American Complacency And Government Corruption

PoliTalker

Diversity Makes Greatness
This is a response to a post by Dutch Uncle in another thread.

I pulled it out and began this thread because I felt it is a discussion in it's own right.

Hello Dutch Uncle,

Hence my point. Americans were complacent despite threats going back over a decade. The first attack on the WTC was a big fucking clue, yet Clinton was more interested in getting his dick sucked and the Democratic Congress was busy turning Guns into Butter. The Republicans aren't blameless either. Newt and his horde brought an entirely new level of animosity to Washington DC in the mid-90s.

The point being that, while there is a lot of blame to go around on both parties for failures of leadership, We the People bear the majority of the blame for being narrow-minded, partisan and selfish.

I could describe much of the American public's political concerns in one word: 'Apathetic.'

They think the USA is a given, that nobody need concern themselves with building our own nation. Just go about their own lives and business, and the only time to take an interest in politics is when it begins to affect them personally.

The way I see it is the founders did a great job of getting things going and each generation is not given a country, but a kit from which they can continue to build a nation.

Whether or not they use the materials in the kit is up to them. The rich and powerful are using everything at their disposal to further their wealth, which translates into government corruption.

For most people, they take it all for granted and don't give a hoot. Mostly they only get involved if some capitalistic sensationalist media thrusts it into their face.

Here's how I think we should deal with government corruption:


The American Anti-Corruption Act


Here's the proposed Act:

" The American Anti-Corruption Act:
1
Stop political bribery

Make it illegal for politicians to take money from lobbyists.
Politicians get extraordinary sums of money in the form of campaign donations from the special interests who lobby them. In return, politicians create laws favorable to these special interests – even when those laws hurt voters.

Under the American Anti-Corruption Act, people who get paid to lobby cannot donate to politicians.

Ban lobbyist bundling.
Lobbyists regularly bundle together big contributions from their friends and colleagues and deliver them in one lump sum to politicians. This turns lobbyists into major fundraisers, giving politicians an incentive to keep them happy by working political favors.

The Act prohibits lobbyists from bundling contributions.

Close the revolving door.
Lobbyists and special interests routinely offer public officials high-paying lobbying jobs. Politicians and their staff routinely move straight from government to these lucrative lobbying jobs, where they get paid to influence their former colleagues.

The Act stops elected representatives and senior staff from selling off their government power for high-paying lobbying jobs, prohibits them from negotiating jobs while in office, and bars them from paid lobbying activity for several years once they leave.

Prevent politicians from fundraising during working hours.
Most federal politicians spend between 3 and 7 hours a day fundraising from big donors instead of working on issues that matter to voters.

Under the Act, politicians are prevented from raising money during the workday, when they should be serving their constituents.

2
End Secret Money

Immediately disclose political money online.
Current disclosure laws are outdated and broken. Many donations are not disclosed for months, and some are never made available electronically, making it difficult for citizens and journalists to follow the money in our political system.

The Anti-Corruption Act ensures that all significant political fundraising and spending is immediately disclosed online and made easily accessible to the public.

Stop donors from hiding behind secret-money groups.
Elections are being flooded with big money funneled through groups with secret donors. These secretive groups spend money directly to influence elections and make unlimited contributions to super PACs, which run ads to elect and defeat candidates.

Under the Act, any organization that spends meaningful funds on political advertisements is required to file a timely online report disclosing its major donors.

3
Fix Our Broken Elections

End gerrymandering.
Politicians are intentionally drawing the lines around voters in order to guarantee their own re-election and give their political party an unfair advantage.

The Anti-Corruption Act ends gerrymandering by creating independent, fully transparent redistricting commissions that follow strict guidelines to ensure accurate representation for all voters, regardless of political party.

Let all voters participate in open primaries.
By controlling the primaries, the political establishment controls which candidates we can vote on.

The Act makes all candidates for the same office compete in a single, open primary controlled by voters, not the political establishment. This gives voters more control over our elections and more choices at the ballot.

Let voters rank their top candidates, avoid “spoilers.”
Outdated voting systems force voters to choose between the “lesser of two evils” at the ballot box or vote for a “spoiler” candidate.

Under the Act, voters can rank their top candidates, allowing them to support their top choice without fear of inadvertently helping elect the other party’s candidate. If their top choice isn’t going to win, their vote transfers to their second choice, and so on. This makes it easier to elect independent-minded candidates who aren’t beholden to establishment special interests.

Automatic voter registration.
Our voter rolls and registration systems are outdated, error-prone, and costly. New and proven systems can save taxpayer money and ensure that all eligible voters are able to participate on Election Day.

The Act automatically registers all interested eligible voters when they interact with government agencies – whether it’s when they go to the DMV, get a hunting license, apply for food assistance, or sign up for the national guard. Voters can always opt-out from being registered. Information is transmitted electronically and securely to a central source maintained by the state.

Vote at home or at the polls.
Election Day is a mess. Forcing voters to take time off from work and their families to stand in long lines on a Tuesday is ineffective, insecure, and outdated.

The Act improves voter service by sending ballots to voters at home and allowing them to mail it back on their own timeframe, or drop it off at a professionally-staffed voting center. Voters can still vote in person or receive assistance at a voting center.

Reasonable term limits.
When elected officials are allowed to become career politicians, our elections become uncompetitive and new ideas have a harder time being heard.

The Act sets reasonable term limits of 18 years total at each level of government, so that candidates focus on public service instead of staying in office.

Change how elections are funded.
Running a political campaign is expensive, but few Americans can afford to donate to political campaigns. That makes politicians dependent upon – and therefore responsive to – a tiny fraction of special-interest donors.

The Act offers every voter a small credit they can use to make a political donation with no out-of-pocket expense. Candidates and political groups are only eligible to receive these credits if they agree to fundraise solely from small donors. The Act also empowers political action committees that only take donations from small donors, giving everyday people a stronger voice in our elections.

4
Enforce the Rules

Crack down on super PACs.
As a result of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that super PACs can spend unlimited money influencing elections, so long as they do not coordinate directly with candidate campaigns. Since then, there has been tremendous coordination between campaigns and their super PACs, making a mockery of the “independence” the Supreme Court said must exist.

The American Anti-Corruption Act enforces the Supreme Court’s mandate by fixing the rules aimed at preventing and punishing super PAC coordination.

Eliminate lobbyist loopholes.
The definition of “lobbyist” is weak and outdated. As a result, lobbyists regularly avoid disclosure, and former politicians and their staff can receive big money to influence politicians without formally registering as lobbyists.

The Act prevents lobbyists from skirting the rules by strengthening the definition of lobbying and penalizing lobbyists who fail to register.

Strengthen anti-corruption enforcement.
Agencies routinely fail to enforce the anti-corruption rules that already exist due to partisan deadlock – and when they are able to act, they often lack the enforcement tools necessary to uphold the law. The result is an elections system where even lax rules can be skirted or broken with impunity.

The Act strengthens enforcement of anti-corruption laws by overhauling the broken Federal Election Commission and giving prosecutors the tools they need to combat corruption."
 
I hate to sounds so cynical, but being cynical does not make you wrong. But when, I look at the general voting public, I see a bunch of chickens in a chicken coop, and so long as the feed keeps coming the chickens are content, and don't care about anything else, and they don't want to be bothered about anything else. But when the feed stops coming, the chickens all starts to squawk.

The point here, is that the voting public just doesn't understand the serious responsibility to be informed about the candidates, and to vote. Voter apathy, and voter ignorance is the greatest threat to our democracy.
 
Hello Trumpet,

I hate to sounds so cynical, but being cynical does not make you wrong. But when, I look at the general voting public, I see a bunch of chickens in a chicken coop, and so long as the feed keeps coming the chickens are content, and don't care about anything else, and they don't want to be bothered about anything else. But when the feed stops coming, the chickens all starts to squawk.

The point here, is that the voting public just doesn't understand the serious responsibility to be informed about the candidates, and to vote. Voter apathy, and voter ignorance is the greatest threat to our democracy.

There is no greater unused power than that of the American voting public.

We could have so much if only we could get people to understand the untapped potential.
 
I hate to sounds so cynical, but being cynical does not make you wrong. But when, I look at the general voting public, I see a bunch of chickens in a chicken coop, and so long as the feed keeps coming the chickens are content, and don't care about anything else, and they don't want to be bothered about anything else. But when the feed stops coming, the chickens all starts to squawk.

The point here, is that the voting public just doesn't understand the serious responsibility to be informed about the candidates, and to vote. Voter apathy, and voter ignorance is the greatest threat to our democracy.

Agreed. Our nation has become the "Paris Hiltons" of the modern world; spoiled rich kids who take things for granted, expect to be paid for doing nothing and expect their government to fix everything without money or support.
 
Hello Trumpet,



There is no greater unused power than that of the American voting public.

We could have so much if only we could get people to understand the untapped potential.

Agreed. When our average voter turnout is less than 2/3s, there is absolutely an untapped source of votes.

https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/time-series/demo/voting-historical-time-series.html
1570134429053.jpg

A friend of my wife's said she wasn't voting because she didn't understand all the issues. While I agree that people should be informed voters, my question was "Why doesn't she inform herself?" Granted my wife and her have been friends for over 50 years and, although a very sweet woman, not the brightest bulb on the tree, she's more than capable of educating herself between now and the election. IMHO, it's not a matter of intelligence or education, but a matter of will-to-do.
 
Hello Dutch Uncle,

Agreed. When our average voter turnout is less than 2/3s, there is absolutely an untapped source of votes.

https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/time-series/demo/voting-historical-time-series.html
1570134429053.jpg

A friend of my wife's said she wasn't voting because she didn't understand all the issues. While I agree that people should be informed voters, my question was "Why doesn't she inform herself?" Granted my wife and her have been friends for over 50 years and, although a very sweet woman, not the brightest bulb on the tree, she's more than capable of educating herself between now and the election. IMHO, it's not a matter of intelligence or education, but a matter of will-to-do.

I'm sure for someone who has paid zero attention to politics and the news it must seem very overwhelming. Someone like that must be wondering how to begin. She just needs to hear that all it takes is to change her routine a little bit to include paying attention to the news each day. For extra credit, a little internet searching would go a long way. Before long, she'll be up to speed on everything. As you say. It's not a matter of capability. It is a matter of will.

It's what people who really care about their country do. Otherwise, it's kind of freeloading to let others do it for you. And the more who fail to stay informed, the worse conditions get.
 
This is a response to a post by Dutch Uncle in another thread.

I pulled it out and began this thread because I felt it is a discussion in it's own right.

Hello Dutch Uncle,



I could describe much of the American public's political concerns in one word: 'Apathetic.'

They think the USA is a given, that nobody need concern themselves with building our own nation. Just go about their own lives and business, and the only time to take an interest in politics is when it begins to affect them personally.

The way I see it is the founders did a great job of getting things going and each generation is not given a country, but a kit from which they can continue to build a nation.

Whether or not they use the materials in the kit is up to them. The rich and powerful are using everything at their disposal to further their wealth, which translates into government corruption.

For most people, they take it all for granted and don't give a hoot. Mostly they only get involved if some capitalistic sensationalist media thrusts it into their face.

Here's how I think we should deal with government corruption:


The American Anti-Corruption Act


Here's the proposed Act:

" The American Anti-Corruption Act:
1
Stop political bribery

Make it illegal for politicians to take money from lobbyists.
Politicians get extraordinary sums of money in the form of campaign donations from the special interests who lobby them. In return, politicians create laws favorable to these special interests – even when those laws hurt voters.

Under the American Anti-Corruption Act, people who get paid to lobby cannot donate to politicians.

Ban lobbyist bundling.
Lobbyists regularly bundle together big contributions from their friends and colleagues and deliver them in one lump sum to politicians. This turns lobbyists into major fundraisers, giving politicians an incentive to keep them happy by working political favors.

The Act prohibits lobbyists from bundling contributions.

Close the revolving door.
Lobbyists and special interests routinely offer public officials high-paying lobbying jobs. Politicians and their staff routinely move straight from government to these lucrative lobbying jobs, where they get paid to influence their former colleagues.

The Act stops elected representatives and senior staff from selling off their government power for high-paying lobbying jobs, prohibits them from negotiating jobs while in office, and bars them from paid lobbying activity for several years once they leave.

Prevent politicians from fundraising during working hours.
Most federal politicians spend between 3 and 7 hours a day fundraising from big donors instead of working on issues that matter to voters.

Under the Act, politicians are prevented from raising money during the workday, when they should be serving their constituents.

2
End Secret Money

Immediately disclose political money online.
Current disclosure laws are outdated and broken. Many donations are not disclosed for months, and some are never made available electronically, making it difficult for citizens and journalists to follow the money in our political system.

The Anti-Corruption Act ensures that all significant political fundraising and spending is immediately disclosed online and made easily accessible to the public.

Stop donors from hiding behind secret-money groups.
Elections are being flooded with big money funneled through groups with secret donors. These secretive groups spend money directly to influence elections and make unlimited contributions to super PACs, which run ads to elect and defeat candidates.

Under the Act, any organization that spends meaningful funds on political advertisements is required to file a timely online report disclosing its major donors.

3
Fix Our Broken Elections

End gerrymandering.
Politicians are intentionally drawing the lines around voters in order to guarantee their own re-election and give their political party an unfair advantage.

The Anti-Corruption Act ends gerrymandering by creating independent, fully transparent redistricting commissions that follow strict guidelines to ensure accurate representation for all voters, regardless of political party.

Let all voters participate in open primaries.
By controlling the primaries, the political establishment controls which candidates we can vote on.

The Act makes all candidates for the same office compete in a single, open primary controlled by voters, not the political establishment. This gives voters more control over our elections and more choices at the ballot.

Let voters rank their top candidates, avoid “spoilers.”
Outdated voting systems force voters to choose between the “lesser of two evils” at the ballot box or vote for a “spoiler” candidate.

Under the Act, voters can rank their top candidates, allowing them to support their top choice without fear of inadvertently helping elect the other party’s candidate. If their top choice isn’t going to win, their vote transfers to their second choice, and so on. This makes it easier to elect independent-minded candidates who aren’t beholden to establishment special interests.

Automatic voter registration.
Our voter rolls and registration systems are outdated, error-prone, and costly. New and proven systems can save taxpayer money and ensure that all eligible voters are able to participate on Election Day.

The Act automatically registers all interested eligible voters when they interact with government agencies – whether it’s when they go to the DMV, get a hunting license, apply for food assistance, or sign up for the national guard. Voters can always opt-out from being registered. Information is transmitted electronically and securely to a central source maintained by the state.

Vote at home or at the polls.
Election Day is a mess. Forcing voters to take time off from work and their families to stand in long lines on a Tuesday is ineffective, insecure, and outdated.

The Act improves voter service by sending ballots to voters at home and allowing them to mail it back on their own timeframe, or drop it off at a professionally-staffed voting center. Voters can still vote in person or receive assistance at a voting center.

Reasonable term limits.
When elected officials are allowed to become career politicians, our elections become uncompetitive and new ideas have a harder time being heard.

The Act sets reasonable term limits of 18 years total at each level of government, so that candidates focus on public service instead of staying in office.

Change how elections are funded.
Running a political campaign is expensive, but few Americans can afford to donate to political campaigns. That makes politicians dependent upon – and therefore responsive to – a tiny fraction of special-interest donors.

The Act offers every voter a small credit they can use to make a political donation with no out-of-pocket expense. Candidates and political groups are only eligible to receive these credits if they agree to fundraise solely from small donors. The Act also empowers political action committees that only take donations from small donors, giving everyday people a stronger voice in our elections.

4
Enforce the Rules

Crack down on super PACs.
As a result of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that super PACs can spend unlimited money influencing elections, so long as they do not coordinate directly with candidate campaigns. Since then, there has been tremendous coordination between campaigns and their super PACs, making a mockery of the “independence” the Supreme Court said must exist.

The American Anti-Corruption Act enforces the Supreme Court’s mandate by fixing the rules aimed at preventing and punishing super PAC coordination.

Eliminate lobbyist loopholes.
The definition of “lobbyist” is weak and outdated. As a result, lobbyists regularly avoid disclosure, and former politicians and their staff can receive big money to influence politicians without formally registering as lobbyists.

The Act prevents lobbyists from skirting the rules by strengthening the definition of lobbying and penalizing lobbyists who fail to register.

Strengthen anti-corruption enforcement.
Agencies routinely fail to enforce the anti-corruption rules that already exist due to partisan deadlock – and when they are able to act, they often lack the enforcement tools necessary to uphold the law. The result is an elections system where even lax rules can be skirted or broken with impunity.

The Act strengthens enforcement of anti-corruption laws by overhauling the broken Federal Election Commission and giving prosecutors the tools they need to combat corruption."

We need public financing of elections with no outside money at all. We need much shorter elections. Three months seems right. Will Rogers says we have the best politicians that money can buy. Money in politics is not a joke. It has to be stopped for the people to have power.
 
There's a lot to wade through in that OP. I agree with some of their suggestions and disagree with others. Really want to fix elections? Tie them to the actual vote and voters and much of the problems they rail against are fixed.

The way that would work is quite simple actually. In any election you need 50%+1 of the eligible voter pool to win. That is, you need half plus one of ALL possible voters that could vote in the election to vote for you. That means if less than half of all eligible voters vote in the election, nobody wins. You need 50%+1.

By doing that simple change, you take away the power of lobbyists and money to a huge degree. Sure, they can still buy influence but not nearly as much as being able to deliver reliable votes to the polls. So, you have some corporation or lobbying group that can't deliver more than a few votes but has millions to give you to campaign, the astute politician would tell them they need to be out buying voters with that money because they as it is they have no power at the polls because they can't deliver voters and votes necessary to win the election.

Turnout at the polls (where voter ID would be an absolute necessity) would become issue number one with every politician. Gotta turn out the vote to get elected or our proposition passed. Low voter turnout would be the death of politicians.

Make it easier. Mail everyone a ballot that they can fill out at their leisure that then has to be dropped off in person, with ID, at a polling station where it is counted immediately. One person, one ballot, in person, and verified to be the eligible voter.

Thus, the result of those changes would mean that any lobbying group has political power directly equal to its ability to turn out votes for a candidate or proposition, etc., in an election. Small lobbying special interests that are good at bundling donations would be kicked to the curb because they can't deliver votes. Thus, elections become first and foremost about convincing voters to show up and vote for a specific candidate.
 
Hello Nordberg,

We need public financing of elections with no outside money at all. We need much shorter elections. Three months seems right. Will Rogers says we have the best politicians that money can buy. Money in politics is not a joke. It has to be stopped for the people to have power.

The Act provides for public financing of campaigns:

" The Act offers every voter a small credit they can use to make a political donation with no out-of-pocket expense. Candidates and political groups are only eligible to receive these credits if they agree to fundraise solely from small donors. "
 
Hello Nordberg,



The Act provides for public financing of campaigns:

" The Act offers every voter a small credit they can use to make a political donation with no out-of-pocket expense. Candidates and political groups are only eligible to receive these credits if they agree to fundraise solely from small donors. "

Public financing of campaigns is equally onerous to the current system. Nobody should be forced to give money to support ideas and causes they object to. That's what public finance of campaigns does. It doesn't matter how the money is parceled out. What matters is how it is taken in. If everyone is paying into this system through taxes and they can then designate a politician(s) they want some of it to go to the problem arises when somebody says "I don't want to finance any of those assholes!" They are still forced to pay in.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly struck down laws where forcible contributions were required be they a public system or one like union dues.
 
Hello T. A. Gardner,

There's a lot to wade through in that OP. I agree with some of their suggestions and disagree with others. Really want to fix elections? Tie them to the actual vote and voters and much of the problems they rail against are fixed.

The way that would work is quite simple actually. In any election you need 50%+1 of the eligible voter pool to win. That is, you need half plus one of ALL possible voters that could vote in the election to vote for you. That means if less than half of all eligible voters vote in the election, nobody wins. You need 50%+1.

By doing that simple change, you take away the power of lobbyists and money to a huge degree. Sure, they can still buy influence but not nearly as much as being able to deliver reliable votes to the polls. So, you have some corporation or lobbying group that can't deliver more than a few votes but has millions to give you to campaign, the astute politician would tell them they need to be out buying voters with that money because they as it is they have no power at the polls because they can't deliver voters and votes necessary to win the election.

Turnout at the polls (where voter ID would be an absolute necessity) would become issue number one with every politician. Gotta turn out the vote to get elected or our proposition passed. Low voter turnout would be the death of politicians.

Make it easier. Mail everyone a ballot that they can fill out at their leisure that then has to be dropped off in person, with ID, at a polling station where it is counted immediately. One person, one ballot, in person, and verified to be the eligible voter.

Thus, the result of those changes would mean that any lobbying group has political power directly equal to its ability to turn out votes for a candidate or proposition, etc., in an election. Small lobbying special interests that are good at bundling donations would be kicked to the curb because they can't deliver votes. Thus, elections become first and foremost about convincing voters to show up and vote for a specific candidate.

An interesting prospect, but it leaves a huge problem unsolved. If no candidate is elected because an election had more than two candidates, then offices go unfilled. Thus, when there is no winner in a presidential election, the incumbent candidate simply stays in office. That incumbent can then stay in office as long as he can mudsling all prospective challengers so that none get 50% +1. The incumbent thus does not need 50% +1 to stay in office. All he needs to do is keep a replacement out.

Or an incumbent could simply make sure that several candidates are on the ticket to split the vote and foil a prospective challenger.

The AACA solves that by keeping the big money out of elections in the first place.
 
Hello T. A. Gardner,



An interesting prospect, but it leaves a huge problem unsolved. If no candidate is elected because an election had more than two candidates, then offices go unfilled. Thus, when there is no winner in a presidential election, the incumbent candidate simply stays in office. That incumbent can then stay in office as long as he can mudsling all prospective challengers so that none get 50% +1. The incumbent thus does not need 50% +1 to stay in office. All he needs to do is keep a replacement out.

Or an incumbent could simply make sure that several candidates are on the ticket to split the vote and foil a prospective challenger.

The AACA solves that by keeping the big money out of elections in the first place.

Yes, that is a problem. But, its one that would resolve itself quickly. You can bank on two things. First somebody will want to get that position and be elected to it. Second, that they will work the system to maximize their potential to get elected. If no one is elected, the position goes unfilled. That won't last long before someone gets the necessary votes. You can take that to the bank. The nice thing about this is now your vote really does count.
 
Hello Dutch Uncle,
I'm sure for someone who has paid zero attention to politics and the news it must seem very overwhelming. Someone like that must be wondering how to begin. She just needs to hear that all it takes is to change her routine a little bit to include paying attention to the news each day. For extra credit, a little internet searching would go a long way. Before long, she'll be up to speed on everything. As you say. It's not a matter of capability. It is a matter of will.

It's what people who really care about their country do. Otherwise, it's kind of freeloading to let others do it for you. And the more who fail to stay informed, the worse conditions get.
"Overwhelming" is an excellent word for the major problem. With 24/7 Infotainment "news" shows and the vast number of emails, Facebook posts from friends containing links, it's easy for a person to become overwhelmed with the information. Alvin Toffler discussed "information overload" in his book "Future Shock":

Information overload will lead to 'future shock syndrome' as an individual will suffer severe physical and mental disturbances.

People just shut down and refuse to become involved in their own elections. That's not the total number of reasons, but I believe it's the main one which branches out to the others.

Another response that's visible on this and other forums, friend's emails and/or Facebook posts, is the political extremist. They skew hard Left or hard Right (mostly to the Right due to age and/or negative life experiences). The way they handle information overload is to put on blinders and only see the views they like. Corporations capitalize on this by presenting Infotainment catering to these political extremists or budding ones.

The key factor here for such people is a severe lacking of Critical Thinking skills; they simply don't know how to discern facts from all the noise of people screaming "THIS IS A FACT!!!". It burns them hard and they give up. A few become political extremists in response.

https://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766
Critical thinking is self-guided, self-disciplined thinking which attempts to reason at the highest level of quality in a fair-minded way. People who think critically consistently attempt to live rationally, reasonably, empathically. They are keenly aware of the inherently flawed nature of human thinking when left unchecked. They strive to diminish the power of their egocentric and sociocentric tendencies. They use the intellectual tools that critical thinking offers – concepts and principles that enable them to analyze, assess, and improve thinking. They work diligently to develop the intellectual virtues of intellectual integrity, intellectual humility, intellectual civility, intellectual empathy, intellectual sense of justice and confidence in reason. They realize that no matter how skilled they are as thinkers, they can always improve their reasoning abilities and they will at times fall prey to mistakes in reasoning, human irrationality, prejudices, biases, distortions, uncritically accepted social rules and taboos, self-interest, and vested interest. They strive to improve the world in whatever ways they can and contribute to a more rational, civilized society. At the same time, they recognize the complexities often inherent in doing so. They avoid thinking simplistically about complicated issues and strive to appropriately consider the rights and needs of relevant others. They recognize the complexities in developing as thinkers, and commit themselves to life-long practice toward self-improvement. They embody the Socratic principle: The unexamined life is not worth living , because they realize that many unexamined lives together result in an uncritical, unjust, dangerous world.

~ Linda Elder, September, 2007
 
Hello Dutch Uncle,

"Overwhelming" is an excellent word for the major problem. With 24/7 Infotainment "news" shows and the vast number of emails, Facebook posts from friends containing links, it's easy for a person to become overwhelmed with the information. Alvin Toffler discussed "information overload" in his book "Future Shock":

Information overload will lead to 'future shock syndrome' as an individual will suffer severe physical and mental disturbances.

People just shut down and refuse to become involved in their own elections. That's not the total number of reasons, but I believe it's the main one which branches out to the others.

Another response that's visible on this and other forums, friend's emails and/or Facebook posts, is the political extremist. They skew hard Left or hard Right (mostly to the Right due to age and/or negative life experiences). The way they handle information overload is to put on blinders and only see the views they like. Corporations capitalize on this by presenting Infotainment catering to these political extremists or budding ones.

The key factor here for such people is a severe lacking of Critical Thinking skills; they simply don't know how to discern facts from all the noise of people screaming "THIS IS A FACT!!!". It burns them hard and they give up. A few become political extremists in response.

https://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766
Critical thinking is self-guided, self-disciplined thinking which attempts to reason at the highest level of quality in a fair-minded way. People who think critically consistently attempt to live rationally, reasonably, empathically. They are keenly aware of the inherently flawed nature of human thinking when left unchecked. They strive to diminish the power of their egocentric and sociocentric tendencies. They use the intellectual tools that critical thinking offers – concepts and principles that enable them to analyze, assess, and improve thinking. They work diligently to develop the intellectual virtues of intellectual integrity, intellectual humility, intellectual civility, intellectual empathy, intellectual sense of justice and confidence in reason. They realize that no matter how skilled they are as thinkers, they can always improve their reasoning abilities and they will at times fall prey to mistakes in reasoning, human irrationality, prejudices, biases, distortions, uncritically accepted social rules and taboos, self-interest, and vested interest. They strive to improve the world in whatever ways they can and contribute to a more rational, civilized society. At the same time, they recognize the complexities often inherent in doing so. They avoid thinking simplistically about complicated issues and strive to appropriately consider the rights and needs of relevant others. They recognize the complexities in developing as thinkers, and commit themselves to life-long practice toward self-improvement. They embody the Socratic principle: The unexamined life is not worth living , because they realize that many unexamined lives together result in an uncritical, unjust, dangerous world.

~ Linda Elder, September, 2007

Excellent post.

I know lots of people who don't want to have anything to do with politics, and consider ANY political discussion to be in poor taste. They are totally blocking out politics from their lives. Good thing everyone doesn't do this. A Democracy depends on the active engagement of a well informed populace.

So how in the world does one stay abreast of politics (and all the bad news in the world) and still maintain a cheery outlook?

That's where critical thinking is crucial. Without critical thinking, and the ability to deal with terrifying news one moment, and innocent play the next, people 'let it get to them.'

It's a matter of seeing the big picture and placing things in perspective.

That's the trick.

I think a firm grasp of reality is absolutely crucial there.
 
Last edited:
Hello Dutch Uncle,



Excellent post.

I know lots of people who don't want to have anything to do with politics, and consider ANY political discussion to be in poor taste. They are totally blocking out politics from their lives. Good thing everyone doesn't do this. A Democracy depends on the active engagement of a well informed populace.

So how in the world does one stay abreast of politics (and all the bad news in the world) and still maintain a cheery outlook?

That's where critical thinking is crucial. Without critical thinking, and the ability to deal with terrifying news one moment, and innocent pay the next, people 'let it get to them.'

It's a matter of seeing the big picture and placing things in perspective.

That's the trick.

I think a firm grasp of reality is absolutely crucial there.
Agreed 100%

So how do "We, the People" teach our fellow citizens critical thinking skills? To use a phrase Hillary culturally misappropriated "it takes a village".

Good parents know that they can't teach their kids what to look for in each and every crisis of their lives. They know that by teaching their kids good life and thinking skills, then, as adults, the kids will be able to take care of themselves. Local government needs to be the "parent" in educating the local public. The State government the state population and all the way to Washington. It's a necessary skill for our citizens to learn in an increasingly complex world.

People like Trump look backwards and promise to bring back the past. The campaign commercial showing empty factories and slamming Biden for China is an example. The United States can't compete in the modern world by having most of our citizens only having the skills to sew shirts, make jeans and stamp out hammers. Due to the standing IQ spread of human beings, there will always be citizens who can never rise above menial labor, but the vast majority of our citizens can easily operate in the modern world if they have the necessary education and thinking skills.
 
Hello Dutch Uncle,

Agreed 100%

So how do "We, the People" teach our fellow citizens critical thinking skills? To use a phrase Hillary culturally misappropriated "it takes a village".

Good parents know that they can't teach their kids what to look for in each and every crisis of their lives. They know that by teaching their kids good life and thinking skills, then, as adults, the kids will be able to take care of themselves. Local government needs to be the "parent" in educating the local public. The State government the state population and all the way to Washington. It's a necessary skill for our citizens to learn in an increasingly complex world.

People like Trump look backwards and promise to bring back the past. The campaign commercial showing empty factories and slamming Biden for China is an example. The United States can't compete in the modern world by having most of our citizens only having the skills to sew shirts, make jeans and stamp out hammers. Due to the standing IQ spread of human beings, there will always be citizens who can never rise above menial labor, but the vast majority of our citizens can easily operate in the modern world if they have the necessary education and thinking skills.

Oh yeah, heard that. People want to think capitalism is the end-all, be-all of economic systems, but capitalism is not perfect. Some of the problems are just what you describe. The problem is capitalism requires a lot of stupid people to exploit. The last thing capitalism wants is for everyone to be so smart they see right through all the marketing come-ons. That would instantly kill most of the business for really dumb far overpriced stuff. And people would realize what a scam greedy big money has with legalized government corruption. Why, they might get organized and want to pass the American Anti-Corruption Act. That would kill big greedy profits for a lot of very powerful people.
 
Hello Dutch Uncle,



Oh yeah, heard that. People want to think capitalism is the end-all, be-all of economic systems, but capitalism is not perfect. Some of the problems are just what you describe. The problem is capitalism requires a lot of stupid people to exploit. The last thing capitalism wants is for everyone to be so smart they see right through all the marketing come-ons. That would instantly kill most of the business for really dumb far overpriced stuff. And people would realize what a scam greedy big money has with legalized government corruption. Why, they might get organized and want to pass the American Anti-Corruption Act. That would kill big greedy profits for a lot of very powerful people.

note: destroying all small businesses so only large fascist cartels remain is not "getting rid of capitalism". it's moving to fascism.
 
Here's another great idea...Get Rid of Pelosi!!!!

To a degree, this is exclusive of Trump and the nightmare he is.

Among other circumstances it is largely due to of fake Democratic so-called representatives like Pelosi that we wound up with a monster like Trump. Dems abandoned their Progressive roots and became Republican-lite, corporate masters and all.

"Two Fridge" Nancy has a very competent brilliant Progressive challenger who I hope wipes the floor with her.

David Dayen: Why Pelosi is TO BLAME for coronavirus ECONOMIC disaster

 
Hello Dutch Uncle,



Oh yeah, heard that. People want to think capitalism is the end-all, be-all of economic systems, but capitalism is not perfect. Some of the problems are just what you describe. The problem is capitalism requires a lot of stupid people to exploit. The last thing capitalism wants is for everyone to be so smart they see right through all the marketing come-ons. That would instantly kill most of the business for really dumb far overpriced stuff. And people would realize what a scam greedy big money has with legalized government corruption. Why, they might get organized and want to pass the American Anti-Corruption Act. That would kill big greedy profits for a lot of very powerful people.
Agreed in part but it's incorrect to say "capitalism requires a lot of stupid people to exploit". Greedy assholese exist regardless of economic system. People are still people. The "problem" with capitalism only exists with unregulated or Laissez-faire; it's capitalism with Jungle Rules. Capitalism can be "win-win".

IMO, the best government and economic system with our present level of technology is what we have: Federal Constitutional Republic, regulated capitalism and a socialist safety net for the sick, aged and minors. The problem is that people on both sides of Congress have weakened parts of that system to be dysfunctional.
 
Hello Dutch Uncle,

Agreed in part but it's incorrect to say "capitalism requires a lot of stupid people to exploit". Greedy assholese exist regardless of economic system. People are still people. The "problem" with capitalism only exists with unregulated or Laissez-faire; it's capitalism with Jungle Rules. Capitalism can be "win-win".

IMO, the best government and economic system with our present level of technology is what we have: Federal Constitutional Republic, regulated capitalism and a socialist safety net for the sick, aged and minors. The problem is that people on both sides of Congress have weakened parts of that system to be dysfunctional.

Good clarification. I should have said 'capitalism as we use it.'

Because of legalized government corruption, we do not have proper regulation of our capitalism. This threatens our very nation because it contributes to a dangerous rise in extreme wealth inequality and a general resentment in those who are disadvantaged by our system. Worse, the greedy and powerful manipulate the media to keep people hating the government. They use the government as the scape-goat for the way they extract our wealth.
 
Back
Top