7 ms·

I believe it's almost tautological that a politician would prefer personal cash instead of campaign donations. Among other things, campaign donations cannot be

I believe it's almost tautological that a politician would prefer personal cash instead of campaign donations. Among other things, campaign donations cannot be used to buy themselves a boat or ensure luxury in retirement. It's a pretty good example of the point I'm trying to make that my post is being downvoted, presumably by people of the mindset of the other reply, i. e. "Nope. U STUPID. Burn all politicians". I completely agree that Citizen United is atrocious. But blanket hate and cynicism is the surefire way to populism, and the ensuing wide lurches across the political spectrum. It just seems far too many people think everything is so bad it's time to get out the guillotines. That proposition strikes me as rather shortsighted, considering today still would seem to be the best time in history to be alive. A revolution acts a lot like random shuffling. If you consider society as a puzzle, which is not done, but more complete than ever before, throwing it in the air and letting the pieces fall where they may seems unlikely to produce a more perfect arrangement, just by the principles of entropy.

akiselev 8y ago
That assumes that progress in civilization is a forward path and that there are no local minima that are both extremely difficult to get out of given the institutions that got them there and dangerously unstable. Entropy eats away at systems no matter the path we chose and there is no guarantee that the end result of our current path won't be worse than a traumatic reshuffle now. I'm not advocating revolution, having seen the end result of one first hand, but to say that revolution is shortsighted entirely misses the forrest for the trees. All complex systems, be they biological organisms or deep learning neural networks, need randomness injected into them or they will fail to respond to the randomness of the environment around them. In the case of societies and organisms, that could very well mean extinction. It's a risk-reward calculation like any action.
- whatshisface 8y ago
  I'd want a revolution like I'd want to have my molecules scrambled by standing in the LHC beam - sure, maybe I'll end up in a superior configuration, but the odds are that if I am at all happy today in even the slightest way, a randomly chosen state will regress me to the mean of complete, brutal dysfunction.
  - dmix 8y ago
    Violence tends to be the dynamic in which power is doled out in the anarchy of post-revolutionary states. Whether it's direct violence against political groups or against honest hardworking citizens so their property can be handed to another group. Usually it's a little of both.
- tartoran 8y ago
  Did you experience a revolution firsthand? Learned something from it?
- thelasthuman 8y ago
  Elections are supposed to be bloodless revolutions. If you can't effect change through the electoral system, then the non violent solution is to revolutionize how we vote. Relevant videos (IMO) First Past The Post Voting - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo Range Voting - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3GFG0sXIig https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3GFG0sXIig Single Transferable Vote - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8XOZJkozfI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8XOZJkozfI Alternative Vote - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE Mixed-Member Proportional Representation - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QT0I-sdoSXU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QT0I-sdoSXU Bonus video This video will make you angry - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc
  - boomboomsubban 8y ago
    I hate to be a downer, but that would require an amendment that drastically hurts both parties. Just try and imagine it passing, remembering that you would be asking your elected representative to give up some of their power.
    - idontpost 8y ago
      No it wouldn't. Voting methods and how presidential electors are chosen are entirely up to the states.
hvidgaard 8y ago
While you're not wrong that campaign donations aren't a direct benefit to the politicians, you're arguing on a too limited scope. Donating to a campaign buys influence. That politician is keen to keep a good relationship to the donators do keep the money flowing, and get good deals outside the campaign, get positions that pays him/her directly ect. In really bad cases a donor can blatantly say "I have this new boat, since I've used it once it's only worth half of the original sales price - want to buy it? And completely omit that it was actually build for the donatee". That is just some of the examples of indirect payment involved in blatant corruption.
raxxorrax 8y ago
> I think it's important to appreciate such nuances. I think this is complete nonsense. Where you see nuances I see direct conflict of interest. There are no pragmatic approaches to be made here, because they would simply not be beneficial in any case but for involved parties. Strong condemnation and punishment of corruptions is very viable to drive up the price. For every little penny. The more outgoing form of cynism is taking it up the... and fighting corruption isn't some inquisition to the next revolution. That is a strawman.
cimmanom 8y ago
Just because they’d prefer one doesn’t necessarily mean that the other is all that much less effective.
iscrewyou 8y ago
This is what the bribes buy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolving_door_(politics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolving_door_(politics) I can show you the increase in politicians turning into lobbyists over the years or you can research it. I know which documentary shows the number (Saving Capitalism) but don’t have time to look it up at this moment.

akiselev 8y ago

That assumes that progress in civilization is a forward path and that there are no local minima that are both extremely difficult to get out of given the institutions that got them there and dangerously unstable. Entropy eats away at systems no matter the path we chose and there is no guarantee that the end result of our current path won't be worse than a traumatic reshuffle now. I'm not advocating revolution, having seen the end result of one first hand, but to say that revolution is shortsighted entirely misses the forrest for the trees. All complex systems, be they biological organisms or deep learning neural networks, need randomness injected into them or they will fail to respond to the randomness of the environment around them. In the case of societies and organisms, that could very well mean extinction. It's a risk-reward calculation like any action.

whatshisface 8y ago
I'd want a revolution like I'd want to have my molecules scrambled by standing in the LHC beam - sure, maybe I'll end up in a superior configuration, but the odds are that if I am at all happy today in even the slightest way, a randomly chosen state will regress me to the mean of complete, brutal dysfunction.
- dmix 8y ago
  Violence tends to be the dynamic in which power is doled out in the anarchy of post-revolutionary states. Whether it's direct violence against political groups or against honest hardworking citizens so their property can be handed to another group. Usually it's a little of both.
tartoran 8y ago
Did you experience a revolution firsthand? Learned something from it?
thelasthuman 8y ago
Elections are supposed to be bloodless revolutions. If you can't effect change through the electoral system, then the non violent solution is to revolutionize how we vote. Relevant videos (IMO) First Past The Post Voting - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo Range Voting - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3GFG0sXIig https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3GFG0sXIig Single Transferable Vote - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8XOZJkozfI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8XOZJkozfI Alternative Vote - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE Mixed-Member Proportional Representation - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QT0I-sdoSXU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QT0I-sdoSXU Bonus video This video will make you angry - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc
- boomboomsubban 8y ago
  I hate to be a downer, but that would require an amendment that drastically hurts both parties. Just try and imagine it passing, remembering that you would be asking your elected representative to give up some of their power.
  - idontpost 8y ago
    No it wouldn't. Voting methods and how presidential electors are chosen are entirely up to the states.

hvidgaard 8y ago

While you're not wrong that campaign donations aren't a direct benefit to the politicians, you're arguing on a too limited scope. Donating to a campaign buys influence. That politician is keen to keep a good relationship to the donators do keep the money flowing, and get good deals outside the campaign, get positions that pays him/her directly ect. In really bad cases a donor can blatantly say "I have this new boat, since I've used it once it's only worth half of the original sales price - want to buy it? And completely omit that it was actually build for the donatee". That is just some of the examples of indirect payment involved in blatant corruption.

raxxorrax 8y ago

> I think it's important to appreciate such nuances. I think this is complete nonsense. Where you see nuances I see direct conflict of interest. There are no pragmatic approaches to be made here, because they would simply not be beneficial in any case but for involved parties. Strong condemnation and punishment of corruptions is very viable to drive up the price. For every little penny. The more outgoing form of cynism is taking it up the... and fighting corruption isn't some inquisition to the next revolution. That is a strawman.

cimmanom 8y ago

Just because they’d prefer one doesn’t necessarily mean that the other is all that much less effective.

iscrewyou 8y ago

This is what the bribes buy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolving_door_(politics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolving_door_(politics) I can show you the increase in politicians turning into lobbyists over the years or you can research it. I know which documentary shows the number (Saving Capitalism) but don’t have time to look it up at this moment.