586
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
586 points (98.5% liked)
politics
19097 readers
1159 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I dont get how someone can vote for Obama twice and then just say fuck it at some point. Isn't that what more or less keeps happening, how does one make sense of all this?
How is there so much turnover and churn every election, how can someone who says he's going to make everything harder for you have any appeal?
My only guess is he's promising to go even harder on people they don't like which magically makes it all palatable
That was my brother-in-law. In West Virginia. Votes for Obama twice then Trump.
Near as I can tell, they want “change” and doesn’t matter much what that means. They feel powerless in the face of the “other”. The government itself is “other”. It’s who they blame for problems whether it’s taxes or complicated rules for their small business or the way “elites” get away with doing the stuff they can’t do. They have some legitimate gripes with the government and “elites”.
Obama sold “change” really well. So did Trump. It’s not the same kind of change. And, he employed many more “others”. Trump’s change is a lie but Obama’s change never materialized even though he was probably more sincere about it.
These people are dealing with feelings of frustration, inadequacy, envy and shame. They’re lashing out and their only power is their vote. Trump fed those feelings and gave them a target and convinced them that only he could help them.
If you were to put on your diagnostician hat, what do you think he actually needs and would be satisfied with. Like what actual change does he seek and would it actually satisfy him?
What kind of change was Obama actually selling, what ideas did your relative have that Obama was going to fix that he became disillusioned by?
Post scriptum: This got way longer and way more opinionated than I intended. I still believe there is some fundamental argument in there, but it's not delivered rational. Sorry.
--
Something I have repeatedly heard and read in criticism of modern democratic governments is that they don't actually do anything.
The calculus of political compromise, the promise and ideal of stability, and over complex systems they over see make them fundamentally incapable of changing anything. The way democracies govern cannot adapt to outside change and will not deliver on inside demands. Change is opposed to how they calculate decision paths, how they understand incentive.
They promise you that the continuation of injustice will guarantee price stability and then inflation happens. They ask you to cut back your carbon footprint and climate change escalates anyway. And when the fascists are appearing on the horizon they ask you to defend democracy, the system that fails you over and over again, by sacrificing your ideals, your needs, and in many cases your personal safety and security by opposing fascism.
Democratic governments have proven that they cannot and will not protect you from economic hardship, war, climate catastrophe, wealth inequality, and your neighbor's tree standing to close to your fence.
This is nothing that is necessary or inherent to democracies, it is how the internal way of thinking of democratic governments incentives their decision making.
People want things to change. Past governments have shown that they won't deliver on that ever.
And to make that clear I don't think minority rights are nothing, but they are for minorities. There is no fundamental change to the lives of the majority populous on the scale of same sex marriage.
What they choose instead is burning books and people, because that is an expression of their internal suffering and pain, which they feel is ignored. They don't care that they might be next on the chop block, as long as they get to chop for a time.
It's a nihilistic reaction to political frustration.
That’s interesting. Where have you read this? I would like to read it too.
If I remember correct there is a [Edit] video recording from a [/Edit] Chaos communication Congress on the failure of democracies in which this is discussed. I'll see if I can dig it up. Might be in German though, but we'll see...
[Edit] Yeah sorry it is in German https://media.ccc.de/v/37c3-12056-ist_die_demokratie_noch_zu_retten
Selk, the presenter also has seemingly published mostly or exclusively in German, but I guess one can find similar researcher with publications in English.
Edit3 there is a English translation audio track available