4 ms·

I think it’s frowned upon by many. It’s extremely challenging to address since Citizens United made it legal, and the courts have chipped away at efforts to mak

I think it’s frowned upon by many. It’s extremely challenging to address since Citizens United made it legal, and the courts have chipped away at efforts to make it more transparent. I’m absolutely unhappy with the result. We legalized bribery and rank corruption. It’s awful for the system. What do you think it’s not frowned upon?

skrebbel 4y ago
To answer your last question: I'm not American, but I read a fair bit of US politics on places like HN. Whenever companies bribing US politicians is mentioned, it's done in a matter-of-fact way using extreme euphemisms. I don't just mean by the people involved, I mean by everybody, all the way down to regular nobodies discussing politics on the internet. I very seldomly read stuff like "FTX bribed both the democrats and the republicans". People write stuff like "this practice of supporting “both sides” is a very common, by-the-book strategy". I mean, "supporting", really? "by-the-book"? That doesn't sound very frowned-upon-y to me. That sounds like y'all think this stuff is as normal as the air we breathe.
- rosnd 4y ago
  These aren't bribes. This isn't corruption either.
  - skrebbel 4y ago
    I don't understand that. What's the difference between "bribing" and "buying influence"? Is it about the time difference between when you give a politician money and when you expect something back?
    - rosnd 4y ago
      It's the nature of the transaction. You are paying for a specific official act, that would be outright corruption. Generally the money does not get you anything but an opportunity to pitch stuff to the politician, it's just an expensive way to become golf buddies. There's a lot of things the politicians can help you with outside of their official duties. A senator chasing after your business partners visa issue is going to get it resolved within a day, without needing to wield any official power. This isn't corruption, corruption would be paying off the person making the visa decisions. I get that if you come from a country with little actual corruption, this might seem like a distinction without a difference. It really isn't though, real corruption places a price tag on government officials doing (or not doing) their jobs.
      - skrebbel 4y ago
        I don't mean this in a dismissive way, because I appreciate your comment and you carefully set out a distinction, but it very much underlines what I'm worried about: that Americans are totally a-ok with corruption as long as it's done on a high enough level, to the point that it's openly discussed in the media and on internet forums and people do effort to explain to one another that it's not really real corruption at all.
wpietri 4y ago
I think their point is more that it's not frowned upon by people with lots of power and/or money. US policy very often aligns with the interests of the rich, and being able to buy the policy they want is very much in the interests of the rich.

skrebbel 4y ago

To answer your last question: I'm not American, but I read a fair bit of US politics on places like HN. Whenever companies bribing US politicians is mentioned, it's done in a matter-of-fact way using extreme euphemisms. I don't just mean by the people involved, I mean by everybody, all the way down to regular nobodies discussing politics on the internet. I very seldomly read stuff like "FTX bribed both the democrats and the republicans". People write stuff like "this practice of supporting “both sides” is a very common, by-the-book strategy". I mean, "supporting", really? "by-the-book"? That doesn't sound very frowned-upon-y to me. That sounds like y'all think this stuff is as normal as the air we breathe.

rosnd 4y ago
These aren't bribes. This isn't corruption either.
- skrebbel 4y ago
  I don't understand that. What's the difference between "bribing" and "buying influence"? Is it about the time difference between when you give a politician money and when you expect something back?
  - rosnd 4y ago
    It's the nature of the transaction. You are paying for a specific official act, that would be outright corruption. Generally the money does not get you anything but an opportunity to pitch stuff to the politician, it's just an expensive way to become golf buddies. There's a lot of things the politicians can help you with outside of their official duties. A senator chasing after your business partners visa issue is going to get it resolved within a day, without needing to wield any official power. This isn't corruption, corruption would be paying off the person making the visa decisions. I get that if you come from a country with little actual corruption, this might seem like a distinction without a difference. It really isn't though, real corruption places a price tag on government officials doing (or not doing) their jobs.
    - skrebbel 4y ago
      I don't mean this in a dismissive way, because I appreciate your comment and you carefully set out a distinction, but it very much underlines what I'm worried about: that Americans are totally a-ok with corruption as long as it's done on a high enough level, to the point that it's openly discussed in the media and on internet forums and people do effort to explain to one another that it's not really real corruption at all.

wpietri 4y ago

I think their point is more that it's not frowned upon by people with lots of power and/or money. US policy very often aligns with the interests of the rich, and being able to buy the policy they want is very much in the interests of the rich.