TL;DR - 6 min video: https://youtu.be/5tu32CCA_Ig
>A recent article in the Washington Post described how the current US tax-‘reform’ bill is being shaped; and it describes, basically (at least as far as tax-law changes are concerned), the operation of a US dictatorship by the super-rich.
>First of all, however: there is no longer any realistic question as regards whether the US in recent decades has been a dictatorship, or instead a democracy. According to the only scientific analysis of the relevant data ( https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf ), that has been done in order to determine whether the US is a dictatorship or a democracy, the US is definitely a dictatorship that’s perpetrated by the extremely richest, against the public-at-large; in other words: the US Government functions as an aristocracy, otherwise referred-to as an oligarchy, or a plutocracy, or a kleptocracy; but, in any case, and by whatever name, it’s ruled by a tiny number of the extremely wealthiest and their agents, on behalf of those few super-rich, against the concerns and interests and needs of the public (everyone else). So: instead of being rule by the public (the “demos” is the Greek term for it), it’s rule on behalf of a tiny dictatorial class, of extreme wealth — by whatever name we might happen to label this ruling class.
>That study, by professors Gilens and Page, explained that it examined “1,779 instances between 1981 and 2002 in which a national survey of the general public asked a favor/oppose question about a proposed policy change,” and it compared those public-policy preferences, by the public, versus the public-policy preferences regarding those same issues, by the super-wealthiest; and, it found that only the public-policy preferences by the super-wealthiest and their paid agents, made any discernible difference, at all, in the likelihood that a given public policy ultimately became enacted into law, in the United States. Whereas the public-policy preferences of the wealthiest do, at far higher than mere random chances, become enacted into laws, the public-policy preferences of the public are (except in political rhetoric and promises — frauds perpetrated to deceive the public) ignored, in the United States.
…
https://archive.is/vfjPF - strategic-culture.org
/mlpol/ - My Little Politics
Archived thread
File (): 36CDC3C65B8F1E781F013A21CDAEBB7E-116226.jpg (113.5 KB, 1143x682, or-40002.jpg)
File (): 9BB619ADFC342A1D10805B43B70ED1ED-1876089.png (1.8 MB, 1850x1600, nightmare_rarity_by_jack_p….png)
File (): 0E683D09B7D09DFCD0EFD2194AAFBEF4-3009985.png (2.9 MB, 2732x1536, nightmare-rarity.png)
From the science paper above:
>Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.
Muh democracy! Muh land of the free!
>Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.
Muh democracy! Muh land of the free!
File (): 3417E224F97EDD031A4F115C68CC09DA-138203.png (135.0 KB, 894x894, 1494462721536.png)
>>92566
>LETS MAKE CURRUPTION ILLIGAL!
Illegal my ass the problem isn't corruption the problem is democracy, any faggot that thinks this isn't how it ideally runs needs to accept the cold hard truth that this has been happening since the start of it all and will continue to happen. Politicians will always be willing to take money because they will always want to buy favors, and the idea that we should be mob ruled entirely is equally stupid.
Democracy is cancer and the idea that we can fix it with some magic is just as dumb.
>LETS MAKE CURRUPTION ILLIGAL!
Illegal my ass the problem isn't corruption the problem is democracy, any faggot that thinks this isn't how it ideally runs needs to accept the cold hard truth that this has been happening since the start of it all and will continue to happen. Politicians will always be willing to take money because they will always want to buy favors, and the idea that we should be mob ruled entirely is equally stupid.
Democracy is cancer and the idea that we can fix it with some magic is just as dumb.
>>92669
Any government is bound to be ruled by those with a greater interest in it rather than the general citizenry, many of whom do nothing more than vote every few years (mainly because they're out being productive and contributing to society). The larger and more bureaucratic a government gets, the more distant it becomes from the average Joe simply because petty regulations and rigmarole are a waste of time to read.
Citizens who are concerned are generally concerned with a specific part of politics and will ignore the rest except when it coincides with their agenda. As it takes significant time and monetary investment to push through their specific interests, these citizens will band together in special interest groups and fund lawyers, lobbyists, et al.: environmentalists will support Greenpeace, feminists will support Planned Parenthood, manufacturing workers will support their unions, gun owners will support the NRA, etc. These interest groups, besides ideological reasons, will want to "earn" the donations they receive and will push for legislation that will benefit them specifically. All these interest groups will support new legislation that could be broad but has a clause benefiting them, and will tend to support repealing only existing legislation they consider harmful. As a result, you wind up with an ever-deeper morass of political deals and legalism that only adds obstacles for everyone.
How do the super-rich relate to this? They also have specific political wishes and, unlike the average citizen, have the capital to lobby independently. As the government's power grows their incentive to lobby increases: those who fail to do so either by principle or negligence will be at a disadvantage to those who obtain subsidies or restrict the opposition legally. They are also less concerned with blanket regulations as they can hire lawyers to get off accidental infractions lightly. Therefore, wealthy lobbyists are likely to form political arrangements with either politicians or with interest groups. When a wealthy "philanthropist" donates to a political cause you can bet he has some stake in it. This is without getting into the (((conspiracies))) that exist but you can connect the dots.
Abolishing government is the only real way to destroy corruption completely.
Any government is bound to be ruled by those with a greater interest in it rather than the general citizenry, many of whom do nothing more than vote every few years (mainly because they're out being productive and contributing to society). The larger and more bureaucratic a government gets, the more distant it becomes from the average Joe simply because petty regulations and rigmarole are a waste of time to read.
Citizens who are concerned are generally concerned with a specific part of politics and will ignore the rest except when it coincides with their agenda. As it takes significant time and monetary investment to push through their specific interests, these citizens will band together in special interest groups and fund lawyers, lobbyists, et al.: environmentalists will support Greenpeace, feminists will support Planned Parenthood, manufacturing workers will support their unions, gun owners will support the NRA, etc. These interest groups, besides ideological reasons, will want to "earn" the donations they receive and will push for legislation that will benefit them specifically. All these interest groups will support new legislation that could be broad but has a clause benefiting them, and will tend to support repealing only existing legislation they consider harmful. As a result, you wind up with an ever-deeper morass of political deals and legalism that only adds obstacles for everyone.
How do the super-rich relate to this? They also have specific political wishes and, unlike the average citizen, have the capital to lobby independently. As the government's power grows their incentive to lobby increases: those who fail to do so either by principle or negligence will be at a disadvantage to those who obtain subsidies or restrict the opposition legally. They are also less concerned with blanket regulations as they can hire lawyers to get off accidental infractions lightly. Therefore, wealthy lobbyists are likely to form political arrangements with either politicians or with interest groups. When a wealthy "philanthropist" donates to a political cause you can bet he has some stake in it. This is without getting into the (((conspiracies))) that exist but you can connect the dots.
Abolishing government is the only real way to destroy corruption completely.
File (): 7F9D42A0C37B28B80979F9D14378E57A-2084258.png (2.0 MB, 1024x1556, nightmare-rarity-teeth.png)
Evolution is always happening. Evolution is the spontaneous method of exploiting randomness to make a larger organised thing. Humanity is a fairly random thing, from this, spontaneous order can arise to exploit that randomness, you.
Government tries to be the brain, and you are just mere cells to support the brain. Evolution will keep trying until it succeeds. The alternative is to fall back into chaos. Humanity would have to put some serious effort into making government transparent to avoid this. But since humanity is tribalistic, we need to keep government secrets, this then allows them to win over you. National Security is more important than transparency and it can cover up soooo many nefarious things as the brain gets better and better at keeping control over its body.
Government tries to be the brain, and you are just mere cells to support the brain. Evolution will keep trying until it succeeds. The alternative is to fall back into chaos. Humanity would have to put some serious effort into making government transparent to avoid this. But since humanity is tribalistic, we need to keep government secrets, this then allows them to win over you. National Security is more important than transparency and it can cover up soooo many nefarious things as the brain gets better and better at keeping control over its body.
7 replies | 5 files | 1 UUIDs | Archived