8
submitted 1 year ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] APassenger@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago

These links (clicked and read) are not all that salacious.

Where there are like-minded people, we like to help. If we can get more like-minded people, that's better.

If it was for free market capitalism, I'd have an issue with our contribution. A lot of this is about the spread of democracy. I don't take issue with that.

Self-determination (including the rejection of democracy) seems fundamental to me. Overall, however, I think socialist democracies make the most sense. Beneficent dictatorships seem like a they're one step away from not being beneficial. Slippery slope thing.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That is such an absurd statement to make. To understand how absurd what you're saying is replace Taiwan with Texas or Hawaii and replace US with Russia or China. Then tell me with a straight face that US would allow this level of interference in a US state where Russia or China would groom politicians, sponsor movements via their state orgs, and send weapons there. Last I checked US liberals are still losing their minds over the fact that a Russian oligarch bought a few 100k worth of Fb ads during an election campaign. What these links show is political interference on an incredible scale, and the kind US would never tolerate in a million years.

And don't pretend that this is about spreading democracy, it's about spreading US hegemony. US doesn't even have democracy at home, how can it possibly spread it anywhere else:

What do our findings say about democracy in America? They certainly constitute troubling news for advocates of “populistic” democracy, who want governments to respond primarily or exclusively to the policy preferences of their citizens. In the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not rule—at least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S. political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it.

Having a foreign power take over and run your government isn't what self determination is. Self determination fundamentally starts with having sovereignty, and having a foreign power drive your political system is literally the opposite of that.

[-] APassenger@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago

I have no disagreement with calling our system an oligarchy. It's part of why I'm pro-socialism.

Money isn't the only thing driving the oligarchy, but it's way up there on my list.

Profound, immeasurable wealth is a blight and a hallmark of poor mental health.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml -3 points 1 year ago

Well that's something we can agree on. Politics of any society that allows mass wealth inequality will end up being captured by those who have the wealth. The only way to have a just society is by limiting inequality. And in my view, Americans should not run around the world and interfere in other countries pretending to do it for some grand standing purposes like spreading democracy while their own society is profoundly sick. Fix yourselves and stop playing world police. Let other countries deal with their own problems, and we'll all be in a better place.

this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2023
8 points (57.7% liked)

World News

32286 readers
670 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS