hereditary government and democracy

i'm not sure it is...

Yes, but what can we really do about that? I mean, you look at the Rockefeller and the Kennedy family who have innundated American politics for almost a century. Is it fair? No, I don't think so. But at the same time, it isn't unjust either. It just is what it is.Its kind of like disliking people who use their name to further their status. Some people will vote for the name as if it were a brand name. Others won't vote for them just because of the distatse of riding on the coattails of their forefathers hard won efforts. As wrong as it might be to simply vote for someone just because of their family stone iot may be just as wrong to not vote for them soley because of their name.

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

I am worried that with increase concentration of wealth and power in certain families, and increased bars to gaining offices based on wealth and connections, the situation can become unjust.Further still, I worry what unjust things family members might be willing and able to do. I think the potential for excess is higher there.What can we do? Well I'm suggesting limitations on major public offices. Not all offices, just one's with major influence. President/VP, Congressmen, and Governors.Is there a reason such a restriction would be unjust?It's obvious that my worry is not a popular one, so I'm not holding out that its going to happen anytime soon. Or cry that it won't.

---

holmes {in temp decloak from lurker mode}
"What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)