3 ms·

This post seems like it was probably sarcasm but I can't tell. Just in case, though: we already have that.

• chrisseaton 9y ago
  My post wasn't sarcasm. Nobody thinks the current system is perfect or not vulnerable to corruption or special interests etc, but at least it attempts to be representative of the people and accountable, and to be well informed through intelligence networks and professional analysis. A dictatorship of a union of Google employees forcing the hand of the government based on what they're angry about from Twitter doesn't even bother to make a pretense of being fair.
  • deciplex 9y ago
    I think if you can twist your head enough to believe that our current system "at least attempts" (but, by implication, even you seem to agree still fails) to be representative of the people, but also believe that any employee union is a priori unrepresentative, you might be showing some bias. Maybe a lot of it, actually. And it doesn't help that you immediately heap a bunch of strawmen on this hypothetical Google union, either. Edit: from your original post it also occurs to me you might think union leadership is never elected? But it almost always is (usually by law, in fact).