What Americans want
Tomorrow (Oct 19), I'm in Charleston, WV to give the 41st annual McCreight Lecture in the Humanities. And on Friday (Oct 20), I'm at Charleston's Taylor Books from 12h-14h.
If you aspire to be a Very Serious Person (and whomst amongst us doesn't?) then you know why we can't have nice things. The American people won't stand for court packing, Congressional term limits, the abolition of the Electoral College, or campaign finance limits. Politics is the art of the possible, and these just aren't possible.
Friends, you've been lied to.
The latest Pew Research mega-report investigates Americans' attitudes towards politics, and honestly, the title says it all: "Americans’ Dismal Views of the Nation’s Politics":
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/09/19/americans-dismal-views-of-the-nations-politics/
The American people hate Congress. They hate the parties. They hate the president. They hate the 2024 presidential candidates. They loathe the Supreme Court. Approval for America's bedrock institutions are at historic lows. Disapprovals are at historic highs.
The report's subtitle speaks volumes: "65% say they always or often feel exhausted when thinking about politics." Who can blame them? After all: "63% express not too much or no confidence at all in the future of the U.S. political system."
"Just 4% of U.S. adults say the political system is working extremely or very well": that is to say, there are more Americans who think Elvis is alive than who think US politics are working well.
There are differences, of course. Young people have less hope than older people. Republicans are more reactionary than Democrats. Racialized people trust institutions less than white people.
But there are also broad, bipartisan, cross-demographic, intergenerational agreements, and these may surprise you:
Take Congressional term-limits. 87% of US adults support these. Only 12% oppose them.
Everyone knows American gerontocracy is a problem. I mean, for one thing, it's destabilizing. There's a significant chance that neither of the presumptive US presidential candidates will be alive on inauguration day:
https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/01/designated-survivors/
But beyond the inexorable logic of actuarial science, there's the problem that our Congress of septuagenarians have served for decades, and are palpably out-of-touch with their constituents' lives. And those constituents know it, which is why 79% of Americans favor age limits for elected officials and Supreme Court justices:
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/09/19/how-americans-view-proposals-to-change-the-political-system/
Not all of this bipartisan agreement is positive. 76% of Americans have been duped into favoring a voter ID requirement to solve the nonexistent problem of voter fraud by imposing a racialized, wealth-based poll-tax. But even here, there's a silver lining: 62% of American support automatically registering every eligible voter.
Threats to pack the Supreme Court have a long and honorable tradition in this country. It's how Lincoln got his antislavery agenda, and how FDR got the New Deal:
https://pluralistic.net/2023/03/25/consequentialism/#dotards-in-robes
The majority of Americans don't want to pack the court…yet. The race is currently neck-and-neck – 51% opposed, 46% in favor, and with approval for the Supreme Court at lows not seen since the 2400 baud era, court-packing is an idea with serious momentum:
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/07/21/favorable-views-of-supreme-court-fall-to-historic-low/
66% of Democrats want the court packed. 58% of under 30s – of every affiliation – favor the proposal.
And two thirds (65%) of Americans want to abolish the Electoral College and award the presidency to the candidate with the most votes. That includes nearly half (47%) of Republicans, and two thirds of independents.
Americans believe – correctly – that their elected representatives are more beholden to monied interests than to a sense of duty towards their constituents. Or, as a pair of political scientists put it in their widely cited 2014 paper:
Economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B
So yeah, no surprise that 70% of Americans believe that voters have too little influence over their elected lawmakers. 83% of Republicans say big campaign donors call the shots. 80% of Democrats agree.
Which is why 72% of Americans want to limit political spending (76% for Democrats, 71% for Republicans). The majority of Americans – 58% – believe that it is possible to get money out of politics with well-crafted laws.
Americans truly do have a "dismal view of the nation's politics," and who can blame them? But if you "feel exhausted thinking about the nation's politics," consider this – the majority of Americans, including Republicans, want to:
abolish the electoral college;
impose campaign spending limits;
put term limits on elected officials and Supreme Court justices;
put age limits on elected officials and Supreme Court justices; and
automatically register every eligible American to vote.
What's more, packing the Supreme Court is a coin-toss, and it's growing more popular day by day.
Which is all to say, yes, things are really screwed up, but everyone knows it and everyone agrees on the commonsense measures that would fix it.
If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
https://pluralistic.net/2023/10/18/the-people-no/#tell-ya-what-i-want-what-i-really-really-want
My next novel is The Lost Cause, a hopeful novel of the climate emergency. Amazon won't sell the audiobook, so I made my own and I'm pre-selling it on Kickstarter!
200 notes
·
View notes
Who did Glip and Eevee befriend in the art and tech spheres to be so untouchable ??? No doubt those in the industry that protect them sympathize with predators at best
Art spheres no. Glip used to be this way but fell out of grace with the big fluff logs dropped.
Tech and indie game communities however, are still partial to protecting Eevee because she plays up the 'It's all kiwifarms & transphobia' angle really well and wasn't ever actually married to Marl - loosening the impact of the BF logs on her reputation compared to Glip.
I'll use cohost as an example, because it's pretty blatant there.
Just look at the comments on this post on her cohost, and how she talks about her detractors.
....The post she's talking about, by the way, is only about Lain and Big Fluff. The 2 children Marl sexually abused. It's true that both kids posted on kiwifarms, but it's extremely manipulatively dishonest to refer to them both as just KF users.
Cohost btw, seems to be in her pocket. The one time I'm aware that someone called Eevee out on something, they got banned from the platform entirely nearly instantly.
The original comment was on this post of Eevee's. Eevee edited it out, but the same comment was shared on lolcow and had a link in it. Here is the tweet the banned commenter linked to, and relevant screenshots. Guess she didn't want people seeing this. I wonder why?
It was this comment to Eevee that pushed Glip to double down on wishing Jollys suicide attempt was successful, looking at the timing of everything.
Twitter sucks, but if Cohost is willing to look the other way at abhorrent behavior like wishing that someone who attempted suicide twice was successful....so long as the person doing that said abhorrent behavior is Eevee...but quick to drop the hammer on those that lightly point out that said behavior is beyond fucked up - then cohost is rotten at the top and isn't worth using.
149 notes
·
View notes