6 ms·
From the abstract of the paper: > Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial in
by carapace 2y ago
From the abstract of the paper:
> Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-poli...
However, it's not correct that "capitalists have taken over the control of our governments" (unless you're speaking as British royalty of the American Revolution, eh?) rather they set up the governments in the first place.
- AndrewKemendo 2y agoI’m totally on board with the idea that we were never a valid democracy - and effectively a defacto oligarchy - to begin with
- lurking15 2y agoOligarchy is the unavoidable state of human society, even in communism as it’s ever been instantiated you have oligarchy
- AndrewKemendo 2y agoThis claim is historically inaccurate Do you have an epistemological elucidation of your claim?
- lurking15 2y agoI don't know look at any organization in humanity, the most obvious one is what happened with the Democrat party, Biden is undeniably feeble and there was an entire oligarchic effort to deny that reality even during his 2020 campaign. We're told democracy is in peril if Kamala doesn't win when she's never been successfully entertained in a primary, in fact she's only lost with near zero support. That's apparently "popular will" when it's by now obviously nothing more than manufactured consent. If you want more rigorous work, read up on Elite theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elite_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elite_theory
- AnimalMuppet 2y agoIt's "the unavoidable state of human society" because there is a theory in philosophy, political science, and sociology, and that theory has some people advocate for that theory? That's not evidence. There are multiple other, conflicting, schools of philosophy and sociology, all of which have people that advocate for them. Got any evidence?
- lurking15 2y agoSo when I say - point at any organization even supposedly egalitarian ones and you'll see oligarchy. There are rulers and the ruled, rulers are abnormally competitive and willing to use deception and other underhanded tactics that normal people will not. Therefore in any organization of considerable power, rulers establish themselves, this has always happened in communism too. Unions devolve into the same power structure they seek to fight. Have any evidence of an exception?
- AnimalMuppet 2y agoYou made the claim. Evidence is the job of the one making the claim. But, consider a good sports team. The coach is not chosen because he used underhanded tactics to triumph over other coaching candidates, but because he has a track record of being able to coach. The players are chosen, not because they win political contests, but because they're better at playing the game. The starters are chosen, not because they used deception, but because they're actually better players than the ones who are not starters. And yes, I know you can find teams that are power structures rather than meritocracies. They tend to be the worst teams, though.
- lurking15 2y agoA sports team isn't a political body like a government or union. It's entertainment and performance can't be faked.
- carapace 2y agoThe Quakers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making
- carapace 2y agoDepends on what you mean by "valid". King George probably thought we weren't but not in the way you mean, eh? We could draw a line from the Magna Carta to the Equal Rights Amendment. Democracy is a work-in-progress.
- AndrewKemendo 2y agoMoreso the 3/5ths compromise means the republic didn’t actually represent a significant portion of their claimed collective territories inhabitants. The articles of confederation was a business arrangement primarily to consolidate a market with similar laws for the ability to monopolize the cotton market. Of which Britain was largest purchaser btw. So yes, from the beginning the Americas were a free “wilderness” that economic colonialism torched through. The Holocaust of first nations is just not even recognized as anything worth mentioning it seems. So yeah - as KRS One would say: “you can’t have justice on stolen land.”
- carapace 2y agoI bring up the genocide of the First Nations a lot. Slavery too. The point of the Revolution wasn't that the USA became a utopia instantly, the point is that they threw out the king and then didn't make themselves kings. Establishing and extending freedom and human rights has been and continues to be a slog, a hard-fought and ongoing battle. In re: the original statement, the capitalists didn't take over the government, they started it, and we the (rest of the) people are taking it over from them.
- AndrewKemendo 2y agoI’d generally agree here - though frankly I don’t think it’s as notable as the “founders” want it to be that they didn’t immediately declare themselves lords (despite doing that for 100 years prior) I currently live in “Prince William” County. Take that for what you will but it’s not cause lordships weren’t around I don’t think anyone should get points for not behaving like a psychopath
- 2y ago