6 ms·

I don’t buy that explanation. Democracy turned out to be easily manipulatable with large sums of money and media control. At this point, an average person can’

I don’t buy that explanation. Democracy turned out to be easily manipulatable with large sums of money and media control. At this point, an average person can’t have much of an affect on how government is acting. Very few people can take a day off to protest, and even if they do, protests tend to be meaningless too. I’m not saying that average person is blameless but most of the fault lies with the ruling classes.

Nokinside 4y ago
>Democracy turned out to be easily manipulatable with large sums of money and media control. People being easy to manipulate is feature of humanity, not evidence that democracy does not work. People are in charge for allowing that to happens, allowing to continue etc. If things go shit under heavy influencing and manipulation it's the failure of the people. "ruling classes" in democracy works is the fault of the non ruling majority.
- selfhoster11 4y ago
  > People being easy to manipulate is feature of humanity, not evidence that democracy does not work. Maybe it's both. Much like communism assumes altrustic spherical humans in a vacuum, so does democracy assume that each voter will both bother to vote, and that they are rational enough to vote close to what they actually want without being swayed. This could be evidence that democracy, much like communism, does not work very well.
  - Nokinside 4y ago
    I don't think so. Communism has an idea of what should happen next, democracy does not. Democracy is open to change, for whatever people choose, even quitting democracy. Democracy is always changing, always on move and dangerous. That's why I like democracy. Functioning democracy can even end democracy and choose tyranny.
robertlagrant 4y ago
> At this point, an average person can’t have much of an affect on how government is acting. Very few people can take a day off to protest, and even if they do, protests tend to be meaningless too. The older I get, the more I believe the only real voting someone can do is with their wallet.
- selfhoster11 4y ago
  And even that is mostly bullshit, if you don't happen to be flush with money so you can actually afford to throw the weight of your wallet's contents around.
  - robertlagrant 4y ago
    It's more fundamental than that. Prices and features of low-cost things and services are equally picked in this manner.
refurb 4y ago
Nahh... when people say "the vote was manipulated" what they mean is "the vote made no sense to me personally, and clearly the voters can't be blamed, so it must have been manipulated". There are plenty of examples of billions being thrown at campaigns and barely even moving the needle (e.g. Bloomberg's $1B fight for the Presidential race where he didn't even get 1% of the vote).
- treeman79 4y ago
  Or maybe a water main breaks during vote counting and everyone is sent home. Except one party that keeps working. But of course nothing suspicious about that.
- pjc50 4y ago
  People aren't arguing that the vote was manipulated in the UK, rather that the voters were misled, especially by the partisan media.
  - refurb 4y ago
    I know. What I'm saying is that what people see as manipulation of voters (nobody could ever believe that!) is actually just another valid opinion that you so happen to disagree with. Nobody was deceived. Nobody was manipulated. The voters just don't agree with you on this issue.
    - ben_w 4y ago
      If any vote results in voters regretting their vote, I think that counts as voters being deceived. I don't know (or care, given I left the UK as a direct result of the vote) if there was any significant regret in this case. (I caveat "significant" because 5-10% of the population will agree with almost any proposition in any opinion poll, no matter how nonsensical the question).
    - pjc50 4y ago
      This is silly: all kinds of promises were made for Brexit, and if they weren't delivered then those expecting them are at least disappointed, and if there was no reasonable way they could have been delivered and no real effort to deliver them, then they absolutely were deceived. How did the "£350m for the NHS" bus work out? > actually just another valid opinion Some opinions - sky is green, earth is flat - aren't valid.
treeman79 4y ago
The founding fathers were heavily against democracy and did everything they could to limit the power of the government without being completely ineffective. Idea being that individuals create wealth. Government will always become tyrannical.
- ben_w 4y ago
  > The founding fathers were heavily against democracy Well yes, but this is the UK so the founding fathers would be one of William the Conqueror, James VI and I (that's one person), or George III and his regent, depending on which argument you want to have.
dkarl 4y ago
> Democracy turned out to be easily manipulatable with large sums of money and media control. Is it, though? Establishment interests spend huge sums of money and often lose. The Republican party was an elite country club party, but when evangelicals emerged as a political force, the party had to jump on that wave, no matter how distasteful the old party elites found it. Then Trump came along, giving blatantly shallow lip service to religion, and now the party is beholden to him. That wasn't in anybody's plan except Trump's, and his personal wealth was paltry next to the Republican Party's resources. But maybe the elites who do the manipulation are happy to pander on a few issues if they get what they want on the issues that are really important to them. Let's think about that. If there was one core tenet of the GHWB-era Republican Party that its elites would have wanted to protect above all else, what would it be? If there was one core tenet that united all American economic elites, one thing above all others that they would want to instill in voters' heads, wouldn't it be economical liberalism? More specifically, free trade? Well, they've failed at that. NAFTA was a banner achievement for the Republicans. Now Trump calls NAFTA a Clinton disaster and promotes trade war with China, and he runs the Republican Party, because it does matter what the voters want, and you can't outright buy their belief in anything. We blame voters for being bought and manipulated when someone speaks to them in a way they find compelling but "shouldn't" according to our worldview. We assume that the superiority of our worldview gives us a natural advantage, and we look for special reasons why our views don't prevail. "What's the matter with Kansas?" in other words. What's the matter is that Trump's voters really do care more about Trump licking their wounded egos more than they care about anything else.
- ben_w 4y ago
  Wrong country. Despite the joke, the UK isn't an American state.
  - dkarl 4y ago
    Do you think it doesn't apply to the UK? I drew on a US example because it was something I could explain in enough detail. Maybe UK economic elites have mastered control of their voters in a way that US elites have not. Although, you'll have to explain which economic elites in the UK decided that Brexit would be to their advantage and how they stole a march on the UK finance industry.

Nokinside 4y ago

>Democracy turned out to be easily manipulatable with large sums of money and media control. People being easy to manipulate is feature of humanity, not evidence that democracy does not work. People are in charge for allowing that to happens, allowing to continue etc. If things go shit under heavy influencing and manipulation it's the failure of the people. "ruling classes" in democracy works is the fault of the non ruling majority.

selfhoster11 4y ago
> People being easy to manipulate is feature of humanity, not evidence that democracy does not work. Maybe it's both. Much like communism assumes altrustic spherical humans in a vacuum, so does democracy assume that each voter will both bother to vote, and that they are rational enough to vote close to what they actually want without being swayed. This could be evidence that democracy, much like communism, does not work very well.
- Nokinside 4y ago
  I don't think so. Communism has an idea of what should happen next, democracy does not. Democracy is open to change, for whatever people choose, even quitting democracy. Democracy is always changing, always on move and dangerous. That's why I like democracy. Functioning democracy can even end democracy and choose tyranny.

robertlagrant 4y ago

> At this point, an average person can’t have much of an affect on how government is acting. Very few people can take a day off to protest, and even if they do, protests tend to be meaningless too. The older I get, the more I believe the only real voting someone can do is with their wallet.

selfhoster11 4y ago
And even that is mostly bullshit, if you don't happen to be flush with money so you can actually afford to throw the weight of your wallet's contents around.
- robertlagrant 4y ago
  It's more fundamental than that. Prices and features of low-cost things and services are equally picked in this manner.

refurb 4y ago

Nahh... when people say "the vote was manipulated" what they mean is "the vote made no sense to me personally, and clearly the voters can't be blamed, so it must have been manipulated". There are plenty of examples of billions being thrown at campaigns and barely even moving the needle (e.g. Bloomberg's $1B fight for the Presidential race where he didn't even get 1% of the vote).

treeman79 4y ago
Or maybe a water main breaks during vote counting and everyone is sent home. Except one party that keeps working. But of course nothing suspicious about that.
pjc50 4y ago
People aren't arguing that the vote was manipulated in the UK, rather that the voters were misled, especially by the partisan media.
- refurb 4y ago
  I know. What I'm saying is that what people see as manipulation of voters (nobody could ever believe that!) is actually just another valid opinion that you so happen to disagree with. Nobody was deceived. Nobody was manipulated. The voters just don't agree with you on this issue.
  - ben_w 4y ago
    If any vote results in voters regretting their vote, I think that counts as voters being deceived. I don't know (or care, given I left the UK as a direct result of the vote) if there was any significant regret in this case. (I caveat "significant" because 5-10% of the population will agree with almost any proposition in any opinion poll, no matter how nonsensical the question).
  - pjc50 4y ago
    This is silly: all kinds of promises were made for Brexit, and if they weren't delivered then those expecting them are at least disappointed, and if there was no reasonable way they could have been delivered and no real effort to deliver them, then they absolutely were deceived. How did the "£350m for the NHS" bus work out? > actually just another valid opinion Some opinions - sky is green, earth is flat - aren't valid.

treeman79 4y ago

The founding fathers were heavily against democracy and did everything they could to limit the power of the government without being completely ineffective. Idea being that individuals create wealth. Government will always become tyrannical.

ben_w 4y ago
> The founding fathers were heavily against democracy Well yes, but this is the UK so the founding fathers would be one of William the Conqueror, James VI and I (that's one person), or George III and his regent, depending on which argument you want to have.

dkarl 4y ago

> Democracy turned out to be easily manipulatable with large sums of money and media control. Is it, though? Establishment interests spend huge sums of money and often lose. The Republican party was an elite country club party, but when evangelicals emerged as a political force, the party had to jump on that wave, no matter how distasteful the old party elites found it. Then Trump came along, giving blatantly shallow lip service to religion, and now the party is beholden to him. That wasn't in anybody's plan except Trump's, and his personal wealth was paltry next to the Republican Party's resources. But maybe the elites who do the manipulation are happy to pander on a few issues if they get what they want on the issues that are really important to them. Let's think about that. If there was one core tenet of the GHWB-era Republican Party that its elites would have wanted to protect above all else, what would it be? If there was one core tenet that united all American economic elites, one thing above all others that they would want to instill in voters' heads, wouldn't it be economical liberalism? More specifically, free trade? Well, they've failed at that. NAFTA was a banner achievement for the Republicans. Now Trump calls NAFTA a Clinton disaster and promotes trade war with China, and he runs the Republican Party, because it does matter what the voters want, and you can't outright buy their belief in anything. We blame voters for being bought and manipulated when someone speaks to them in a way they find compelling but "shouldn't" according to our worldview. We assume that the superiority of our worldview gives us a natural advantage, and we look for special reasons why our views don't prevail. "What's the matter with Kansas?" in other words. What's the matter is that Trump's voters really do care more about Trump licking their wounded egos more than they care about anything else.

ben_w 4y ago
Wrong country. Despite the joke, the UK isn't an American state.
- dkarl 4y ago
  Do you think it doesn't apply to the UK? I drew on a US example because it was something I could explain in enough detail. Maybe UK economic elites have mastered control of their voters in a way that US elites have not. Although, you'll have to explain which economic elites in the UK decided that Brexit would be to their advantage and how they stole a march on the UK finance industry.