4 ms·

What if this is reflective of common ideology? What if most people agree on most things somewhere near a center (with some fluctuation) and the wedge issues are

What if this is reflective of common ideology? What if most people agree on most things somewhere near a center (with some fluctuation) and the wedge issues are the rare points of hard, uncompromising disagreement. Wouldn't that eventually lead to the duopoly we see? Wouldn't that be the best case scenario?

mikewarot 5y ago
No, it's the worst possible outcome, it is totally obstructive to the will of the people, and appears to be exclusively in service to the donor class who fund their reelection efforts.
- hn_version_0023 5y ago
  So then the problem is the existence of the donor class. Perhaps we ought to curtail their power. Or their existence, I’m open to either.
  - acomar 5y ago
    from where does the donor class derive their wealth? they pay you a wage or collect rent, profiting either way. in all cases, they derive their wealth because they own the things that allow us to produce value. perhaps those things should be commonly owned instead. then these class distinctions would evaporate.
    - stjohnswarts 5y ago
      It has been tried and has failed. Communism doesn't work on a scale larger than a few hundred people (top end)
      - sudosysgen 5y ago
        Centrally planned economies (what is commonly called communism) is not the only solution that fits the above description. Cooperative market economics does the same, so would a partial land decommodification or a land value tax combined to a steep progressive tax rate combined to considering collaterilization as a partial realization of gain, etc...
    - BobbyJo 5y ago
      Anyone who works in software can attest to the fact that 'common ownership' inevitably leads to 'zero ownership'.
- ss108 5y ago
  What? Wedge issues are what the people unfortunately want. It gets them jazzed up even though these are not the most impactful issues for most people's lives. While blame should be placed on politicians who use such issues to drive votes instead of tackling bigger, more boring challenges, we also have to fault the populace for being easily distracted, emotive, etc.
  - mikewarot 5y ago
    Wedge issues are not what people want... they want to live their lives Wedge issues are what make them angry, or scared enough to post on social media, etc. It collectively is a dark pattern that subverts our tendency to fix broken things by making us believe that everything is broken.
    - ss108 5y ago
      ? People really care about abortion, for example, but it's really just a wedge issue. Wedge issues are bad overall for society, but they are not anyone's "fault" except for society. What you're arguing connotes to me that people are victims of some kind, but the fact is the "dark pattern" works because people care about that stuff. I think they are logically incorrect for assigning these issues disproportionate weight, but like...they're free to lol, and it's not inherently invalid. But then, take something like abortion. Some people really feel strongly about that issue (on both sides of the political spectrum). There are people who do vote based on that single issue alone. They are free voters who have constructed their moral/political rubric or w/e, and have elected to accord that single issue decisive importance in their political decisions. That would seem to me to be a feature, not a bug, of democracy.
- BobbyJo 5y ago
  What will is it obstructing? The will of the far left? Yeah. The will of the far right? Yeah. The will of the 90% that just want to live their life in peace? No. If you think the government should protect people and infrastructure so that they can exchange goods and services according to a common understanding of private property, then today's government likely isn't too far from what you'd like, and, therefore, the tension holding things over center is a blessing.
  - mikewarot 5y ago
    Infrastructure is one of the things that goes wanting for funding, while almost a trillion dollars/year goes into the Military Industrial Complex. The results of that diversion can be seen all over the country as things literally collapse, or fall apart. Programs that are popular with the people consistently go to die in Congress.
rjbwork 5y ago
No. It will lead to a terrible Nash equilibrium as far towards the donor class's interests as possible while still giving the voters the illusion of choice and enough of a quorum to provide airs of legitimacy.
- BobbyJo 5y ago
  What's the alternative? Resources, in a very direct, physical, way afford one power. As soon as you allow unequal distribution of resources, you create unequal power. The fact that the 'donor class' are put on a leash to the degree that most demand be done means things are working well no?
newbie789 5y ago
pessimizer 5y ago
It does reflect the common ideology of the people who donate to parties. The wedge issues are the ones that donors don't care about, except that they boost support for both major parties by threatening doom as a result of defection. All this with the support of a media that almost exclusively covers wedge issues, and ignores bipartisan screwjobs.

mikewarot 5y ago

No, it's the worst possible outcome, it is totally obstructive to the will of the people, and appears to be exclusively in service to the donor class who fund their reelection efforts.

hn_version_0023 5y ago
So then the problem is the existence of the donor class. Perhaps we ought to curtail their power. Or their existence, I’m open to either.
- acomar 5y ago
  from where does the donor class derive their wealth? they pay you a wage or collect rent, profiting either way. in all cases, they derive their wealth because they own the things that allow us to produce value. perhaps those things should be commonly owned instead. then these class distinctions would evaporate.
  - stjohnswarts 5y ago
    It has been tried and has failed. Communism doesn't work on a scale larger than a few hundred people (top end)
    - sudosysgen 5y ago
      Centrally planned economies (what is commonly called communism) is not the only solution that fits the above description. Cooperative market economics does the same, so would a partial land decommodification or a land value tax combined to a steep progressive tax rate combined to considering collaterilization as a partial realization of gain, etc...
  - BobbyJo 5y ago
    Anyone who works in software can attest to the fact that 'common ownership' inevitably leads to 'zero ownership'.
ss108 5y ago
What? Wedge issues are what the people unfortunately want. It gets them jazzed up even though these are not the most impactful issues for most people's lives. While blame should be placed on politicians who use such issues to drive votes instead of tackling bigger, more boring challenges, we also have to fault the populace for being easily distracted, emotive, etc.
- mikewarot 5y ago
  Wedge issues are not what people want... they want to live their lives Wedge issues are what make them angry, or scared enough to post on social media, etc. It collectively is a dark pattern that subverts our tendency to fix broken things by making us believe that everything is broken.
  - ss108 5y ago
    ? People really care about abortion, for example, but it's really just a wedge issue. Wedge issues are bad overall for society, but they are not anyone's "fault" except for society. What you're arguing connotes to me that people are victims of some kind, but the fact is the "dark pattern" works because people care about that stuff. I think they are logically incorrect for assigning these issues disproportionate weight, but like...they're free to lol, and it's not inherently invalid. But then, take something like abortion. Some people really feel strongly about that issue (on both sides of the political spectrum). There are people who do vote based on that single issue alone. They are free voters who have constructed their moral/political rubric or w/e, and have elected to accord that single issue decisive importance in their political decisions. That would seem to me to be a feature, not a bug, of democracy.
BobbyJo 5y ago
What will is it obstructing? The will of the far left? Yeah. The will of the far right? Yeah. The will of the 90% that just want to live their life in peace? No. If you think the government should protect people and infrastructure so that they can exchange goods and services according to a common understanding of private property, then today's government likely isn't too far from what you'd like, and, therefore, the tension holding things over center is a blessing.
- mikewarot 5y ago
  Infrastructure is one of the things that goes wanting for funding, while almost a trillion dollars/year goes into the Military Industrial Complex. The results of that diversion can be seen all over the country as things literally collapse, or fall apart. Programs that are popular with the people consistently go to die in Congress.

rjbwork 5y ago

No. It will lead to a terrible Nash equilibrium as far towards the donor class's interests as possible while still giving the voters the illusion of choice and enough of a quorum to provide airs of legitimacy.

BobbyJo 5y ago
What's the alternative? Resources, in a very direct, physical, way afford one power. As soon as you allow unequal distribution of resources, you create unequal power. The fact that the 'donor class' are put on a leash to the degree that most demand be done means things are working well no?

newbie789 5y ago

pessimizer 5y ago

It does reflect the common ideology of the people who donate to parties. The wedge issues are the ones that donors don't care about, except that they boost support for both major parties by threatening doom as a result of defection. All this with the support of a media that almost exclusively covers wedge issues, and ignores bipartisan screwjobs.