Princeton does study and concludes America is an Oligarchy not a Democracy

[dank69]

Obviously, I'm not the only one that thinks this way.

Most conservatives share the same brain defect.

 

[dank69]

First, a political party can't "rule" anything. Second, money and power have always and will always go hand in hand. You can go ahead and believe the partisan drivel being fed to you to pretend that somehow one party is not on board with that status, I'm not that naive.

Yes, pretend that liberal judges didn't vote against that notion.

 

[dank69]

Both parties believe this. You're just a typical liberal fool that thinks that anything with a D after it is inherently virtuous.

First of all, I don't think the D makes anyone virtuous. Second, see my reply to PokerGuy regarding your attempts to try to pretend that conservative and liberal judges didn't vote differently on this issue.

 

[FerrelGeek]

First of all, I don't think the D makes anyone virtuous. Second, see my reply to PokerGuy regarding your attempts to try to pretend that conservative and liberal judges didn't vote differently on this issue.

Whether you or I like it or not (and I'm no fan of this either, btw) $ does = free speech when it comes to politics. Though the internet may be slowly starting to have an impact, why do you think it now seems to take ~$1B to fund a presidential campaign these days? It's a disgusting reality, but it IS reality. Why do you think there was such a flap over the potential use of the IRS to inhibit groups from getting tax exempt status?

I've made this point before. The DC insiders are bought and paid for and don't give a rat's fetid backside about you or me. You're just so stuck up on your own sense of moral superiority that you're unwilling to admit that your side is just as corrupt as everyone else. Or worse, you know it and don't care cuz it's 'your' side.

 

[dank69]

Whether you or I like it or not (and I'm no fan of this either, btw) $ does = free speech when it comes to politics. Though the internet may be slowly starting to have an impact, why do you think it now seems to take ~$1B to fund a presidential campaign these days? It's a disgusting reality, but it IS reality. Why do you think there was such a flap over the potential use of the IRS to inhibit groups from getting tax exempt status?

I've made this point before. The DC insiders are bought and paid for and don't give a rat's fetid backside about you or me. You're just so stuck up on your own sense of moral superiority that you're unwilling to admit that your side is just as corrupt as everyone else. Or worse, you know it and don't care cuz it's 'your' side.

What I KNOW is that liberal judges voted against it. You are not a fan of money == free speech because it should not be that way. It doesn't have to be that way.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Self-regulation,.. led to totalitarian rule,... who knew?

Oh, right,.. everyone.

Except those who are now in control, and pretended back then that something like this would never happen.

 

[unokitty]

Major Study Finds The US Is An Oligarchy

The US government does not represent the interests of the majority of the country's citizens, but is instead ruled by those of the rich and powerful, a new study from Princeton and Northwestern Universities has concluded...

"The central point that emerges from our research is that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence."

Researchers concluded that US government policies rarely align with the the preferences of the majority of Americans, but do favour special interests and lobbying organizations: "When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the US political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favour policy change, they generally do not get it."

The positions of powerful interest groups are "not substantially correlated with the preferences of average citizens"...

Link to study (PDF Format).

Academic study of 1,779 policy issues indicates that average citizens and mass-interest groups, have little or no independent influence. Results provide substantial support for theories of Economic Elite Domination ... but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy...

Or in simpler terms, this study provides proof for Professor Lessig' theory that the USA is Lesterland with a political system where:

Members of Congress and candidates for Congress spend anywhere between 30% and 70% of their time raising money to get themselves elected or their party back in power. But they raise that money not from all of us. Instead, they raise that money from the tiniest fraction of the 1%. Less than 1/20th of 1% of America are the “relevant funders” of congressional campaigns. That means about 150,000 Americans, or about the same number who are named “Lester,” wield enormous power over this government.

Everyone has an opinion. But, unless your name is Lester, your opinion doesn't count to the people that make the laws in the US.

Uno

 

[Zaap]

Its almost funny when the obvious is pointed out and people with rose colored glasses on act all shocked.

"A big, bloated, cash-addicted govt serves its benefactors (the rich) while shunning its liabilities (the poor)! Say it isn't so!!!!! That's as far fetched as a crack addict favoring his dealer vs rehab!!!! That never happens!!"

Welcome to the big government the sycophants BEGGED for. Keep posting "shocking!!!" tales of government favoring it's dealer and shunning its liabilities and acting shocked at nature taking its course.

Then in the next breath, keep begging for govt to get even bigger, more in debted to people with money, more out of control.

 

[chucky2]

t's nice to see the intellectual elite arrive at the conclusion after study that water is indeed wet. Only way this has a prayer of changing is introduce term limits, and even then, it'll still be majority crooks. But at least then you only have the crook for 1/3 of the time you do now.

Really what we need is the type of person who is not looking to make a career out of politics, who views getting elected as serving their country and not themselves, as a sacrifice. Someone bigger than themselves, for the good of all the people they represent not just themselves and their masters. Who wants to get there, serve a term or maximum two, and hand it off to the next person with the same attitude.

Good luck finding people like that. We indoctrinate people to think about themselves from a young age, then really drive that up in high school, college, and early adult life. Where will such people come from?

 

[alzan]

LOL!

It's a Republic.

Actually it's a conglomeration of both republic and democracy.

 

[Oldgamer]

I Don't understand why people insist the USA is a Democracy when It's a representative Republic. Then again, schools stopped teaching Civics some time ago...

And yeah: While we the people can take consolation other places are far worse... The truth really is this country was bought and paid for a LONG time ago.

There are many articles on this. America is a Republic with a Democratic process, or well, is suppose to be, but the study Princeton did is talking about how that has changed.

 

[Oldgamer]

t's nice to see the intellectual elite arrive at the conclusion after study that water is indeed wet. Only way this has a prayer of changing is introduce term limits, and even then, it'll still be majority crooks. But at least then you only have the crook for 1/3 of the time you do now.

Really what we need is the type of person who is not looking to make a career out of politics, who views getting elected as serving their country and not themselves, as a sacrifice. Someone bigger than themselves, for the good of all the people they represent not just themselves and their masters. Who wants to get there, serve a term or maximum two, and hand it off to the next person with the same attitude.

Good luck finding people like that. We indoctrinate people to think about themselves from a young age, then really drive that up in high school, college, and early adult life. Where will such people come from?

I think that we have allowed all this money into politics and that just put us on a path toward Oligarchism. We the wealthy elite now buying politicians and lobbyists and pushing their own written policies to benefit them and their big Corps.

 

[shira]

Of course they did. This just confirms that neither a small nor massive (and ever increasing) government helps the citizens in terms of actually having a say in what goes on. Either way, the big money interests rule as long as big money is allowed to exert a massively disproportionate influence to sway elections and legislation in order to protect their interests.

Fixed that for you.

 

[PokerGuy]

You're just embarrassing yourself.

You must be looking in the mirror again.

It is about how economic elites exercise outsized influence on policy, the theoretical framework coming from their greater economic and business related resources, and their IV in the study was income percentile. Greater income inequality gives higher percentiles more separation from the median.

All of which still has nothing to do with the point. Please point me to the paragraph in the linked document that mentions "income inequality". I'll be waiting.

Of course, if you read the thing you'd know it wasn't in there, so now you're grasping at straws trying to create a linkage between income variance and separation from the median and the actual point of the article. The actual point of it is NOT about income inequality, it's about disparate impact on public policy and which model describes the US. The rest of the drivel is yours, not from the article.

Everyone comments on an article without reading it sometimes, but it takes a true dumbass to try and say someone else hasn't when you haven't.

Indeed, so now you've self identified as a "true" dumbass. For once, I agree wholeheartedly with your self assessment! Good work

 

[Oldgamer]

Good grief, do some of you posters ever stop with the trolling on these threads? Damn you can't even have an intelligent conversation or debate anymore without all the hate filled name calling and mudslinging nonsense.

 

[trenchfoot]

Turning the tables on the rich and powerful more commonly known as "The Privileged Minority" to hand over the reins of power to the middle class and poor more commonly known as "The Easily Duped Oppressed Majority" while preserving the form of government that our nation was founded on is going to take some kind of rude awakening on the side of the oppressed and/or an occurrence of some kind that threatens the treasures of the very rich and powerful and compel them to sacrifice some of that treasure (givebacks) "for the common good".

 

[Scotteq]

Good grief, do some of you posters ever stop with the trolling on these threads? Damn you can't even have an intelligent conversation or debate anymore without all the hate filled name calling and mudslinging nonsense.

Clearly not ...

...want some popcorn?

 

[fskimospy]

You must be looking in the mirror again.

All of which still has nothing to do with the point. Please point me to the paragraph in the linked document that mentions "income inequality". I'll be waiting.

Of course, if you read the thing you'd know it wasn't in there, so now you're grasping at straws trying to create a linkage between income variance and separation from the median and the actual point of the article. The actual point of it is NOT about income inequality, it's about disparate impact on public policy and which model describes the US. The rest of the drivel is yours, not from the article.

Yes, shockingly enough there is a link between income inequality and the power of economic elites. The economic elites' relative wealth and economic power is how they wield their influence, and inequality in income is (completely unsurprisingly) a principal way in which they amass relative wealth and economic power.

I get how you're trying to salvage your pride, but I don't really care. I'm sure you will do whatever is necessary to avoid admitting fault, as usual. A true dumbass indeed.

 

[chucky2]

I think that we have allowed all this money into politics and that just put us on a path toward Oligarchism. We the wealthy elite now buying politicians and lobbyists and pushing their own written policies to benefit them and their big Corps.

Actually the point I took out of this, and something we already know prior to the study simply be looking at Politican behavior since...ever?, is that allowing crooks to remain in office decade after decade, growing ever more entrenched, is a poor way to serve the majority of the populace. The negatives of these crooks remaining there so far outweigh any potential positive of a, say, 30 year experienced Politician, being there as to make an arguement for Politicians remaining in that office so long simply a non-starter.

It's like saying, 'Yeah, it'd be a good idea to not wipe before standing up because just possibly you might run into a situation that having sh1t smeared all over your ass would be a good thing.' Yes, there is some possibilty that that could happen. Does that possibility outweigh having sh1t all over us the entire rest of the time? No. So, why even suggest it?

And really, it's not even just the long term entrenched Pols. Even the young ones are crooked. Blago, J.J. Jr., etc.

 

[fskimospy]

Actually the point I took out of this, and something we already know prior to the study simply be looking at Politican behavior since...ever?, is that allowing crooks to remain in office decade after decade, growing ever more entrenched, is a poor way to serve the majority of the populace. The negatives of these crooks remaining there so far outweigh any potential positive of a, say, 30 year experienced Politician, being there as to make an arguement for Politicians remaining in that office so long simply a non-starter.

It's like saying, 'Yeah, it'd be a good idea to not wipe before standing up because just possibly you might run into a situation that having sh1t smeared all over your ass would be a good thing.' Yes, there is some possibilty that that could happen. Does that possibility outweigh having sh1t all over us the entire rest of the time? No. So, why even suggest it?

And really, it's not even just the long term entrenched Pols. Even the young ones are crooked. Blago, J.J. Jr., etc.

Just so you know, term limits for congress would likely make the executive branch even more powerful vis a vis congress. Since most people seem to agree that the presidency is already too powerful, what do you do about that?

 

[Kadarin]

Good grief, do some of you posters ever stop with the trolling on these threads? Damn you can't even have an intelligent conversation or debate anymore without all the hate filled name calling and mudslinging nonsense.

It gets so bad that I wonder sometimes if people are being paid by someone to deliberately subvert and derail meaningful discussion.

 

[werepossum]

What I KNOW is that liberal judges voted against it. You are not a fan of money == free speech because it should not be that way. It doesn't have to be that way.

Yep, the liberal judges voted that buying time for political and advocacy is not REAL free speech like, say, nude dancing. On the other hand, the liberal judges voted that it's perfectly all right for government to seize your property and transfer it to a rich person for that person's use. Sounds a bit oligarchic to me . . .

Just so you know, term limits for congress would likely make the executive branch even more powerful vis a vis congress. Since most people seem to agree that the presidency is already too powerful, what do you do about that?

That's a good point, but not having term limits doesn't seem to be fixing the problem either. Perhaps not having a mandarin class of career politicians might actually help reduce government power across the board since they too would soon be them once again.

It gets so bad that I wonder sometimes if people are being paid by someone to deliberately subvert and derail meaningful discussion.

Meaningful discussion on the Internet? Hmm, gonna need some time to wrap my head around that concept . . .

 

[AViking]

Super depressing. Also of note, this is not mentioned on CNN or Foxnews

 

[Stewox]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3y3JU1MCZI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrB7tLkpD90

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icmE_tdl38o

 

[Pocatello]

It is sick, however, and America as a whole has to wake up and realize that there is very little left of what made us a great nation.

-John

What made us a great nation? When the South had slavery, when women and minorities were treated as second class citizen or worse? You really think the little folks had power back in the days? The rich and powerful had always ruled this country and will be for the foreseeable future.