5 ms·

Americans aren’t your enemy. We’re just as upset by these idiots running our government as you are.

by ta9000 9mo ago

Cthulhu_ 9mo ago
It's not an either / or though; enough Americans are in support of the government, that's how democracy works. Nobody can speak for everyone.
monooso 9mo ago
I don't think there's any suggestion that Americans are the enemy. Indeed, the article makes it clear that (a) the issue is not individuals, and (b) the desired changes would be good for most (non-billionaire) Americans.
BadBadJellyBean 9mo ago
Possibly. But the people who matter the most in this discussion lost their trustworthiness. The government and the tech giants are working together to be a bad partner. It unfortunately doesn't matter if the average Joe is not with them unless they do something about the state of things. And not trying to get too political: the GOP and Trump did win the electorate and the popular vote. So the USA kinda wanted this.
kergonath 9mo ago
I have a lot of sympathy for the American people, and many personal American friends. Still, in a democracy everyone is collectively responsible for the government. "It’s not us, it’s our government" only work for so long.
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
- 0_gravitas 9mo ago
  It's not a democracy (by definition)
  - kergonath 9mo ago
    Trump won the popular vote, so even without electoral college shenanigans, he would be in power. It’s a representative democracy, in which the people delegate their legislative power to representatives and the executive power to, largely, a president. Its executive branch is stronger than a lot of democracies, but that itself does not make it "not a democracy". It turns out that its constitution is not as much of a guarantee than some people expected but, again, it does not prevent it from being a democracy. It’s on its way to Orbanization, though, which is very concerning and a sign that it might not be an actual democracy for too long.
- rakoo 9mo ago
  That's assuming that the population has any power, which in pretty much all countries in the world is not true. "Democracy" isn't just a value to behold, if the population has no power, it has no power and a country can't be called as such out of nowhere. Now, the people might have no actual power, but it's in their hands to get it.
  - kergonath 9mo ago
    True, there is usually the caveat of the electoral college and gerrymandering. That can excuse the impotence of Congress, but Trump won the popular vote. By any measure, it is a democratic result.
aebtebeten 9mo ago
> We’re just as upset by these idiots The former soviets were upset with their empire, and got rid of it themselves. Is there any reason you all would not be capable of doing what they did?
- TrackerFF 9mo ago
  There's no mechanism for the people to remove the president. You can't have a loss of confidence vote that every eligible voter can partake in. There's no coalition system where one part can pull out and essentially dissolve the sitting coalition. No snap election. By now it should be clear to anyone that the only way to remove the president, by lawful means, is to impeach and remove him. But with politicians choosing party over people, that will likely not happen anytime soon. The median senator and congressman in the US has a net worth close to a million dollars. Other than in the very unlikely event that the US invaded, they will really never feel the effects of bad presidents. At worst they will live under the threat of being primaried. US politics is very much a case of "you've made your bed, now lie in it" for minimum the next 4 years.
  - aebtebeten 9mo ago
    If I understand correctly, this is to say the Soviet Union was more responsive* to its people than the United States is? If the people wished to, could they not make it clear what the results of a primary would be, eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissolution_of_the_Soviet_Union#:~:text=An%20estimated%202,spheres%20of%20influence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissolution_of_the_Soviet_Unio... If legislators are afraid of the President, should they not be more afraid of their constituents? * in the event, it looks like it took them 4 years as well, 1988-1991, but somehow I doubt they were just telling themselves they'd sit around and wait for 2028...
    - gsf_emergency_6 9mo ago
      soviet mil was a representative slice of soviet demographics. US civilian enforcers: not so much. (Elsewhen- the antiVW movement "worked" because the same was true of the US mil) That's mostly it I think. Edit- "anti-Kissinger" movement
flumpcakes 9mo ago
I mean this kindly - but Americans need to ditch their current administration fast. I don't understand how a Democrat can be a lame duck for four years but the current president can literally threaten NATO members with invasion and nothing happens. If the US goes too far, it won't be coming back. There are no more Obama years of stability. No more soft power. No more tacit agreement from the rest of the democratic world with whatever hair brained scheme US wants to do. The US is great at making money from monopolies. It has thousands of billionaires and it has more money than sense. It is not a technological supremacy. It is at a stark risk of turning away 450m highly educated people, who traditionally would align with the US as 'shared democracies'. Imagine those same people aligning with China, not out of shared principle, but out of necessity. That would end the US hegemony in a single day. I don't think the average US person realises what their government is doing. All empires end eventually, but your America is running towards the finish line chasing some dream of 'greatness' and imperial ambition. Meanwhile the average schmoe doesn't even have universal healthcare.
nbates80 9mo ago
From the article: > And never forget that the post-American internet will be good for Americans. Because, in a K-shaped, bifurcated, unequal America, the trillions that American companies loot from the world don't trickle down to Americans. The average American holds a portfolio of assets that rounds to zero, and that includes stock in US tech companies. > The average American isn't a shareholder in Big Tech, the average American is a victim of Big Tech. Liberating the world from US Big Tech is also liberating America from US Big Tech.

Americans aren’t your enemy. We’re just as upset by these idiots running our government as you are.

by ta9000 9mo ago

Americans aren’t your enemy. We’re just as upset by these idiots running our government as you are.

It's not an either / or though; enough Americans are in support of the government, that's how democracy works. Nobody can speak for everyone.

monooso 9mo ago

I don't think there's any suggestion that Americans are the enemy. Indeed, the article makes it clear that (a) the issue is not individuals, and (b) the desired changes would be good for most (non-billionaire) Americans.

BadBadJellyBean 9mo ago

Possibly. But the people who matter the most in this discussion lost their trustworthiness. The government and the tech giants are working together to be a bad partner. It unfortunately doesn't matter if the average Joe is not with them unless they do something about the state of things. And not trying to get too political: the GOP and Trump did win the electorate and the popular vote. So the USA kinda wanted this.

kergonath 9mo ago

I have a lot of sympathy for the American people, and many personal American friends. Still, in a democracy everyone is collectively responsible for the government. "It’s not us, it’s our government" only work for so long.

deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]
0_gravitas 9mo ago
It's not a democracy (by definition)
- kergonath 9mo ago
  Trump won the popular vote, so even without electoral college shenanigans, he would be in power. It’s a representative democracy, in which the people delegate their legislative power to representatives and the executive power to, largely, a president. Its executive branch is stronger than a lot of democracies, but that itself does not make it "not a democracy". It turns out that its constitution is not as much of a guarantee than some people expected but, again, it does not prevent it from being a democracy. It’s on its way to Orbanization, though, which is very concerning and a sign that it might not be an actual democracy for too long.
rakoo 9mo ago
That's assuming that the population has any power, which in pretty much all countries in the world is not true. "Democracy" isn't just a value to behold, if the population has no power, it has no power and a country can't be called as such out of nowhere. Now, the people might have no actual power, but it's in their hands to get it.
- kergonath 9mo ago
  True, there is usually the caveat of the electoral college and gerrymandering. That can excuse the impotence of Congress, but Trump won the popular vote. By any measure, it is a democratic result.

aebtebeten 9mo ago

> We’re just as upset by these idiots The former soviets were upset with their empire, and got rid of it themselves. Is there any reason you all would not be capable of doing what they did?

TrackerFF 9mo ago
There's no mechanism for the people to remove the president. You can't have a loss of confidence vote that every eligible voter can partake in. There's no coalition system where one part can pull out and essentially dissolve the sitting coalition. No snap election. By now it should be clear to anyone that the only way to remove the president, by lawful means, is to impeach and remove him. But with politicians choosing party over people, that will likely not happen anytime soon. The median senator and congressman in the US has a net worth close to a million dollars. Other than in the very unlikely event that the US invaded, they will really never feel the effects of bad presidents. At worst they will live under the threat of being primaried. US politics is very much a case of "you've made your bed, now lie in it" for minimum the next 4 years.
- aebtebeten 9mo ago
  If I understand correctly, this is to say the Soviet Union was more responsive* to its people than the United States is? If the people wished to, could they not make it clear what the results of a primary would be, eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissolution_of_the_Soviet_Union#:~:text=An%20estimated%202,spheres%20of%20influence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissolution_of_the_Soviet_Unio... If legislators are afraid of the President, should they not be more afraid of their constituents? * in the event, it looks like it took them 4 years as well, 1988-1991, but somehow I doubt they were just telling themselves they'd sit around and wait for 2028...
  - gsf_emergency_6 9mo ago
    soviet mil was a representative slice of soviet demographics. US civilian enforcers: not so much. (Elsewhen- the antiVW movement "worked" because the same was true of the US mil) That's mostly it I think. Edit- "anti-Kissinger" movement

flumpcakes 9mo ago

I mean this kindly - but Americans need to ditch their current administration fast. I don't understand how a Democrat can be a lame duck for four years but the current president can literally threaten NATO members with invasion and nothing happens. If the US goes too far, it won't be coming back. There are no more Obama years of stability. No more soft power. No more tacit agreement from the rest of the democratic world with whatever hair brained scheme US wants to do. The US is great at making money from monopolies. It has thousands of billionaires and it has more money than sense. It is not a technological supremacy. It is at a stark risk of turning away 450m highly educated people, who traditionally would align with the US as 'shared democracies'. Imagine those same people aligning with China, not out of shared principle, but out of necessity. That would end the US hegemony in a single day. I don't think the average US person realises what their government is doing. All empires end eventually, but your America is running towards the finish line chasing some dream of 'greatness' and imperial ambition. Meanwhile the average schmoe doesn't even have universal healthcare.

nbates80 9mo ago

From the article: > And never forget that the post-American internet will be good for Americans. Because, in a K-shaped, bifurcated, unequal America, the trillions that American companies loot from the world don't trickle down to Americans. The average American holds a portfolio of assets that rounds to zero, and that includes stock in US tech companies. > The average American isn't a shareholder in Big Tech, the average American is a victim of Big Tech. Liberating the world from US Big Tech is also liberating America from US Big Tech.