You're viewing a single thread.
As your lone resident critical thinker, at least the government's authority is derived from the people. The power of corporations and the profit motive ensure they are opposed to all human interests beyond greed.
The government's authority used to be derived from the people. The people who developed the republic never could have imagined the immense bureaucratic superstate that exists and overrides the will of the people and often the will of the elected officials.
If it was the will of the people laws that the people want would pass. Like legalizing weed. It's mostly the will of the corporations because they fund the politicians. There is basically zero correlation between what the people want and whether a law is passed but a very high correlation between what the corporations want and what laws are passed.
For example, vaccine corporations having zero liability for injuries. Take a popular vote and see if that would pass.
Touche.
If the government was following the will of the people, then daylight savings time would be a distant memory.
An even better example. Daylight savings is retarded. It is always good bread for programmers when they change time. All those scheduling programs got to build that in.
Permanently Deleted
But the weird thing to me is that people blame the government rather than corporations, as if leaving the latter alone, de-regulating the spaces in which they operate, will somehow lead to a better outcome. That's logically absurd. Corporations must be regulated by the government. The challenge for "the people" is ensuring they're not wooed by corporate interests to the point that they let the government be captured by them.
But we're long, long past that point in the United States. Our challenge wrestling back public power from private actors.
I think we are coming at the same problem from different angles. Which is fine. I just describe the same problem differently.
They also never imagined the national and global problems an immense bureaucratic superstate could address.
The "will of the people" made sense when there was like 2.5 million people, most of which were opposed to British monarchy. It makes less sense with 330 million people in a modern context. There is no one will of the people.
That's a good point too. Especially since "The people" were a subset of the actual residents at the time. Back then "The people" were male land owners.