4 ms·
Our "representative democracy" has been entirely coopted by a single entity which has mastered, through marketing and deception, masking itself as two separate
by notakio 4y ago
Our "representative democracy" has been entirely coopted by a single entity which has mastered, through marketing and deception, masking itself as two separate entities. The reality of this entity is that it is uniform, philosophically, intellectually, and in every other manner. They hand the baton of "power" back and forth between themselves, keeping the voting populace as worked up as possible with wedge issues, which neither sub-entity will actually touch, for fear of losing the ability to leverage the wedge issue for division of the ever-decreasing numbers of people who bother to vote.
Not content with this opaque "duopoly", the R/D machine has gone way past the line of acceptable behavior in setting up "non-partisan" organizations such as the Commission on Presidential Debates and the Federal Election Commission, which exist entirely to exclude anyone who is not an approved part of either faction of this single entity from basic participation in the election process.
While I understand the goal behind the authors advocating RCV, I have no faith that the implementation of of RCV would not be circumvented or counteracted by the existing "duopoly"; they will not give up the stranglehold on power (and money, which is the real goal; controlling 1/3rd of every dollar earned as income and spending it as you are instructed by your masters is not something they will give up lightly) without a fight. Given their total control over the production of legislation, legal interpretation of that legislation, and enforcement of said legislation, they've got a distinct advantage.
Honestly, I don't see anything changing in US elections within the remainder of my lifetime; short of a shifting of the balance of power, the likes of which would require "breaking some eggs", their grip is too overpowering to challenge. Team D will continue to demonize Team R, Team R will continue to demonize Team D, and both will quietly do everything in their power to make sure non-D/non-R candidates do not even appear on ballots, much less receive the necessary votes to take office.
- gryfft 4y ago> wedge issues, which neither sub-entity will actually touch Tell that to Citizens United and Roe vs. Wade.
- notakio 4y agoRoe vs. Wade has not actually changed. Once it does, we can "circle back" and discuss the real world changes, which I suspect won't be anywhere near as widespread as we are led to believe. What has happened seems like an intentional distraction being played out; predictably enough, the results are exactly what would be expected; citizens provoked by fear of change rush to the town square to let "the other team" no this is "no bueno". But citizens in the street will always be comfortably ignored by those who purportedly represent them.
- gryfft 4y agoWill you take 2:1 odds? I'll send $10 to a charity of your choice if Roe isn't overturned by August, if you agree to send $20 to Planned Parenthood if Roe is overturned.
- notakio 4y agoThat's a reasonable bet, you're on. End of August deadline, my chosen charity would be the Green Beret Foundation (having nothing to do with the issue in question; I just believe that their work does direct good for those they serve).
- gryfft 4y agoI've set a calendar reminder and commit to this gentleman's agreement. Will provide proof in form of anonymized donation receipt screenshot should I lose.
- shkkmo 4y agoWhich were both notably decided by the courts rather than legislation or constitutional amendment.
- pessimizer 4y agoBetter for both parties to claim absolute helplessness over the short term, but also insist that absolute allegiance is required over the long term. All that's about to happen is that a bunch of states that had one brave, beleaguered clinic will now have none. Getting abortions in those places was already hopelessly difficult, and Democrats had nothing to say about it other than declarations that while they were personally against abortion and thought it should be rare, they supported the court's decisions. Now that line is going to change to them saying that they're personally against abortion and think it should be rare, but that the Supreme Court has been hopelessly "politicized" by the Republicans.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]