Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

In feudalism the taxes go into your lord's pockets. In democracy you get to vote on how taxes are spent.


In Democracy you get to vote on who gets to vote on how taxes are spent.


Lately turning into getting to vote for who gets to vote for who gets to unilaterally call the shots...


And your landlord was the same entity as your security.


As George Carlin observed, if voting really mattered they wouldn't let you do it.


They do indeed spend a lot of time and effort not letting people do it.

https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/block-the-vote-vot...


“If your vote didn’t matter, they wouldn’t fight so hard to block it.”


Carlin was an insufferable cynic who helped contribute to the nihilistic, cynical, defeatist attitude to politics that affects way too many people. The fact that he probably didn't intend to do this doesn't make it any better.


I don't dispute that Carlin was a cynic, but saying he contributed to political attitudes is an overstatement. There are hordes of people who were and still are making a reality all the things he so cynically highlighted.


He helped make it legitimate to doubt that there can ever be a politician who is not motivated by self-interest.

The fact that self-interest may play a role in the careers of many politicians doesn't undo the damage that this attitude has caused to our polity.

"They're all fuckers, they're the same" is the attitude that leads to people being unable to differentiate between one party that is subject to excessive corporate lobbying and donations, still starts too many wars, and frequently makes mistakes but nevertheless is fundamentally trying to improve most people's lives, and another that wants to destroy Medicaid.


Too much cynicism is destructive, but so is not being able to resist the temptation to see one's political opponents as aliens with inscrutable motives or truly failed or defective human beings with despicable motives.


I am not that interested in motives, since they are rarely truly knowable.

I prefer to judge my political opponents by what they actually do, and by that metric, it is self-evident from both their public and private speech, and from the legislation that they seek to (and sometimes do) pass, that Republicans would like to destroy (or at least massively downsize) redistributive programs that provide assistance to the poor.

Now, as to why they might want to do this, I remain mute and disinterested, since in 61 years of life, I've never heard any explanation that doesn't deconstruct under cross-examination.


Also, everything is a joke with that guy.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: