4 ms·

> If you can get to a polling station you have more influence than the average Iranian. Have you not been watching the news? Iran has proven itself to be at le

> If you can get to a polling station you have more influence than the average Iranian. Have you not been watching the news? Iran has proven itself to be at least better at performing like a democracy than most of our allies in the region, excepting maybe Turkey. Regardless, it's extremely difficult to wield real influence with a vote (or via advocating for any sort of elected official) as most problems are directly avoided during campaigning, and citizens can be safely ignored when reelection isn't under threat. And anyway, most of our society is owned privately and outside the reach of democratic oversight. Anyway, lip service to democratic processes is not the same thing as actual democratic will. Just because you're performing the aesthetics of what you're taught democracy is doesn't demonstrate any actual influence. For the most part, problems are decided long before they hit the ballot box and you can only really weigh in on certain wedge issues.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> Iran has proven itself to be at least better at performing like a democracy than most of our allies Sure. That wasn't the question. The comparison was between Iran and America, and whether being able to bribe people gives Iranians more power than Americans. It doesn't. > it's extremely difficult to wield real influence with a vote (or via advocating for any sort of elected official) as most problems are directly avoided during campaigning You're focussing on Presidential elections. Of course in a national vote the individual will be diluted. That's the point. Go more local (and earlier, to primaries) and you see massive questions resolved with tens of votes, even in New York. > problems are decided long before they hit the ballot box and you can only really weigh in on certain wedge issues Correct. Most of what I described above is before the ballot box. That said, even the multiple-choice power exerted at the ballot box is more power than the average Iranian has. (There is an argument to be made that if someone doesn't believe this, they shouldn't vote.)
- ClumsyPilot 2y ago
  > Go more local (and earlier, to primaries) and you see massive questions resolved with tens of votes, even in New York. You have influence over local issues in dictatorships. Putin does not care or engage in zoning and other minor issues. They are open to influence by both residents and bribery.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> Iran has proven itself to be at least better at performing like a democracy than most of our allies Sure. That wasn't the question. The comparison was between Iran and America, and whether being able to bribe people gives Iranians more power than Americans. It doesn't. > it's extremely difficult to wield real influence with a vote (or via advocating for any sort of elected official) as most problems are directly avoided during campaigning You're focussing on Presidential elections. Of course in a national vote the individual will be diluted. That's the point. Go more local (and earlier, to primaries) and you see massive questions resolved with tens of votes, even in New York. > problems are decided long before they hit the ballot box and you can only really weigh in on certain wedge issues Correct. Most of what I described above is before the ballot box. That said, even the multiple-choice power exerted at the ballot box is more power than the average Iranian has. (There is an argument to be made that if someone doesn't believe this, they shouldn't vote.)

ClumsyPilot 2y ago
> Go more local (and earlier, to primaries) and you see massive questions resolved with tens of votes, even in New York. You have influence over local issues in dictatorships. Putin does not care or engage in zoning and other minor issues. They are open to influence by both residents and bribery.