3 ms·

But there is external effects. Wealth translates into political power, how about people ending up disenfranchised by the excessive wealth of a small part of the

But there is external effects. Wealth translates into political power, how about people ending up disenfranchised by the excessive wealth of a small part of the people? They did not voluntarily give up their right to political participation.

bhupy 6y ago
> Wealth translates into political power This is debatable: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/money-and-elections-a-complicated-love-story/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/money-and-elections-a-c... Consider that the representative from Bezos' own district in Washington is a socialist. At the end of the day, the greatest check on wealth's effect on political power is the fact that legislators can only win office if they can win a democratic election.
- HarryHirsch 6y ago
  There is this paper from Princeton that makes a convincing case for the US being an oligarchy because the superrich control what gets on the ballot: https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/fi... At the end of the day, the greatest check on wealth's effect on political power is the fact that legislators can only win office if they can win a democratic election. It doesn't work like that. You donate to both sides of the aisle so you always have someone in your pockets. The famous cartoon from John Herzfeld about the "Millions behind Hitler" (this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Heartfield#/media/File:Heartfield_Hitler_Salute.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Heartfield#/media/File:He...) is bullshit. German industrialists did give substantial support to Hitler, but not for ideological reason, they'd have given to anyone in power. The cash did amplify Hitler's ability to implement his ideology, though, and the non-donors didn't choose that.

bhupy 6y ago

> Wealth translates into political power This is debatable: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/money-and-elections-a-complicated-love-story/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/money-and-elections-a-c... Consider that the representative from Bezos' own district in Washington is a socialist. At the end of the day, the greatest check on wealth's effect on political power is the fact that legislators can only win office if they can win a democratic election.

HarryHirsch 6y ago
There is this paper from Princeton that makes a convincing case for the US being an oligarchy because the superrich control what gets on the ballot: https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/fi... At the end of the day, the greatest check on wealth's effect on political power is the fact that legislators can only win office if they can win a democratic election. It doesn't work like that. You donate to both sides of the aisle so you always have someone in your pockets. The famous cartoon from John Herzfeld about the "Millions behind Hitler" (this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Heartfield#/media/File:Heartfield_Hitler_Salute.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Heartfield#/media/File:He...) is bullshit. German industrialists did give substantial support to Hitler, but not for ideological reason, they'd have given to anyone in power. The cash did amplify Hitler's ability to implement his ideology, though, and the non-donors didn't choose that.