3 ms·

Of course not. However they are like 5% more willing to pursue anti-trust action and enforce regulations. Even a small threat like that will be resisted by the

Of course not. However they are like 5% more willing to pursue anti-trust action and enforce regulations. Even a small threat like that will be resisted by the ultra wealthy.

csallen 2y ago
Agreed, but that's just them voting for their interests, not voting to end democracy.
- wormlord 2y ago
  The destruction of democracy is a convenient byproduct of their consolidation of power. Fascism in germany was convenient for the wealthy-- even if they weren't the architects of it.
  - bamboozled 2y ago
    In the long term was it a good thing for the wealthy though ?
  - csallen 2y ago
    The idea that the rich in America, as a class, want the destruction of democracy, is laughable. Few people want to overturn a system that's making them millions.
olliej 2y ago
You understand that anti-trust and regulations exist to support capitalism right? You understand that that is why those things exist right? Because absent those comments you don't get capitalism, because absent those things you don't have a free market
- wormlord 2y ago
  If you think a free market is a requirement for capitalism then by definition sure. If you think it is about the distribution of ownership over capital then the free market doesn't matter. Many political scientists refer to the economic model of the USSR as "State Capitalism" because the state owns the means of production. Would you rather I use a word like "Cronyism" to specify private ownership of capital without free-market competition?
  - olliej 2y ago
    Yeah, that's reasonable lets go for that, so given statements to the effect of A) Ending democracy vs B) Ending cronyism Regardless of how effective you may think they would be at that goal, would you pick (A) over (B)?
bamboozled 2y ago
So there isn’t democracy as we thought there was anymore…it’s really becoming an oligarchy. Look at musk jumping around on stage and handing out money for votes. It’s really disturbing.

Of course not. However they are like 5% more willing to pursue anti-trust action and enforce regulations. Even a small threat like that will be resisted by the ultra wealthy.

csallen 2y ago

Agreed, but that's just them voting for their interests, not voting to end democracy.

wormlord 2y ago
The destruction of democracy is a convenient byproduct of their consolidation of power. Fascism in germany was convenient for the wealthy-- even if they weren't the architects of it.
- bamboozled 2y ago
  In the long term was it a good thing for the wealthy though ?
- csallen 2y ago
  The idea that the rich in America, as a class, want the destruction of democracy, is laughable. Few people want to overturn a system that's making them millions.

olliej 2y ago

You understand that anti-trust and regulations exist to support capitalism right? You understand that that is why those things exist right? Because absent those comments you don't get capitalism, because absent those things you don't have a free market

wormlord 2y ago
If you think a free market is a requirement for capitalism then by definition sure. If you think it is about the distribution of ownership over capital then the free market doesn't matter. Many political scientists refer to the economic model of the USSR as "State Capitalism" because the state owns the means of production. Would you rather I use a word like "Cronyism" to specify private ownership of capital without free-market competition?
- olliej 2y ago
  Yeah, that's reasonable lets go for that, so given statements to the effect of A) Ending democracy vs B) Ending cronyism Regardless of how effective you may think they would be at that goal, would you pick (A) over (B)?

bamboozled 2y ago

So there isn’t democracy as we thought there was anymore…it’s really becoming an oligarchy. Look at musk jumping around on stage and handing out money for votes. It’s really disturbing.