871
Billionaires Are Lying Shamelessly to Convince Us To Destroy Our Government
(www.currentaffairs.org)
this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2024
871 points (98.7% liked)
politics
19241 readers
2259 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm not from the US, so I don't care about your founders.
History books, and biology as well mind you, actually say that the actions of a group of individuals working together have more power than those of individuals working alone, and in any coordinated effort there is a subsection of the group that takes care of the whole and marks the pace. Throughout history the civilizations that managed to thrive and leave their mark were those whose governing body was efficient and effective, and there's no denying that. You may be able to wrangle your friends and coordinate them without a specific administrative role, but try doing that with a group of people surpassing the hundreds of millions and you will have a problem.
In this instance, US history is more relevant than your opinions.
Ooooh nice, an enlightened Libertarian, and one that thinks that Americans are special, unique little snowflakes, different from the rest and immune to the rules that have historically governed the entirety of humanity for millennia
The article is about the US.
And this thread is about governments in general, and their necessity in enforcing these social contracts you're referring to.
Wrong. You're responding to me who is commenting on OP's article.
You understand that there's more than one person involved in an Internet comment thread right
Sure.
https://www.allsides.com/news-source/current-affairs-media-bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echo_chamber_(media)#%3A%7E%3Atext=An+epistemic+bubble+is+an%2Cof+significant+information+and+reasoning.
In an extreme "echo chamber", one purveyor of information will make a claim, which many like-minded people then repeat, overhear, and repeat again (often in an exaggerated or otherwise distorted form) until most people assume that some extreme variation of the story is true.
Care to explain what the fuck that has to do with anything?
OP simply started this thread by posting an article, to which I commented, and you replied on my comment. If you wanted to talk to everyone in the thread you could have just not clicked reply on my comment.
I am aware that there are many people in this thread (to which you are not directly replying) but you know it really seems like one person. OPs article coming from extreme left bias site, and everyone in here having basically the same opinion and almost saying exactly the same thing over and over "look at this enlightened libertarian".exe highlights how really it doesn't matter how many of you there are here. It's essentially just one view.
You could have just said no, would have been much less effort
no.
For some reason it doesn't surprise me that you don't believe in history beyond 1776
Most of the history that comes to mind predates 1776, which makes sense.
Stopping your historical studies before things like the end of chattel slavery and the start of the industrial revolution seems like a bad idea. You might have missed one or two significant events.
I'm sorry I think you're replying to the wrong person as I didn't say anything about stopping but hey, go gettem tiger.
You said this:
So sure, you didn't literally use the word stop. You just decided any history post-the third quarter of the eighteenth century was moot. My mistake.
What I said is straight forward and true and doesn't say anything about stopping or history being moot, that's all your baggage.
We have a lot of history about governments spanning many thousands of years so naturally when you are thinking about governments from a historical perspective, most will predate 1776. It doesn't mean I am not thinking about what has transpired since but you know its been hundreds of years, and not thousands. Kind of a no-brainer my dude.
See, the issue here is that you are so ignorant of history that you think 1776 is some important date for governments due to the association with the American Declaration of Independence, rather than the U.S. Constitution that wasn't written until over 20 years later.
So essentially what you are saying is that the only history of governments that is worth studying is the history of absolute monarchy, feudalism and the Althing in Iceland... but only those things up to 1776.
Someone else brought up 1776.
Cool. That doesn't change my point since you've been defending the concept not caring about governments post-feudalism.
You are not obligated to reply, you're free to go.
I'm also free to stay and continue to reply if I'm enjoying myself. Which I am. If you don't want to discuss this, take your own advice.