2 ms·

"The mere perception that there's a groundswell of support for something" That's a good point. But while I'm interested in the right thing happening that is no

by larrys 13y ago

"The mere perception that there's a groundswell of support for something" That's a good point. But while I'm interested in the right thing happening that is not necessarily the same as getting people to make a lot of phone calls to make that right thing happen. Seems to me to be very lynch mob-ish. Legislators simply responding to the most organized group is really no better than legislators responding to lobbyists. Just because a group is able to organize effectively doesn't mean that what they are trying to achieve is right (although it could be).

thedufer 13y ago
> Legislators simply responding to the most organized group is really no better than legislators responding to lobbyists. I don't think that's true at all. Lobbyists require nothing but money. An organized group requires organization, yes, but it also requires a group who actually cares about the issue strongly enough to do something. I think that sounds a lot closer to the ideal of democracy than lobbying.
- larrys 13y ago
  "also requires a group who actually cares about the issue strongly enough to do something" True but what I am guessing is that many people simply lemming along with something and don't fully develop their own opinion. Or they will read something that someone says and without any further thought decide to support without vetting any of the facts. We see examples of this on HN where multiple knowledgeable people often chime in to debunk some blog post as being less than factually correct.
  - Intermernet 13y ago
    Yes, this applies to democracy in general. Many people see it as a failure of democracy, but it's actually a failure of education. Many people take the easy way out when confronted by issues they don't know about. By taking the popular line, they at least ensure that they won't be on the unpopular side of any conversations they have at social engagements. Most bad ideas continue on the strength that most believers in said idea don't have the time or will to question it.
Natsu 13y ago
> Seems to me to be very lynch mob-ish. While true on some level, from what I know of the history of legal reform, it's pretty much how most changes have actually gone down: the lawmakers come under intense pressure to do something about X and something gets done. Granted, there are quite a few slight of hand tricks that have been pulled, both in terms of creating artificial pressure and making sure that the thing that gets done is what you want (even when it has nothing to do with the original X...).
1010011010 13y ago
> Seems to me to be very lynch mob-ish. Really? You are comparing calling your elected representatives to a lynch mob? wtf?

by larrys 13y ago

thedufer 13y ago

> Legislators simply responding to the most organized group is really no better than legislators responding to lobbyists. I don't think that's true at all. Lobbyists require nothing but money. An organized group requires organization, yes, but it also requires a group who actually cares about the issue strongly enough to do something. I think that sounds a lot closer to the ideal of democracy than lobbying.

larrys 13y ago
"also requires a group who actually cares about the issue strongly enough to do something" True but what I am guessing is that many people simply lemming along with something and don't fully develop their own opinion. Or they will read something that someone says and without any further thought decide to support without vetting any of the facts. We see examples of this on HN where multiple knowledgeable people often chime in to debunk some blog post as being less than factually correct.
- Intermernet 13y ago
  Yes, this applies to democracy in general. Many people see it as a failure of democracy, but it's actually a failure of education. Many people take the easy way out when confronted by issues they don't know about. By taking the popular line, they at least ensure that they won't be on the unpopular side of any conversations they have at social engagements. Most bad ideas continue on the strength that most believers in said idea don't have the time or will to question it.

Natsu 13y ago

> Seems to me to be very lynch mob-ish. While true on some level, from what I know of the history of legal reform, it's pretty much how most changes have actually gone down: the lawmakers come under intense pressure to do something about X and something gets done. Granted, there are quite a few slight of hand tricks that have been pulled, both in terms of creating artificial pressure and making sure that the thing that gets done is what you want (even when it has nothing to do with the original X...).

1010011010 13y ago

> Seems to me to be very lynch mob-ish. Really? You are comparing calling your elected representatives to a lynch mob? wtf?