3 ms·
> By removing from power the corrupt officials who colluded with JPM and other large corporations to steal stimulus money from small businesses? Bluntly, I thi
by mumblemumble 7y ago
> By removing from power the corrupt officials who colluded with JPM and other large corporations to steal stimulus money from small businesses?
Bluntly, I think that this is a polyannaish idea. The best pop culture representation of how US politics works is the Simpsons one where Kang and Kodos ran for President. The choice presented to the American public is rarely a choice between a corrupt politician and a non-corrupt one. It's much more typically typically down to deciding which corrupt, power-hungry individual spews the platitudes, half-truths and lies that you think sound the nicest.
Yes, we should still vote. But voting is not a panacea. The real province of democracy is grassroots organizing. It's probably never enough, but the US Constitution and 200 years of supreme court decisions around it have (tacitly, if not explicitly) made it so that that's the only piece of real political leverage available to those of us who don't have enough money to purchase actual political influence.
- zimpenfish 7y ago> is rarely a choice between a corrupt politician and a non-corrupt one 2008? 2012? Can't say that I've heard (m)any corruption allegations against Obama. 2016? I mean, I don't think a single charge of corruption or malfeasance ever turned out to be true for Hillary Clinton, has it? Unless you mean "corrupt" in the sense of "non-pure" and, yeah, 99.9$ people who have enough money to be politicians are distinctly "non-pure". Now if you want to get the money out of politics, it'll need consistent Democrat gains at every level down to local council for the next 20 years to move SCOTUS left and undo all the dark money idiocies of the Roberts' court.