The USA votes it’s president in with the Electoral College. Every poll talking about “voters … tie … blah …blah …blah” doesn’t mean shit, cause the voters don’t get to pick the president. Their representatives do. And guess what, their representatives don’t have to represent them. They can vote however they want. They can even get elected and then switch parties to the bad guys team. Also, fuck the GOP.
In 200 odd years there’s been something like 1 case of a faithless elector. For all intents and purposes it’s a filtered general vote. The electors just carry out their district/state’s will.
That would be true if electoral votes were proportional to states’ populations. As it is now, your vote counts (I think) six times more if you live in Wyoming vs if you live in California.
That’s not the issue so much as the “rounding” in the way electoral college votes are distributed. Plus states that do “winner take all”. It has the effect of skewing the results away from being proportional to the popular vote.
Okay? That’s not what they said though. They said elected representatives choose the president. That’s just completely wrong in every sense but the most technical.
I was more replying to you, that it’s the filtering I have issue with. I’m other words I agree that “faithless electors” is not really an issue rather my problem with the electoral system is that it’s not a passthrough and does change the outcome.
Yeah. I’d love to see a system that represented people and not land. But we didn’t keep up with the whole Constitutional Convention every 20 years thing. And the founders were dealing with 13 governments that had their own national egos. So they had to play to those governments instead of the actual people and now we’re stuck with the system. The proportional representation pact is the current best shot. Followed by an amendment and then rolling the dice with a modern Constitutional Convention.
Fun fact: As of 2023, the 2004 general election between Bush and Kerry is the only Presidential election since 1988 where Republicans have won the popular vote.
I wasn’t paying close attention (because of utter revulsion), but I hear leftist podcasts talking about how the economy was in good shape pre-pan. For context, they talk about ways the orange asshole will leverage dem policies to smear Biden. I assume this is correct because I hear it as a talking point from multiple different podcasts. Please, someone correct me if I’m wrong on this.
Millions of Americans are stupid and don’t know how to use their brain. These are the same idiots who drive around town in a truck flailing a trump flag. These are the same morons that drive a Tesla because they think Elon is awesome.
Can we just give it to them then? We make them live under a brutally oppressive dictatorship with reduced rights, while the rest of us continue to participate in a democracy? We separate them out from society, put them into camps. They could have their own gestapo-esque police force that only had jurisdiction over them. We could even make Trump the head of that police force, but give him no real power outside of the camps, they’d just all live in isolation from the outside world, like Jim Jones or the Branch Dravidians.
The thing is they don’t want that for themselves, they want that for everyone else. The republican mentality has become freedom for me and not for you because they hate being told what to do but love telling others what they can and cannot do.
What we need to do is get them to go into the camps themselves so that we can’t be accused of oppressing them. Just tell them that living in the camps would own the liberals and make them cry salty tears. Make a movie about an empowered girl who leaves the camp and becomes a success and encourage Ben Shapiro to see it so he’ll make a 1-hour video about how people not living in camps proves American men are not masculine anymore. Those sorts of things.
That’s because they all think they are the special individual that will be given special treatment and that all the bad things will happen to groups they don’t like.
Because they are stupid.
That’s why we got the famous direct quote: “He’s not hurting the right ones”.
The Roman Historian Sallust once said “Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master”
I remember posting that quote on Facebook once probably about 12 years ago. An older guy I worked with at the time chimed in that he was one of the few and how important liberty was to him.
It's to be expected for Christians (et al); a vast majority have been taught at a young age that the perfect society is one where a benevolent god makes all the decisions and you just shut up and do as you're told. It was never The People's Republic of Heaven; it's the Kingdom of Heaven.
I think I agree with their central point, but the writing is terrible. Legitimately reads like the author forgot to take their ADHD medication before writing it.
The wording implies that the heads of big media groups being white has (significant) impact on “the media […] choosing ratings over democracy”.
Corporations choosing profits above moral considerations is a significant component of capitalism. If a CEO chooses moral over profits they’re a terrible CEO and will be replaced immediately.
So the author is taking a core component of capitalism (choosing profits over morals) and claims that it only exists because of the colour of skin of people in higher-up positions.
That’s racist.
They take something negative (choosing profits) and blame it on people with a certain attribute (white skin), while that attribute has nothing to do with the negative.
No. That’s what you’re making it about. What major media/news organization in the is not “white” owned/controlled. You’re accusing them of being racist for pointing out that the lions share is controlled by groups that would classically be considered “white”.
And no, morals are not incompatible with capitalism. If it were there wouldn’t be all these religious exceptions etc. Morals are incompatible with authoritarianism like fascism.
What’s the point of pointing out that a lot of media is controlled by white people?
“Haha random fun fact did you know that the CEO’s skin is pretty bright?” Why not talk about the CEO’s hair colour? Because the point is not a random fun fact, the point is racism.
morals are not incompatible with capitalism
I never claimed they were. You can limit capitalism by enforcing morals through laws. But that’s not a part of capitalism. It is a limit imposed on the natural imorality that comes with capitalism.
(By the way: I’m not anti capitalism, even if my tone may make it seem that way. I’m just focusing on this perhaps negative component of capitalism because it’s relevant to the topic.)
Pointing out racial disparities is not racism. No matter how much you perform your outrage. Saying that only white people are fit to really be CEOs would be racist. Pointing out that oddly most CEOs are white is not racist. Oh and by the way just to scare you with a boogeyman, CRT!
Oh and you literally said that if a CEO put morals over profits that they would be a bad CEO and replaced. Basically implying that morals are incompatible with capitalism.
By the way I am anti-capitalism in large scope. And I’m also against whiny little concern trolls.
Depends on the context. Just like the “jewish-controlled media” (when talking about e.g. the new yorker) would have an implication, the “white-controlled media” has an implication, too.
This information can be presented independently, but you have to wonder why this disconnceted information is brought in multiple times in just the opening of the article.
a boogeyman, CRT!
I’m not American. Private slave ownership never existed in my country. (The term “race” when referring to a group of humans, however, is very ill-regarded.)
I see. So you’re trying to misrepresent, and worse gaslight someone else about something you have no personal experience with and no very little about. Good to know.
What do I have no personal experience with? Slavery? Or Americans? Or white-controlled media? Or racism?
What personal experience would you say I’d need so I could make the claim that “the jewish-controlled media is trying to sway people away from democracy” is a problematic statement?
(By the way good job moving away from the topic and moving to baseless attacks against me.)
So-called ‘reverse racism’ (ie just normal racism) has become shockingly acceptable in online discourse. To me, it’s just absurd how the same people who’d be outraged at black stereotypes will turn around and say ‘lol white girls fuck dogs’.
Kiddo I am a white male. Take your reverse racism and shove it. I can be racist against myself if I want to. And yet you still cannot explain the disparity in much of American society without pointing to the factual and enduring racism and racial bias that exists in it to this day.
And that’s irrelevant. Racism is racism no matter who does it, and defending racism is still defending racism.
Racism is racism yes. But what you’re pointing out isn’t racism. You are accusing him of racism for pointing out the long-term impacts of The United States long and continuing history of racism. That is a completely different thing. And it is pretty disingenuous of you to imply otherwise. Further if he is part of the group you’re accusing her of being bigoted against. That is a pretty silly thing to imply. And I have to say you are in wrong here.
Why don’t you first explain what white people specifically have to do with the media chasing ratings. Would black-controlled media not chase ratings just as aggressively? Are non-white people more moral on average?
He already did. Things like slavery, segregation, redlining, and discrimination much of which does still get seen today. Explains it handily.
And then why did you go on to throw up all those strawmen? None of that was anything he ever implied accused or even addressed. It simply doesn’t have anything to do with the discussion. Those are all non sequiter.
Perhaps you should answer your own question. Why is it that white males are so overrepresented in such positions. I think that’s the much more pertinent and interesting question to ask. And you have not answered that.
Racism is racism yes. But what you’re pointing out isn’t racism. You are accusing him of racism for pointing out the long-term impacts of The United States long and continuing history of racism. That is a completely different thing. And it is pretty disingenuous of you to imply otherwise. Further if he is part of the group you’re accusing her of being bigoted against. That is a pretty silly thing to imply. And I have to say you are in wrong here.
As the other guy said, replace literally any other race with ‘white’ in it and it suddenly sounds extremely racist; especially if you include any other stereotype in there, like saying ‘(insert race) run media is responsible for (insert negative race stereotype here)’. That was the original point, which is that the way this line was written comes across as racist.
Also, idk who died and made that guy the representative of ‘all white people’ but I think you’d agree that a black guy defending racism against his own race would still be called a racist, or at least an enabler. The African-American community even has a specific term for it.
He already did. Things like slavery, segregation, redlining, and discrimination much of which does still get seen today. Explains it handily.
Saying it’s explained by ‘lul whites’ is nothing more than racism itself; especially when you continue to blame white people today for ‘enabling fascism’, especially when said ‘white people’ are liberals.
And then why did you go on to throw up all those strawmen? None of that was anything he ever implied accused or even addressed. It simply doesn’t have anything to do with the discussion. Those are all non sequiter.
What strawmen? I simply pointed out that the article pointing fingers at ‘white run media’ gives this an unnecessary race angle, and that if you don’t deny it, there’s at least an implicit understanding that media run by people of any other color would be dissimilar, in their view.
Perhaps you should answer your own question. Why is it that white males are so overrepresented in such positions. I think that’s the much more pertinent and interesting question to ask. And you have not answered that.
That’s not a question I asked. I’m well aware of what you’re trying to shift the narrative towards, and I’m not having it. Stop blaming ‘institutionalized racism’ for everything, including the ills of capitalism.
It’s not even remotely racist. One cannot be racist by simply pointing out an actual verifiable fact. Beyond a lion’s share of CEOs and owners are disproportionately white. Especially when it comes to media companies. And that isn’t a racist thing to say that simply an observation. To say that only white people should be CEOs would be raised. You are grasping at straws. Basically seeking and excuse to be outraged. Would it be racist for me to say that most slaves in America were and still are black? Because it’s a verifiable fact. Not all were but most were and still are.
I agree you never actually ask the question. Though if you were ever to be honest you would have asked it of yourself. But you aren’t being honest. You are just going around the screaming racism at facts you don’t like. Quite childish.
lol funny that you (and others) keep making the same ‘but it’s just stating facts!!!’ argument rather than actually addressing the core of the discussion, which is that (insert race)-controlled (insert institution) is encouraging/helping spread (insert stereotype)!!!’ would be considered racist by anyone if used for any other race.
Go ahead, tell me that swapping around communities and institutions wouldn’t make it sound like some extremely common rhetoric that you’ve obviously heard elsewhere.
Just a privilege little white kid talking about shit he doesn’t know. The fact that you’re white does not make it any better calling out another white person claiming reverse racism. A thing that doesn’t exist. It just drives home the point that you have no idea what you’re talking about. You know what’s worse than racism. Pretending it and its effects do not exist.
And I should not have to explain well-known American history to you. Has school failed you that badly. That you learned nothing about slavery segregation or the ongoing racial divide that still exists to this day. Effects that extend into all ownership not just the media. Or are you just another foreigner trying to tell someone who’s experienced and lived through all this that what they feel what they’ve seen what they know is wrong. I don’t take kindly to gas lighters.
Holy shit, can’t believe you wrote a whole essay and still failed to address any of my points in any meaningful way. I’m not sure if your reading comprehension is just that dogshit, or your prefrontal cortex is so horrendously atrophied that your response to any evil in the world is ‘lol white people amirite’ and then immediately resorting to insinuations of race and privilege if someone challenges your narrow worldview.
Whatever, feel free to wallow in your self-hatred and guilt for the rest of eternity. Frankly, I don’t give a rat’s ass, at least not enough to continue engaging with you. Enjoy being blocked.
Seriously, I had to scroll down this far to find this? Their evidence is that millions of people support Trump, and Trump wants to be a dictator, ergo millions of people want a dictatorship. Sorry, not people: “whites”.
So first, fuck Donald Trump. But while he’s certainly said some wild shit, and I do believe that in his heart he would love to be a dictator, I’m pretty sure he’s never said anything out loud like “I want to be a dictator”. I’m sure a certain number of his fans would be happy to have him as Dear Leader, but most of them want him as President. And, just as many while people voted against Trump as for him, and a significant percentage of the country can’t stand the fucker.
Meanwhile, Trump has been growing more popular with non-whites.
This article reads like a hit piece on “white people” by a 14-year-old.
Add comment