They are basically corporate accounts that are payed to be bigots online. You are looking at literal astroturf and asking why it doesn’t feel like grass.
All the well spoken amoral greedy fuckers know exactly where to go to maximize their personal upsides from those “skills” in a system where power alternates between only two political parties.
Power Duopolies created through mathematical rigging of representative allocation systems are better than outright One Party systems but not by much and certainly not Democratic or in any way close to representative of the entire interests and beliefs of millions of human beings.
I’ve actually lived in countries with FPTP and with Proportional Vote and the way the latter countries are managed is vastly better than the former and even public discourse a lot more produtive.
After over 3 decades of voting, across 3 countries, even having held beliefs all the way from what I though was “communism” (when I was little more than a kid) through neoliberalism and finally settling down to a sort of social democracy (shaped by and subservient to my principles) and having even been involved in a supposedly thinking leftwing party around here I would stay that mindless tribalism is exactly what almost the entirety of politics is nowadays.
The whole “building your on political beliefs starting from your core principles upwards, and always keeping them in mind” thing is very unusually: normally (even in that supposedly “thinking” people party) it’s all about choosing sides, growing an emotional bond with your side and then just blindly waving the team’s flag and unskeptically take in and parrot whatever your side’s celebrities says as if they’re unchallangeable truths delivered down all the way from the gods.
In fact I’m pretty pissed from discovering that most people in even that party of supposedly thinking people are little more than clubist political parrots. It does however explain why so many measures people parrot as the right thing to do are actually one-sided and in practice not anchored in the principles we’re told they’re suppose to promote, sometime even de facto going against them: when people are unskeptical unthinking fans of the team, they’re really easy to lead by the nose by womever captures the leadership positions on that team, an sometimes said leaders aren’t even purposefully manipulative, they’re just nowere as bright as their small-pond celebrity status makes them think and generally have ridiculously narrow life experience and hence don’t really know much about how the World works outside their tiny tiny bubble.
Mainstream parties, which are pretty much ideology-free (or as their top people often call it: “pragmatic”) also relly heavilly on clubism, so I think cultivating fans not partners it’s a much more widespread strategy than merely only for the “standardized political slogan packs” which are ideologies (failed or otherwise).
Why is everybody on these platforms “4 something” now? Politics isn’t football, you don’t pick your team and have to let everyone know about it.
If you’re a racist/white nationalist you do in coded language.
I am now 4 being a sloth, working hard is overrated.
I dunno, they have to climb all the way down to the ground once a week to poop. That sounds like a lot of effort.
If I were a sloth, I’d just hang from a branch and let fly.
They are basically corporate accounts that are payed to be bigots online. You are looking at literal astroturf and asking why it doesn’t feel like grass.
In a place with first past the post voting, two parties will dominate and then it does become a sports game.
Two player games are fundamentally different than three or more player games, in terms of which strategies are optimal to win.
Ranked Choice.
Or STAR
Or fucking anything better than what we have now.
All the well spoken amoral greedy fuckers know exactly where to go to maximize their personal upsides from those “skills” in a system where power alternates between only two political parties.
Power Duopolies created through mathematical rigging of representative allocation systems are better than outright One Party systems but not by much and certainly not Democratic or in any way close to representative of the entire interests and beliefs of millions of human beings.
I’ve actually lived in countries with FPTP and with Proportional Vote and the way the latter countries are managed is vastly better than the former and even public discourse a lot more produtive.
I am only on a platform “for something” if that “something” is AOC. Purely for professional reason.
No lie, her Amongus Twitch streams were pretty lit.
After over 3 decades of voting, across 3 countries, even having held beliefs all the way from what I though was “communism” (when I was little more than a kid) through neoliberalism and finally settling down to a sort of social democracy (shaped by and subservient to my principles) and having even been involved in a supposedly thinking leftwing party around here I would stay that mindless tribalism is exactly what almost the entirety of politics is nowadays.
The whole “building your on political beliefs starting from your core principles upwards, and always keeping them in mind” thing is very unusually: normally (even in that supposedly “thinking” people party) it’s all about choosing sides, growing an emotional bond with your side and then just blindly waving the team’s flag and unskeptically take in and parrot whatever your side’s celebrities says as if they’re unchallangeable truths delivered down all the way from the gods.
In fact I’m pretty pissed from discovering that most people in even that party of supposedly thinking people are little more than clubist political parrots. It does however explain why so many measures people parrot as the right thing to do are actually one-sided and in practice not anchored in the principles we’re told they’re suppose to promote, sometime even de facto going against them: when people are unskeptical unthinking fans of the team, they’re really easy to lead by the nose by womever captures the leadership positions on that team, an sometimes said leaders aren’t even purposefully manipulative, they’re just nowere as bright as their small-pond celebrity status makes them think and generally have ridiculously narrow life experience and hence don’t really know much about how the World works outside their tiny tiny bubble.
Everything is political. To assume otherwise if naive at best.
It’s a preservation strategy for failed ideologies.
Mainstream parties, which are pretty much ideology-free (or as their top people often call it: “pragmatic”) also relly heavilly on clubism, so I think cultivating fans not partners it’s a much more widespread strategy than merely only for the “standardized political slogan packs” which are ideologies (failed or otherwise).