USA Politics (redux)

[Florestan]

Thanks for these kind words! Yes, I believe I am "nice/trustful", but also a weirdo and lacking social skills. For most people being my friend is an unattractive idea. Instead of relaxed small talk about sports, I give cliquish lectures (the trademark of people with Asperger's) about obscure topics such as the inverse function approximation for the spatial hearing model ITD = r/c * (ɑ + sin ɑ) and just after 10 minutes you'll beg me to change the topic back to US politics. 

Peace! ✌🏽

Rauhaa! 

[71 dB]

Re:oligarchy --- Do you mean that those who comprise the Finnish government and parliament have not been mostly the same people from the same parties for years, if not decades? If you take the Finnish political class as a whole, what percentage of the Finnish population would they make?

Re: corruption --- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_Finland

Re: crony capitalism --- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia#Controversies

I don't understand what you mean. What matters is who do these politicians represent. 

"Finland's overall corruption is low, according to public opinion and global standards. The Corruption Perception Index, released by Transparency International in 2021, reported that Finland is the third-most-transparent country in the world."

[Florestan]

I don't understand what you mean.

I mean that in every country there is only a very small fraction of the population which is involved in politics, and an even smaller fraction of people who really matter in politics, ie regular members of government and legislative. It is those very few people who really define and draft agendas and policies --- and that is the very etymological definition of oligarchy: the rule of the few over the many. The common folks choose between them according to what they believe to be their best interest, but they personally have no say whatsoever in the making of those agendas and policies. When was the last time when an important Finnish politician asked you personally about how the country should be run?

[71 dB]

I mean that in every country there is only a very small fraction of the population which is involved in politics, and an even smaller fraction of people who really matter in politics, ie regular members of government and legislative. It is those very few people who really define and draft agendas and policies --- and that is the very etymological definition of oligarchy: the rule of the few over the many. The common folks choose between them according to what they believe to be their best interest, but they personally have no say whatsoever in the making of those agendas and policies. When was the last time when an important Finnish politician asked you personally about how the country should be run?

Finland is a representative democracy. In elections people elect 200 representatives to the parliament. The party with most elected representatives forms the government with those parties who are willing to negotiate for the agendas and policies. I believe things are quite similar in other countries with functioning democracy.

Politicians can be approached with email for example, but mostly people just vote for parties and politicians who they believe represent their own  ideas and agendas. I want green/lefty politics done. Most of the time I vote for a green party candidate. My assumption is that the person I vote knows better than I do how green politics shoud be done. So, I don't have a reason to tell them what to do. They are supposed to tell me what they want to do and convince me they know their shit (to earn my trust/vote).

I am not interested of the etymological definition of oligarchy. I am interested of what oligarchy causes in society. In the US because of oligarchy millions of people don't have access to basic healthcare or are in danger of bankruptcy because of  medical bills. That is a very serious consequence of oligarchy (whether the etymological definition is met or not). Whatever tiny amount of corruption is found in Finnish political system, it haven't caused people to not have "nice things." The effects of oligarchy are extraordinarily strong in the US for a "western rich allegedly democratic" country. Even Russia has universal healthcare to my knowledge and it is a clear oligarchy avoid of democracy. 

[Florestan]

I want green/lefty politics done. Most of the time I vote for a green party candidate. My assumption is that the person I vote knows better than I do how green politics shoud be done. So, I don't have a reason to tell them what to do. They are supposed to tell me what they want to do and convince me they know their shit (to earn my trust/vote).

Precisely my point. The difference is that you name it representative democracy, while I name it oligarchy.

The only democracy worth its name is direct democracy --- to which I'm utterly opposed.

[71 dB]

Precisely my point. The difference is that you name it representative democracy, while I name it oligarchy.

The only democracy worth its name is direct democracy --- to which I'm utterly opposed.

Labels are just labels. If oligarchy gives people "nice things" then it is good. If it doesn't then it is bad. If we call the system in every country an oligarchy then obviously oligarchy can mean very different kind of political outcomes, because we witness different outcomes. That's why I call the US an oligarchy and Finland a representative democracy. Different names for different outcomes. In Finland the politicians actually represent more or less the people who elected them. In the US that's not the case. They represent their donors, mostly the rich and the corporations.

[Florestan]

If oligarchy gives people "nice things" then it is good. If it doesn't then it is bad.

I agree. But an oligarchy giving people "nice things" is no less an oligarchy than one not giving people "nice things".

Bottom line: either the people (demos) exercise the power (kratos) themselves, or they don't. The hard reality is that they don't, be it USA or Finland or Romania or Spain or whatever country you may think of. There is a whole world of difference between designing policies (ie, what top politicians do) and ratifying them (ie, what ordinary voters do).

Aristotle and Rousseau nailed it: true democracy can be obtained only where the whole amount of people can be completely had in sight from the top of a hill.

[71 dB]

I agree. But an oligarchy giving people "nice things" is no less an oligarchy than one not giving people "nice things".

Bottom line: either the people (demos) exercise the power (kratos) themselves, or they don't. The hard reality is that they don't, be it USA or Finland or Romania or Spain or whatever country you may think of. There is a whole world of difference between designing policies (ie, what top politicians do) and ratifying them (ie, what ordinary voters do).

People don't give a shit about definitions and labels. All they care about is having "nice things."

I use my power (kratos) when I cast my vote in elections.  How much more power should/can one individual have? If I alone were able to say how politics is done in Finland then I would be the dictator of Finland. 

[71 dB]

Aristotle and Rousseau nailed it: true democracy can be obtained only where the whole amount of people can be completely had in sight from the top of a hill.

Idealistic version of democracy is perhaps impossible, but representative democracy can be made to function so well that the outcomes are almost the same. The most democratic countries in the World prove this.

[Herman]

I don't have a dog in this fight, but the definitions of oligarchy and democracy bandied about here are rather wilfully iffy.

[Florestan]

representative democracy can be made to function so well that the outcomes are almost the same.

I doubt it. Turkey and Finland are both representative democracies. The outcomes are drastically different.

[71 dB]

I doubt it. Turkey and Finland are both representative democracies. The outcomes are drastically different.

Yes, because Turkey is a caricature of representative democracy. Hence drastically different outcomes.

[Florestan]

Turkey is a caricature of representative democracy.

Caricature, really? Why? In Turkish elections Turkish people elect a certain number of representatives to the parliament. The party with most elected representatives forms the government with those parties who are willing to negotiate for the agendas and policies. How is this any different from Finland?

[71 dB]

Caricature, really? Why? In Turkish elections Turkish people elect a certain number of representatives to the parliament. The party with most elected representatives forms the government with those parties who are willing to negotiate for the agendas and policies. How is this any different from Finland?

Sorry, if I start to lose my interest in this discussion. It's getting silly. My knowledge of Turkish politics isn't on the level to properly analyse this question. Finland is part of EU. Turkey is not considered democratic enough to join EU. The representative democracy just works worse in Turkey. Why? I don't know. Less political parties? Lower education level on population? Different religion? My expertise is not on the level...

[Daverz]

Sorry, if I start to lose my interest in this discussion. It's getting silly. My knowledge of Turkish politics isn't on the level to properly analyse this question. Finland is part of EU. Turkey is not considered democratic enough to join EU. The representative democracy just works worse in Turkey. Why? I don't know. Less political parties? Lower education level on population? Different religion? My expertise is not on the level...

Florestan is just being obtuse.

Anyone interested can sample some of the top google hits.

The rise and fall of liberal democracy in Turkey: Implications ...www.brookings.edu › research › the-rise-and-fall-of-lib...
Turkey was once a beacon of democratic consolidation in a volatile neighborhood, but its authoritarian turn is straining relations with key partners in the West.

The Fragility of Turkish Democracy - E-International Relationswww.e-ir.info › 2021/01/29 › the-fragility-of-turkish-d...
Jan 29, 2021 — After the failed coup attempt in 2016, Turkish political sphere has been dominated by a series of emergency laws. It can be said that Turkey has ...

Turkish Democracy Can't Die, Because It Never Lived ...foreignpolicy.com › 2019/05/13 › turkish-democracy-c...
May 13, 2019 — The party has not resurrected the military as the arbiter of Turkish politics, but President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is engaged in a familiar pattern of ...

Why did Turkish democracy collapse? A political economy ...journals.sagepub.com › doi › full
by B Esen · Cited by 7 — After decades of multiparty politics, Turkey is no longer a democracy. A theory-upending case, the country has descended into a competitive ...
‎Abstract · ‎Why do democracies break... · ‎How different is the AKP...

The Myth of Turkish Democracy | Council on Foreign Relationswww.cfr.org › blog › myth-turkish-democracy
May 22, 2019 — Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan leaves the voting booth at a polling station in Istanbul, Turkey June 24, 2018. REUTERS/Umit Bektas.

Turkish democracy is still alive | Opinion | DW | 24.06.2019www.dw.com › opinion-turkish-democracy-is-still-alive
Jun 24, 2019 — The Turkish opposition's victory over the ruling party in Istanbul's rerun election is an important victory for democracy. It also sets the stage for a ...

The Outlook for Turkish Democracy: 2023 and Beyond | The ...www.washingtoninstitute.org › policy-analysis › outloo...
Mar 26, 2020 — Over nearly two decades, Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdogan has managed to strengthen his hold on power despite numerous political ...

Turkish Democracy Is Down But Not Out | Balkan Insightbalkaninsight.com › 2019/08/26 › turkish-democracy-i...
Aug 26, 2019 — Relations between Turkey and the West are clearly going through an extremely delicate phase. Under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the ...

The West Hoped for Democracy in Turkey. Erdogan Had Other ...www.nytimes.com › 2018/08/18 › business › west-democ...

[DavidW]

It is my understanding that Turkey is really just a fascist regime now.

[71 dB]

Florestan is just being obtuse.

That's why I lost my interest. 

[71 dB]

For SimonNZ:

New Zealand Law Puts U.S. To ABSOLUTE Shame

https://www.youtube.com/v/YNDS5EJ4ztU

Good job New Zealand!  0:)

[Herman]

Florestan is just being obtuse.

Anyone interested can sample some of the top google hits.

I would add "wilfully" to the "obtuse".

He should not be on political threads.

I believe he had a talk with the mods some time ago, but the effect is wearing off...

[Dry Brett Kavanaugh]

I mean that in every country there is only a very small fraction of the population which is involved in politics, and an even smaller fraction of people who really matter in politics, ie regular members of government and legislative. It is those very few people who really define and draft agendas and policies --- and that is the very etymological definition of oligarchy: the rule of the few over the many. The common folks choose between them according to what they believe to be their best interest, but they personally have no say whatsoever in the making of those agendas and policies. When was the last time when an important Finnish politician asked you personally about how the country should be run?

Robert Michels, "Iron Law of Oligarchy."
Michels studied many mass political parties in Europe, including socialist parties, which were considered to be most democratic and least elitist. But Michels found what you are saying in almost all the parties he examined.

Gaetano Mosca observes that the formal differences in government, ie. republic vs monarchy, democracy vs. tyranny, are superficial. He sees that all the govts are oligarchical and elitist, regardless of gotl form, region, civilization etc.

The scholars called pluralists agree that there are only few powerful people in society. But in representative democracy, ordinary citizens have indirect influence on policy-making by voting and supporting among plural and "competing" power elites, ie. political parries, labor union, chamber of commerce, catholic/protestant organizations, consumer group, etc.

I recommend Irony of Democracy, by Thomas Dye, for your leisure time.