4 ms·

Wait, do we want to live in that kind of democracy? Literally the whole reason that I love democracy is it lets the people set the rules, then gets out of the w

Wait, do we want to live in that kind of democracy? Literally the whole reason that I love democracy is it lets the people set the rules, then gets out of the way and lets people do their thing. I could not disagree more strongly with the notion that democracy should be the mechanism by which businesses should be run. Democracy says which choices we're okay with, but businesses and people should totally have the autonomy to decide which of the allowed choices to go with.

paulryanrogers 2y ago
When companies are big or rich enough they can capture regulators and pay for lobbyists to override the masses, the democratic process is undermined. We become ruled by socialopathic oligarchy, in the form of corporations instead of a few individuals. And no one executive can be held accountable because they're large organizations that diffuse responsibility. Once I was a young conservative who thought these ideas were crazy Hollywood tropes. As I get older I see the pattern manifest more and more in the USA.
- alakin 2y ago
  And you're suggesting what, that we hand the reins to the democratic process you just described as flawed, one that is corrupted by lobbying? Yeah why don't we just take a corrupt institution and put it in charge of more things.
  - remarkEon 2y ago
    I don't think that's a suggestion that we have Google take over the country or something. It's an acknowledgement of the Iron Law of Oligarchy[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy
    - alakin 2y ago
      Anti monopoly law already handles that.
      - paulryanrogers 2y ago
        Or anti-trust would handle that if it weren't neutered by the only criteria being (direct) consumer harm.
  - paulryanrogers 2y ago
    I suggest we fix the system we have by making paid lobbying illegal, campaign finance reform, same day primaries, robust anti-trust, etc.
    - alakin 2y ago
      Fair and solid focus on government domain issues. It's us the people that will fix govt, instead of govt fixing companies.
      - paulryanrogers 2y ago
        If we cannot regulate companies via a government we control then they will regulate us, and in fact they do as much as they can.
workfromspace 2y ago
> democracy is it lets the people set the rules, then gets out of the way and lets people do their thing. I believe you are talking about "representative democracy" specificly. Besides from this and "Direct democracy", there seems to be dozens of more types, according to Wikipedia.
rakoo 2y ago
> it lets the people set the rules, then gets out of the way and lets people do their thing. "Forcing people into jobs they don't want, working on things they don't want, forbidding tpem to talk about it, all because they need money to eat and have a roof" is not letting people do their thing. The whole point of a democracy is that the people are the priority; everything else is a tool to further the people's lives. Companies must be tools to make the lives of people, both outside and inside, better. Otherwise when it decides to do what it wants with no counter-power it is not furthering democracy. Remember: businesses are not people.
- w4 2y ago
  No one is being forced to do anything. You are free to change jobs whenever you want. Or you can start a company of your own which embodies your ideals whenever you want. No one is stopping you. Furthermore, the fact that you are not free to act with impunity, and do not have the right to demand that others indulge your preferences and suppress their own, is not in of itself anti-democratic. In a free society other people also have the right to structure their affairs as they see fit. And you have the right to choose to engage with them, or not.
  - rileymat2 2y ago
    Generally, I agree, but the word "forced" is a tricky one; because there are a string of consequences for making different choices. Which is generally a good thing. What you are doing is treating some of those consequences as "force" and others as not. For example, if you need money to pay your property tax, you need to earn that money somehow. Or face the consequence of losing your home. No one is forcing you to stay in that home, leave, but that's pretty brutal thing to not call "forced." But you can see paying property tax is optional as long as you accept the consequences.
    - ndriscoll 2y ago
      No one in the software industry that works at Google is there because they otherwise couldn't find a job. They're there because they want to maximize money and don't have concerns about the ethics of mass surveillance.

paulryanrogers 2y ago

When companies are big or rich enough they can capture regulators and pay for lobbyists to override the masses, the democratic process is undermined. We become ruled by socialopathic oligarchy, in the form of corporations instead of a few individuals. And no one executive can be held accountable because they're large organizations that diffuse responsibility. Once I was a young conservative who thought these ideas were crazy Hollywood tropes. As I get older I see the pattern manifest more and more in the USA.

alakin 2y ago
And you're suggesting what, that we hand the reins to the democratic process you just described as flawed, one that is corrupted by lobbying? Yeah why don't we just take a corrupt institution and put it in charge of more things.
- remarkEon 2y ago
  I don't think that's a suggestion that we have Google take over the country or something. It's an acknowledgement of the Iron Law of Oligarchy[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy
  - alakin 2y ago
    Anti monopoly law already handles that.
    - paulryanrogers 2y ago
      Or anti-trust would handle that if it weren't neutered by the only criteria being (direct) consumer harm.
- paulryanrogers 2y ago
  I suggest we fix the system we have by making paid lobbying illegal, campaign finance reform, same day primaries, robust anti-trust, etc.
  - alakin 2y ago
    Fair and solid focus on government domain issues. It's us the people that will fix govt, instead of govt fixing companies.
    - paulryanrogers 2y ago
      If we cannot regulate companies via a government we control then they will regulate us, and in fact they do as much as they can.

workfromspace 2y ago

> democracy is it lets the people set the rules, then gets out of the way and lets people do their thing. I believe you are talking about "representative democracy" specificly. Besides from this and "Direct democracy", there seems to be dozens of more types, according to Wikipedia.

rakoo 2y ago

> it lets the people set the rules, then gets out of the way and lets people do their thing. "Forcing people into jobs they don't want, working on things they don't want, forbidding tpem to talk about it, all because they need money to eat and have a roof" is not letting people do their thing. The whole point of a democracy is that the people are the priority; everything else is a tool to further the people's lives. Companies must be tools to make the lives of people, both outside and inside, better. Otherwise when it decides to do what it wants with no counter-power it is not furthering democracy. Remember: businesses are not people.

w4 2y ago
No one is being forced to do anything. You are free to change jobs whenever you want. Or you can start a company of your own which embodies your ideals whenever you want. No one is stopping you. Furthermore, the fact that you are not free to act with impunity, and do not have the right to demand that others indulge your preferences and suppress their own, is not in of itself anti-democratic. In a free society other people also have the right to structure their affairs as they see fit. And you have the right to choose to engage with them, or not.
- rileymat2 2y ago
  Generally, I agree, but the word "forced" is a tricky one; because there are a string of consequences for making different choices. Which is generally a good thing. What you are doing is treating some of those consequences as "force" and others as not. For example, if you need money to pay your property tax, you need to earn that money somehow. Or face the consequence of losing your home. No one is forcing you to stay in that home, leave, but that's pretty brutal thing to not call "forced." But you can see paying property tax is optional as long as you accept the consequences.
  - ndriscoll 2y ago
    No one in the software industry that works at Google is there because they otherwise couldn't find a job. They're there because they want to maximize money and don't have concerns about the ethics of mass surveillance.