3 ms·

>> The Appeals Courts, the Supreme Court, the executive (can pardon) So basically you're saying the watchers watch themselves? But this is exactly the problem

>> The Appeals Courts, the Supreme Court, the executive (can pardon) So basically you're saying the watchers watch themselves? But this is exactly the problem I was pointing out. It's just not going to work, ever, and the US is excellent proof of that. Started with a minimal government and a strong constitution, but then.. an Empire happened. >> We certainly aren't hopeless, we just have to try a little harder. Not through political means though. Writing to your representatives doesn't work all that well either. Neither does voting.

zymhan 13y ago
> So basically you're saying the watchers watch themselves? No, because judges don't hear appeals to their decisions. Of course if you think the entire system is broken, then there's not much I can do to convince you.
- anoncowherd 13y ago
  The system is working fine, it's just not to our benefit.
  - zymhan 13y ago
    But it _does_ work to our benefit. Sure, innocent people are mistakenly jailed (and even executed), which is a travesty beyond words. But overall the system works, and throwing your hands up in defeat instead of trying to influence the system is certainly unhelpful. You won't start a revolution by kvetching in online comments, maybe you should try writing some letters sometime. They really do read them, and respond to them.
    - anoncowherd 13y ago
      >> But it _does_ work to our benefit. No it doesn't. It works to the benefit of the ruling class, which, coincidentally, is the group of people who set the system up in the first place, and still control it today. Sure, its members come and go, but the power structure stays in place. >> Sure, innocent people are mistakenly jailed Mistakenly? -Rarely, if ever. Most of the time they know exactly what they're doing. >> But overall the system works, and throwing your hands up in defeat What defeat? I thought you just said the system "works"? -Where's the defeat if it's working properly and thus, everything is fine? >> instead of trying to influence the system is certainly unhelpful. You won't start a revolution by kvetching in online comments, maybe you should try writing some letters sometime. They really do read them, and respond to them Wow, you're so naive. Check out the other reply to my comment above, where someone said he's figured that it doesn't work. When Obama or whoever gets elected through receiving and using millions/billions of dollars of campaign contributions (ie. "bribes"), who exactly do you think he represents?
cryoshon 13y ago
Unfortunately, the way that I have begun to see things is that voting and representative-writing are pressure release valves for the public's discontent. I have had poor results with both methods, though I have gained the all-important sensation of "doing something" while truly accomplishing precisely nothing tangible. In my view, the sublime difficulty is that voting, forming PACs to finance/bribe campaigns, and writing representatives are the only fully-recognized "legitimate" outlets for political discontent. These methods are absolutely ineffective in the face of money and power structures. Even the mildest in desire and most orderly in execution of protests aren't viewed as reputable by bystanders, typically aren't covered positively by media if at all, and thus aren't effective in creating change.
- anoncowherd 13y ago
  >> I have had poor results with both methods, though I have gained the all-important sensation of "doing something" while truly accomplishing precisely nothing tangible. At least now you know it's a waste of time and effort. >> In my view, the sublime difficulty is that voting, forming PACs to finance/bribe campaigns, and writing representatives are the only fully-recognized "legitimate" outlets for political discontent. Yep, that's the way the system is designed. >> These methods are absolutely ineffective in the face of money and power structures. Indeed they are. By design. >> Even the mildest in desire and most orderly in execution of protests aren't viewed as reputable by bystanders, typically aren't covered positively by media if at all, and thus aren't effective in creating change. Well, who do you think the media serves? What group of people is it that decides whether some specific TV/radio-channel is allowed to operate, and for how long? What group of people would stand to gain the most from controlling the whole mainstream media?

zymhan 13y ago

> So basically you're saying the watchers watch themselves? No, because judges don't hear appeals to their decisions. Of course if you think the entire system is broken, then there's not much I can do to convince you.

anoncowherd 13y ago
The system is working fine, it's just not to our benefit.
- zymhan 13y ago
  But it _does_ work to our benefit. Sure, innocent people are mistakenly jailed (and even executed), which is a travesty beyond words. But overall the system works, and throwing your hands up in defeat instead of trying to influence the system is certainly unhelpful. You won't start a revolution by kvetching in online comments, maybe you should try writing some letters sometime. They really do read them, and respond to them.
  - anoncowherd 13y ago
    >> But it _does_ work to our benefit. No it doesn't. It works to the benefit of the ruling class, which, coincidentally, is the group of people who set the system up in the first place, and still control it today. Sure, its members come and go, but the power structure stays in place. >> Sure, innocent people are mistakenly jailed Mistakenly? -Rarely, if ever. Most of the time they know exactly what they're doing. >> But overall the system works, and throwing your hands up in defeat What defeat? I thought you just said the system "works"? -Where's the defeat if it's working properly and thus, everything is fine? >> instead of trying to influence the system is certainly unhelpful. You won't start a revolution by kvetching in online comments, maybe you should try writing some letters sometime. They really do read them, and respond to them Wow, you're so naive. Check out the other reply to my comment above, where someone said he's figured that it doesn't work. When Obama or whoever gets elected through receiving and using millions/billions of dollars of campaign contributions (ie. "bribes"), who exactly do you think he represents?

cryoshon 13y ago

Unfortunately, the way that I have begun to see things is that voting and representative-writing are pressure release valves for the public's discontent. I have had poor results with both methods, though I have gained the all-important sensation of "doing something" while truly accomplishing precisely nothing tangible. In my view, the sublime difficulty is that voting, forming PACs to finance/bribe campaigns, and writing representatives are the only fully-recognized "legitimate" outlets for political discontent. These methods are absolutely ineffective in the face of money and power structures. Even the mildest in desire and most orderly in execution of protests aren't viewed as reputable by bystanders, typically aren't covered positively by media if at all, and thus aren't effective in creating change.

anoncowherd 13y ago
>> I have had poor results with both methods, though I have gained the all-important sensation of "doing something" while truly accomplishing precisely nothing tangible. At least now you know it's a waste of time and effort. >> In my view, the sublime difficulty is that voting, forming PACs to finance/bribe campaigns, and writing representatives are the only fully-recognized "legitimate" outlets for political discontent. Yep, that's the way the system is designed. >> These methods are absolutely ineffective in the face of money and power structures. Indeed they are. By design. >> Even the mildest in desire and most orderly in execution of protests aren't viewed as reputable by bystanders, typically aren't covered positively by media if at all, and thus aren't effective in creating change. Well, who do you think the media serves? What group of people is it that decides whether some specific TV/radio-channel is allowed to operate, and for how long? What group of people would stand to gain the most from controlling the whole mainstream media?