I believe everything the state department says, but I oppose the deep state.

Oh it doesn’t, but I don’t think it matters because you don’t get genuine options. They just give you a set of canned option to vote for, and that’s all you get. As Marx put it: “The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them.”

I guess it is because they need to have a long career in politics to appear experienced. Well, they really do need to have experience to ratfuck everyone else and to build connections because particular politicians are a tools to ruling class and it don’t really care who is the one doing its bidding, so politicians do need to compete among themselves. Also the more ossified bureocracy is, the more ancient cadavers are getting propped by the vitrue of having more accumulated ties inside the bureocracy than the younger ones, that’s why US has Biden now and that’s why catholics had most of their popes.

Also name is a brand. People, especially content liberals and conservatives, are more likely to vote on someone they always heard than someone new.

Yeah, I also don’t really understand what the OP is getting at with the age thing in the title. If anything, it would seem like the actual rulers (pictured) should be more likely to be ancient vampires than the the politicians chosen for the facade of democracy.

In theory: these capitalist types are allowed “proper” hereditary system. Scions taking over after the elders decide they want to chill. Meanwhile, the politicians are just tools. And if you have an old hammer that does the job, why would you waste money on a new one? One that may not be exactly to your preferences too. When the tool is completely broken, then you toss it away and grab a new one.

I’m not disagreeing that the entire economy is owned by a small circle of corporations/individuals. The sources provided for this are probably accurate as well although I haven’t bothered double checking. We know this is true. In fact, Marx predicted it over a decade ago. But this article comes to the wrong conclusions on why this is a problem because the author has petty bourgeois aspirations and is butthurt about the fact that they can’t profit off the stock market themselves because it is run by the bourgeoisie. On top of that it equates socialism to fascism which is so fucking stupid I’m not even gonna go into that. Anyone active on Lemmygrad should know this is false and refrain from spreading anything espousing such ideas. It feels like you have no idea what beliefs this community holds which is ok, but if you find yourself agreeing with any of the opinions you find here I’d suggest you look into Marxism. I believe it will give you a lot more insight into why the economy is structured the way it is than this “investigation” ever will. It’s not that a few smart people figured out how to take control of the companies that run the economy. This is an inevitable consequence of capitalism and as long as this disgusting socioeconomic system is allowed to persist nothing will change about the fact that the world is run by a very small group of people who line their pockets.

I think what was meant is China allowing a foreign investment corp such as Blackrock to become involved in housing speculation in the first place.

I was meaning the speculator market companies which grew far too large during china’s development, and had the attention of predatory western investment companies which wanted to strengthen these companies. A fault to china’s goal to prosperity as these companies which were largely ignored, and allowed to fester into the tumors which blight china’s economy, a fault which needs correction. Something which china’s doing by nationalising them after they fail.