America has one political party — The Plutocracy Party

[superstition]

It has two brand names and colors, like Marathon and Speedway.

Apparently those two brands are owned by the same company. In my town they are on opposite sides of the same intersection — to give people choice.

Hobson's Choice. Pick which 1%-approved candidate you are given.

For instance:

Obamacare is a misnomer because both parties made sure it passed (notably with no "public option") so the industry, and the political establishment would get its prize — the "mandate" that government can force citizens to bankroll "lobbying". It's a nice scheme. Corporations bribe politicians to get what they want. Corporations sell stuff to citizens forced by the government to purchase their products. This pays for the "lobbying", as well as other things like golden parachutes and advertising.

This is nothing new. Read Smedley Butler's "War is a Racket" to see how it all went down around WWI. Nothing has changed, just the minutiae.

But they're incrementally eroding your constitutional rights. Indefinite preventative detention. Bans on public protest. Total destruction of privacy. I wouldn't be surprised to see America get a Sesame Score in the next twenty years. All the profiling is happening. At first it won't be public but then it will be made public so people can be safe.

As for the big con of Democrats being kind and caring. Let's just mention how the Obama/Clinton administration pressured Haiti to exempt Levi-Strauss and Hanes from a paltry minimum wage increase. Thanks to Wikileaks we know this. But, for the Dems, it's a terrible Russian plot for us to know what our government is actually doing whilst pretending to be the guiding light of international liberty.

 

[agent00f]

The democratic party was made centrist by the clintons in order to win elections. There were simply too many white people who crossed over to R after desegregation otherwise.

It's no big secret that centrism means they're half-conservative by design.

 

[superstition]

Bill Clinton was just one of them:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/10/how-democrats-killed-their-populist-soul/504710/

The only thing wrong with that article is how it falsely portrays these people as being idealists instead of profiteers. We saw just how idealistic the Clintons were when they pardoned Marc Rich and took money from his people (the same guy who kept apartheid going among other things).

American political journalists love to falsely portray our politics as being battles of ideology when in fact they're battles over money with ideology used to delude the public.

 

[agent00f]

Bill Clinton was just one of them:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/10/how-democrats-killed-their-populist-soul/504710/

The only thing wrong with that article is how it falsely portrays these people as being idealists instead of profiteers. We saw just how idealistic the Clintons were when they pardoned Marc Rich and took money from his people (the same guy who kept apartheid going among other things).

The two aren't mutually exclusive. You get at least some of your ideas instead of none and profit; "win-win" has a certain appeal to it.

 

[superstition]

The two aren't mutually exclusive. You get at least some of your ideas and profit; win-win.

American political journalists love to falsely portray our politics as being battles of ideology when in fact they're battles over money with ideology used to delude the public.

It's always battling over money with ideology as the window dressing just as elections are always not about policy for the public. Peer past the curtain and ideology evaporates.

 

[agent00f]

American political journalists love to falsely portray our politics as being battles of ideology when in fact they're battles over money with ideology used to delude the public.

It's always battling over money with ideology as the window dressing just as elections are always not about policy for the public. Peer past the curtain and ideology evaporates.

You're right, human politics/will/ambition in general is mostly a battle of interests with evolved tools of rationalization for cover.

 

[theeedude]

We have a Fascist Republican party.

 

[Commodus]

I understand the frustration with the "don't blame me, I voted for Kodos" nature of American politics, but there are still differences.

The Democrats aren't the ones who'll be waging wars against science, free speech, the LGBT community, women's reproductive freedoms and all Muslims. They're not the ones who'll very overtly favor the rich with tax cuts, or try to gut pro-competition regulation like net neutrality.

Do they still pander to elites and fail to tackle deep-seated issues? Absolutely. But the "they're equally as bad" mindset is destructive, and leads us to the situation we're in now -- we have a demagogue that wants to undo progress and silence all his critics. As horrible as the two-party system is, you can't just throw your hands up in defeat and say it doesn't matter.

 

[Sonikku]

Obamacare is a misnomer because both parties made sure it passed (notably with no "public option") so the industry, and the political establishment would get its prize — the "mandate" that government can force citizens to bankroll "lobbying". It's a nice scheme. Corporations bribe politicians to get what they want. Corporations sell stuff to citizens forced by the government to purchase their products. This pays for the "lobbying", as well as other things like golden parachutes and advertising.

This is why I wish Trump hadn't gone back on this promise to repeal Obamacare. Have him ask the House and Senate to pass a bill repealing it just one more time, after the dozens of times they've done it already, with the knowledge that this time their vote would actually repeal it. I don't think they would do it. Their hypocrisy when be displayed for all to see.

 

[Jhhnn]

American political journalists love to falsely portray our politics as being battles of ideology when in fact they're battles over money with ideology used to delude the public.

It's always battling over money with ideology as the window dressing just as elections are always not about policy for the public. Peer past the curtain and ideology evaporates.

Please. Ideology matters. Repub leaders & backers believe that the natural order of human society looks like India or the Russian oligarchy. Dems think it should look more like western Europe. Both models incorporate entrenched wealth & power but in entirely different ways. You have to move into Marxist territory to not have that.

In thinking about it at all, one has to acknowledge that wealthy Dems donated $100M's to Clinton's campaign believing that she'd try to raise their taxes & more closely regulate financial dealings. She'd try to expand social programs they'd have to pay for. She'd try to raise the minimum wage making doing business more expensive.

Nobody believed that about Trump, obviously.

 

[kage69]

But, for the Dems, it's a terrible Russian plot for us to know what our government is actually doing whilst pretending to be the guiding light of international liberty.

I'm more worried about Dem-hating people like you who somehow think some creative editing is beyond the Russians, that they can be trusted as a 'guiding light.'

The Dems aren't the ones confused about Russia, or enthralled by it's pint sized dictator.

 

[bshole]

I'm more worried about Dem-hating people like you who somehow think some creative editing is beyond the Russians, that they can be trusted as a 'guiding light.'

The Dems aren't the ones confused about Russia, or enthralled by it's pint sized dictator.

Are they the ones who advocate opening shooting war with them? Apparently both parties are frothing at the bit for a chance to engage Russia militarily..... outright insanity.... there is no other word to describe that. IT IS NOT AN OPTION, stop pretending that it is.

 

[kage69]

Are they the ones who advocate opening shooting war with them? Apparently both parties are frothing at the bit for a chance to engage Russia militarily..... outright insanity.... there is no other word to describe that. IT IS NOT AN OPTION, stop pretending that it is.

And what if Putin thinks it's an option?

 

[Jhhnn]

And what if Putin thinks it's an option?

Trump being soft on Nato wouldn't encourage that, would it?

 

[bshole]

And what if Putin thinks it's an option?

If we aren't there, how could that be an option? Why are we there? What vital American interest is being served? What exactly are we accomplishing? Why should America get to dictate who rules in Syria... a country that almost universally loathes it. If we strong arm in a government of our choosing, what will be the consequences?

I would support humanitarian intervention but bombing the shit out of a third world country, targeting its infrastructure and engaging a nuclear power that was invited by the Syrian government is something I would never and could never support no matter what political party pushes for it .

 

[ivwshane]

The OP is a perfect example of why trump won, because the electorate is full of morons.

More "both sides..." bullshit.

 

[agent00f]

If we aren't there, how could that be an option? Why are we there? What vital American interest is being served? What exactly are we accomplishing? Why should America get to dictate who rules in Syria... a country that almost universally loathes it. If we strong arm in a government of our choosing, what will be the consequences?

I would support humanitarian intervention but bombing the shit out of a third world country, targeting its infrastructure and engaging a nuclear power that was invited by the Syrian government is something I would never and could never support no matter what political party pushes for it .

Hard to just the massive white welfare program that milks half the federal discretionary spending without bombing some expendable brown scapegoats once in a while.

The OP is a perfect example of why trump won, because the electorate is full of morons.

More "both sides..." bullshit.

I think to some degree it's important to recognize centrism still involves being half-conservative.

 

[ivwshane]

Hard to just the massive white welfare program that milks half the federal discretionary spending without bombing some expendable brown scapegoats once in a while.



I think to some degree it's important to recognize centrism still involves being half-conservative.

Of course. But he's more concerned with conspiracy theories and pushing the intellectually lazy narrative that the system is rigged and both parties are in on it together. Its bullshit and should be called out for it.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

I'll take plutocracy over populism tbh. The elites know better how to govern a country than the common folk, and the idea that American workers are entitled to cushy government-protected jobs while non-Americans can fuck off and starve is selfish and pathetic. I find Sanders, Warren, Trump, etc much more worrying than Clinton, Gingrich, etc.

Things aren't perfect today, but I think a lot of bipartisan skepticism is more due to how much more we know than things actually getting that much worse. Today we waste trillions of dollars on pointless wars. In the 70s we did the same but drafted the young on top of it. Today there are public threats to the internet and our privacy; in the 60s we didn't have an internet, just a handful of news channels which were deeply in bed with the government, and warrantless wiretapping was a-OK. Flag burning was not protected speech in the 80s, but is today (and I'm very skeptical that Trump will seriously bring that back). Aside from the public debt, I'm pretty optimistic. As long as we don't have some kind of total economic collapse, surprise nuclear attack, etc, I think it all averages out to an improvement even if we're in for some hiccups.

 

[agent00f]

Of course. But he's more concerned with conspiracy theories and pushing the intellectually lazy narrative that the system is rigged and both parties are in on it together. Its bullshit and should be called out for it.

There's a certain reality that the socioecon system is stratified with advantage ("rigging") increasing with height, that's just how capitalism works. All modern social democracies balance that by robin hooding the top.

A better way to understand the situation for people who care would be a graphic depicting how much each party/candidate represents the interests of various tiers. The R's would be top heavy and D centrists are relatively flat.

I'll take plutocracy over populism tbh. The elites know better how to govern a country than the common folk, and the idea that American workers are entitled to cushy government-protected jobs while non-Americans can fuck off and starve is selfish and pathetic. I find Sanders, Warren, Trump, etc much more worrying than Clinton, Gingrich, etc.

Things aren't perfect today, but I think a lot of bipartisan skepticism is more due to how much more we know than things actually getting that much worse. Today we waste trillions of dollars on pointless wars. In the 70s we did the same but drafted the young on top of it. Today there are public threats to the internet and our privacy; in the 60s we didn't have an internet, just a handful of news channels which were deeply in bed with the government, and warrantless wiretapping was a-OK. Flag burning was not protected speech in the 80s, but is today (and I'm very skeptical that Trump will seriously bring that back). Aside from the public debt, I'm pretty optimistic. As long as we don't have some kind of total economic collapse, surprise nuclear attack, etc, I think it all averages out to an improvement even if we're in for some hiccups.

"Plutocracy" increasing diverges from meritocracy with time due to nepotism, potentially to worse outcome than populism. That's a difficult problem to solve without substantial egalitarian measures/pressure from both directions, ie like a good edu system (free to the bottom, expensive for the top) from one end and wealthy taxes on the other.

 

[superstition]

Of course. But he's more concerned with conspiracy theories and pushing the intellectually lazy narrative that the system is rigged and both parties are in on it together. Its bullshit and should be called out for it.

Lazy? I offered detailed analysis and evidence. You've offered ad hominem and empty rhetoric.

Anyone who wants to examine the evidence will see that "both" parties operated in cahoots with "Obamacare" — to give the industry the mandate.

It's the height of intellectual sloth to dismiss the fact that conspiracy is what profit motive inherently involves.

Profit is convincing someone to pay more for something than what it's worth. Scamming people is how people get to hoard resources (become "rich").

 

[Fenixgoon]

I'll take plutocracy over populism tbh. The elites know better how to govern a country than the common folk, and the idea that American workers are entitled to cushy government-protected jobs while non-Americans can fuck off and starve is selfish and pathetic. I find Sanders, Warren, Trump, etc much more worrying than Clinton, Gingrich, etc.

Things aren't perfect today, but I think a lot of bipartisan skepticism is more due to how much more we know than things actually getting that much worse. Today we waste trillions of dollars on pointless wars. In the 70s we did the same but drafted the young on top of it. Today there are public threats to the internet and our privacy; in the 60s we didn't have an internet, just a handful of news channels which were deeply in bed with the government, and warrantless wiretapping was a-OK. Flag burning was not protected speech in the 80s, but is today (and I'm very skeptical that Trump will seriously bring that back). Aside from the public debt, I'm pretty optimistic. As long as we don't have some kind of total economic collapse, surprise nuclear attack, etc, I think it all averages out to an improvement even if we're in for some hiccups.

for a period of time, perhaps. but once the disparity is too great, you get the french revolution. and this is what elites in america totally do not see. history repeats itself.

 

[superstition]

for a period of time, perhaps. but once the disparity is too great, you get the french revolution. and this is what elites in america totally do not see. history repeats itself.

Indefinite preventative detention

NSA expansion, infrastructure, more advanced/spread tech, and legal loosening (a Sesame score dossier for every citizen — better than FICO)

paramiliarization of police — LRADs, bearcats, SWAT teams, tanks, grenades

new bans on public protest (e.g. Secret Service can declare any place off-limits at any time, far worse than "free speech zones")

social programming (pedophile or terrorist; you have no right to privacy and you're made to know it)

crackdown on transparency

If you think the elites aren't taking steps...

 

[ivwshane]

Lazy? I offered detailed analysis and evidence. You've offered ad hominem and empty rhetoric.

Anyone who wants to examine the evidence will see that "both" parties operated in cahoots with "Obamacare" — to give the industry the mandate.

It's the height of intellectual sloth to dismiss the fact that conspiracy is what profit motive inherently involves.

Profit is convincing someone to pay more for something than what it's worth. Scamming people is how people get to hoard resources (become "rich").

You appear to not know what the word "facts" mean. You provided speculation without evidence. You saw a situation and declared it happened for a particular reason without any facts to support your case.

 

[superstition]

You appear to not know what the word "facts" mean. You provided speculation without evidence. You saw a situation and declared it happened for a particular reason without any facts to support your case.

Another ad hom. If that's all you're going to offer don't expect replies.