6 ms·

> As an outsider, it appears to me that the almost the entire US legal and political system is driven by, and for the benefit of, corporate and big business int

by maratd 14y ago

> As an outsider, it appears to me that the almost the entire US legal and political system is driven by, and for the benefit of, corporate and big business interests. This is the case in every country. Those at the top will take an inordinate amount of time to make rules that benefit themselves and their friends. The primary difference between the US and other countries is that the US constitution provides a means for the citizens to fight back against the most outrageous of offenses. Now, that doesn't mean it always works. In fact, it rarely does. But it does, in fact, work occasionally, which is better than nothing.

herval 14y ago
> The primary difference between the US and other countries is that the US constitution provides a means for the citizens to fight back against the most outrageous of offenses. What way does the US constitution provide that other countries don't (besides the firearms shenanigans)?
- maratd 14y ago
  1. A right to practice any religion without the establishment of any official religion. 2. The right to speak freely against the government. This is culturally extended to other targets of speech as well. Includes written, artistic, and some obscene works. 3. The right to not have soldiers commandeer your property, even in times of war. 4. The right to be safe in your possessions against arbitrary search. In the US, a police officer can't just pull you aside and search you. They need to have a clearly defined reason to do so or get a search warrant from a judge. 5. Every citizen above a certain age has the right to vote and be heard in government, regardless of political affiliation or sex. I'm bored of listing things. Go read the constitutional yourself if you're curious. Two and half centuries later, and it's still a document that puts much of Europe and the rest of the world to shame. As I said, it's implementation isn't perfect, nothing in life is ... but it's certainly much better than the alternatives currently on display elsewhere.
  - yardie 14y ago
    Look, the constitution is 250 year old parchment and it appears a lot of legislators have probably forgotten what's on it. 1. Applies to most european countries as well. Some, like Scientology, are actually called what they are, scams. Not because of the dogma, but because they put greater emphasis on raising money. 2. And what EU member country doesn't have this? 3. The US has only been invaded by a) the British b) itself. Just like torture, when push comes to shove the government will find a way around this. Do remember the government confiscated property from the southern gentry by classifying them as traitors. 4. Minorities (black, hispanic, asian, arabic) throughout the US would like to have a word with you. Hell, NYC doesn't even try to gus it up. They call it "stop and frisk". 5. You have the right to vote. Not all states have to make it easy or convenient to do so. I'm lucky in that I live abroad so I'm entitled to an absentee ballot. If I lived in my last US address I could not vote by mail on my free time. I would have to go to the polls, on a tuesday, during working hours. Europe isn't one country so I don't know why you describe it as such. I could equally say the US has a beheading problem since Mexico is right there and they are the same, right?
    - maratd 14y ago
      > 1. Applies to most european countries as well. No. http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/western-europe-vs-religious-freedom-7869 http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/western-europe-vs-rel... > 2. And what EU member country doesn't have this? Germany, Austria, etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Irving#Persona_non_grata http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Irving#Persona_non_grata Mind you, the man is absolute human garbage, but the entire point of protecting speech is protecting the most despicable kind. It's fairly easy to tolerate the pleasant variety. > 3. The US has only been invaded by ... My point still stands. Even if the US throws this one under the bus in the future, my point still stands. It's not about a perfect record, but a good one. The US has a good record on this. > 4. ... Hell, NYC doesn't even try to gus it up. They call it "stop and frisk". I live in the NYC area, so I know about this a bit. In each case, the person consents to the search. Yes, it's pretty scary when a cop walks over to you and tells you to empty your pockets. You need to have balls to say "No" and "I do not consent to any searches". But then again, any right given to you is pointless if you don't have the balls to exercise it. > 5. You have the right to vote. Not all states have to make it easy or convenient to do so. You don't have a right to a convenient process, merely a process. It's a wonderful thing to reach a point where people have the wherewithal to bitch about how convenient voting is, rather than if their vote is actually counted. Mind you, I'm of the same mind as you, I think we should be able to vote on the Internet. Lately, my home state of New Jersey has made an effort to permit this (albeit, in response to a natural disaster).
alan 14y ago
> This is the case in every country. Those at the top will take an inordinate amount of time to make rules that benefit themselves and their friends. It's actually a bit simpler than that. Any set of rules will allow certain segments to rise to the top. Once there, they have great interest in keeping the rules in their favour, but they don't have to take all that much time making the rules favour them in the first place.
- swift 14y ago
  Your categorical statement about rules is an interesting one. I think this is actually a mathematical claim which I'm fairly certain is false. It'd be interesting to explore whether the space of rules that keep everyone on an even keel include any rule sets that we'd actually want to live under, though. Ever read "The Lottery in Babylon" by Borges?
neilk 14y ago
Oh, absolutely. As a Canadian, I live in hope that the US will invade and replace our system of government.
- ced 14y ago
  Why? Or was that sarcasm?
- rapind 14y ago
  Already happened. It was peaceful, and at least we're allowed to think we're different.
- katbyte 14y ago
  As a canadian I sincerely hope that you are joking.
- brightsize 14y ago
  No doubt you're joking, but one thing I've repeatedly noticed in my many visits to Canada is the extent to which Canadians define themselves as being "not American" (meaning not US citizens). Can't blame 'em, more power to them.
  - neilk 14y ago
    This is a fair point. I actually can't stand that too.
- maratd 14y ago
  Oh please. You would only be so lucky. Then this sort of nonsense wouldn't even come to fruition: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/01/quebec-language-police-ban-pasta http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/01/quebec-language-...
gambiting 14y ago
No, I strongly disagree with that statement that it's the same in every country. US supports and openly agrees with lobbying. Actually, I have read opinions saying it's a good thing - companies can have a direct effect on laws by pouring money into the government,so it kind of is democratic, right? Well, not every country is like that. In many others lobbying is illegal and people who do it are severely punished. Any connection with a business is strongly frowned upon, and if the laws a politician is voting for turn out to support his/her company or his family's business, the negative press will pretty much destroy their career as it has happened many times in the past. Meanwhile, in the US, politicians are very well known for making money thanks to policies they themselves wrote, and it has been a plague of both senators and presidents of the United States. The problem is, that the US is calling our approach socialist. The first question we always ask is - how is this going to affect people? Most of the time the people's interest is put before companies interest. Media companies lobbying for making breaking ToS criminal offence? They can piss right off, this does not benefit people in any way. Monsanto wants to grow GMO crops in our country? Sure, but only after they show the documentation that its safe for people and does not affect local businesses. I can't imagine Microsoft ever being given a fine in the US for monopolistic practices - in the US it's probably just how you do business and no one sees anything wrong with it. In the "land of the free" you are also free to exploit your employees, because they being "free" can just change jobs,right? Well, in most of the EU you need to guarantee decent working conditions, health insurance and you can't work more than X number of hours per day. Is that bad/socialist? Maybe, but I know for certain where I would prefer to live and work! And sure, its very,very far from perfect, but I am pretty sure its nowhere as corrupt as the US government. Mostly because in US it's not corruption, it's legitimate business.
- camus 14y ago
  > companies can have a direct effect on laws by pouring money into the government,so it kind of is democratic, right? "corporations are people my friend!" ;)
  - rayiner 14y ago
    I realized the other day that it's a grammatically correct way of saying "corporations are made of people." Consider the famous quote: "Soylent green is people!" It doesn't mean that Soylent Green is a person, it means Soylent Green is made of people.
rosser 14y ago
the US constitution provides a means for the citizens to fight back against the most outrageous of offenses Did you, by chance, mean "voting"? How quaint.
- Aloisius 14y ago
  Did you, by chance, mean "voting"? Suing obviously. Legal action is the American way.
  - inopinatus 14y ago
    I think the observation was that this has turned out to be the problem, not the solution. I.e. that not everything is better as a confrontation.

by maratd 14y ago

herval 14y ago

> The primary difference between the US and other countries is that the US constitution provides a means for the citizens to fight back against the most outrageous of offenses. What way does the US constitution provide that other countries don't (besides the firearms shenanigans)?

maratd 14y ago
1. A right to practice any religion without the establishment of any official religion. 2. The right to speak freely against the government. This is culturally extended to other targets of speech as well. Includes written, artistic, and some obscene works. 3. The right to not have soldiers commandeer your property, even in times of war. 4. The right to be safe in your possessions against arbitrary search. In the US, a police officer can't just pull you aside and search you. They need to have a clearly defined reason to do so or get a search warrant from a judge. 5. Every citizen above a certain age has the right to vote and be heard in government, regardless of political affiliation or sex. I'm bored of listing things. Go read the constitutional yourself if you're curious. Two and half centuries later, and it's still a document that puts much of Europe and the rest of the world to shame. As I said, it's implementation isn't perfect, nothing in life is ... but it's certainly much better than the alternatives currently on display elsewhere.
- yardie 14y ago
  Look, the constitution is 250 year old parchment and it appears a lot of legislators have probably forgotten what's on it. 1. Applies to most european countries as well. Some, like Scientology, are actually called what they are, scams. Not because of the dogma, but because they put greater emphasis on raising money. 2. And what EU member country doesn't have this? 3. The US has only been invaded by a) the British b) itself. Just like torture, when push comes to shove the government will find a way around this. Do remember the government confiscated property from the southern gentry by classifying them as traitors. 4. Minorities (black, hispanic, asian, arabic) throughout the US would like to have a word with you. Hell, NYC doesn't even try to gus it up. They call it "stop and frisk". 5. You have the right to vote. Not all states have to make it easy or convenient to do so. I'm lucky in that I live abroad so I'm entitled to an absentee ballot. If I lived in my last US address I could not vote by mail on my free time. I would have to go to the polls, on a tuesday, during working hours. Europe isn't one country so I don't know why you describe it as such. I could equally say the US has a beheading problem since Mexico is right there and they are the same, right?
  - maratd 14y ago
    > 1. Applies to most european countries as well. No. http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/western-europe-vs-religious-freedom-7869 http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/western-europe-vs-rel... > 2. And what EU member country doesn't have this? Germany, Austria, etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Irving#Persona_non_grata http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Irving#Persona_non_grata Mind you, the man is absolute human garbage, but the entire point of protecting speech is protecting the most despicable kind. It's fairly easy to tolerate the pleasant variety. > 3. The US has only been invaded by ... My point still stands. Even if the US throws this one under the bus in the future, my point still stands. It's not about a perfect record, but a good one. The US has a good record on this. > 4. ... Hell, NYC doesn't even try to gus it up. They call it "stop and frisk". I live in the NYC area, so I know about this a bit. In each case, the person consents to the search. Yes, it's pretty scary when a cop walks over to you and tells you to empty your pockets. You need to have balls to say "No" and "I do not consent to any searches". But then again, any right given to you is pointless if you don't have the balls to exercise it. > 5. You have the right to vote. Not all states have to make it easy or convenient to do so. You don't have a right to a convenient process, merely a process. It's a wonderful thing to reach a point where people have the wherewithal to bitch about how convenient voting is, rather than if their vote is actually counted. Mind you, I'm of the same mind as you, I think we should be able to vote on the Internet. Lately, my home state of New Jersey has made an effort to permit this (albeit, in response to a natural disaster).

alan 14y ago

> This is the case in every country. Those at the top will take an inordinate amount of time to make rules that benefit themselves and their friends. It's actually a bit simpler than that. Any set of rules will allow certain segments to rise to the top. Once there, they have great interest in keeping the rules in their favour, but they don't have to take all that much time making the rules favour them in the first place.

swift 14y ago
Your categorical statement about rules is an interesting one. I think this is actually a mathematical claim which I'm fairly certain is false. It'd be interesting to explore whether the space of rules that keep everyone on an even keel include any rule sets that we'd actually want to live under, though. Ever read "The Lottery in Babylon" by Borges?

neilk 14y ago

Oh, absolutely. As a Canadian, I live in hope that the US will invade and replace our system of government.

ced 14y ago
Why? Or was that sarcasm?
rapind 14y ago
Already happened. It was peaceful, and at least we're allowed to think we're different.
katbyte 14y ago
As a canadian I sincerely hope that you are joking.
brightsize 14y ago
No doubt you're joking, but one thing I've repeatedly noticed in my many visits to Canada is the extent to which Canadians define themselves as being "not American" (meaning not US citizens). Can't blame 'em, more power to them.
- neilk 14y ago
  This is a fair point. I actually can't stand that too.
maratd 14y ago
Oh please. You would only be so lucky. Then this sort of nonsense wouldn't even come to fruition: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/01/quebec-language-police-ban-pasta http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/01/quebec-language-...

gambiting 14y ago

No, I strongly disagree with that statement that it's the same in every country. US supports and openly agrees with lobbying. Actually, I have read opinions saying it's a good thing - companies can have a direct effect on laws by pouring money into the government,so it kind of is democratic, right? Well, not every country is like that. In many others lobbying is illegal and people who do it are severely punished. Any connection with a business is strongly frowned upon, and if the laws a politician is voting for turn out to support his/her company or his family's business, the negative press will pretty much destroy their career as it has happened many times in the past. Meanwhile, in the US, politicians are very well known for making money thanks to policies they themselves wrote, and it has been a plague of both senators and presidents of the United States. The problem is, that the US is calling our approach socialist. The first question we always ask is - how is this going to affect people? Most of the time the people's interest is put before companies interest. Media companies lobbying for making breaking ToS criminal offence? They can piss right off, this does not benefit people in any way. Monsanto wants to grow GMO crops in our country? Sure, but only after they show the documentation that its safe for people and does not affect local businesses. I can't imagine Microsoft ever being given a fine in the US for monopolistic practices - in the US it's probably just how you do business and no one sees anything wrong with it. In the "land of the free" you are also free to exploit your employees, because they being "free" can just change jobs,right? Well, in most of the EU you need to guarantee decent working conditions, health insurance and you can't work more than X number of hours per day. Is that bad/socialist? Maybe, but I know for certain where I would prefer to live and work! And sure, its very,very far from perfect, but I am pretty sure its nowhere as corrupt as the US government. Mostly because in US it's not corruption, it's legitimate business.

camus 14y ago
> companies can have a direct effect on laws by pouring money into the government,so it kind of is democratic, right? "corporations are people my friend!" ;)
- rayiner 14y ago
  I realized the other day that it's a grammatically correct way of saying "corporations are made of people." Consider the famous quote: "Soylent green is people!" It doesn't mean that Soylent Green is a person, it means Soylent Green is made of people.

rosser 14y ago

the US constitution provides a means for the citizens to fight back against the most outrageous of offenses Did you, by chance, mean "voting"? How quaint.

Aloisius 14y ago
Did you, by chance, mean "voting"? Suing obviously. Legal action is the American way.
- inopinatus 14y ago
  I think the observation was that this has turned out to be the problem, not the solution. I.e. that not everything is better as a confrontation.