Comment by unclebucknasty
1 year ago
>A certain amount of creative destruction is necessary...
This sounds truthy and even casts instability as somehow heroic, but it's an oversimplification and hides similar fallacies. It also implies that instability for the sake of instability is default-positive.
The best way to avoid capture is via law / regulation. There should be term limits, campaign finance reform, more regulation against lobbyists and the revolving door, etc. We can't have Citizens United then wonder how capture happened. And, no amount of instability will address that.
In fact, instability in this environment can serve as cover for increased capture, as there is no bulwark against reassignment of winners. This is likely what we're seeing with Musk right now.
Stability here doesn't mean nothing changes. It means things change in an orderly, reasoned manner to include thoughtfully preventing capture.
> The best way to avoid capture is via law / regulation. There should be term limits, campaign finance reform, more regulation against lobbyists and the revolving door, etc. We can't have Citizens United then wonder how capture happened. And, no amount of instability will address that.
On the contrary. We tried to reform and improve the system through the normal channels for decades. We failed. The system is evidently already captured and something a little more radical is warranted.
>On the contrary. We tried to reform and improve the system through the normal channels for decades
Did we though? I don't remember the last time campaign finance reform was on the national ballot or lobbying regulation or term limits. People aren't even talking about it.
The problem is that the majority of the voting public is easily distracted and not clamoring for these things that can bring about constructive change.
But, that distraction is not random. The people who push for and benefit most from this distraction (and subsequent failure to change) happen to also do things like donate $250M+ to help buy a president, then convince followers that something "a little more radical" is needed to help seal the deal.
Oh, and they happen to also have billions in government contracts.
But, they are eliminating capture? If ever there was a fox guarding the henhouse. "The Onion" couldn't make this up.