![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
verytwistedmind.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsWhen did 'Czar' enter the American Political lexicon? Is this an official federal job such as a 'Secretary' or something more abstract?
How many Czars do we have now? Here are the ones I could find:
War Czar
Drug Czar
Poverty Czar
Auto Czar
Energy Czar
Environment Czar
Climate Czar
Egg Czar (LBJ assigned this one.)
The danger of a Czar is that they are not approved by The House, merely appointed by the President. These are unelected people given titles of nobility. This is more for my own education. Are there more Czar Titles about there I am unaware of?
Is evoking Russian cast system really the lexicon what American's should use? Isn't there a better term for these individuals who are given such power?
(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 14:49 (UTC)No seriously, I don't think we need any fricking czars of anything, it's a stupid outmoded concept that never worked. It's a PR stunt originally created by a president who couldn't possibly have given a f*ck about whatever it is he's appointing a czar of.
(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 14:56 (UTC)Who originally created it? LBJ?
(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 15:03 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 15:27 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 14:55 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 14:59 (UTC)It surprises me that we would pick this word though. It doesn't seem appropos. In my mind what they really want is a 'wizard'. He puts these people in positions of power to make the problem go away like magic. Ohh warlock would be good to. I like the idea of an American Warlock. Sounds schemxy
(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 15:08 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 15:36 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 16:01 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 15:26 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 15:37 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 15:38 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 15:20 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 15:43 (UTC)The difference between that and this is that those were terms dubbed by the media whereas these are titles given by the President of The United States Of America.
(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 17:51 (UTC)And I find it funny that we're discussing the term "Caesar" as applied to the US anyhow. What's next? An American businessman finances a private army and attempts a fairer shake for things than the government? (Marius)?
(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 17:55 (UTC)There is a significant difference between 'Ceasar' and 'Czar' when Caesar was in power he still had to battle a Senate. Rome was a republic. When the Czars were in power they were kings without being beholden to any representation of the people.
(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 17:57 (UTC)And the Caesars never had to battle the Senate, they had to worry that the standing Roman Army was going to revolt if they weren't paid enough to suit them.
(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 18:50 (UTC)For example, the Drug Czar is the ONDCP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_National_Drug_Control_Policy).
(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 19:22 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/4/09 00:55 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 16:41 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 15:22 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 16:42 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 17:55 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 18:00 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 21:11 (UTC)CzaRRRRRR!
(no subject)
Date: 1/4/09 01:37 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 20:08 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 16:39 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 20:03 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 18:24 (UTC)But it's a stupid thing to call them. I think it would be more accurate to call them VIZIRs, rather than Czars, since all they do is offer advice to the Sultan, and handle policy details.
(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 18:32 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 18:48 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 18:50 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 21:03 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 19:29 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 21:04 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/4/09 02:02 (UTC)Contemporary figures of speech seems like a pretty feeble thing to worry about, IMO
Date: 31/3/09 20:12 (UTC)Re: Contemporary figures of speech seems like a pretty feeble thing to worry about, IMO
Date: 31/3/09 23:42 (UTC)Re: Contemporary figures of speech seems like a pretty feeble thing to worry about, IMO
Date: 1/4/09 00:08 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/09 23:35 (UTC)Origin of the word
Date: 1/4/09 00:07 (UTC)As for nobility, that is a relative word. Plutocrats are only considered noble by other plutocrats.
Re: Origin of the word
Date: 1/4/09 01:43 (UTC)And I fail to see a reason for Slavs to adopt a word with such similarity to Caesar by random happenstance to refer to a monarch, but considering your constant references to hogwash and inability to name sources....
I'd already put on my splash goggles in anticipation of your head exploding.
Date: 1/4/09 09:37 (UTC)Re: Origin of the word
Date: 1/4/09 23:22 (UTC)BTW, which community college did you say you worked for?
(no subject)
Date: 1/4/09 01:12 (UTC)When he said that, I could just HEAR the lines from Red Dwarf:
Rimmer: "I'm going to blame the Democrats for wrecking the economy by invoking Article 1 Section 9 of the Constitution."
Kryten: "Article 1 Section 9? 'No title of nobility shall be granted by The United States?' Is that strictly relevant sir? I mean, here we are, about to go broke, and you're worried about the Sultan of Brunai giving us all knighthoods at the bankruptcy hearing?"
Rimmer: "Kryten, can't you just let ONE go by?!"
(no subject)
Date: 1/4/09 01:41 (UTC)Tsar these days is like Mogul, a term that once had some meaning but nowadays means someone with a shitload of money and little brains. And the Moghuls were a Moslem dynasty that ruled India and fell before the House of Hanover. And the term Tycoon derives as well from the Japanese Shogun.
(no subject)
Date: 1/4/09 01:34 (UTC)