Asklemmy

43879 readers

1457 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

707

What's a scam that's so normalized that we don't even realize it's a scam anymore? (lemm.ee)

submitted 1 year ago by mastermind@lemm.ee to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

1093 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I agree with this so much. Political parties should just be given one tv ad and one pamphlet. Only allowed to talk about their own policies and nothing else. Exclusively government funded. Any extra donations and you're no longer representing the people's interests so you're murdered or something idk.

[–] Autonomarx@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The "one ad/one pamphlet" concept is a horrible idea. Reactionary political platforms rely on regressive ideas that have remained in the popular political consciousness for centuries - meanwhile, the positive development of society requires an understanding of complex things that won't be adequately expressed in such a brief format. Think economic planning, human ecology, etc.

This is a recipe for a cruel, inhumane, and backwards society. In short, bourgeois democracy.

[–] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

that's fair, I hadn't really thought it through.

[–] ToxicDivinity@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What is the ideal way to deal with campaign finance?

[–] Autonomarx@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

https://www.massline.org/Dictionary/DI.htm#direct_democracy

[–] ToxicDivinity@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago

I don't understand how that addresses campaign finance.

Even under socialism it will still be essential for the people to keep a close eye on their chosen representatives (and also other leaders such as those in the leading revolutionary party), but it will no longer be virtually impossible for those representatives to truly represent the interests of the people

How will these representatives be chosen? Well they be able to campaign and will there be a limit to how much they can spend on a campaign?

If direct democracy is what you're advocating, how can that work? Does every citizen have to spend an hour reading legislation every day then vote through an app on their phone?