4 ms·

Put another way, we defend American interests.

by SllX 1y ago

jeremyjh 1y ago
We defend some of America's interests, and harm some of its other interests. Mostly we defend the interests of the richest people in America and its military industrial complex.
- SllX 1y ago
  We also elect the leaders that make those decisions and form the parties that nominate leaders to choose from. The winners of those elections get to choose the direction to lead.
  - slt2021 1y ago
    you don't elect the leaders in america. Two major party leaderships nominate their candidates, backed by hundreds of millions of corporate and special interest funding. Then some process called electoral college (that has some vague resemblance of the plebiscite) weights two candidates and picks a winner. The candidate then has to obtain approval for every cabinet position from the congress (which is also getting funding in hundreds of mils from major corporate and special interest lobbying groups), that ensure that people occupying cabinet positions have policies aligned with their financial donors
    - SllX 1y ago
      > you don't elect the leaders in america. We do. > Two major party leaderships nominate their candidates, backed by hundreds of millions of corporate and special interest funding. Other Americans. You’re also discounting the impact small-dollar donors have had in American politics as of late and the public primary system. > Then some process called electoral college (that has some vague resemblance of the plebiscite) weights two candidates and picks a winner. 1) The Electors of the Electoral College are in turn elected by the people of the United States. 2) This only applies to the President and Vice President of the United States and no other public office. 3) Most States have laws against faithless electors, but the slate of electors appointed by each State’s elected legislature reflects the popular vote within that State. > The candidate then has to obtain approval for every cabinet position from the congress (which is also getting funding in hundreds of mils from major corporate and special interest lobbying groups), that ensure that people occupying cabinet positions have policies aligned with their financial donors Half of what you’re doing is just describing politics, but yes, the elected President makes appointments, and the elected Senate confirms or denies them.
      - M95D 1y ago
        > You’re also discounting the impact small-dollar donors have had in American politics as of late and the public primary system. Yes, we all saw it. It's a very small impact and it attracts the opposition of every big-dollar donors. Bernie Sanders proved it.
        SllX 1y ago
        Small-dollar donors had an outsized impact outside of just Sanders and others on the left, and helped, just as two examples on the right: Donald J. Trump and Marjorie Taylor Greene. The massive infusion of cash from small-dollar donors and politicians playing to their base on TV to boost their fundraising is doing far more to undermine both the Democratic and Republican parties than large donors ever have.
  - soulofmischief 1y ago
    This take is willfully ignorant of the political climate we live in, where individuals and organizations can pay billions of dollars to shape public opinion through a variety of mechanisms. A huge amount of Americans feel unrepresented by the current administration. US politics should not be "winner takes all", the entire point of having a distributed body of leadership and not just the Supreme Leader is that a wider variety of American interests are supposed to be represented.
freeopinion 1y ago
Please don't conflate the interests of an American with "American interests".
- SllX 1y ago
  Like it or not, the elected President does lead on defending American interests, including which ones to prioritize, and they get to do that because they won the election.
  - jeremyjh 1y ago
    You are the one who said we defend American interests. If you can't defend that statement, then just retract it. You seem to be under the misapprehension that I am talking about your Orange Guy. I am not. Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden all murdered people and should be held accountable.
    - SllX 1y ago
      > You seem to be under the misapprehension that I am talking about your Orange Guy. I’m not. (EDIT: just edited this in, though I thought I’d already written this part earlier when I quoted you. My bad.) > You are the one who said we defend American interests. If you can't defend that statement, then just retract it. We do defend America’s interests, but the President—any sitting President—sets the agenda for how the American State and Military goes about it. Resource allocation is a part of leading. What part of that is difficult to understand?
  - freeopinion 1y ago
    I callout the naivety of believing the the U.S. President personally decides the "American interest" of every action taken. It is a reality today that a nameless, faceless, unelected somebody on the third floor of a building in Arkansas or Arizona can decide on the spur of the moment whether a person in Yemen or Canada should die and press the button to make it happen at the hands of the U.S. government. No elected official needs to be consulted.
computerthings 1y ago
[dead]

Put another way, we defend American interests.

by SllX 1y ago

Put another way, we defend American interests.

We defend some of America's interests, and harm some of its other interests. Mostly we defend the interests of the richest people in America and its military industrial complex.

SllX 1y ago
We also elect the leaders that make those decisions and form the parties that nominate leaders to choose from. The winners of those elections get to choose the direction to lead.
- slt2021 1y ago
  you don't elect the leaders in america. Two major party leaderships nominate their candidates, backed by hundreds of millions of corporate and special interest funding. Then some process called electoral college (that has some vague resemblance of the plebiscite) weights two candidates and picks a winner. The candidate then has to obtain approval for every cabinet position from the congress (which is also getting funding in hundreds of mils from major corporate and special interest lobbying groups), that ensure that people occupying cabinet positions have policies aligned with their financial donors
  - SllX 1y ago
    > you don't elect the leaders in america. We do. > Two major party leaderships nominate their candidates, backed by hundreds of millions of corporate and special interest funding. Other Americans. You’re also discounting the impact small-dollar donors have had in American politics as of late and the public primary system. > Then some process called electoral college (that has some vague resemblance of the plebiscite) weights two candidates and picks a winner. 1) The Electors of the Electoral College are in turn elected by the people of the United States. 2) This only applies to the President and Vice President of the United States and no other public office. 3) Most States have laws against faithless electors, but the slate of electors appointed by each State’s elected legislature reflects the popular vote within that State. > The candidate then has to obtain approval for every cabinet position from the congress (which is also getting funding in hundreds of mils from major corporate and special interest lobbying groups), that ensure that people occupying cabinet positions have policies aligned with their financial donors Half of what you’re doing is just describing politics, but yes, the elected President makes appointments, and the elected Senate confirms or denies them.
    - M95D 1y ago
      > You’re also discounting the impact small-dollar donors have had in American politics as of late and the public primary system. Yes, we all saw it. It's a very small impact and it attracts the opposition of every big-dollar donors. Bernie Sanders proved it.
      - SllX 1y ago
        Small-dollar donors had an outsized impact outside of just Sanders and others on the left, and helped, just as two examples on the right: Donald J. Trump and Marjorie Taylor Greene. The massive infusion of cash from small-dollar donors and politicians playing to their base on TV to boost their fundraising is doing far more to undermine both the Democratic and Republican parties than large donors ever have.
- soulofmischief 1y ago
  This take is willfully ignorant of the political climate we live in, where individuals and organizations can pay billions of dollars to shape public opinion through a variety of mechanisms. A huge amount of Americans feel unrepresented by the current administration. US politics should not be "winner takes all", the entire point of having a distributed body of leadership and not just the Supreme Leader is that a wider variety of American interests are supposed to be represented.

freeopinion 1y ago

Please don't conflate the interests of an American with "American interests".

SllX 1y ago
Like it or not, the elected President does lead on defending American interests, including which ones to prioritize, and they get to do that because they won the election.
- jeremyjh 1y ago
  You are the one who said we defend American interests. If you can't defend that statement, then just retract it. You seem to be under the misapprehension that I am talking about your Orange Guy. I am not. Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden all murdered people and should be held accountable.
  - SllX 1y ago
    > You seem to be under the misapprehension that I am talking about your Orange Guy. I’m not. (EDIT: just edited this in, though I thought I’d already written this part earlier when I quoted you. My bad.) > You are the one who said we defend American interests. If you can't defend that statement, then just retract it. We do defend America’s interests, but the President—any sitting President—sets the agenda for how the American State and Military goes about it. Resource allocation is a part of leading. What part of that is difficult to understand?
- freeopinion 1y ago
  I callout the naivety of believing the the U.S. President personally decides the "American interest" of every action taken. It is a reality today that a nameless, faceless, unelected somebody on the third floor of a building in Arkansas or Arizona can decide on the spur of the moment whether a person in Yemen or Canada should die and press the button to make it happen at the hands of the U.S. government. No elected official needs to be consulted.

computerthings 1y ago

[dead]