Do you think some of the greedy rich few who have learned to basically buy elections in the United States of America are doing so in other countries as well?

Question US

Do you think some of the greedy rich few who have learned to basically buy elections in the United States of America are doing so in other countries as well?

by TechnoZeus Posted November 06, 2009 08:45:31

43 answers
Read all 85 comments
+10 raves

Those who have participated in the discussions connected to my political polls here on SodaHead should probably know what I'm talking about already, but for those who don't... consider why it is that some people put so much money into BOTH of the parties that have any reasonable chance at winning in an election in the United States, and consider what the effect is on those elections when some of those same people pay others to slander the very candidates they are supporting financially. Okay, if I just lost you... please check out my older polls and come back here later. Otherwise, consider the question and think about whether or not it's likely that some of those who gain so much through controlling the elections in the United States of America may in fact have their hands in the rest of America as well. Not speculation on my part... I've already had to run for my life. I'm just curious if it's as unobvious as the people who want me dead seem to think it is... and either way, I just want to live my life in peace. If I get sent back to the USA and end up dead... you'll all have your answer. I'm hoping it doesn't come to that.

Answers
Results
Recommend This

		I don't know, but it would explain why some things work the way they do.
		Yes. I expect (or know) that some such people are involved in political corruption across multiple countries or across the Americas.
		No. (People who are involved in political corruption would not cross political boundries in the process.)
		Political corruption is a myth. / Elections don't work that way. / Every politician who is elected into office is exactly who the PEOPLE wanted!
		Undecided (Please leave a comment)
		None of the above (Please leave a comment)

You!

Add Photos & Videos

Top Comment

+3 raves Jester November 08, 2009 14:50:56

Answered: None of the above
Buy elections? That only becomes really possible if you have a citizenry that is inept enough to be swayed by propaganda advertising and ideological and rhetorical sermons.

The Obama campaign is a perfect example of this in action.
View thread

Sort By

Most Raves
Least Raves
Oldest
Newest

text size

Comments

+1 raves
TechnoZeus to m.c. ge... 5 days ago

Yeah, I got one and it nearly cost me my life... so I know exactly what you mean.
Mejink to m.c. ge... 4 days ago

The rich decide nothing unless we are weak to them. But how much do you need it life? The less you need money, the less it has control over you.
+1 raves
TechnoZeus to Mejink 4 days ago

Hehe. I take it you are either rich or oblivious, or both... but nice thoughts, none the less.
Mejink to TechnoZeus 3 days ago (edited)

I'm one who strives to be self-sufficient and diminish money in my future... it's hard, I'm not naive. But it's a goal. I don't want to use money, lol. I'll be truthful, I was given an annuity after my father's death, and that has enabled me to do research every day on many different things, as I currently do not have to work. But this research has shown me that there are new/old better ways, and money is not necessary to lead a full or satisfactory life, if one can learn how to do it.
+1 raves
TechnoZeus to Mejink 2 days ago

Absolutely. Interdependence has both its good and bad points. In an overly populated area of course there is no real choice in the matter... but yes, this planet is big enough that it is still possible to get away from society. Personally, I would rather be a productive member of it... but that is my own preference. Unfortunately even if I did choose to live completely off the land, it's not likely that I could get to some place where I could give it a go in the Americas, and impossible for me to do without putting others at risk. Australia is my home now whether I like it or not. I hope the government here will be nice enough to allow me to like it.
+2 raves
The Bantam Seditioner - Bla... November 08, 2009 06:07:29

Answered: None of the above
I see where you're coming from, but in my opinion, the problem isn't the corporatist fatcats who buy the elections (ok...they're definitely PART of the problem), but the very concept of electoral democracy itself. There's no way any individual can be unconditionally free from tyranny in a society where 51% of random schmucks can vote away the other 49%'s freedom of choice. And that's if we're being extremely generous by presupposing that anywhere near that percentage of "American citizens" actually vote in most elections and feel they have a candidate who represents them among the increasingly identical Republicrats and Demublicans.
+1 raves
TechnoZeus to The Ban... November 08, 2009 07:58:12 (edited)

The concept of an electoral democracy is not where the flaw is. Sure, the current system would work pretty much like you said, in the absense of corruption... but it doesn't have to be that way. The flaw is actually in the format of the electoral process. Specifically, it is one sided because only those who want some candidate in more than they want some candidate out can actually be correctly represented and counted... since only positive votes are allowed. Nobody is allowed to "just say no" to a corrupt politician that they are afraid will win the election... so they vote for another that "has a chance" in order to keep that one out, even if the other seems almost as bad. Think about it. If people could vote directly against one of the candidates as an alternative option... it would no longer be a choice of which side of the same dirty coin any more... because the people could defeat the dirty money. They did it once already without the right to vote against anyone, but it wasn't easy to explain to Barack Obama's Senate staff how to pull it off or why it would work, and it won't catch those who buy political positions by surprise a second time.
+1 raves
whatsatobe November 07, 2009 22:55:16

Answered: Yes. I expect (or know) that some such people are involved in political corruption across multiple countries or across the Americas.
Massive wealth must protect its stained and polluted existence wherever it feels threatened.
TechnoZeus to whatsatobe November 08, 2009 08:08:24

Unfortunately, that does seem to be the case with much of it. In truth, there's no reason why it should be that way. Thei universe and indead even this tiny planet is capable of providing more ... way more... than all of the humans who could stand to live together on one planet could possibly want. The problem is that rather than concentrate on making that happen, those with the most power and wealth seem to concentrate mainly on taking more away from others. Sure, there are those exceptions, who work hard, earn very well, and give what they can back to society... but they can't undo what the corrupt ones are doing.
+1 raves
Parotpirat November 07, 2009 17:58:11

Answered: Yes. I expect (or know) that some such people are involved in political corruption across multiple countries or across the Americas.
You would have to be fairly naive to believe this isn't the case.
Absolute power corrupts, Absolutely.
+1 raves
TechnoZeus to Parotpirat November 08, 2009 08:11:32

Yes, it does seem that way.
+2 raves
diaverde08-MolecularGastron... November 07, 2009 16:01:48

Answered: Yes. I expect (or know) that some such people are involved in political corruption across multiple countries or across the Americas.
The idea that other governments aren't susceptible to the same corruption and greed as that in the U.S. is naive and a bit pompous.
+1 raves
TechnoZeus to diaverd... November 08, 2009 08:18:53

Yeah, exactly... and unfortunately, the biggest reason for the susceptibility has been copied both directly and indirectly from the USA, all over the world... and most people don't even seem to be able to see what the problem is. Now people from any country with enough money and the right connections can participate in over-riding the wishes of the people in that country and buying the results of their elections. Those who enjoy such a privilege really want to keep it that way... but it hurts everyone ... including those same people. They just don't understand that. :(
+1 raves
John Alward Proud American Man November 07, 2009 15:06:51

Answered: Yes. I expect (or know) that some such people are involved in political corruption across multiple countries or across the Americas.
Without question...
+1 raves
TechnoZeus to John Al... November 08, 2009 08:21:10

So I wonder... do you think most people see that? It looks like most of those answering this poll do, but... are they the exception, or do you think most people can see that it's happening?
+1 raves
John Al... to TechnoZeus November 08, 2009 11:46:36

I think almost everyone sees this. The problem as I see it is that people do one of two things; they will either shrug their shoulders, say that's the way it is and do nothing about it, including not vote, or the will continuously vote these long term incumbents in and blame the other guys long term incumbent. Besides, as long as they have plasma tv, unlimited texting, all you can eat buffets and so on, why should they do anything? We're fat, dumb and happy.

Much of the American population, including here on SH talk tough, but when it comes down to it, with the exception of a few, they will do nothing. It's cynical but I believe accurate.
+1 raves
TechnoZeus to John Al... November 08, 2009 12:03:04

Yes, I think you pretty much nailed it. I have offered the solution, and many have seen and understood it, but... I still seemed to be alone in trying to do something about it. Think enough of them may ever wake up before its too late?
John Al... to TechnoZeus November 09, 2009 00:07:12

Only if there are enough people cushioning them from to much commitment. You follow me?
+1 raves
TechnoZeus to John Al... November 09, 2009 00:15:53

Yeah... nobody, or practically nobody, wants to take on such a task without knowing that they'll have lots of other people helping them along the way... and I can't blame them really. It's not easy. Still... it's important. I hope enough people will realize just how important.
John Al... to TechnoZeus November 09, 2009 00:46:07 (edited)

With all due respect to you, TZ, I can blame them. I've hung them out and been castrated so many times because people suddenly become loose their gumption or never had it to begin with but talk a really good game.
But I still keep doing it because it's the right thing to do and that's just the way I'm built.
+1 raves
Warren - Novus Ordo Seclorum November 07, 2009 14:51:56 (edited)

Answered: Yes. I expect (or know) that some such people are involved in political corruption across multiple countries or across the Americas.
No doubt. Haven't see you in a while, hope you're OK. What country are you in and why are people after you? Is this something you can write about?
+1 raves
TechnoZeus to Warren ... November 08, 2009 08:27:19 (edited)

Well, yeah... I suppose I can talk about it. I don't think they will come after me here anyway... and after I get out of immigration detention, (if I ever get my Protection Visa,) I plan to settle down and raise a family, and let the work I have done on this issue continue pretty much without me. Not that I don't want to see the problem get fixed, but... I want my life to be spared. I still have other things to offer this world. Want to start a university some day, for example. Anyway... I'm in Australia. Had to leave the Americas because I was being hunted down there... first in Panama, and then in Bolivia and then in the USA, all because I explained to the wrong people in Panama how step one of my electoral reform plan could help the people in any country that has elections... including theirs.
+1 raves
Bill November 07, 2009 14:33:05

Answered: Yes. I expect (or know) that some such people are involved in political corruption across multiple countries or across the Americas.
I don't think that our greedy politics greed stops at our U.S. borders.
TechnoZeus to Bill November 08, 2009 08:27:52

Unfortunately, I know it doesn't.
+2 raves
Ihr Hase ~ Radix Libertas November 07, 2009 14:10:32

Answered: Yes. I expect (or know) that some such people are involved in political corruption across multiple countries or across the Americas.
Welcome to what socialism really is dude, it is the aristocracy of political pull...
TechnoZeus to Ihr Has... November 08, 2009 08:28:34

Can't say that I really understand what you mean by that. Care to elaborate, please?
Ihr Has... to TechnoZeus November 08, 2009 15:25:21

Politics is fundamentally a socialist concept, as political corruption is, it is dealing for less loss of liberty at the expense of others liberty...

In the end, the people with the most tokens in the assumed jurisdiction of the government (royalty, elected elite, etc.) lose less liberty than the rest, no less slaves, but they are "more equal than others".
TechnoZeus to Ihr Has... November 08, 2009 22:39:47

Now THAT was easy to understand... and yes, that's pretty much how it works. Of course, that would not be a problem in a society in which those with ambition and skill could rise over those without such things without actually pushing them further down in the process. The United States of America was intended to be such a place, but unfortunately fell short due to the exploitation of certain features of how its government works... at the top of which is the flaw in the electoral process that allows those with, as you said, the most tokens... to use their resources in a way that allows them to affect changes in the laws which increase the imbalance rather than help to keep it in check.
Ihr Has... to TechnoZeus November 08, 2009 22:55:32

The problem is not the people who have stuff... it is the people who want what others have that do not want to earn it....

The problem is government in total, as it is a tool to do such an action...
TechnoZeus to Ihr Has... November 08, 2009 23:21:20

It has been, and it is... but it does not have to be. The "idea" of government covers many areas... but of course governance is the root of it, and why people tollerate it in the first place. Although there are those few who would love to live in total anarchy where survival of the most ruthless is the rule, and also those few who honestly believe that in a world without laws people would simply learn to get along well on their own... most tend to agree that it's a good idea to kee people who think only of themselves from being able to do whatever they feel at everyone else's expense. This is where the idea of a government of the people, by the people, and for the people came in. The problem is that it was a good theory but failed in practice because a flaw in the process of electing that government allowed some of those who think only of themselves to use their collected wealth to pick the people running it so that they could change the laws to help them take even more from others.
Ihr Has... to TechnoZeus November 09, 2009 01:33:56

That is far from what civilized people would do in absence of government, uncivilized people like government because it allows them to benefit from theft with no risk of retribution...
TechnoZeus to Ihr Has... November 09, 2009 08:06:08

Not everyone who is born into or chooses to move into a society is or necessarily ever will be civilized. Having a government is to cociety a bit like having dedicated Internet servers is to the Internet. Not necessary, but can have the potential to make things run much more smoothly... and can also end up being the root of many problems. The trick, I think, is to do it right. To keep the power balanced and well distributed. Not easy, but worth the effort. The trouble is that there is no sysem currently in place which allows that to be done. The solution is actually quite simple... let people have an election system that represents the people's votes accurately. For example, it should allow opposing views to be counted as opposing, rather than simply as different from each other but not truely opposite. The unbalanced system of only being able to vote "for" someone, causes votes meant to be against someone to end up counted as for someone or not even cast. Easy to solve... but hard to get those in power to allow a solution for.
Ihr Has... to TechnoZeus November 09, 2009 14:18:03

Regardless the trade off is give in Liberty for the sake of people who need government, therefore it is accepting obligation for nothing in return, in other words slavery. And no matter the role you play in the choosing process, all you are doing is bidding to have the master of your liking, in the hopes (not the guarantee) that the whip will less often be applied to you.

If we examine the true results of government, every war, every genocide, every shred of wealth they rob through taxation, regulation and inflation, the debasement of the human condition to that of a domesticated animal, etc, and stack it against nothing, nothing certainly comes across as the better choice...

I think one of the issues a lot of people have is they misunderstand what anarchy really is, they take for granted that anarchy must be violence in the streets and survival of the fittest....

Anarchy is living without the State, that is to say without arbitrary lawmakers, monopoly judges and enforcers and without a collective that has rights that individuals do not. An anarchist society has laws, judges and police, but these are subject to free market logic....
+1 raves
mk, Smartass Oracle November 07, 2009 06:16:14

Answered: Yes. I expect (or know) that some such people are involved in political corruption across multiple countries or across the Americas.
Its the Golden Rule. Those with the gold rule
+2 raves
TechnoZeus to mk, Sma... November 07, 2009 07:59:37

So true.... and unfortunately, they don't always rule fairly. That's why people tried to change things so many years ago... but unfortunately, they left a big flaw in the election process that has been exploited by some of those with money and power to gain even more money and power at the expense of others.
+1 raves
missnoee November 07, 2009 04:08:53

Answered: Yes. I expect (or know) that some such people are involved in political corruption across multiple countries or across the Americas.
Of course they are ! There is nothing honest in political elections ! Especially on the side that's losing. What I mean is, the losing side reverts to total lies, hatefulness etc to try to discredit the winning side !
+1 raves
TechnoZeus to missnoee November 07, 2009 04:17:24

Yep, and unfortunately the winning side is usually doing it too... but perhaps a bit less desparately. Okay, so we got away from that pretty well for one election... on one side, at least.... but I warned the people that I gave the plan to in the first place that it's not going to take the people who buy the elections by surprise twice in a row. Something needs to be done. I did my best... anyone care to have a go at convincing their senator or congrassman to get that simple electoral reform into place before it's too late?
+2 raves
concerned November 06, 2009 23:35:35

Answered: I don't know, but it would explain why some things work the way they do.
yeah ,, but sometimes I feel like they placed Obama in office so they would have someone other than themself to blame for this bankrupt unemployed country .. But history tells us the republicans always seen things flopping like crazy .. they are so dam greedy it turns my stomach ... they only vote for things that always lead our tax dollars into the hands of corprationsand keep tring to make a job a part of our personal life .. it is just a job .. Now they are tring to stop healthcare or insurance reform from happening .. they have their plants everywhere .. well BUSH was spending time bankrupting this country they were quite or a mouse .. but oh now they have so much to say
+1 raves
TechnoZeus to concerned November 07, 2009 04:41:44

Well, it is possible that they didn't try very hard this time, because they knew whoever got in would have Bush's mess to clean up.... but it looked to me like they were really trying for World War.
McCain actually seemed convinced that more war would improve the economy. Well... it would create JOBS, sure... but there are better ways.
concerned to TechnoZeus November 14, 2009 17:26:37

Well I seem to see from Mccain was listern to the generals .. and now we have two .. wonder what he thinks now .. LOL We will have to peace this economy back togather for sure .. and if Mccain would have won .. there would be even more unemployement and more hungry people becasue he would not have had enough taxes to pay unemployment or enough taxes to keep the schools open .. giving tax breaks takes away from those things .. and others ..