- cross-posted to:
- thisisnotmylife@lemm.ee
You must log in or register to comment.
I mean, yeah, but they’d be in a better position to make that argument if they hadn’t been campaigning with Mark Cuban. (Not that Robert Reich needs to be told that, but it still needs to be said.)
I wish I had a schilling
for every senseless killing
I’d buy a government
America’s for sale
And you can get a good deal on it
And make a healthy profit
Or maybe tear it apart
Start with assumption
That a million people are smart
Smarter than one
If the numbers are true it costed him less than 0.1% of his wealth which is surprising how little it takes. Would you spend 0.1% of your wealth to elect a President and gain a government post that will bring you more wealth? Would you spend 1% of your wealth to become insanely rich? 10%?
In the society where power is measured by wealth ultra rich should not exist. Or better such society should not exist.
Also Musk wasn’t even the biggest donor. And Harris was okay with this whole thing, she also received enormous donations. Who was against ultra rich? Bernie Sanders. No wonder he was sacked despite popular support.
No I wouldnt spend 1 percent of my wealth to become insanely rich. Mostly cause that implies corruption and I aint nearly as bad as my kin though I have far more homicidal tendencies.
If you live in Europe and think your democratic system is resistant to these things: it’s not.
Don’t wait until your version of Trump gets elected. Start organizing now.
Italy elected Berlusconi (a corrupted tycoon who had ties with the mafia and bribed his way to the top of the Italian broadcasting world) in 1994. Y’all just catching up.
Absolutely, over here we’ve recently elected a horrible party as the biggest one, with 25% of the votes. Dark times.
The difference is that in many European countries the head of state is more of a ceremonial position (at least in practice) and the head of the government holds nowhere near the amount of power a US president does. With proportional representation, the biggest party often doesn’t have an absolute majority and needs to form a government together with other parties, or might even end up in the opposition. Together they agree on who’s going to be the head of government (usually the head of the largest party), who will be the ministers and what will be the policy. If it doesn’t work out because of disagreements, the government breaks up and new elections will be held.
My point is: the risk is real, populism is growing, policy is shifting, but the dynamics are different. Having a first past the post system and concentrating so much power into a single political position feels like an accelerator.
deleted by creator
Don’t wait until your version of Trump gets elected. Start organizing now.
No worries, he already has been elected last year!
This is fascism 101.
Fascism is at least as much an economic system as a political one, or more precisely, it’s more like an economic system hiding behind a political system.
And the way the economic system works is very simple - private ownership of the means of production combined with an overt and institutionalized revolving door between business and government, so that the end result is plutocratic oligarchy.
Basically, it’s taking the system that already existed in the US, by which the wealthy bought access to political power mostly surreptitiously and nominally illegally unless they followed specific restrictions, and legitimizes and formalizes and institutionalizes it and moves it right out into the open.
And behind all of the white supremacist and christian nationalist and reactionary conservative rhetoric, this was always the real goal.
What an absolute treasure Robert and Sam Reich are.
Last stage democracy
* plutocracy
Late stage humanity
We don’t need to be such downers about it.
Let’s just celebrate this as the age of facilitating future dolphin supremacy!
We sucked hard, I have faith that they can do better because I can’t really imagine how a sapient species could find a way to do even worse.
Plus late stage capitalism.
Speedrunning the decline and fall of the Roman empire.
We’re already speedrunning climate-based societal collapse, so there’s not really much time to slow walk these things.
He also spent 44 billion buying twitter to disrupt and control the conversations happening there as part of his efforts, and now the the government essentially has a data mining tool and propaganda machine without actually ‘owning’ it.
Any of those 2a weirdos gonna show us what 2a is for or not?
I see a lot of domestic enemies around and suddenly the obese, insanely loud dipshits aren’t making a peep.
No, they love the boot on their face, as long as someone they hate also has a boot on their face.
To be fair, a couple of them already tried.
As a 2A advocate, I’ve recently considered buying my first gun. I don’t own one mostly because I have young kids and I don’t want to risk them playing with it and getting hurt, but there have also been a some incidents where people got shot due to road rage, and it would be nice to have an option to defend myself.
That said, regardless of how many or what kinds of guns I end up owning, there’s no way I’m using them against the government, there’s zero chance that ends well for anyone.
You can’t have a democracy if you can’t hold it accountable. Violence is the last option, of course. But it must be an option in the face of the threat of more violence. Fascists will always exploit this weakness in liberalism.
Sure, and if I felt we were actually facing a fascist takeover, I’d reconsider my options (and probably move elsewhere). But I don’t, I’m more worried about the crazies on the roads that got something messed up from COVID or something and are taking it out on drivers.
Trump is certainly going to mess some stuff up that I care about, but I believe he’ll leave in 4 years and we’ll have another idiot in power, but hopefully one that brings us forward and undoes some of Trump’s mess.
We’re not going to see concentration camps or death squads, so a gun won’t be helpful there. I’m far more worried about random crazies getting more bold and threatening my family.
yes for him the USA is just a high return investment and livelihoods of the US citizens are just expandibles.
Turns out it really is all a big club and we didn’t get invited.
Carlin had it right 30 years ago
The term is crony capitalism.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crony_capitalismJust capitalism taken to the logical conclusion. This term implies there’s some form of capitalism in which this doesn’t happen. There is not.
Okay but… blaming the other side gets tiring after a few decades. When will we blame those who allowed it, and moreover how much did Kamala Harris spend by comparison?
If it’s still too raw and early for such, please just ignore me. I’m still spinning, like all of us, and seeing desperately for some reasoning to help make sense of it all.
Its not about the amount of money that was spent, its about the obvious conflict of interest between the individuals private interests, and the government controlling how much tax payers funds are being funnelled into their private interests.
Have the dems fucked around and found out? Sure, but don’t compare a failure to save a bad status quo (D) with a concerted effort to rebuild the status quo in a way that exclusively benefits them ®
Well said.
What do the campaign expenditures of Kamala Harris have to do with how much Elon Musk paid as what boils down to a bribe to Trump?
I guess technically he spent $44.13 billion
