User Tag List

12 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 20

  1. #1
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default great ted talk about american political system



    Quote Originally Posted by description
    There is a corruption at the heart of American politics, caused by the dependence of Congressional candidates on funding from the tiniest percentage of citizens. That's the argument at the core of this blistering talk by legal scholar Lawrence Lessig. With rapid-fire visuals, he shows how the funding process weakens the Republic in the most fundamental way, and issues a rallying bipartisan cry that will resonate with many in the U.S. and beyond.
    Add the two party system to this and well

    This issue he is talking in Finland(and i think in many other countries) is not an issue at all. When it comes to Finland, first of all the amount of fundings(from a single source) is limited in campaigning and all the funding has to be public and if there is some shady business going on with the fundings there is a HUGE media coverage and shit storm going on(and possibly some legal consequences). Its really a shame that capitalism has stronger influence in politics than democracy in USA.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  2. #2

    Default

    I think its a complex issue, capitalism has to be defined in so far as its corrupting role in politics is being considered because power, status, class stratification, dynastic rivalries or legacies, those things all result in corruption or at the very least entropy and degeneration.

    Of course the economy underpins everything and probably creates a certain sort of culture but its even more broad and even more insidious than perhaps the simple idea that people can betray their constituencies for money or that other people will attempt to buy influence.

    For instance the idea that more political parties will solve the problems which do exist to me just reflects the consumerist idea that more choice is simply better, an improvement on less, or the market ideology that more choice, greater variety, more suppliers will result in useful competition with a more efficient and equitable allocation of resources.

    In reality exercises in branding can thinly disguise a generic product, competition were it exists is usually limited, mitigated and/or when it escalates a symptom of impending collapse or failure before a winner takes all and consolidates their market share as unassailable.

    Managerialism explains politics pretty well, there is a narcissism of small differences in all functional democracies but pretty much the parties function as brands of professional public handlers.

  3. #3

    Default

    Off topic, could anyone tell me of a good way of filtering or selecting TED talks? I've heard lots of people talking about them online and I've watched the Post Secret one, are there sites other than Youtube which list topics or you just have to search yourself through youtube using keywords? Are there any other examples of anything similar to TED talks?

    I've found a lot of material on youtube which is shockingly disappointing, its not just the lack of production values either, there's a lot of people who post videos of themselves ranting or talking to their webcams to some imagined audience or gallery and its just even more annoying than when I read walls of text motivated by the same thing.

  4. #4
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    I think its a complex issue, capitalism has to be defined in so far as its corrupting role in politics is being considered because power, status, class stratification, dynastic rivalries or legacies, those things all result in corruption or at the very least entropy and degeneration.

    Of course the economy underpins everything and probably creates a certain sort of culture but its even more broad and even more insidious than perhaps the simple idea that people can betray their constituencies for money or that other people will attempt to buy influence.

    For instance the idea that more political parties will solve the problems which do exist to me just reflects the consumerist idea that more choice is simply better, an improvement on less, or the market ideology that more choice, greater variety, more suppliers will result in useful competition with a more efficient and equitable allocation of resources.

    In reality exercises in branding can thinly disguise a generic product, competition were it exists is usually limited, mitigated and/or when it escalates a symptom of impending collapse or failure before a winner takes all and consolidates their market share as unassailable.

    Managerialism explains politics pretty well, there is a narcissism of small differences in all functional democracies but pretty much the parties function as brands of professional public handlers.
    Simple solution to the problem; limit the amount of funding from a single source to lets say 5000 dollars.

    All complexities beyond that are just imaginary shit or excuses from people who benefit from it.

    What comes to that selecting ted talks thing, personally i just subscribe to their channel and see if the topics of new videos seem interesting. This works fine for me.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    Simple solution to the problem; limit the amount of funding from a single source to lets say 5000 dollars.

    All complexities beyond that are just imaginary shit or excuses from people who benefit from it.

    What comes to that selecting ted talks thing, personally i just subscribe to their channel and see if the topics of new videos seem interesting. This works fine for me.
    I can think of a bunch of ways to circumvent rules like that, cant you?

    I think I might subscribe too.

  6. #6
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    I can think of a bunch of ways to circumvent rules like that, cant you?
    Yea, but its kinda hard if all funds used on your campaigning is public information and people might want to think twice before trying to do crimes that might ruin their whole political career and get bashed in media about corruption.

    Im not saying that the system would be water proof and there has been some scandals about this in finland too http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Fi...inance_scandal , but the fact that its something seen as illegal and scandalous would definitely make a difference in the whole election system.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  7. #7
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    Simple solution to the problem; limit the amount of funding from a single source to lets say 5000 dollars.
    Already done.

    http://www.opensecrets.org/overview/limits.php

    Its also already public information.

  8. #8
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    Already done.

    http://www.opensecrets.org/overview/limits.php

    Its also already public information.
    Reducing the amount a single contributer can give is way too easy to get around. For anyone who's really dead set on controlling the influence of money on the race, I'd suggest actually capping the total amount of money a campaign is allowed to get altogether and having the government provide matching funds.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  9. #9
    Senior Member cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,827

    Default

    I like the idea of totally publicly funded elections with mandatory voting on a national voting holiday. Problem is, the people that are in a position to make that happen would be cutting their own throats if they did it.

    A public servant involved in the regulatory process who allows themselves to be influenced by the industry they are regulating for personal gain or whose close associates accept favors, etc ought to face criminal prosecution and public shame.
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Reducing the amount a single contributer can give is way too easy to get around. For anyone who's really dead set on controlling the influence of money on the race, I'd suggest actually capping the total amount of money a campaign is allowed to get altogether and having the government provide matching funds.
    I would suggest that if you are going to sponsor or otherwise finance campaigns there ought to be a special tax band or obligatory public finance contribution to be made which matches political financing.

    I think the big issue is that political and public financing are divorced because it divorces politicians from citizens and national taxpayers and often their political/corporate sponsors and pay masters are operating at an even greater remove themselves. If they the politicians are well financed regardless what should they care if they legislate irresponsibly or in a partisan ideological manner or introduce cuts or spending priorities which will prove unsustainable and devisive?

    I'm very, very wary about public financing of campaigns because it would mean that tax payers are supporting with their money political organisations which they would under no circumstances support otherwise, for instance socialist tax payers in the UK financing the campaigns of the neo-nazi British National Party or blacks, jews and catholics in the US supporting Ku Klux Klan fronts or sympathisers, I know tax payers money is already used on things they may not support, such as abortion, state executions, foreign militarism or aid but I dont consider them in the same league.

Similar Threads

  1. I love this about my country's political system.
    By ilikeitlikethat in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-10-2017, 05:48 PM
  2. when you talk about politics
    By Agent Jelly in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 09-20-2011, 08:49 AM
  3. [ENFJ] ENFJ: Talk About Yourself!
    By Usehername in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 167
    Last Post: 03-24-2010, 01:09 AM
  4. TED talks politics.
    By DiscoBiscuit in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-22-2009, 01:41 AM
  5. What excites you? What do you wish people would talk about with you?
    By ladypinkington in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 08-05-2007, 03:58 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO