Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Firstly social movements can be manipulated and sabotaged by making them into part of the "Democrat-Republican" political theater. A popular movement with everyone in the country behind it is scary to those in power, so introducing pundits/personalities to deflect/spin the message and make it unattractive to other groups will mean the movement is sabotaged. The Tea Party was all about small government, and look at it now.. it's just a bogeyman for Democrats (keeping the people divided). Likewise Occupy Wall Street has fractured into many small groups, no influence. If the message is distorted/lost the movement may fail.
The second point is self-explanatory.
Thirdly, governments can pay off political leaders. The Brits paid Emmeline Pankhurst and she went from a women's suffrage crusader to a pro-World War I crusader, along with her entire movement.
As for blackmail... Let's say you are the leader of an anti-illegal immigration movement and somehow you overcome the partisan divisions and get a cross movement to reform immigration, which would remove illegal labor but also improve lives in Latin America. Now, you have a college-aged son who phones home every week and says he loves you.
One day a man in a fedora, suit and tie, and sunglasses rings your doorbell. He asks to stop for a chat. First he asks a bit about your political activities, congratulating you for your present success. He asks you about your son, chatting about his grades and social life. Then...
He shows you a few pictures on his tablet... of your son, wearing baby gear and diapers, giggling and cooing. You had no idea your son was involved in such activities. So Mr. Man in Fedora makes it clear:
Quote:
Resign and stop your activities or these photos are posted on the World Wide Web.
Let's say you defy him. The next day, the photos are on 4Chan. It looks like some teenagers hacked your son's computer, and even though you say some scary government agent gave you this threat, plenty of people in the media say you are lying to get attention. At night you get a phone call from your son. His voice is trembling, and between tears he talks about his former friends laughing at him, guys telling him to his face that he's "disgusting" and a "sicko". You try your best to help him but the line cuts off. The next day, you see a news story about a college student who jumped off of a building. He was fatally injured on the concrete but it took minutes for him to die. It was your son. And you have no will left to continue your movement.
So if "dirt" on you won't stop you they can go after your family too.
Or just maybe us ordinary folk have lives and families and jobs, and the weight of daily living just gets to us.
That's a less dramatic reason: There's a reason why political thinkers and revolutionaries, even from populist causes, tend to come from the middle to middle upper classes at least. Leisure time = time to think = political thought
However, the power difference between the middle/upper middle classes and the ultrawealthy are still immense. AFAIK in the novel 1984 the elite feared the equivalent of the middle class and not the poor.
Firstly social movements can be manipulated and sabotaged by making them into part of the "Democrat-Republican" political theater. A popular movement with everyone in the country behind it is scary to those in power, so introducing pundits/personalities to deflect/spin the message and make it unattractive to other groups will mean the movement is sabotaged. The Tea Party was all about small government, and look at it now.. it's just a bogeyman for Democrats (keeping the people divided). Likewise Occupy Wall Street has fractured into many small groups, no influence. If the message is distorted/lost the movement may fail.
The second point is self-explanatory.
Thirdly, governments can pay off political leaders. The Brits paid Emmeline Pankhurst and she went from a women's suffrage crusader to a pro-World War I crusader, along with her entire movement.
As for blackmail... Let's say you are the leader of an anti-illegal immigration movement and somehow you overcome the partisan divisions and get a cross movement to reform immigration, which would remove illegal labor but also improve lives in Latin America. Now, you have a college-aged son who phones home every week and says he loves you.
One day a man in a fedora, suit and tie, and sunglasses rings your doorbell. He asks to stop for a chat. First he asks a bit about your political activities, congratulating you for your present success. He asks you about your son, chatting about his grades and social life. Then...
He shows you a few pictures on his tablet... of your son, wearing baby gear and diapers, giggling and cooing. You had no idea your son was involved in such activities. So Mr. Man in Fedora makes it clear:
Let's say you defy him. The next day, the photos are on 4Chan. It looks like some teenagers hacked your son's computer, and even though you say some scary government agent gave you this threat, plenty of people in the media say you are lying to get attention. At night you get a phone call from your son. His voice is trembling, and between tears he talks about his former friends laughing at him, guys telling him to his face that he's "disgusting" and a "sicko". You try your best to help him but the line cuts off. The next day, you see a news story about a college student who jumped off of a building. He was fatally injured on the concrete but it took minutes for him to die. It was your son. And you have no will left to continue your movement.
So if "dirt" on you won't stop you they can go after your family too.
KILL off the Lobby system and the little guy will get his voice back, until, enjoy not having a voice.
If one considers a political movement to be a battle, then it's pretty simple - the strongest side, be that in numbers, arms, strategy, tactics, or whatever, is the winner.
If you fight the battle on the soapbox, the corporation and the politician will crush the "common man" because they have a bigger soapbox and a louder bullhorn.
If you fight it in the papers, the publisher and the politician win since they made a deal a long time to hold on to their shared power.
If you fight with votes, the politician wins because their politician friends and corporate backers decide who you get to vote for.
Bottom line, if you fight them where they are stronger than you...then you lose. Since you can't get 10 Americans to agree on any 3 issues of the day, the one strength the common man has - strength in numbers - becomes a weakness.
Such is the evolution of societies. We are powerless to stop what comes next. Any intellectually honest observer can see it.
He is just like every other President before him, they all say Lobbys will not run their administration and the Government yet all of them allow it. The only way to end it to ban them, period. You seem stuck on the President when the lobbies are running our House and Senate and doing far more damage, selective outrage?
He is just like every other President before him, they all say Lobbys will not run their administration and the Government yet all of them allow it. The only way to end it to ban them, period. You seem stuck on the President when the lobbies are running our House and Senate and doing far more damage, selective outrage?
High-priced lobbyists are hired by large organizations, and the SCOTUS has ruled that corporations have free speech rights. Any attempt to rein them in runs afoul of the First Amendment. Get rid of corporate personhood, and maybe ordinary people would have a chance.
It is in fact impossible for any elected politician to ignore lobbyists as long as they have free speech rights. Corruption need not be involved, although it sure can be. The issue is a fundamental power imbalance.
He is just like every other President before him, they all say Lobbys will not run their administration and the Government yet all of them allow it. The only way to end it to ban them, period. You seem stuck on the President when the lobbies are running our House and Senate and doing far more damage, selective outrage?
CANT ban them. There's that pesky First Amendment - the right of the people to petition for redress of grievances!
High-priced lobbyists are hired by large organizations, and the SCOTUS has ruled that corporations have free speech rights. Any attempt to rein them in runs afoul of the First Amendment. Get rid of corporate personhood, and maybe ordinary people would have a chance.
It is in fact impossible for any elected politician to ignore lobbyists as long as they have free speech rights. Corruption need not be involved, although it sure can be. The issue is a fundamental power imbalance.
The only way it will ever change is by doing the above, until get used to the idea that every politician is bought and owned by entities other than the voter, which in my opinion subverts our system of government and voids the ideals of the founding fathers. Some will attempt to defend the idea of those with the most money being rightfully in control, that is until it is they do not have it and then they whine that the system is not fair, get the money out of our political system and then we as Citizens will truely have a voice, until then it is all a shell game.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
