4 ms·

It's the #1 reason why so many people have been voting against their own interest for the past 20 years

by medlazik 6y ago

astura 6y ago
Can you explain?
- medlazik 6y ago
  The deregulation frenzy that started with Reagan/Thatcher and all over the world is responsible for the insane inequalities we have today. The billionaire owned media has a neoliberal agenda against regulation. Of course they don't have to call journalists to tell them what to say, they recruit heads of HR who recruit neoliberal journalists/editorialists. 90% of people haven't seen their wages progressing that much in 20 years, yet they keep voting for the Biden/Trump/Macron/Bolsonaro of the world whom appeal is 100% created by the media. Deregulation is also responsible for leaders doing nothing about global warming and so many other things that make the world a particularly shitty place right now.
- saiya-jin 6y ago
  Not OP but generally poorer folks in US especially in rural parts vote for right which protects much more the rich. Its sold to them for generations under guise of 'American dream' and if you are not yet rich, well you just didn't work hard enough and should be ashamed and go back to work more and harder. Which is bullshit on many levels. Everybody in society benefits when poor are helped a bit and not kept poor and desperate. But that would require skimming a bit off the top, reshuffling few things and bottom jobs would still have to be paid livable wages without exception. Compared to places where social inequality is much lower (ie some parts of Europe), US has some deep societal issues that I don't see going away soon, in contrary. Marketing has been very effective in branding any other idea as socialism/communism. And here is the media role, be it Hollywood, news etc - resist any change, our way is the best, it was and always will be. Don't think hard if its best for you, or you are not a true American. Or it could be the opposite - from US conservative viewpoint those leaning left are harming themselves and US society in the long run (not that I agree with this, but I can understand why certain people would hold this opinion). (I don't have a personal stake at this, just presenting an outsider's, potentially flawed view. When deciding where to settle around the globe US went quickly off the list for quite a few reasons, overall not a place I wanted to raise my kids in but that's another topic. That was despite obvious strengths of US society and location, as strengths don't cancel out weaknesses in my opinion).
- dillondoyle 6y ago
  I look at Rupert Murdoch here as complicit with an intentional political goal he achieved through his vast media network. Think all the conservative outlets. Fox news changing news to opinion not based in the same reality, not even accepting base facts - while most of their viewers take it as actual news and fact.
refurb 6y ago
Most of the major media companies have a pro-Democrat bias. Is that what you mean?
- medlazik 6y ago
  Democrats and Republicans only differ on societal issues. Smoke and mirrors pushed by the billionaires to avoid talking about the insanity that is unregulated capitalism, the only issue that actually matters.
  - coldtea 6y ago
    Yep. "It's ok to fuck the lives, communities, job prospects, etc. of blacks, latinos, gays, lesbians, whites, fill billionaires' pockets, and bomb foreign countries, but we care for correct pronouns, and are in favor of same-sex marriage and stuff. Oh, and yay for ACA [as if that solves anything]". vs "It's ok to fuck the lives, communities, job prospects, etc. of blacks, latinos, gays, lesbians, whites, fill billionaires' pockets, and bomb foreign countries, but we don't care for political correctness and we are pro-life and stuff. Oh, and yay for more tax-decuctions to the rich [as if that solves anything]".
vncecartersknee 6y ago
Who would I vote for who is "in my interest" to vote for?
- medlazik 6y ago
  Socialists, if you make less than $500k or if you care about more people living a decent life.
  - coldtea 6y ago
    So, (given the lack of an actual socialist party to vote for), it's basically voting Democrats - a party complicit in the same neo-liberal policies, Wall Street bailouts and deregulation, warmongering, corporatism, looking down upon the "unwashed masses" (aka "deplorables"), and rampant corporate globalism (i.e. job outsourcing hitting the working classes) with the Republicans, that can't even stand a "soft" "socialist" like Bernie Sanders to be given a chance?
    - medlazik 6y ago
      Not sure what your point is, I was obviously talking about Bernie (soft is right). Once again, inconsequent societal issues won over economic interests of these voters.
- duxup 6y ago
  Kinda depends on who you are right? We would have to know that ...
coldtea 6y ago
You mean why they don't vote what others that know better think "their own interest" should be?

It's the #1 reason why so many people have been voting against their own interest for the past 20 years

astura 6y ago

Can you explain?

medlazik 6y ago
The deregulation frenzy that started with Reagan/Thatcher and all over the world is responsible for the insane inequalities we have today. The billionaire owned media has a neoliberal agenda against regulation. Of course they don't have to call journalists to tell them what to say, they recruit heads of HR who recruit neoliberal journalists/editorialists. 90% of people haven't seen their wages progressing that much in 20 years, yet they keep voting for the Biden/Trump/Macron/Bolsonaro of the world whom appeal is 100% created by the media. Deregulation is also responsible for leaders doing nothing about global warming and so many other things that make the world a particularly shitty place right now.
saiya-jin 6y ago
Not OP but generally poorer folks in US especially in rural parts vote for right which protects much more the rich. Its sold to them for generations under guise of 'American dream' and if you are not yet rich, well you just didn't work hard enough and should be ashamed and go back to work more and harder. Which is bullshit on many levels. Everybody in society benefits when poor are helped a bit and not kept poor and desperate. But that would require skimming a bit off the top, reshuffling few things and bottom jobs would still have to be paid livable wages without exception. Compared to places where social inequality is much lower (ie some parts of Europe), US has some deep societal issues that I don't see going away soon, in contrary. Marketing has been very effective in branding any other idea as socialism/communism. And here is the media role, be it Hollywood, news etc - resist any change, our way is the best, it was and always will be. Don't think hard if its best for you, or you are not a true American. Or it could be the opposite - from US conservative viewpoint those leaning left are harming themselves and US society in the long run (not that I agree with this, but I can understand why certain people would hold this opinion). (I don't have a personal stake at this, just presenting an outsider's, potentially flawed view. When deciding where to settle around the globe US went quickly off the list for quite a few reasons, overall not a place I wanted to raise my kids in but that's another topic. That was despite obvious strengths of US society and location, as strengths don't cancel out weaknesses in my opinion).
dillondoyle 6y ago
I look at Rupert Murdoch here as complicit with an intentional political goal he achieved through his vast media network. Think all the conservative outlets. Fox news changing news to opinion not based in the same reality, not even accepting base facts - while most of their viewers take it as actual news and fact.

refurb 6y ago

Most of the major media companies have a pro-Democrat bias. Is that what you mean?

medlazik 6y ago
Democrats and Republicans only differ on societal issues. Smoke and mirrors pushed by the billionaires to avoid talking about the insanity that is unregulated capitalism, the only issue that actually matters.
- coldtea 6y ago
  Yep. "It's ok to fuck the lives, communities, job prospects, etc. of blacks, latinos, gays, lesbians, whites, fill billionaires' pockets, and bomb foreign countries, but we care for correct pronouns, and are in favor of same-sex marriage and stuff. Oh, and yay for ACA [as if that solves anything]". vs "It's ok to fuck the lives, communities, job prospects, etc. of blacks, latinos, gays, lesbians, whites, fill billionaires' pockets, and bomb foreign countries, but we don't care for political correctness and we are pro-life and stuff. Oh, and yay for more tax-decuctions to the rich [as if that solves anything]".

vncecartersknee 6y ago

Who would I vote for who is "in my interest" to vote for?

medlazik 6y ago
Socialists, if you make less than $500k or if you care about more people living a decent life.
- coldtea 6y ago
  So, (given the lack of an actual socialist party to vote for), it's basically voting Democrats - a party complicit in the same neo-liberal policies, Wall Street bailouts and deregulation, warmongering, corporatism, looking down upon the "unwashed masses" (aka "deplorables"), and rampant corporate globalism (i.e. job outsourcing hitting the working classes) with the Republicans, that can't even stand a "soft" "socialist" like Bernie Sanders to be given a chance?
  - medlazik 6y ago
    Not sure what your point is, I was obviously talking about Bernie (soft is right). Once again, inconsequent societal issues won over economic interests of these voters.
duxup 6y ago
Kinda depends on who you are right? We would have to know that ...

coldtea 6y ago

You mean why they don't vote what others that know better think "their own interest" should be?