4 ms·

Don't know why you were immediately down-voted, litigation is the wrong approach to use, since the litigation process is already captured by our national securi

Don't know why you were immediately down-voted, litigation is the wrong approach to use, since the litigation process is already captured by our national security cabal. I think many of us here writing walls of text plan to run for office, but do not have access to the kind of capital that it would take to actually have a chance

WealthVsSurvive 5y ago
Yes, I'd like to know exactly what part of our current US government is tenable even from within. The only office I can think of is the unitary executive. The Senate was created in the founding father's own words to protect the "opulent from the many". The house is perpetually obstructed by this Senate, the likes of which smarter nations have discarded. But, even the house is captured in such a manner that citizens in more populated states have less representative voting power than slaves during the 3/5 compromise. What other option is left, aside from rebirth? It's no coincidence that dark forces conspire to now "get out in front" of this zeitgeist and swap the baby in its cradle for something ugly.
kelnos 5y ago
Unless you are rich, you can't just decide to run for President (or Congress) tomorrow without having any existing political experience. First stop would be to run for a local elected office, like a school board, county/city treasurer, or something like that. If your city has some sort of city council, work your way up to that. From there, give mayor a go. Next stop might be your state legislature. From there, you might have enough popularity and name recognition to run for the US House. If the US Senate is your goal, you may have to spend more time at the state level -- controller, secretary of state, perhaps lieutenant governor or governor -- before you'll have the backing for a US Senate run. And that's the thing. Even if everything goes to plan, you're looking at 10-20 years before you're competitive enough to get into US Congress (either chamber, but the Senate will take more work and time). I'm not surprised that it's hard for people to go from "I'm really upset with how the US is turning into a surveillance state; I wish there was something I could do to change that", to "I'm gonna ditch my existing career and dedicate the next several decades of my life to politics". And consider that doing all that is no guarantee you'll be successful! Even if you make it to the House or Senate, it'll still be a hugely uphill battle to get any kind of surveillance reform bill passed and signed into law.
- tdeck 5y ago
  It seems this is the problem with our representative democracy. The system is designed to impede and frustrate good-faith efforts by throwing up a bunch of barriers and then offering opportunities to compromise your principles to get past them. It's like a freemium game that you pay for by gradually selling out to those who already have power. Sure, theoretically it's possible to win the freemium game without selling out, but that theoretical possibility serves only as marketing for the game itself.
  - indigochill 5y ago
    If power was more decentralized (e.g. delegated to cities or counties), then an ordinary person running for office would be a lot more viable. This is why some of us oppose "big government". It's not necessarily that we all want a wild west with no laws, but there are a lot of layers of government between a citizen and national government and ideally as much decision-making power sits as low on that pyramid as possible so that people can plausibly "self-govern". It also means that policies can be tailored to the needs of the people. The needs of dense urban populations are different from the needs of rural farmers, so you can't effectively govern both at the national level.

WealthVsSurvive 5y ago

Yes, I'd like to know exactly what part of our current US government is tenable even from within. The only office I can think of is the unitary executive. The Senate was created in the founding father's own words to protect the "opulent from the many". The house is perpetually obstructed by this Senate, the likes of which smarter nations have discarded. But, even the house is captured in such a manner that citizens in more populated states have less representative voting power than slaves during the 3/5 compromise. What other option is left, aside from rebirth? It's no coincidence that dark forces conspire to now "get out in front" of this zeitgeist and swap the baby in its cradle for something ugly.

kelnos 5y ago

Unless you are rich, you can't just decide to run for President (or Congress) tomorrow without having any existing political experience. First stop would be to run for a local elected office, like a school board, county/city treasurer, or something like that. If your city has some sort of city council, work your way up to that. From there, give mayor a go. Next stop might be your state legislature. From there, you might have enough popularity and name recognition to run for the US House. If the US Senate is your goal, you may have to spend more time at the state level -- controller, secretary of state, perhaps lieutenant governor or governor -- before you'll have the backing for a US Senate run. And that's the thing. Even if everything goes to plan, you're looking at 10-20 years before you're competitive enough to get into US Congress (either chamber, but the Senate will take more work and time). I'm not surprised that it's hard for people to go from "I'm really upset with how the US is turning into a surveillance state; I wish there was something I could do to change that", to "I'm gonna ditch my existing career and dedicate the next several decades of my life to politics". And consider that doing all that is no guarantee you'll be successful! Even if you make it to the House or Senate, it'll still be a hugely uphill battle to get any kind of surveillance reform bill passed and signed into law.

tdeck 5y ago
It seems this is the problem with our representative democracy. The system is designed to impede and frustrate good-faith efforts by throwing up a bunch of barriers and then offering opportunities to compromise your principles to get past them. It's like a freemium game that you pay for by gradually selling out to those who already have power. Sure, theoretically it's possible to win the freemium game without selling out, but that theoretical possibility serves only as marketing for the game itself.
- indigochill 5y ago
  If power was more decentralized (e.g. delegated to cities or counties), then an ordinary person running for office would be a lot more viable. This is why some of us oppose "big government". It's not necessarily that we all want a wild west with no laws, but there are a lot of layers of government between a citizen and national government and ideally as much decision-making power sits as low on that pyramid as possible so that people can plausibly "self-govern". It also means that policies can be tailored to the needs of the people. The needs of dense urban populations are different from the needs of rural farmers, so you can't effectively govern both at the national level.