6 ms·

>Her references to tech companies is a familiar, but irrelevant they're extremely relevant which is even evident from your post. Trying to tinker with the elec

>Her references to tech companies is a familiar, but irrelevant they're extremely relevant which is even evident from your post. Trying to tinker with the electoral process to create some sort of value free machine is exactly the 'tech bro' mindset. It is a stance devoid of concrete moral and literally political values. "Just solve politics, and it'll run itself" essentially. Abortion or guns aren't 'hot button issues'. They're at their core about self determination and Americans deeply and ideologically disagree on them. Firearm politics is as old as the nation, in a sense even older. They can't be done away with by just making some process better, as if factions and divisions are just some sort of hallucination caused by wrong mechanisms. These issues are so important to people they override anything else. How is brushing that off not exactly an example of the mindset that she criticizes in the piece?

Taikonerd 3y ago
You're right that politics is (partly) about actual disagreements in ideology that can't be hand-waved away. But that being said, there are more than 2 ideologies in the US! And I think that begs for a system with more than 2 political parties. When I lived in the Netherlands, I was struck by how there were 21 parties with at least 1 seat in parliament. And I think that led to a healthier political culture, where the parties would form different coalitions each electoral cycle, instead of a constant Us vs. Them, year after year.
rcxdude 3y ago
With first past the post, it matters little what any third party thinks about those topics, so what's the point? What they are advocating for enables meaningful third party involvement in the conversation, trying to speak on those matter before that only serves to perpetuate the two-party state of affairs (for example, with ranked choice, and individual who is pro-choice and pro-gun-rights might actually be able to vote for a candidate who embodies their views on the matter).
shortrounddev2 3y ago
> Abortion or guns aren't 'hot button issues'. They're at their core about self determination and Americans deeply and ideologically disagree on them. Firearm politics is as old as the nation, in a sense even older. They can't be done away with by just making some process better, as if factions and divisions are just some sort of hallucination caused by wrong mechanisms. I truly believe that most people wouldn't give a shit about either of these issues if they weren't being told to give a shit about these issues. These issues are signals for political tribes and most people are far less ideological than they think they are. The monkey parts of their brains are being manipulated for reasons as arbitrary as the religious wars of the 16th century.

Taikonerd 3y ago

You're right that politics is (partly) about actual disagreements in ideology that can't be hand-waved away. But that being said, there are more than 2 ideologies in the US! And I think that begs for a system with more than 2 political parties. When I lived in the Netherlands, I was struck by how there were 21 parties with at least 1 seat in parliament. And I think that led to a healthier political culture, where the parties would form different coalitions each electoral cycle, instead of a constant Us vs. Them, year after year.

rcxdude 3y ago

With first past the post, it matters little what any third party thinks about those topics, so what's the point? What they are advocating for enables meaningful third party involvement in the conversation, trying to speak on those matter before that only serves to perpetuate the two-party state of affairs (for example, with ranked choice, and individual who is pro-choice and pro-gun-rights might actually be able to vote for a candidate who embodies their views on the matter).

shortrounddev2 3y ago

> Abortion or guns aren't 'hot button issues'. They're at their core about self determination and Americans deeply and ideologically disagree on them. Firearm politics is as old as the nation, in a sense even older. They can't be done away with by just making some process better, as if factions and divisions are just some sort of hallucination caused by wrong mechanisms. I truly believe that most people wouldn't give a shit about either of these issues if they weren't being told to give a shit about these issues. These issues are signals for political tribes and most people are far less ideological than they think they are. The monkey parts of their brains are being manipulated for reasons as arbitrary as the religious wars of the 16th century.