Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: Grade Inflation (Was: Student Evaluations of Teaching)



Ohhhh!

Yes.

probably a neologism  -- proscribed by Strunk and White.  BC definition:  Members of the ruling class in a "kleptocracy." e.g. The Russian mafia including Yeltson -- I was referring to our own, though.

I suppose it's from Greek:  klept and cracy The thieves rule!

I couldn't find it (either) in the four dicts.  in which I looked (incdng. 2nd ed Webster's unabridged). However, I found over 800 sites using altavista -- most are a typeface!!  Here, however, is a recent use:

By now it should he obvious that chiefdoms introduced the dilemma fundamental to all centrally governed, non egalitarian societies. At best, they do good by providing expensive services impossible to contract for on an individual basis. At worst, they function unabashedly as kleptocracies, transferring net wealth from commoners to upper classes. These noble and selfish functions are inextricably linked, although some governments emphasize much more of one function than of the other. The difference between a kleptocrat and a wise statesman, between a robber baron and a public benefactor, is merely one of degree: a matter of just how large a percentage of the tribute extracted from producers is retained by the elite, and how much the commoners like the public uses to which the redistributed tribute is put. We consider President Mobutu of Zaire a kleptocrat because he keeps too much tribute (the equivalent of billions of dollars) and redistributes too little tribute (no functioning telephone system in Zaire). We consider George Washington a statesman because he spent tax money on widely admired programs and did not enrich himself as president. Nevertheless, George Washington was born into wealth, which is much more unequally distributed in the United States than in New Guinea villages.

 For any ranked society, whether a chiefdom or a state, one thus has to ask: why do the commoners tolerate the transfer of the fruits of their hard labor to kleptocrats? This question, raised by political theorists from Plato to Marx, is raised anew by voters in every modern election. Kleptocracies with little public support run the risk of being overthrown, either by downtrodden commoners or by upstart would-be replacement kleptocrats seeking public support by promising a higher ratio of services rendered to fruits stolen. For example, Hawaiian history was repeatedly punctuated by revolts against repressive chiefs, usually led by younger brothers promising less oppression. This may sound funny to us in the context of old Hawaii, until we reflect on all the misery still being caused by such struggles in the modern world.
 What should an elite do to gain popular support while still maintaining.........
 

More in:   Guns, Germs, and Steel  (The fates of Human Societies), by Jared Diamond.
 

bc

P.s.  the first if below is an of.
 
 

Herbert H Gottlieb wrote:

On Sun, 02 Jan 2000 11:23:28 -0800 "Bernard G. Cleyet & Nancy Ann Seese"
<georgeann@REDSHIFT.COM> writes:
>
> Another example if the increasing disparity in our 'new communist
> free" world.  Education is even less free and available --  to the
> advantage of the  kleptocrats.
>
Please explain the term "kleptocrats" . I am unable to find it in my
dictrionary or encyclopedia.  Does it have anything to do with
kleptomania"

Herb Gottlieb from New York City
(Where we have every nationality except kleptocrats)