Kill the Culture and Burn the Pulpit Part 1: An Analysis of a revolution

[Captain Utopia]

Well, all this time I've been talking about a revolution in terms of changing institutional structures as defined earlier in the thread, so I think we're talking about different things.

When I mentioned protests, I was talking about teabaggers, silly.
Of course, they haven't been cracked down on. Yet. Neither did the National Socialist German Workers' party for a while. I maintain my stance on the Tea Party as presented on page 1 of this thread.

EDIT: Oops. Didn't know what you were replying to.

My bad - I quickly edited the proper quote in after I hit post.

I would say that politics is irrelevant to most people precisely because they don't get a say any more than once every couple of years, and even then it's a choice between two shitty options and still their voice is unheard except for a single vote which will probably be miscounted anyway.  The rational decision in that environment is to not give a shit about politics.

E-Democracy can address all of those flaws.  Will it make everyone super aware and awesome?  No, of course not.  But it follows that under those circumstances more people will take more interest in a process in which they can play a meaningful part without having to dedicate unreasonable personal resources.

It's not a panacea but this incremental benefit, alone, makes it a topic worth exploring.

The country is schizophrenic enough without giving people the ability to change their mind as often as they want.

No, I want to see the same sort of decisiveness we currently put into our space program applied to EVERYTHING! 

Bump.

I love this plan.

Sorry to dampen your enthusiasm, but I expect a simple threshold can be implemented to compensate for 50%+/-1 hysteresis.  If you set it at 66%, then you've got to get at least a full third of voters to switch their votes - how likely is it that this would happen often enough to cause the problem you're describing?

[Doktor Howl]

Sorry to dampen your enthusiasm, but I expect a simple threshold can be implemented to compensate for 50%+/-1 hysteresis.  If you set it at 66%, then you've got to get at least a full third of voters to switch their votes - how likely is it that this would happen often enough to cause the problem you're describing?

Judging from New Hampshire since 2008?  They voted for Obama, and then went negative on him, IIRC, before he was even inaugurated.

[Adios]

I quit this thread.

[Doktor Howl]

I quit this thread.

Sorry to hear that.  I'm still enjoying the kid explain the world to me.

[Adios]

I quit this thread.

Sorry to hear that.  I'm still enjoying the kid explain the world to me.

Fuck it, he is lost somewhere in 1969.

[Doktor Howl]

I quit this thread.

Sorry to hear that.  I'm still enjoying the kid explain the world to me.

Fuck it, he is lost somewhere in 1969.

Sure.  I remember explaining all this to some cynical old bastard relative, back in 1982 or so.  They laughed and I got pissed...But my, how that worm does turn.

[President Television]

I would say that politics is irrelevant to most people precisely because they don't get a say any more than once every couple of years, and even then it's a choice between two shitty options and still their voice is unheard except for a single vote which will probably be miscounted anyway.  The rational decision in that environment is to not give a shit about politics.

E-Democracy can address all of those flaws.  Will it make everyone super aware and awesome?  No, of course not.  But it follows that under those circumstances more people will take more interest in a process in which they can play a meaningful part without having to dedicate unreasonable personal resources.

It's not a panacea but this incremental benefit, alone, makes it a topic worth exploring.

Or they will vote on a whim and take less interest than they do currently. At least the current farce is keeping the masses hooked. They will be ever more shortsighted, and this time nobody will be able to say "Remember the ____ administration? Let's not make those mistakes again." There will be no administration, no period of time to refer back to. Politics will exist purely in the moment, with no memory and no foresight, and everybody focusing on their own desires above all. Nobody will even consider anyone else's point of view, because they didn't suffer as a group when they were on the losing side.
Business as usual in the 21st century.

[Doktor Howl]

But it follows that under those circumstances more people will take more interest in a process in which they can play a meaningful part without having to dedicate unreasonable personal resources.

I see precisely zero reason to believe this.

[President Television]

If you ever want to see what the Internet does to people, see Facebook. See Youtube. See 4chan.

[Adios]

If you ever want to see what the Internet does to people, see Facebook. See Youtube. See 4chan.

Catchy but 169% full of fail.

[Doktor Howl]

If you ever want to see what the Internet does to people, see Facebook. See Youtube. See 4chan.

Catchy but 169% full of fail.

Actually, he's right.

[Adios]

If you ever want to see what the Internet does to people, see Facebook. See Youtube. See 4chan.

Catchy but 169% full of fail.

Actually, he's right.

Bullshit. Remember my nuts grow on trees theory?

[President Television]

If you ever want to see what the Internet does to people, see Facebook. See Youtube. See 4chan.

Catchy but 169% full of fail.

Actually, he's right.

Bullshit. Remember my nuts grow on trees theory?

Maybe I'm wrong on the causation, but look at how people act on those sites and ask yourself if you want them running a country that way.

[Jasper]

If you ever want to see what the Internet does to people, see Facebook. See Youtube. See 4chan.

Catchy but 169% full of fail.

Actually, he's right.

Bullshit. Remember my nuts grow on trees theory?

Sorry, don't recall.  Link?

[Doktor Howl]

If you ever want to see what the Internet does to people, see Facebook. See Youtube. See 4chan.

Catchy but 169% full of fail.

Actually, he's right.

Bullshit. Remember my nuts grow on trees theory?

I saw what FC did to regular people.  CG, for that matter.