381
submitted 9 months ago by spaceghoti@lemmy.one to c/politics@lemmy.world

In the 2020 presidential election cycle, more than $14bn went to federal candidates, party committees, and Super Pacs – double the $7bn doled out in the 2016 cycle. Total giving in 2024 is bound to be much higher.

That money is not supporting US democracy. If anything, that money is contributing to rising Trumpism and neofascism.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] spaceghoti@lemmy.one 6 points 9 months ago

Of course not. They know they have to destroy society as it is before they can rebuild it the way they want it. That's the point. That's why they've been working for seventy years to undermine confidence in the government, so they can justify tearing it down and replacing it with their own vision.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12115-011-9498-4

[-] twisted28@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Considering the end of our current government, no one would be forced to work and could take up arms against the people trying to enslave them. Given dems are 60-70% of population., what makes them so sure they wouldn’t be overwhelmed. Looking at fighting age males alone, extremely outnumbered

[-] spaceghoti@lemmy.one 6 points 9 months ago

They think they control the police and military. The South thought they had the advantage as well. History is about to repeat itself.

[-] twisted28@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

The police and military would need to be paid otherwise they won’t show up, regardless would probably stay home to protect their family. This plan doesn’t seem thoroughly explored. The world’s leading superpower being overrun by bible thumping slack jawed yokels. Lmao, what a joke.

[-] spaceghoti@lemmy.one 4 points 9 months ago

They largely control the nation's resources. They can pay, the question is how many of our police and military forces are willing to sell their loyalty.

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Given that 95% of U.S. law enforcement personnel are conservatives, I'm pretty sure the vast majority of them will be on board.

[-] twisted28@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

What resources do they control? You’re also assuming the ones involved would be ok leaving their family alone.

[-] spaceghoti@lemmy.one 2 points 9 months ago

We're talking about the industrialists who oversee food, construction, and so forth. They control most of the wealth and wealth-generating resources.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

There is a fatal flaw here though. The same people who own the wealth and resources are also incapable of producing them. They don't have the knowledge of the necessary scientific principles or day to day operations.

They won't be able to force it either. If you're persecuting me and my people, I'm not going to earn you a penny. And if you try to compel me, I'll sabotage the whole thing. And because they don't actually know anything, they won't even notice.

I used to work for one of big oil and gas corporations before coming to my senses, and the employees heavily skewed liberal. They were really interested in sustainability. The executives were not, beyond lip service. The educated workforce can bring these industrialists to their knees if they want to fuck around and find out. It's about damn time white collar workers made our own unions too.

[-] spaceghoti@lemmy.one 1 points 9 months ago

People are working under wage slavery now. I think they've already considered strategies for getting people to work for them. Starving people will consider options they wouldn't accept otherwise.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

I don't think they'll be able to starve out knowledge workers. It would be too tempting for other companies to poach that talent

[-] spaceghoti@lemmy.one 1 points 9 months ago

Yeah, that free market bullshit never actually works like people think it should.

[-] twisted28@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

While it could be, that doesn’t sound accurate. If I remember correctly it was blue states paying high amounts of taxes while red states taking in the most tax dollars.

I’m gonna need a source on this claim cause that sounds like bullshit

Upon further research almost every red state takes in more tax dollars than they pay out. Republican moochers.

[-] spaceghoti@lemmy.one 3 points 9 months ago

Reich lists the billionaire donors who are hoping to become the new feudal lords in the new American empire. It's not about states at that point. It's about oligarchy.

[-] twisted28@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

When America collapses, so will the dollar, and that means they aren’t rich anymore

[-] spaceghoti@lemmy.one 1 points 9 months ago

The dollar is based on confidence, like all money. That confidence is backed by the country's ability to deliver. When they take over the government's functions they can (if they choose) print their own script.

With the resources they command, money isn't the problem.

[-] twisted28@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

No confidence would be left. Look at the speakership debacle, they can’t even agree to pay the stuff they themselves approved

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Let's March to Sea properly this time and do Sherman proud

this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2023
381 points (97.0% liked)

politics

18821 readers
4820 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS