• Jabroni@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6 found this helpful
    ·
    8 hours ago

    He’s right.

    The only thing that will save the United States is overturning Citizens United. Everything else is secondary.

    If you want representatives who are there as actual public servants, allowing them to accept money from large donors makes them a for-profit entity.

    Everything we hear that would “fix” the US can be attributed to Citizens United.

    Immigration reform? Guess what - industries thrive on the broken system, and they pay to keep it broken.

    You want Congress to take back control of who the US goes to war with? Defense contractors are some of the largest donors in the country. War will remain a racket.

    Ranked-choice voting and 3rd party redistricting? The US’s two-party system is funded by those large donors and thrives in this system.

    You can’t fix this without removing the dark money first.

    It is the only thing I care about in a politician at this point. I get that being a single issue voter is dumb, but this is so foundational that once it’s overturned, we can start getting back to the issues at hand.

    • Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4 found this helpful
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Primary establishment Dems. And even then, as we saw in Illinois this past primary election, consolidate progressives around the same candidate. Vote splitting is the death of the Left in a First Past The Post (FPTP) system.

      Once we get Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) in more places and eventually everywhere, then we can vote to our heart’s content.

      Electionalism might not work even then with how late stage capitalism is faring. Organizing and mutual aide are our only future then.

    • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7 found this helpful
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Vote for them, and tell the DNC and your current reps to support their legislation and ideas.

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2 found this helpful
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Surely by making more purity tests and calling people who support AOC liberals and Zionists

  • 🍉 Albert 🍉@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56 found this helpful
    ·
    24 hours ago

    lobbying should be 100% illegal. corporate donations should be 100% illegal. and donations from foreign nations should be considered as treason and bring the death penalty…

    Although the bar is so low, that said rules would basically execute every politician in America.

      • krashmo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13 found this helpful
        ·
        22 hours ago

        There’s value to be had in industry experts advising governments. Think about your old ass representative regulating the internet without any advice from people who have actually used the internet. The problem is not that the government converses with industry, it’s that lobbyists bribe politicians under false pretenses. Outlaw the exchange of money, not ideas.

        • Today@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12 found this helpful
          ·
          21 hours ago

          I work in education with the lowest kids, most functioning below 12 months. We had a representative visit one of my schools one day. He had no idea that these kids exist and come to school. These are the people making laws regarding state testing and school funding. Politicians desperately need to be educated!

    • fonix232@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1 found this helpful
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Corporations should be able to voice their opinions, support (in the sense of “I think this new regulation is a good/bad idea because […]”, not in the sense of $$$$), and such about legislation.

      Corporations should not be allowed to influence those legislations beyond the aforementioned, by providing $$$/favours/kickbacks to politicians.

      Just like people, companies can have opinions, but that’s it. No further influence.

      • HermitBee@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6 found this helpful
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Just like people, companies can have opinions, but that’s it. No further influence.

        What the fuck is it with people treating companies like people? Companies are not people.

        • fonix232@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1 found this helpful
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Where did I say I treat them like people? I very specifically differentiated them, drawing the only parallel between the two groups, namely that they can have opinions…

          • athatet@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1 found this helpful
            ·
            9 hours ago

            Corps shouldn’t have opinions. They should do their work and keep their mouths shut.

      • Soup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3 found this helpful
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Companies are led by people, and those people can have opinions. After that, fuck right the hell off. You’re delusional if you think company should be able to have opinions.

        • 🍉 Albert 🍉@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3 found this helpful
          ·
          13 hours ago

          I’ll disagree, companies are led by shareholder interest, not people. the CEO? replaceable the moment shareholders want, he isn’t the leader.

            • 🍉 Albert 🍉@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3 found this helpful
              ·
              13 hours ago

              they aren’t, they just want number go up, no interest whatsoever about the company. and all their individual opinions are averaged out.

              and most of them aren’t even people, but institutions, banks, funds…

              • Soup@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1 found this helpful
                ·
                13 hours ago

                Who runs the institutions, banks, and funds? Yes, they are stupid and short-sighted and greedy but ultimately that does not mean they get to hide behind a company. You talk about them having a pretty singular interest and then say it’s all averaged out, but the average between a pool of nearly the exact same opinions isn’t particularly important or nuanced.

                Companies do not get opinions. If the people who run them want to share their voice they can vote like everyone else, and if they don’t like democracy they can drown themselves in their pools.

                • 🍉 Albert 🍉@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4 found this helpful
                  ·
                  12 hours ago

                  those institutions are human, and have no human interests. they are a super organism. an emergent behavior of our capitalist society. they are literally burning the planet and killing us in the millions.

                  they get an opinion about things the same way a cancer gets an opinion about treatment.

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1 found this helpful
          ·
          12 hours ago

          They don’t, the company hires lobbyists. AKA people. To argue for them.

          If you take that away, you take away the constitutional right of all citizens to petition their government.

          What we need is regulation

          • athatet@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1 found this helpful
            ·
            9 hours ago

            Corps aren’t people. We can take away their toys while still keeping ours.

        • fonix232@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1 found this helpful
          ·
          12 hours ago

          The difference is, individuals can have vastly different opinions on a topic than a grouping they’re in (even if that grouping happens to be a company).

          Companies are essentially that, a formal representation of the interests of a specific group. That does not make their opinion any more important than a singular person’s, but the opinion itself should be recognised. Nothing beyond that, just recognised, it doesn’t even have to be considered.

          And this is literally what I’m saying, let the shareholders loudmouth all they want, limit their ability to influence others to this only - speech. Not money, not favours, not tit for tat, not kickbacks, not bribes, speech. Let them huff hot air all they want, let them exhaust themselves, and see the world go on without giving a fuck about it. Kinda like street preachers. They’re annoying but essentially harmless. Limit companies to this level instead of allowing them to ruin our planet.

          And as to why let them keep this one thing: it’s not because I want to hear their crap. Or that I want to give them human rights. Far from it. I just want to enjoy seeing said shareholders exhaust themselves with the sole method they have to “influence” things. I want to see them spend countless hours, countless cups of coffee, countless tears and sweat drops, on achieving nothing. Like those prank videos where they put shampoo onto people’s head as they shower, an endless frustration of trying to rinse it out and it still being fucking foamy. I want to see that but on a corporate level. Because as long as they’re busy trying to get more weight behind their voices, they can’t go on and scheme against the world that much.

      • 🍉 Albert 🍉@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4 found this helpful
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Just like people, companies can have opinions,

        and said statements should be a fart in the wind. better yet, shouldn’t exist

  • lemmylump@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16 found this helpful
    ·
    23 hours ago

    It must go.

    There is no possibility of fair and equal government as long as it exists.

  • Almacca@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15 found this helpful
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Keep shouting, Bernie. One day, someone in power might even listen.

  • Wataba@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2 found this helpful
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Ok Bernie, well just get on that while trans people are hunted down and executed in bathrooms.

    Gotta prioritise after all.

    • fonix232@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11 found this helpful
      ·
      17 hours ago

      What do you think makes it possible for the anti-trans, anti-“woke” politicians to stay relevant, stay in power?

      It’s all the dark money funding them and their culture war. Eliminate that and you’ll see a massive shift to the left, consequently, less propaganda against trans folk, leading to more societal acceptance from the easily influenced types (the very people who’ve been manipulated into hating on trans/“woke”/etc., essentially deporgramming them through the lack of propaganda), thus better treatment for trans folk.

      But sure, let’s focus on treating the symptoms only instead of getting rid of the sickness. That worked so well before.