3 ms·

This is what a broken system looks like- the people are no longer represented, and corruption has no check or balance. Question is, what do we do about it? Sid

This is what a broken system looks like- the people are no longer represented, and corruption has no check or balance. Question is, what do we do about it? Side note: it would be foolish to think that these two things are not related. The motivations for removing our civil rights dovetail with the goals for keeping us under control.

matt4077 9y ago
I really don't see how anybody is actually being kept under control, so far. Not disputing the overreach of many of these transgressions that have become public over the last years. But to suggest that they are actively used to influence US domestic politics and elections just doesn't seem plausible. Even if the theory is that the two parties act as a duopoly and protect their shared interests, which seems unlikely given they barely contain their mutual hatred in public–wouldn't they have used such subversion to avoid the current president?
- _jal 9y ago
  > But to suggest that they are actively used to influence US domestic politics and elections just doesn't seem plausible Have you heard the name J. Edgar Hoover[1]? Have you read about the FBI's, ah, interactions, with MLK[2]? If so, on what grounds do you believe that such things don't happen today? With more subtlety, of course; things change, and the FBI has had a long time to refine technique. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King_Jr.#FBI_and_King.27s_personal_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King_Jr.#FBI_and...
- moomin 9y ago
  I don't think you actually need a conspiracy for this behaviour to hold true. As different as the parties are, there's huge amounts they both agree on. (It's positively ridiculous how much time is spent presenting everyone's minor differences in approach on Terrorism and Syria, for instance) It's pretty ridiculous that America's idea of an anti-establishment candidate is pro-foreign intervention, pro-big business, anti-drugs and favours mass incarceration. I mean, seriously, how is this different from Bill Clinton's policies. TL;DR; Whilst there are genuine and important differences between the two parties and specific candidates, American policy in general is pretty damn stable.

matt4077 9y ago

I really don't see how anybody is actually being kept under control, so far. Not disputing the overreach of many of these transgressions that have become public over the last years. But to suggest that they are actively used to influence US domestic politics and elections just doesn't seem plausible. Even if the theory is that the two parties act as a duopoly and protect their shared interests, which seems unlikely given they barely contain their mutual hatred in public–wouldn't they have used such subversion to avoid the current president?

_jal 9y ago
> But to suggest that they are actively used to influence US domestic politics and elections just doesn't seem plausible Have you heard the name J. Edgar Hoover[1]? Have you read about the FBI's, ah, interactions, with MLK[2]? If so, on what grounds do you believe that such things don't happen today? With more subtlety, of course; things change, and the FBI has had a long time to refine technique. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King_Jr.#FBI_and_King.27s_personal_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King_Jr.#FBI_and...
moomin 9y ago
I don't think you actually need a conspiracy for this behaviour to hold true. As different as the parties are, there's huge amounts they both agree on. (It's positively ridiculous how much time is spent presenting everyone's minor differences in approach on Terrorism and Syria, for instance) It's pretty ridiculous that America's idea of an anti-establishment candidate is pro-foreign intervention, pro-big business, anti-drugs and favours mass incarceration. I mean, seriously, how is this different from Bill Clinton's policies. TL;DR; Whilst there are genuine and important differences between the two parties and specific candidates, American policy in general is pretty damn stable.