To: The Philosopher who wrote (16621 ) 6/13/2001 6:54:06 PM From: one_less Respond to of 82486 Well, we are justified in calling our selves a Nation only according to what we have established and agreed upon as the rule of law. To support the rule of law we must have impeccable leadership, responsible citizens, and a commitment of the masses to social responsibility. IMO we are in a very fragile time: The social fabric of our society is disintegrating. The responsibility of individuals and society at large is now most influenced by the political agenda of the day. Whereas, some Nations have fine constitutions that have no strong basis in driving the practical affairs of the citizenry; Our constitution is founded on solid principles to living, forged in blood. Unfortunately it has become popular to ridicule the idea of living a principled life in America. Equally problematic is the tendency of persons, like you, who live a life founded on principle to become disenfranchised by our circumstance. With the rule of law comes a measure of bureaucracy. The weight of the measure required to accommodate every rule and regulation as a charge against one's compliance is an impossible task. So, the majority of us just have the assumption that (NA) is the proper attitude to hold unless or until charged. If (or when) we are addressed and must come to an accounting for more than one or two light weight regs it can become an insurmountable difficulty in light of our other responsibilities to home, family, community, career, etc. Something as simple as getting licence plates for a vehicle takes a day of waiting at the Motor Vehicle Department. The bureaucrats typically expect you to stop the rest of your life and stand in a line someplace until the accounting is complete and paperwork is on file. I've seen the other side also. In some countries the bureaucracy is a secondary consideration and accessed on an as needed basis only. I have never seen one that is civilized and not totally corrupt. So I would stick with what we've got given the two choices. 1) A bureacracy that works but is cumbersome vs 2) An ineffective bureacracy that lends to corruption. Course, I'm always open to looking behind door number three.