6 ms·

I feel like the American populis basically deserves this for endlessly electing the "practical" centrist candidates who don't have the political courage to chan

I feel like the American populis basically deserves this for endlessly electing the "practical" centrist candidates who don't have the political courage to change anything (or game show hosts, but Trump didn't seem particularly interested in dismantling the surveillance state)

burnbabyburner 5y ago
We don’t vote them in. Walmart and Amazon place them there to uphold the status quo.
- 1MachineElf 5y ago
  A very clear example of this, but with Citigroup: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/10/15/wiki-o15.html https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/10/15/wiki-o15.html
  - leesalminen 5y ago
    Your source doesn’t claim that Citigroup wanted to maintain the societal status quo, though.
    - 1MachineElf 5y ago
      Depends on your definition of societal status quo. If it includes "not out of business", then I think the example still holds. Citigroup's positioning helped them secure $20 billion in government bailout loans following the 2008 crash, while most Americans wanted to let them fail.
- shadowgovt 5y ago
  That's a pretty lie that citizens in a democracy get to tell themselves so they don't have to take responsibility for the will of the people coming to a bad decision. Walmart and Amazon can afford to shape the news, but they don't hold the pen in the voting booth. "Absolute governments, (tho’ the disgrace of human nature) have this advantage with them, they are simple; if the people suffer, they know the head from which their suffering springs; know likewise the remedy; and are not bewildered by a variety of causes and cures." ~Thomas Paine
  - burnbabyburner 5y ago
    I like this perspective. I hear you. It just seems that the list of candidates (for which we vote) is assembled by corporations with the intent of writing laws that promote their profits (at the expense of the people and other businesses). I don’t see how we (the people) can vote who gets on the list in the first place. Until that happens I don’t consider it to be true representation.
    - shadowgovt 5y ago
      The list is decided during the primaries. In the US at least, the biggest problem is that very few Americans seem to understand how significant primaries are; we usually see sub-30% turnout for those elections, but those are the elections where questions like "Trump or Cruz" or "Clinton or Biden" are decided (to say nothing of federal legislators, which are a full branch of government, or state government, which has more day-to-day impact on most Americans than who is President).
      - burnbabyburner 5y ago
        Yeah that is a serious problem. Is there a buy-in to participate in the primaries?
tboyd47 5y ago
That's the problem with democracy. The people are not truly in charge but yet we get blamed. > Athenion struts on stage before the crowd, then displays the sloganeering skills of a modern politician, saying: “Now you command yourselves, and I am your commander in chief. If you join your strength to me, my power shall reach the combined power of all of you.” Then March 86 BC, shouts and trumpet blasts rend the night air as Roman soldiers, swords drawn, run through the city. Blood flows in the narrow streets, as the Romans butcher the Athenians—women and children included. The number of dead is beyond counting. In despair, many Athenians kill themselves.
- leetcrew 5y ago
  I believe athenion was not actually in control of athens in 86 BC, but rather the tyrant aristion who had seized control. if athenion had still been in power, he might have followed the other city-states in surrendering to sulla. hard to say of course, but he did not have the same conflicting motives as athenion. I'm not really sure what this example is supposed to show.
  - tboyd47 5y ago
    My point was not about who was really responsible for the rebellion. My point was that the everyday people were blamed for what transpired, then they were massacred, and this was the end of democracy in Athens for a long time.
- SQueeeeeL 5y ago
  Idk man, a lot of people didn't vote for Bernie in that primary. They had the option and didn't go for it.
  - erhk 5y ago
    Remember when he was winning and then there was a "software failure"
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
hncurious 5y ago
They're not voting for anyone practical. They're voting for career politicians who are in the pockets of big corporate donors. That's why nothing changes, they work for the donors, not the voters.
- the_only_law 5y ago
  I was at a bar a couple months back and met a guy running for one of the new US Congress seats. He stated, quite bluntly, that donors are much more important than voters when it comes to elections.
  - dwd 5y ago
    And it's not during the actual election either, the donors wield their influence way earlier in deciding who gets as far as the primaries. If you can't self fund, you have to sell your soul to donors who will put up the money. Not to mention getting access to the party apparatus who will fuck you over if they have a preferred candidate that's not you: Howard Dean and Bernie Sanders managed to go it alone only to get done over by their own party in the end.
keewee7 5y ago
Even small doses of fear and pessimism is enough to make the majority of people accept mass surveillance. In Denmark in 2017 we had a summer of daily gang shootings. That fear was enough for the government to fly military SIGINT and surveillance planes above Copenhagen for weeks. There was almost no opposition to this level of mass surveillance. https://www.berlingske.dk/samfund/politiet-tager-nye-vaaben-i-brug-mod-banderne-vi-goer-fund-og-fangster-fordi-vi https://www.berlingske.dk/samfund/politiet-tager-nye-vaaben-...
srswtf123 5y ago
Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. We only get to choose between candidates who are corrupt in different ways. That isn't the fault of the people, it's the fault of the incumbent politicians who game the system to be most favorable to themselves. If you want to blame us for something, blame us for enjoying the empty comforts of modern life over choosing civil war.

burnbabyburner 5y ago

We don’t vote them in. Walmart and Amazon place them there to uphold the status quo.

1MachineElf 5y ago
A very clear example of this, but with Citigroup: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/10/15/wiki-o15.html https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/10/15/wiki-o15.html
- leesalminen 5y ago
  Your source doesn’t claim that Citigroup wanted to maintain the societal status quo, though.
  - 1MachineElf 5y ago
    Depends on your definition of societal status quo. If it includes "not out of business", then I think the example still holds. Citigroup's positioning helped them secure $20 billion in government bailout loans following the 2008 crash, while most Americans wanted to let them fail.
shadowgovt 5y ago
That's a pretty lie that citizens in a democracy get to tell themselves so they don't have to take responsibility for the will of the people coming to a bad decision. Walmart and Amazon can afford to shape the news, but they don't hold the pen in the voting booth. "Absolute governments, (tho’ the disgrace of human nature) have this advantage with them, they are simple; if the people suffer, they know the head from which their suffering springs; know likewise the remedy; and are not bewildered by a variety of causes and cures." ~Thomas Paine
- burnbabyburner 5y ago
  I like this perspective. I hear you. It just seems that the list of candidates (for which we vote) is assembled by corporations with the intent of writing laws that promote their profits (at the expense of the people and other businesses). I don’t see how we (the people) can vote who gets on the list in the first place. Until that happens I don’t consider it to be true representation.
  - shadowgovt 5y ago
    The list is decided during the primaries. In the US at least, the biggest problem is that very few Americans seem to understand how significant primaries are; we usually see sub-30% turnout for those elections, but those are the elections where questions like "Trump or Cruz" or "Clinton or Biden" are decided (to say nothing of federal legislators, which are a full branch of government, or state government, which has more day-to-day impact on most Americans than who is President).
    - burnbabyburner 5y ago
      Yeah that is a serious problem. Is there a buy-in to participate in the primaries?

tboyd47 5y ago

That's the problem with democracy. The people are not truly in charge but yet we get blamed. > Athenion struts on stage before the crowd, then displays the sloganeering skills of a modern politician, saying: “Now you command yourselves, and I am your commander in chief. If you join your strength to me, my power shall reach the combined power of all of you.” Then March 86 BC, shouts and trumpet blasts rend the night air as Roman soldiers, swords drawn, run through the city. Blood flows in the narrow streets, as the Romans butcher the Athenians—women and children included. The number of dead is beyond counting. In despair, many Athenians kill themselves.

leetcrew 5y ago
I believe athenion was not actually in control of athens in 86 BC, but rather the tyrant aristion who had seized control. if athenion had still been in power, he might have followed the other city-states in surrendering to sulla. hard to say of course, but he did not have the same conflicting motives as athenion. I'm not really sure what this example is supposed to show.
- tboyd47 5y ago
  My point was not about who was really responsible for the rebellion. My point was that the everyday people were blamed for what transpired, then they were massacred, and this was the end of democracy in Athens for a long time.
SQueeeeeL 5y ago
Idk man, a lot of people didn't vote for Bernie in that primary. They had the option and didn't go for it.
- erhk 5y ago
  Remember when he was winning and then there was a "software failure"
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]

hncurious 5y ago

They're not voting for anyone practical. They're voting for career politicians who are in the pockets of big corporate donors. That's why nothing changes, they work for the donors, not the voters.

the_only_law 5y ago
I was at a bar a couple months back and met a guy running for one of the new US Congress seats. He stated, quite bluntly, that donors are much more important than voters when it comes to elections.
- dwd 5y ago
  And it's not during the actual election either, the donors wield their influence way earlier in deciding who gets as far as the primaries. If you can't self fund, you have to sell your soul to donors who will put up the money. Not to mention getting access to the party apparatus who will fuck you over if they have a preferred candidate that's not you: Howard Dean and Bernie Sanders managed to go it alone only to get done over by their own party in the end.

keewee7 5y ago

Even small doses of fear and pessimism is enough to make the majority of people accept mass surveillance. In Denmark in 2017 we had a summer of daily gang shootings. That fear was enough for the government to fly military SIGINT and surveillance planes above Copenhagen for weeks. There was almost no opposition to this level of mass surveillance. https://www.berlingske.dk/samfund/politiet-tager-nye-vaaben-i-brug-mod-banderne-vi-goer-fund-og-fangster-fordi-vi https://www.berlingske.dk/samfund/politiet-tager-nye-vaaben-...

srswtf123 5y ago

Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. We only get to choose between candidates who are corrupt in different ways. That isn't the fault of the people, it's the fault of the incumbent politicians who game the system to be most favorable to themselves. If you want to blame us for something, blame us for enjoying the empty comforts of modern life over choosing civil war.