANYTHING to do with the oligarchs?

..didn't think so...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Ford

Can you find any evidence of Ford's family connection to the illumanti...nor can I.

Kennedy may have been a blue blood but Johnson was no aristocrat.

The Bush Family is the exception, not the rule.

And what about this little fact:





People are moving up and down the income ladder all the time.

Yes, you CAN become one of the elite. It might take more than one generation but there is significant opportunity for improvement.

I would never claim that coming from a wealthy family is not an advantage in life. Of course it is. But being wealthy does not automatically mean you are powerful. It also is not a necessary precondition for power.

I'd argue that luck is more important than money for gaining political power.

John Kerry was born rich but hit a few unlucky breaks and lost the presidency. Obama was born poor but lucked out when he gave a great speech at the Democratic National Convention that propelled him to national stardom.

[Ludi]

the internet has acted as an accelerant for the advent of a public aristocracy that no longer needs to hide in the shadows.

Not really sure how the internet helps the oligarchs.

[rattleshirt]

Those charts heavily skewed because the recording agencies stop counting at one million dollars per year income. Thus if your income jumps from 999,999 to 10 million it is recorded only as 1 million. this makes it appear that the rich have not gotten richer while the reality is it only indicates the people moving over the million dollar mark.

[Cid_Yama]

Future president Richard Nixon considered Prescott Bush to be his political mentor and consulted him before his famous 1952 "Checkers speech", in which Nixon, then the vice-presidential candidate, addressed his exoneration of receiving $18,000 in illegal campaign contributions. However, Nixon admitted accepting a cocker spaniel pup from a supporter. Nixon was defiant, stating: "the kids, like all kids, love the dog and I just want to say this right now: that regardless of what they say about it, we're gonna keep it."
link