this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2024
942 points (98.1% liked)

Comic Strips

18726 readers
1781 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 42 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (9 children)

Imagine a society where those setting the regulations are wealthy in such a way that they face no money related consequences. If they stuff up, or get into a tight spot with money, they'll be a subsidy, or bailout, or sweet deal with a bank loan, or a wealthy relative, or they sell a property or a stock holding, or a mega yatch, or they'll just declare that shell company bankrupt. They'll never have a monetary problem that can't be immediately resolved.

...this class of people - those with essentially no financial consequences in life, are expected to make empathetic and caring laws, systems, and regulations for the rest of us, for whom money is behind literally everything consequential. For whom a small or temporary lack of money drastically changes us and our quality of life immediately and often with no real resolution.

We have all the consequences they do not, they have all the power we do not. Nothing about this system makes sense, and it's enough to say we live in a kind of Capitalist Monarchy, posing as a democracy of, by, and for the people.

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee 3 points 8 months ago (8 children)
[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Voting alone is insufficient, because in captive systems where a limited number of parties hold all political capital, you can only vote for complicit parties.

Individual people have to run for office, and there has to be movements to get them elected, and those movements need to be more powerful than the existing parties who will attempt to suppress them.

Honestly, at the level of organization that would be required, you'd probably just be better off ignoring the democratic process entirely, because it would take tens of millions.

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee 4 points 8 months ago

It does take tens of millions, that's the point

I'm not saying you should only vote, but rioting while letting your opposition win every election sure isn't going to work

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)