The DNC is a corporation.
Corporate Democrats fear democracy.
If things don't go according to script, sabotage commences.
The character assassination attempts against the Sanders campaign right before IOWA caucus was only the first stage. Warren accusing Sanders of sexism was a dirty tactic that backfired and old perv. and Patriot Act architect Uncle Joe resonates with exactly no one under 65.
The DNC is terrified that their cookie-cutter corporate candidates are falling flat on their cardboard faces.
In a way this is fun to watch - but it makes a mockery of democracy as you point out.
We don't live in a democracy though, we live in a plutocracy/oligarchy and we have no influence over the controlled democratic process as it currently stands.
The script became Buttigieg is a surprise winner, Sanders supporters are sore losers and conspiracy theorists, while Biden's flop is swept under the rug. The eventual vote totals will hardly be mentioned. The narrative managers are masters at crafting dramatic storylines to suit their agenda.
It's not surprising that other nations look at the US of A — allegedly the richest and most powerful nation on the planet — and just scratch their heads, if they are not laughing outright. Yesterday/today's debacle? How can we seriously be expected to be taken seriously... except by flexing our muscles and exercising bully tactics?
Institutions focus the power of sovereign individuals, creating Great Leaders. While it is obvious that nefarious parties will seek that power, and so corrupt institutions, that will not be my point here.
The problem is more fundamental. We are neither Ubermensch, nor untermensch. There are not really Great Leaders, and the creation of them through institutional mechanisms deranges the natural social function of humanity. We are peers, and our societal mechanisms should be designed to effect our ends without creating artificially superpowered parties.
While the extant system is what there is, the distortion of our human society such institutional mechanisms cause is revealed here, with the several ways in which those vying for the Great Leader status compete to seize it invariably producing apparent deception.
I cannot support such a system for implementing the mutual ends of the peers in society. I don't think elevating peers to the status of Great Leaders can be more than occasionally beneficial, like a broken clock telling the right time. I am sorry you are dismayed by this clusterfuck. I know you feel your candidate for Great Leader is the best choice of those on offer, but I submit that there should be no such Great Leader at all, and the clusterfuck is simply a specific example of the unavoidable failure any system of delegating our sovereign authority to a Great Leader must inevitably produce.
We are peers, and our societal mechanisms should be designed to effect our ends without creating artificially superpowered parties.
Now, wouldn't that be nice..? I agree with all you're saying here @valued-customer, which is why Sanders is the only choice here; he'll be on top of an institutional hierarchy, but as a human he exhumes modesty and a willingness to fight for his peers, all other humans.
I appreciate your intellectual grasp of my point, but note the latter part of your reply simply restates your intention of supporting the extant system.
Our ability to undertake rational systems of social function are only possible insofar as we do not expend our effort otherwise. Support for any Great Leader is support for the extant system, and opposes the natural functioning society we are responsible for.
I do encourage you to end that support for demonstrably harmful social mechanisms, and to act to effect rational and endemic social modalities.
Support for any Great Leader is support for the extant system, and opposes the natural functioning society we are responsible for.
I'm a dreamer myself and dream often about a communist anarchy (which is just communism as communism is a stateless society without money). All I'm saying is we're not there yet, not by a long shot. Until then we work with what we've got. And every other election, when there isn't someone like Sanders on the ballot, I hold your position and refuse to support the system.In The Netherlands, where I live, there's no one even close to Bernie, so I do not vote here, just to give an example. If those lucky Americans didn't have Sanders, all my posts would be about refusing the vote, as I've written often in the past. Here's a chance, even if it's a small one, to change things a little closer to what we want; a more equal distribution of power.
I do appreciate your call to inaction though; it's the principled position to hold, without doubt.
The caucus procedure has always been a bit baffling to me. Buttigieg coming in first is a surprise but if you recall in the past, the Iowa caucus routinely have weird winners, who go on to fizzle out soon thereafter.
What a great article and great piece of writing. For me, US politics and it's intricate build up to the main event has always been confusing but I learned more in the 5 minutes it took to read this than the rest of my life!
Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 4.002 which ranks you at #4089 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has improved 1 places in the last three days (old rank 4090).
In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 87 contributions, your post is ranked at #41.
Evaluation of your UA score:
Some people are already following you, keep going!
The readers like your work!
Try to work on user engagement: the more people that interact with you via the comments, the higher your UA score!
The DNC is a corporation.
Corporate Democrats fear democracy.
If things don't go according to script, sabotage commences.
The character assassination attempts against the Sanders campaign right before IOWA caucus was only the first stage. Warren accusing Sanders of sexism was a dirty tactic that backfired and old perv. and Patriot Act architect Uncle Joe resonates with exactly no one under 65.
The DNC is terrified that their cookie-cutter corporate candidates are falling flat on their cardboard faces.
In a way this is fun to watch - but it makes a mockery of democracy as you point out.
We don't live in a democracy though, we live in a plutocracy/oligarchy and we have no influence over the controlled democratic process as it currently stands.
The script became Buttigieg is a surprise winner, Sanders supporters are sore losers and conspiracy theorists, while Biden's flop is swept under the rug. The eventual vote totals will hardly be mentioned. The narrative managers are masters at crafting dramatic storylines to suit their agenda.
Precisely, well summarized!
Exactly that! Thanks for the perfect summary @skepticology !
You're right of course: in a way this mockery IS fun to watch... I really appreciate you stopping by and commenting @v4vapid, thanks so much !
It's not surprising that other nations look at the US of A — allegedly the richest and most powerful nation on the planet — and just scratch their heads, if they are not laughing outright. Yesterday/today's debacle? How can we seriously be expected to be taken seriously... except by flexing our muscles and exercising bully tactics?
=^..^=
I agree with all you're saying here. Thanks so much for stopping by @curatorcat.ccc !
Institutions focus the power of sovereign individuals, creating Great Leaders. While it is obvious that nefarious parties will seek that power, and so corrupt institutions, that will not be my point here.
The problem is more fundamental. We are neither Ubermensch, nor untermensch. There are not really Great Leaders, and the creation of them through institutional mechanisms deranges the natural social function of humanity. We are peers, and our societal mechanisms should be designed to effect our ends without creating artificially superpowered parties.
While the extant system is what there is, the distortion of our human society such institutional mechanisms cause is revealed here, with the several ways in which those vying for the Great Leader status compete to seize it invariably producing apparent deception.
I cannot support such a system for implementing the mutual ends of the peers in society. I don't think elevating peers to the status of Great Leaders can be more than occasionally beneficial, like a broken clock telling the right time. I am sorry you are dismayed by this clusterfuck. I know you feel your candidate for Great Leader is the best choice of those on offer, but I submit that there should be no such Great Leader at all, and the clusterfuck is simply a specific example of the unavoidable failure any system of delegating our sovereign authority to a Great Leader must inevitably produce.
Thanks!
Now, wouldn't that be nice..? I agree with all you're saying here @valued-customer, which is why Sanders is the only choice here; he'll be on top of an institutional hierarchy, but as a human he exhumes modesty and a willingness to fight for his peers, all other humans.
I appreciate your intellectual grasp of my point, but note the latter part of your reply simply restates your intention of supporting the extant system.
Our ability to undertake rational systems of social function are only possible insofar as we do not expend our effort otherwise. Support for any Great Leader is support for the extant system, and opposes the natural functioning society we are responsible for.
I do encourage you to end that support for demonstrably harmful social mechanisms, and to act to effect rational and endemic social modalities.
Thanks!
I'm a dreamer myself and dream often about a communist anarchy (which is just communism as communism is a stateless society without money). All I'm saying is we're not there yet, not by a long shot. Until then we work with what we've got. And every other election, when there isn't someone like Sanders on the ballot, I hold your position and refuse to support the system.In The Netherlands, where I live, there's no one even close to Bernie, so I do not vote here, just to give an example. If those lucky Americans didn't have Sanders, all my posts would be about refusing the vote, as I've written often in the past. Here's a chance, even if it's a small one, to change things a little closer to what we want; a more equal distribution of power.
I do appreciate your call to inaction though; it's the principled position to hold, without doubt.
I myself did the same thing regarding Ron Paul, which today I would not do for the above reasons, so I appreciate your position.
Thanks!
The caucus procedure has always been a bit baffling to me. Buttigieg coming in first is a surprise but if you recall in the past, the Iowa caucus routinely have weird winners, who go on to fizzle out soon thereafter.
You're not dumb at all, @dumb-news ;-) Thanks so much for stopping by!
What a great article and great piece of writing. For me, US politics and it's intricate build up to the main event has always been confusing but I learned more in the 5 minutes it took to read this than the rest of my life!
Brilliant overview. Thanks and best wishes :-)
Posted using Partiko Android
Thank you so much for the kind words @nathen007!
Hi @zyx066!
Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 4.002 which ranks you at #4089 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has improved 1 places in the last three days (old rank 4090).
In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 87 contributions, your post is ranked at #41.
Evaluation of your UA score:
Feel free to join our @steem-ua Discord server