Current Events > politics is all about power and ego, i hate it

(+) Yeah! (+)

not necessarily in that order either

awful
---

If you took that away it would just be bureaucracy
---

MedeaLysistrata posted...

If you took that away it would just be bureaucracy

the dream
---

Im all about facts, my man.
---

That's why most if the politicians are there, yes. For the rest of us, all we see is political theatre. One grandstanding after another, and people eat it up.
---

https://local.theonion.com/insecure-frustrated-bully-with-something-to-prove-cons-1819575405
---

Squall28 posted...

That's why most if the politicians are there, yes. For the rest of us, all we see is political theatre. One grandstanding after another, and people eat it up.

I think most people are kind of politically uninterested except for one or two strongly held opinions they have based on their life experiences. If even that. Or at least that was how things were before this presidency iirc, honestly everyone is like overcompensating now that trump is president
---

so youve never heard of bernie sanders

I heard in the bathrooms they adjust the urinals so that they catch the pee as it runs off their balls.
---

Omnislasher posted...

so youve never heard of bernie sanders

he's alright
---

Balrog0 posted...

Omnislasher posted...

so youve never heard of bernie sanders

he's alright

ya ok cool guy

what?
---

Government is the institution that gets to legally initiate violence in a given geographic region. I dont see how politics could be anything other than scummy, particularly when a government gets to be as massive as ours. Its no coincidence that there is a ton of wealth around DC, and its not because they are building semiconductors and cars.
---

tennisdude818 posted...

I dont see how politics could be anything other than scummy, particularly when a government gets to be as massive as ours.

this is at least as true of lower levels of government as it is for the federal government
---

Balrog0 posted...

tennisdude818 posted...

I dont see how politics could be anything other than scummy, particularly when a government gets to be as massive as ours.

this is at least as true of lower levels of government as it is for the federal government

A mayor in Alabama can do some damage, but he cant destroy Iraq and Libya while enriching Lockheed Martin. He also cant saddle future generations with trillions in unfunded liabilities.
---

tennisdude818 posted...

Balrog0 posted...

tennisdude818 posted...

I dont see how politics could be anything other than scummy, particularly when a government gets to be as massive as ours.

this is at least as true of lower levels of government as it is for the federal government

A mayor in Alabama can do some damage, but he cant destroy Iraq and Libya while enriching Lockheed Martin. He also cant saddle future generations with trillions in unfunded liabilities.

seems like a total non-sequitur
---

Balrog0 posted...

tennisdude818 posted...

Balrog0 posted...

tennisdude818 posted...

I dont see how politics could be anything other than scummy, particularly when a government gets to be as massive as ours.

this is at least as true of lower levels of government as it is for the federal government

A mayor in Alabama can do some damage, but he cant destroy Iraq and Libya while enriching Lockheed Martin. He also cant saddle future generations with trillions in unfunded liabilities.

seems like a total non-sequitur

Nope. They are examples of how the stakes are higher at the Federal level, and only get higher as the government gets bigger. That goes hand in hand with the rot that we have in DC now. The Federal government can do the most damage, and it does.
---

i seriously don't understand what you're doing on about. for instance even if politics weren't about power and ego, you might could convince people to do horrible things for their own sake. some people would say that your stance on illegal immigration is an example of that, for instance, a thing people think not because they're interested in brokering power and their own image but a genuinely held opinion that is odious

on the other hand, even the only thing you can control is a city budget, the politics involved could be petty and based on ego and self-interest.

so maybe im not sure i understand where you're coming from, when you said politics is scummy especially at bigger levels of government i thought you were responding to me and the op and having a conversation about this topic rather than bringing up something new
---

Delirious_Beard posted...

https://local.theonion.com/insecure-frustrated-bully-with-something-to-prove-cons-1819575405

---

It also used to be about assassinations, but we don't do that kind of assassination much anymore. Character assassinations are much more commonplace, and public.
---

EverDownward posted...

It also used to be about assassinations, but we don't do that kind of assassination much anymore. Character assassinations are much more commonplace, and public.

what about duels? I feel like those could make a come back
---

Balrog0 posted...

i seriously don't understand what you're doing on about. for instance even if politics weren't about power and ego, you might could convince people to do horrible things for their own sake. some people would say that your stance on illegal immigration is an example of that, for instance, a thing people think not because they're interested in brokering power and their own image but a genuinely held opinion that is odious

on the other hand, even the only thing you can control is a city budget, the politics involved could be petty and based on ego and self-interest.

so maybe im not sure i understand where you're coming from, when you said politics is scummy especially at bigger levels of government i thought you were responding to me and the op and having a conversation about this topic rather than bringing up something new

Politics is about power (per your OP) and the US federal government is the most powerful institution on the planet that countless interests latch onto for resources. This concept applies at lower levels of government, but to a lesser degree.

If you were saying that local politicians can be dirtbags too, I agree. If you are saying that they tend to be as scummy as federal politicians, I disagree.

My original point was the government is a dirty business, so the players involved will be dirty too.
---

tennisdude818 posted...

This concept applies at lower levels of government, but to a lesser degree.

I don't see how this follows

tennisdude818 posted...

If you were saying that local politicians can be dirtbags too, I agree. If you are saying that they tend to be as scummy as federal politicians, I disagree.

i'm saying that the politics are no less about ego and power than they are at higher levels of government

if anything i'd say they tend to be more that way because many fewer people pay attention to them -- and those that do usually have direct material interests in the policies involved, whereas you have legitimate ideologues that can have some influence at the federal level
---

Balrog0 posted...

tennisdude818 posted...

This concept applies at lower levels of government, but to a lesser degree.

I don't see how this follows

Then please refer to the segment of my post that you didnt quote. Power corrupts, and it attracts corrupt players.

tennisdude818 posted...

If you were saying that local politicians can be dirtbags too, I agree. If you are saying that they tend to be as scummy as federal politicians, I disagree.

Balrog0 posted...

i'm saying that the politics are no less about ego and power than they are at higher levels of government

if anything i'd say they tend to be more that way because many fewer people pay attention to them -- and those that do usually have direct material interests in the policies involved, whereas you have legitimate ideologues that can have some influence at the federal level

The federal government generally gets much more attention than local governments, but it also has more tools at its disposal to temporarily numb or obscure the negative impact of its policies (longer term cheap debt, interest rate suppression via the Fed). This invites more dishonesty, which enables powerhungry egomaniacs.
---

Squall28 posted...

For the rest of us, all we see is political theatre. One grandstanding after another, and people eat it up.

with this last election it has gone from theatre to a freaking circus or reality TV or Jerry Springer levels
---

tennisdude818 posted...

Then please refer to the segment of my post that you didnt quote. Power corrupts, and it attracts corrupt players.

tennisdude818 posted...
If you were saying that local politicians can be dirtbags too, I agree. If you are saying that they tend to be as scummy as federal politicians, I disagree.

I got it. I'm saying it doesn't follow. Please explain how it does. Your argument to this point is just based on the fact that the federal government has more power, but we don't go vote for a 'federal government,' it's composed of many players, many of whom are powerless. E.g., congress is 535 people, my city council is only 10. So even if what you're saying is true in theory, the practice is much more complicated.

tennisdude818 posted...

The federal government generally gets much more attention than local governments, but it also has more tools at its disposal to temporarily numb or obscure the negative impact of its policies (longer term cheap debt, interest rate suppression via the Fed). This invites more dishonesty, which enables powerhungry egomaniacs.

I disagree entirely that deficit financing and monetary policy are what enable 'scummy' politicians. Which seems like a bizarre thing to think. The best argument that local offices are less corruptible than federal offices is just that theyre smaller and therefore theoretically it's easier for normal people to run and win elections. But like I said, a disproportionately smaller number of people pay attention and the people who do are disproportionately self interested in the outcome.
---

Balrog0 posted...

tennisdude818 posted...

Then please refer to the segment of my post that you didnt quote. Power corrupts, and it attracts corrupt players.

tennisdude818 posted...
If you were saying that local politicians can be dirtbags too, I agree. If you are saying that they tend to be as scummy as federal politicians, I disagree.

I got it. I'm saying it doesn't follow. Please explain how it does. Your argument to this point is just based on the fact that the federal government has more power, but we don't go vote for a 'federal government,' it's composed of many players, many of whom are powerless. E.g., congress is 535 people, my city council is only 10. So even if what you're saying is true in theory, the practice is much more complicated.

Well your OP literally says, "Politics is about power", so naturally I focused on the Federal Government's size and power. Congress has many people... who fall in line with 1 of 2 parties most of the time. The authority of those 2 parties is not evenly shared among everyone, and I'm not focused on inconsequential players.

tennisdude818 posted...

The federal government generally gets much more attention than local governments, but it also has more tools at its disposal to temporarily numb or obscure the negative impact of its policies (longer term cheap debt, interest rate suppression via the Fed). This invites more dishonesty, which enables powerhungry egomaniacs.

Balrog0 posted...

I disagree entirely that deficit financing and monetary policy are what enable 'scummy' politicians. Which seems like a bizarre thing to think.

If you like I can explain how deficit spending and interest rate suppression numb and obscure the negative impact of bad policies and enable more pandering than would otherwise be possible. It's not hard to explain if that's where you are getting stuck, but calling my comment bizarre is not an argument.
---

tennisdude818 posted...

Well your OP literally says, "Politics is about power", so naturally I focused on the Federal Government's size and power.

That's crazy dude. Like try to get outside your own personal biases here.

tennisdude818 posted...

If you like I can explain how deficit spending and interest rate suppression numb and obscure the negative impact of bad policies and enable more pandering than would otherwise be possible

I did literally ask you to do this in asking how it follows that a bigger government means elected officials are more corrupt. No one is stopping you from explaining and if anything I think. I've been more tolerant of your non-explanatory insistence than anyone else who doesn't already agree with you would be.

tennisdude818 posted...

. It's not hard to explain if that's where you are getting stuck, but calling my comment bizarre is not an argument.

I agree, that's why I posted more than just that. I told you the things I thought were more relevant than the ability to deficit finance social programs through monetary policy.
---

Anyway your insistence on analyzing everything through a partisan lens is why local officials without an obvious partisan bias can cater to multiple interest groups simultaneously without arousing ire from ideologues like yourself. IMO your posts ITT are totally proving my point re: interest and appeasement
---

Balrog0 posted...

That's crazy dude. Like try to get outside your own personal biases here.

What bias would that be? You referred to partisanship in your next post as well. My comment that you initially took issue with was, "I dont see how politics could be anything other than scummy, particularly when a government gets to be as massive as ours." I'm not underestimating how bad local politics can get. I'm sure the more power that local government has in its' respective region will tend to make it worse. I just think you're underestimating how bad it gets at the federal level where trillions are at stake. The state government using the war on drugs as a way to keep private state prisons populated is very bad. The military industrial complex staging color revolutions around the world is worse, and more money is at stake, which means that bigger players (Lockheed Martin, etc.) are pulling the strings. But when I bring this up you either call it a non sequitur or say that it doesn't follow, and I honestly don't see where the disconnect for you is.

I did literally ask you to do this in asking how it follows that a bigger government means elected officials are more corrupt. No one is stopping you from explaining and if anything I think. I've been more tolerant of your non-explanatory insistence than anyone else who doesn't already agree with you would be.

The ability to fund social programs and endless military campaigns via debt enables the government to pander to multiple interests at once while minimizing costs in the present. The only reason we can pay for old age entitlements, welfare, constant war, bases all over the world, and a bloated government bureaucracy is through debt. This means that future generations are getting the bill for present pandering. This would not be politically possible otherwise. The war in Afganistan for example would have ended 10+ years ago if it caused an obvious, temporary tax hike because voters would have asked what they have to gain from it long ago. The Fed keeps rates low, which makes debt cheap. Japan in an extreme example because if they somehow ended up with significant inflation and the BOJ had to increase rates, before long the Japanese government would spend 100% of tax revenue on debt servicing costs which would lead to default or hyperinflation. The central bank is an enabler of government excess. Politicians can use deficit spending to create the illusion of infinite resources. When voters buy into that lie, it appears cruel to demand a decrease in social spending. You yourself said that I wanted poor single moms to die in another topic. Of course when the government runs out of money and the illusion created through cheap credit is gone, the first people to get hurt will be the most vulnerable people such as poor single moms.

I agree, that's why I posted more than just that. I told you the things I thought were more relevant than the ability to deficit finance social programs through monetary policy.

The rest of your post that I didn't quote was fine, it just wasn't an argument against my point. Members of 3rd parties use the arguments you posted to encourage more activity at the local level all the time.
---

A civil discussion?? On my CE???
---

Here is an example of how uniquely evil players in the Federal Government can be. Smaller and weaker governments cant play God like this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM0uvgHKZe8" data-time="
---