The Princeton Oligarchy Study found that US public interest had NEAR ZERO effect on legislation. When US citizens 'win' any change, it's because wealthy interests share the same goal.
By definition this means the US is not a democracy. It's an oligarchy: Rule by an elite business class.
(5 votes)
Comments
(Long Spike)
People who believe the U.S. was ever a true democracy are not living in reality. It really is an oligarchy with a sprinkling of democratic theory mixed in. It is a presently failing system to be sure. An autocratic government with no freedom of speech, no human rights, complete control of the media, and rule by rather than of law is a much better system. It must be great to live under such a system.
(Old Spike)
Rule of law, where Epstein is standing trial so he can bring down some members of the ruling class, where whistleblowers bring down powerful people & aren't tried in secret courts & forced into silence, where George W isn't celebrated on popular TV shows as some kind of hero. It's a genuine law-ruled state to be sure.
(Long Spike)
Ignore China's transgressions and attack. Your wu mao skills have improved grasshopper. You are a solid member of the 30 Cent Army now.
(Old Spike)
this is a really bad misunderstanding of statistics. maybe to people with a primary school level of education this looks like public interest has zero effect, but to the rest of us it's clear that while public interest has a large effect, other influences also have large effects.
also anybody who isn't a moron knows that public interest doesn't dictate what's good. most people dgaf about most political decisions because they're boring or unrelatable, but that doesn't make those decisions any less meaningful. there are around 50 bills currently before australian parliament and more than 90% haven't been tweeted about at all. "aged care quality and safety commision amendment", "agricultural and veterinary chemicals legislature", etc draw only a few supporters, but if they get passed does that mean our democracy isn't working for us?
this video fundamentally misrepresents what the data show.
(Old Spike)
Here's the paper:
https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf
Here's an interview with one of the researchers:
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/princeton-scholar-demise-of-democracy-america-tpm-interview
I'd love to see your crtiique on how they've misunderstood the data.
(Old Spike)
if you want to see my critique then look above?
interested to hear your rebuttal. how do you think about 30% of public interest goals being adopted while 60% of business elite and special interest goals are adopted equates to "near-zero" public influence?
(Old Spike)
The 30% is coincidental... IE a bill has just as much chance (30%) of being passed with zero public support as it does with 100% public support. Did you not watch the video?
IE public support is a non-factor in legislation, according to this study.
My rebuttal to your assertion that this is primary school-level interpretation of data is that this is coming from a Princeton University group of researchers. It's on you to show that they've misinterpreted the data, given the reputation of that particular university - decades of political research, top tier institution, etc. Simply poo-pooing the paper isn't good enough without showing why it's wrong.
(Old Spike)
It would be interesting to know how the general public thinks about gun legislation....
(Old Spike)
we do know, and california just passed a bunch of new gun-control measures in opposition to special interest groups. amazing considering how the public apparently has a near-zero effect on legislation.
(Old Spike)
Are there polls?