4 ms·

despite sounding sarcastically exasperated, this is a legitimate question asked sincerely: when exactly, in the history of Modern Democracy, did the electorate

despite sounding sarcastically exasperated, this is a legitimate question asked sincerely: when exactly, in the history of Modern Democracy, did the electorate start completely accepting token gestures and empty promises in place of actual, tangible progress enacted by their elected officials?

wahnfrieden 4y ago
since the start, do you want examples?
- adamrezich 4y ago
  if that truly is the case, then doesn't it seem odd that we're still going through the motions, still, in the Internet Age? why would dozens of people in this very thread continue to openly applaud actions that they are fully aware are mere gestures and nothing but, as (they also well know) is and has always been just par for the course, out in the open for all to see? not only is it pathetic beyond reason, but it goes to show just how shallow and "actually just all in our heads" 99% of "politics" is. did any of the supposed doom and gloom that the previous President was supposed to be the harbinger of ever come to fruition? where were the conversion therapy concentration camps? where were the existential threats to Women and Science that necessitated political marches opposing such looming threats? or the President before that one, the First Black President. what did he end up doing for Black America, after eight years in office? are we supposed to look back on him fondly for all that he did for Black Americans, by virtue of getting elected President while Being Black, alone? is that really the level of gesture-accepting we're at, as a nation? as a species? https://twitter.com/i/status/1576916509766451200 https://twitter.com/i/status/1576916509766451200 it's almost as though almost (but not quite) 100% of contemporary "politics" exists solely within the confines of our skulls, transmitted via media disseminated through news organizations complicit in the perpetuation of an ongoing political regime, where the role of the citizen electorate is to play along with the professional wrestling-tier storylines presented to them, at face value, because they've established themselves as Authoritative Sources on The News, which gives them free reign to emotionally manipulate said citizen electorate at a mass scale—especially through the use of the absurdly powerful emotion of fear. if this is the case, why do we continue to play along with it, or at the very least consider it actively virtuous to play along with it? the house is burning but "this is fine"? how did it get to this?
  - anigbrowl 4y ago
    Obvious shill is obvious ◔_◔
  - wahnfrieden 4y ago
    you're talking about a liberal society where the two parties available both operate in extremely pro-corporate / "neoliberal" ways, and their corporate owner constituents (who now author our laws) want anything but for society to find a common enemy in them. of course the day to day politicking, narratives, and coverage are often gestural nonsense this isn't a species-wide thing and definitely overstates the inevitability of these structures. you might be interested in recent wengrow/graeber research like the dawn of everything or their papers.
    - adamrezich 4y ago
      > this isn't a species-wide thing and definitely overstates the inevitability of these structures. well between what I described above and straight-up totalitarianism that covers more or less the majority of the population of the planet does it not
      - wahnfrieden 4y ago
        Well the contrary cases are what the recent anthro/archaeological research is showing. And this is for societies that are well beyond Dunbar’s number, after discovery of agriculture. You have a capitalist realist viewpoint it seems and are behind on anthropology
xtrgz 4y ago
Not really a token gesture though. It's a measurable action for federal parks.
- adamrezich 4y ago
  weird how that wasn't the way the headlines (including OP) framed it. weird how that's not the way several other people in this thread alone interpreted it.
danso 4y ago
Taking you at your word, I assume you have some examples in mind of when the U.S. government making actual tangible progress was standard operating procedure?

wahnfrieden 4y ago

since the start, do you want examples?

adamrezich 4y ago
if that truly is the case, then doesn't it seem odd that we're still going through the motions, still, in the Internet Age? why would dozens of people in this very thread continue to openly applaud actions that they are fully aware are mere gestures and nothing but, as (they also well know) is and has always been just par for the course, out in the open for all to see? not only is it pathetic beyond reason, but it goes to show just how shallow and "actually just all in our heads" 99% of "politics" is. did any of the supposed doom and gloom that the previous President was supposed to be the harbinger of ever come to fruition? where were the conversion therapy concentration camps? where were the existential threats to Women and Science that necessitated political marches opposing such looming threats? or the President before that one, the First Black President. what did he end up doing for Black America, after eight years in office? are we supposed to look back on him fondly for all that he did for Black Americans, by virtue of getting elected President while Being Black, alone? is that really the level of gesture-accepting we're at, as a nation? as a species? https://twitter.com/i/status/1576916509766451200 https://twitter.com/i/status/1576916509766451200 it's almost as though almost (but not quite) 100% of contemporary "politics" exists solely within the confines of our skulls, transmitted via media disseminated through news organizations complicit in the perpetuation of an ongoing political regime, where the role of the citizen electorate is to play along with the professional wrestling-tier storylines presented to them, at face value, because they've established themselves as Authoritative Sources on The News, which gives them free reign to emotionally manipulate said citizen electorate at a mass scale—especially through the use of the absurdly powerful emotion of fear. if this is the case, why do we continue to play along with it, or at the very least consider it actively virtuous to play along with it? the house is burning but "this is fine"? how did it get to this?
- anigbrowl 4y ago
  Obvious shill is obvious ◔_◔
- wahnfrieden 4y ago
  you're talking about a liberal society where the two parties available both operate in extremely pro-corporate / "neoliberal" ways, and their corporate owner constituents (who now author our laws) want anything but for society to find a common enemy in them. of course the day to day politicking, narratives, and coverage are often gestural nonsense this isn't a species-wide thing and definitely overstates the inevitability of these structures. you might be interested in recent wengrow/graeber research like the dawn of everything or their papers.
  - adamrezich 4y ago
    > this isn't a species-wide thing and definitely overstates the inevitability of these structures. well between what I described above and straight-up totalitarianism that covers more or less the majority of the population of the planet does it not
    - wahnfrieden 4y ago
      Well the contrary cases are what the recent anthro/archaeological research is showing. And this is for societies that are well beyond Dunbar’s number, after discovery of agriculture. You have a capitalist realist viewpoint it seems and are behind on anthropology

xtrgz 4y ago

Not really a token gesture though. It's a measurable action for federal parks.

adamrezich 4y ago
weird how that wasn't the way the headlines (including OP) framed it. weird how that's not the way several other people in this thread alone interpreted it.

danso 4y ago

Taking you at your word, I assume you have some examples in mind of when the U.S. government making actual tangible progress was standard operating procedure?