This is a bit reductionist, no? Any and all embers of hope at eliminating wealth inequality are dashed as soon as they are much more than that, all at the behest of shareholders and lobbyists whose money conveniently slips into both blue and red pockets. At this point if you think voting is going to turn this around, man do I have a bridge to sell you. The only thing that will incite material change will be riot, miracle, meteor, or—hey, even more relevantly with another imperialist world war on the horizon—maybe a couple hundred nuclear-tipped warheads! We probably won’t get to vote on that one, ya think?
Maursault|3 years ago
No. But even if it was... your point is?
> At this point if you think voting is going to turn this around
Indeed I do. Republicans want small government (read: no regulation) and support conservatism (read: maintain status quo & low tolerance for others), while other parties are progressive (read: open to changes) and liberal (read: tolerant). Republicans in power are massively over-represented and have been for more than 20 years in the minority, and yet, they are stifling the majority while holding them hostage with illegal acts, such as fraud, efforts to prevent Blacks from voting, gerrymandering, or refusing to execute their sworn duties as elected representatives.
Residents of D.C. and Puerto Rico, US citizens, are being taxed without representation. Clearly this is unethical. If only they could exercise their right to vote, we wouldn't be having this problem. Or if some Californians moved into Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, again, the crushing yoke of Republican tyranny could be cast off, and the US would begin to operate as intended, i.e. as a republic.
broken8ball|3 years ago
survirtual|3 years ago