4543
4544

The 1% hide their money offshore – then use it to corrupt our democracy (theguardian.com)

political が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]Mods4astroturf 748ポイント749ポイント  (136子コメント)

This thread should prove to redditors that this subreddit is being flooded with propaganda accounts. Whether its state hired PR firms, or just cocksucking super pacs for the political season, this is what you get. This isn't genuine discussion anymore. We're at the point where the article could be about some rich guy hiring a hitman and assassinating a president and these shills will argue that it's a part of democracy and the American dream, because he employed the hit man, who then bought the gun from a mom and pop shop, and used his freedom of bullet speech to make his concerns known.

We cant even talk about the corruption of money in politics because that is super nuanced now apparently and "there is no solid proof against those poor rich who are being taxed too much".

When did america become a banana republic in terms of propaganda from the media, the politicians, and now online PR?

Edit: just remembered this sweet link. Make sure to wear your brown pants.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism

[–]timeslaversurfur 61ポイント62ポイント  (20子コメント)

well it has seemed like every election the politics section here, personality changes quite a bit.. some of it can be excused by the people getting riled but some of it definitely seems directed. Reddit has some protections against some gaming but there really isnt that much you can do.

but at times it reminds me of the tactics of the brooksbrothers riot..republican operatives pretending to be florida citizens upset at the recounting. if you yell and scream and refuse to have a discussion, eventually people stop trying to discuss things with you and you are left yelling and screaming unchallenged.

[–]Kame-hame-hug [スコア非表示]  (19子コメント)

I would love if they would ban accounts less than a month old.

[–]Urban_Savage [スコア非表示]  (14子コメント)

Force every user to lurk for a month on their account before they are allowed to post on it. I love that idea.

[–]EntropicalResonance [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

Most all sock puppet accounts are made to appear legitimate by posting bot nonsense for months.

[–]JoyfulGarden [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Wish this was more well known. Just google "buy Reddit accounts". You can choose how old the account is, how much Karma it has, etc...

[–]helpful_hank [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

/u/NutritionResearch, you are needed in this thread.

Edit: PR and Propagamda professional comments on the media

[–]MoldTheClay [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Pointed this out a while ago. Anybody else notice that one Sanders became a real threat that the comments section of every pro Bernie or anti-Clinton post became inundated with Clinton supporters? I feel like I am taking crazy pills here. I didn't see almost any pro clinton posts in topics before Bernie started taking off, and now literally every topic is inundated with pro Clinton posters who seemed to not exist before the primary kicked off.

[–]NutritionResearch [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

This is the tip of the iceberg. See /r/shills

[–]Bozee3 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I've always wanted more karma. . .

[–]TravvyJ [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Reminds me of this one I saw today: https://www.reddit.com/user/colonelsanders_1930

5 months old, 1 link karma, almost 100,000 comment karma. Noticed that one strategy with this one is to go into new /r/funny posts and write "Is this supposed to be funny?". I dunno. Maybe seeing something that isn't really there.

[–]EntropicalResonance [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

The future of the Internet is scary. Not only will bot text be indistinguishable from humans, but eventually artificial voice and even 3d rendered images/video as well. You won't be able to know if anyone online is even real.

And never mind when we have realistic human robots thousands of years from now. The future might suck a lot with such technology, the voice of normal people will be so easy to stifle.

[–]belisaurius [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I'm not sure I agree. It is in the interest of internet megacorporations to sift bots from humans, since humans bring in revenue and bots don't. I imagine that companies like Google and Facebook are working fiendishly to build content verification services that can screen out bots, faked media, and whatnot. We are their profit source, I have confidence that they will protect us.

[–]DaTerrOn [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Imagine wondering if you are the last actual human on earth... or having to carve your own arm to check.

[–]Decyde [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

This. I know a guy who sells accounts with 25k karma for $30 each to places that use them to put adds on Reddit. Once you have that much karma, you pretty much bypass anything that will prevent you from posting.

Can't really complain about this though. The bigger problem is sub's that have users who created them when Reddit came out and do no real mod work even when they invite 20 people to mod the place. Then they invite people who censor or take bribes to mod the place and censor and now we are stuck with shitty subReddits.

[–]Urban_Savage [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Well shit.

[–]Andharwut [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Hahaha, epic.

Tip to Lurkers: If a lurker is reading this don't be afraid to post anywhere about anything. Your voice is your power.

[–]cmdrogogov [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Many of them were created in two batches, some have been around for four years and left largely inactive, some were created around about 10 months ago.

Most of them have a smattering of /r/nba and gaming-related subreddit posts and before the trolling really moved into gear in march, the older batch had around 1,500-1800 karma, and the newer batch around 400-600.

Banning new accounts wouldn't do much to affect these, and would only serve to cripple Reddit as an open platform for discussion. Plus, raising a barrier for entry won't affect the problem accounts already present.

[–]Zienth [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It's very easy to buy accounts with some kind of history.

[–]2015MVP [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

That's an over reaction. Sometimes you go hunting for witches and you find them. Sometimes you go hunting for witches and you exclude people who truly want to discuss the issues and happen have only stumbled upon this site. Are we to exclude them because we are afraid of the possibility that people have set up "shill" accounts? If I wanted to ruin Reddit is just buy an old account which is super easy to do and combine start posting with it using other accounts I've purchased to downvote articles I don't like. You make the bar higher for them to do it but they'll still do it and you just harm our community in process. I don't want to sacrifice freedom on Reddit for a safe space community if it means we begin excluding people in mass. What about people who are getting harassed on their own account and end up not using it to avoid it? Those people no longer have a voice. I hate the idea of excluding an entire chorus of people just to feel like I avoided some people who are paid to be here. And if in the end they provide reasoned and rational arguments does it really matter? People who are jerk and post Sanders is a communist who'll tear apart our country, do you think those people will really sway the discussion? I say all this as a person who does not support sanders for president. I don't want you just to go hunting for witches just people don't like what I have to say.

[–]cannibalking [スコア非表示]  (14子コメント)

I'm seeing a lot of phrases appear in the comments section of /r/politics you'd expect to seem at home in a press release from Pinkerton's Detective Agency or the American Protective League and not the 21st century. Like, allegations of "class warfare" over tax reform, allegations of communism or anti-American sentiments from people that claim to be from the "left" and, of course, the recent resurgence in defense of trickle-down economic policy.

What I find to be the most disturbing part of the astroturfing is how organized it is. This isn't just simply upvote/downvote manipulation, some of the responses are very clearly from script/notes. This becomes obvious when dealing with topics the "internet" can draw from a well of experienced people within that field. They post a detailed, articulate, seemingly educated reply, but as soon as industry specific terminology or experience is raised, it falls apart.

[–]patrunic [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

I really wouldn't claim anti sanders comments read like a script given that there innumerable copy paste comments for sanders source and claims posted constantly.

[–]BurnerAcctNo1 [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

My personal favorite that seems to have been abandoned, or at least said less frequently, "I was a major Sanders supporter until his supporters turned me off of the campaign. I'm all Hillary now".

Right.

[–]insayid [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Just about as believable as people claiming they are sanders supporters that would vote for Trump before Hillary... Dunno how you could ever possibly make that jump in political ideology

[–]belisaurius [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

So, baseless anecdote, but I know some of these people in real life. They have never voted, and are uninterested in voting for an establishment candidate. They are 'single issue voters' specifically on the topic of overturning the current system. They're not dumb, they'd prefer to vote for Sanders, but if push comes to shove they will vote Trump to send their message.

[–]MountSwolmore [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

That aspect has less to do with political ideology than simply just being sick of bullshit.

I will not vote for Hillary, period. I morally can not vote for her because it condones all of her bullshit, lying, flipping, and being a shitty person in general.

I'm torn between voting for Trump and just not voting should Clinton get the nomination.

[–]left_testy_check [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Trust me, there are a lot of them, you just need to read the comment section on Bernie's facebook page when ever he posts something negative towards Hillary. These people want someone who isn't bought and paid for, Bernie & Trump are their only choices.

[–]waiterer [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Idk I know a few people who aren't voting for sanders because they can'take stand the brigading by his supporters.

[–]i4q1z [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Look at FEC filings. Who knows what the fuck gmmb does.

[–]Yung_Calhoun [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Speaking of filings, below is a link with documents tying mega-lobbyists for banks and fossil fuels, Clark Consulting, to the Wilmington Trust. The Wilmington Trust is the only bank whose executives have been convicted for conspiracy and fraud for misrepresenting losses with hundreds of millions of dollars in TARP funds following the 2008 collapse. And if anyone has seen The Inside Job, Clark Consulting owned an executive compensation group, and has heavy ties to Bank of America and AIG. Have fun with the docs! https://uploadfiles.io/3b97925

Or, more simply, visit the Delaware Dept of Corporations website, and punch in "Clark/Bardes Capital Trust" . Or query SEC filing "S7-13-09" for "Proxy Disclosures and Solicitation Enhancements".

[–]Background_Process [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I forgot the name of the software, but it allows to manage hundreds of online personalities or accounts with relative ease, without accidental cross contamination. A dozen people can appear to be thousands of voices.

[–]cybexg [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

You have to realize that reddit benefits from, and hence will protect, the paid for shills. They generate greater traffic, more controversy, and at the same time, reddit gets to claim they don't limit comments.

Don't believe me?, try pointing out the obvious paid for accounts. See how fast your comment gets yanked or worse

[–]nickiter [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Well, a guy a few comments down is saying the 1% should all be burned, so you can kind of see where the class warfare idea comes from.

[–]theathleticjew 25ポイント26ポイント  (19子コメント)

Oh dude it's on both sides now. People post anything ProBernie even if it's from BREITBART and Salon, and that stuff is immediately at the top of this subreddit. Then the comments section is AntiBernie. Everything makes no sense, and it's just stupid.

[–]thegreatobserver [スコア非表示]  (14子コメント)

The shilling is getting so rampant now I don't know which comments to trust anymore. I'm a frequenter of /r/conspiracy because I like the alternative news articles you can find over there; shilling is at an all time high there now. They're not even trying to undermine opinions anymore they just talk nonsense.

On this post about Hillary's recent actions that hit the front page the whole thread was filled with discussion about reaching acsencion. Just really weird stuff, Reddit has gone to shit :(

[–]helpful_hank [スコア非表示]  (12子コメント)

It's not shilling if you sincerely support the candidate. Just like its not shilling if you honestly say "I really love Coca Cola." Duh.

[–]ObeseMoreece [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

But people who disagree with me must have been forced to do so!

Waaaaaah

[–]thegreatobserver [スコア非表示]  (10子コメント)

Nope. You're wrong. Duh

[–]2015MVP [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

I don't know what this prove, but it seems to support his point and not your own.

[–]thegreatobserver [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

Here's a link to the Oxford Dictionary meaning. "A person who pretends to give an impartial endorsement of something in which they themselves have an interest". It has everything to do with whether the person has a vested interested in the idea/person/whatever they are shilling for. To say that someone who really supports whatever they are shilling for is not a shill is downright wrong.

[–]WaitingOnAShillCheck [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

A person paid to endorse a product favourably, while pretending to be impartial.

I think that "paid" part of the definition in your source is a pretty damned important detail if we're arguing what a word means. Based on a source you are providing, a shill is someone paid to support a product or brand.

[–]ObeseMoreece [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Have you ever, just for one second, considered that maybe, just fucking maybe, people can disagree without without having to be told to?

I usually respect all opinions but you come from a community which regularly says the holocaust didn't happen or that one family controls the planet so I'm sure many people can understand why I would take what you say with a metric ton of salt.

[–]i4q1z [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Breitbart basically never makes it to the top. You're just lying.

[–]theathleticjew [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

...what? It's at the top with a ProBernie article every day

[–]Maddoktor2 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

And you haven't been paying attention.

[–]waiterer [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

What... and the NY post never gets to the front either right?

[–]lord_bunny 35ポイント36ポイント  (21子コメント)

I completely agree. I feel like anti-progressives are just camped out in every thread. The comments section of r/politics has gotten very ugly in the last little while.

[–]2015MVP [スコア非表示]  (9子コメント)

Why is so hard to believe that people have opposing views? Do you want r/politics to just be a safe space of progressive ideas?

[–]hectorh [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

It changed rapidly. It appears to be orchestrated. That's worrying in an anonymous environment like Reddit.

[–]Laborismoney [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yes, most do. Since the new blocking policy, I have been blocked more in the past week than ever before. Reddit is about being collectively accepted for most users, not learning or discussion. And it is becoming less about discussion and more about confirming biases.

[–]patrunic [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

As opposed to sanders supporters who just spam the same articles and same comments?

*i love that even when you sanders supporters know it's objectively true that /r/politics is dominated by articles submitted and upvoted by your selves while downvoting other articles, you still just downvote anything calling that out. Silencing other people doesn't make you right.

[–]SiegfriedKircheis [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Same with r/Hillaryclinton, r/conservatives, r/the_donald, and practically every other politically-angled subreddit. That's the nature of the people who go on there. The majority of people on Reddit support Sanders. That's a fact. Bitching about what the collective will of a subreddit chooses to be up voted and down voted is like screaming at the ocean for being wet. If you have a problem with that, then create your own subreddit and post what you want there. There's a difference between posting an opposing view on a subreddit and actively trying to brigade or subvert the discussion.

Every other thread I've been to that has a political spin on it are "safe spaces" that actively ban and remove even the slightest of opposition comments/users. That doesn't happen here. People don't like what others have to say and down vote them, not mods banning and removing people.

[–]patrunic [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

You have literally no statistics about who supports what on reddit, especially since reddit isn't even solely American. And this is /r/politics, the entire point is to discuss politics not just push sanders shit. Go to /r/s4p if you want to have an unashamedly bias subreddit. Acting as if it's okay to label people who disagree with sanders as any negative is fucked and really says a lot about the hypocrisy regarding people like you who would take any opportunity to suppress opposing views.

[–]SiegfriedKircheis [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Let's just completely disregard the entire upvote downvote system as a means of showing interest/support for links and comments, where the link or comment that is mostly agreed with goes to the top. If you have a problem with what is posted or daid, fucking down vote like everyone else does.

I'm not labeling anyone on here. Are there subreddit-supported brigades? Yup. Is there a real possibility that multiple accounts can be made and used to subvert a particular article or discussion? You bet! Russia and China have it on a commercial-scale.

You think I'm suppressing opposing views by voicing my opposition to your opposition in comments and downvoting? That's some attack on Christmas level shit right there. For some reason you don't understand why a majority of people support something you don't support and then accusing someone of spreading suppressing opposition for explaining how the concept of upvotes, downvotes, and what happens when you get a majority opinion. I don't like the 24/7 Sanders circlejerk either, and I support him as a candidate. However, the collective will of r/politics wants to see 1000 Bernie posts a day. I don't like it but more than just me does. Thats called "democracy".

Edit: suppress not spread.

[–]T3hSwagman [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

This comment is the equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and going lalalala. The main demographic that is supporting Sanders also happens to be the majority demographic of Reddit users. If you are going to pretend there won't be an overlap there then that's just being willfully ignorant.

You aren't going to find an unbiased subreddit on this topic because people are too invested in it. Even politicaldiscussion which pretends like they are balanced has a Hillary bias.

[–]waiterer [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yes except those subs have a specific designation r/politics does not....

[–]AppemanxD [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Its wonderful isnt it? People are crying about their veiws not mindlessly taking over

[–]dunkinduncan [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Yeah it sounds like they just can't handle an opposing opinion.

[–]SiegfriedKircheis [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

As compared to which subreddits that are political as well?

[–]bleedingjim [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Why do you fear opinions contrary to your own?

[–]mai_Ttag [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Well when r/politics turns into r/berniesanders that is what you get. I think the problem is you can't even have a healthy discussion unless its Pro Bernie. How is that politics? I am a new Trump supporter and just for mentioning his name ill be down voted into oblivion when I can justify my support with reason.

[–]Sshanx [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Not because of you personally , but because i don't agree with Trump one bit, so yes i will down vote you.

[–]belisaurius [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Are you comfortable with voting for a political candidate who actively supports political violence as a tool for success in our Democracy?

[–]Andharwut 14ポイント15ポイント  (6子コメント)

Our culture needs to promote and celebrate skepticism.

One way I deal with these types of people is trying to quickly determine if they're being intellectually dishonest. If someone is smart enough to see facts while spinning the argument and using talking points, chances are something's not right.

You can sit here and successfully argue pretty much anything if you're willing to be dismissive and are capable of framing.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Framing

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/JAQing_off

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Intellectual_honesty

It's important to listen to others, but always be at least a little skeptical.

[–]helpful_hank [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

I'm skeptical of organizations that find it necessary to name themselves "rational."

[–]firmness [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Funny this one. Of all examples, they used a 911 comment (Silverstein said "pull" the building. He DID say this and there is nothing vague about it. Was this an ironic comment to demonstrate how to frame something to a biased view?

[–]Andharwut [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I'm assuming you mean in the "Just asking Questions" entry?

I was curious what the "pull" thing was about so I looked up a video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p34XrI2Fm6I

In the context of this video it's obvious he made the call to "Pull it" to the Head of the fire department after they informed him they couldn't contain the fire.

When someone's being bombarded with ridiculous accusations they can leave out context and just rapid fire ludicrous claims. By framing it as a question they don't have to prove anything and have an excuse for leaving out context. It forces the conversation and keeps you on the defensive. Pretty insidious shit, haha. I hated Glenn Beck so much for this. This is a fun read:

http://www.cracked.com/blog/i-watch-glenn-becks-comedy-tour-regret-it/

[–]JohanLiebheart [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

People should start by getting rid of Religion and Faith then.

[–]Valek27 [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

And if one of the people that gets payed to spread propaganda is reading this, you're also a piece of shit no matter how well you try and rationalise it.

[–]Colorado222 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

They'll just call you a Bernie Bro and claim that you were aggressive or something towards them.

[–]Colorado222 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

They'll just call you a Bernie Bro and claim that you were aggressive or something towards them.

[–]gnovos 6ポイント7ポイント  (6子コメント)

When did america become a banana republic in terms of propaganda from the media, the politicians, and now online PR?

sometime in the 80's?

[–]Quexana 8ポイント9ポイント  (5子コメント)

This is when I think it was. Once the power elite figured out how the Civil Rights and anti-Vietnam movements had used the media and news to spread their message and change public opinion, they shut that shit down.

[–]gnovos 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

It was Alex P. Keaton, making Conservatism look cool.

[–]TheMagicBola [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It's no coincidence that a lot of 80s babies are named Alex. Seriously the amount of people ive met that were named after that character is shocking.

[–]WaitingOnAShillCheck [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Shut it down? I don't know where you're getting that from. I saw it getting bottled and sold to "rebels" by the companies they're supposedly fighting. Media conglomerates take footage of various protests, cut it to fit whatever narrative sells and then sell it--to both sides of the issue, one who really believes the narrative and the other who watches just to get angry or "because it's funny." Media companies don't care why you're watching it and neither do the companies buying ad space between clips because you're still watching and you're buying what you see. Money goes from you to Unilever to CNN, who spends it to keep your attention.

It was moderately noticeable in the 90's. It's damned near blindingly obvious now.

[–]Quexana [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Fair point. "Shut it down" was inaccurate, "marginalize" and "discredit" are closer to the truth.

[–]belisaurius [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It was probably right around the time Nixon and his cronies figured out that the best way to retain power was this three point plan:

1) Publicly associate Hippies with Marijuana and African Americans with Crack.

2) Heavily criminalize drugs and therefor criminalize your opponents.

3) Invest in an extensive media apparatus to push these views.

Turns out, that's what they did. The War on Drugs + Fox News were born in the Oval Office, alongside the classic Watergate conspiracy.

[–]VROF [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

It really is amazing that somehow millions of Americans have been convinced the only thing keeping them down is lack of bootstrap-pulling. How do people not notice that the people literally working the hardest make the least money?

[–]nickiter [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

You're making sort of a wild generalization... Those rich investment bankers everyone loves to hate work incredibly long hours, as do surgeons, lawyers, etc.

[–]Aimbooze [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

You are not paid based on how hard you work. You are paid based on the value you produce

[–]Meatsim1 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

You are paid based on the value you produce

There it is

[–]helpful_hank [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Dude, nice link. That is some thoroughly good stuff.

[–]firmness [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Thanks for saying this. After a lot of study, reading, debating, and wallowing in ignorance, I have come to the conclusion that the problem is not the abusers. There always have been and always will be abusers. The problem is us. Not all of us, but a few specific flavors of us.

Feminists, white knight types, and cynics are all prime targets for this sort of propaganda. They are all well-meaning and usually empathetic and good - but they are easily riled to action and that action is usually against the wrong people (these days white males).

As long as we keep pointing at the nameless formless 1% we will never take control of our lives and our systems.

Republicans are fighting for their stuff, Democrats fight for theirs, Feminist fight, Gays fight, and Blacks fight - who is fighting for America and the Constitution that makes this all possible? When you fight for an ism, you are killing the very system that allows you the freedom to do so.

Just a thought.

[–]teary_ayed 8ポイント9ポイント  (1子コメント)

You are noticing psychological operations.

I remember driving along a road in a beachside community back around 1980s or thereabouts, and I noticed a store called Banana Republic (it was a clothing store). It was one of those surreal moments I can't adequately explain, but that's when I knew.

I think that the propaganda from the media probably matured simultaneous to the television, around WWII and afterward. Prior to the year 2002 or thereabouts, the Internet seemed much different from today, celebrity didn't exist except in the form of anonymous geeks. Now the Internet is much like TV medium was prior to the Internet, significantly dumbed down from its humble and intelligent beginnings, but more interactive with fancier bells and whistles.

All of this is somewhat cathartic, in the sense of getting a better understanding of the 2011 "Who Runs the World" articles about Swiss economic researchers who discovered a shadow entity with controlling ownership over significant businesses. The plutocracy and their enabling minions are being individually identified, becoming more transparent.

It remains to be seen if the transparency will do any of us any good.

[–]remotecourting [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It remains to be seen if the transparency will do any of us any good.

While certainly a risky proposition, the alternative is an era of neofeudalism and unprecedented exploitation. As the US makes strides towards transparency, it will attract the quality minds of the tech world who presently feel alienated after seeing their labor be turned into a surveillance machine with potentially ominous powers. And, in a way, this might restore geopolitics to equilibrium as a countervailing force to the unrobing of Putin's propoganda machine in 2014.

[–]jayrandez 3ポイント4ポイント  (8子コメント)

What is meant by Banana Republic? I just know that as a clothing store.

[–]Izeinwinter [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

wiki this. But basically, an country with a weak government being taken over by large multinational company and having it's entire economy restructured around maximizing the profits of said company. The phenomenon was named after the trade in banana's, but this also includes horrors like the belgian congo and the rubber trade. That's an extreme case, but it is always very bad for the country in question. Abject poverty, oppression, death.

[–]inthrees [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Imagine a tropical dictatorship where the Dictator and a mere handful of families have outlandish, extravagant wealth and damn near everybody else is living in mud huts and worked to the bone to support the over caste.

The over caste that somehow wins elections repeatedly, via overwhelming landslide.

That's a Banana Republic.

[–]solazyme_investor [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

It has been like that since the beginning of time

[–]Capt_Blackmoore [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Well, more like since the Spanish-American war. When you start to see American business interests and US government policy in supporting or taking out governments in Latin and South America.

[–]Quexana 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's a pejorative term for plutocracy.

[–]goldstarstickergiver [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Banana Republic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_republic

[–]Maddoktor2 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

It's what happens when Republicans are elected. See: Kansas, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Arizona, et al.

[–]Veggiemon [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

If only you were joking

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/18/opinion/racial-gerrymandering-in-north-carolina.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/opinion/sunday/the-great-gerrymander-of-2012.html?pagewanted=all

In North Carolina, where the two-party House vote was 51 percent Democratic, 49 percent Republican, the average simulated delegation was seven Democrats and six Republicans. The actual outcome? Four Democrats, nine Republicans — a split that occurred in less than 1 percent of simulations. If districts were drawn fairly, this lopsided discrepancy would hardly ever occur.

[–]QSector [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

You act like this is a new phenomena. Paid shills were very much in play in 2008 on sites like Digg. Submitters worked in teams headed by a single person who was in contact with the sites/publishers who were pulling the purse strings and writing the checks. It's always been much more difficult to do on reddit, but it's done. People are just more clever and more careful. They also get control of subreddits to provide extra insulation.

[–]Jackmack65 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

When did america become a banana republic in terms of propaganda from the media, the politicians, and now online PR?

Beginning in about 1981 accelerating in 1987 (termination of the "fairness doctrine," which gave birth to 24/7, shrieking right-wing radio and the erosion of journalism), and gathering speed and momentum ever since.

[–]ChipAyten 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is an innate human problem.

[–]TopNFalvors [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Well this is the "best" comment, even 7 hours later, so that says something.

[–]bangorthebarbarian [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It's been an honor to have met you online. Farewell Mods4astroturf.

[–]nickiter [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

IDK man... Maybe there are just people out there who don't agree with you.

[–]reddit_lurker11 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1FFVWEQnSM

[–]hectorh [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The NYDT thread is particularly bad. I've noticed comment scores fluctuate rapidly. Some form of analysis on these threads would be interesting.

[–]waiterer [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I honestly think people are sick and tired of the Bernie brigading on this sub so they are pushing back. I'm sure there are shill accounts that work for all the candidatearth but I would be willing to bet there are a good amount of shill accounts that work for websites like salon.Com to push people towards clicking on their bait titles. If there were that many paid accounts with a single agenda they would probably all down vote this article instead of spending time in the comment section.

[–]monkeyminding [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

this subreddit is being flooded with propaganda accounts.

It's not just this subreddit. I've had suspicions about the comment threads on /r/news and /r/worldnews too. There are a number of accounts I have flagged because they only ever comment in defense of, for example, Monsanto or Koch Industries.

[–]ArkitekZero [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

When did america become a banana republic in terms of propaganda from the media, the politicians, and now online PR?

When you rejected the socialists.

[–]Capt_Blackmoore [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

there's an understatement. I can hardly equate rejection with ruin, and incarceration.

[–]geeses -3ポイント-2ポイント  (2子コメント)

There was never really much discussion around here. Mostly just circlejerking.

[–]remotecourting [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Not true--it was buried and derailed by the circlejerk.

[–]Sakkyoku-Sha -4ポイント-3ポイント  (1子コメント)

While there's definitely people who are paid to shill on sites (I actually did this for a time) there are also many legitimate fears against reactionary movements for the sake of 'social progress'. I plead you to consider all sides before making a decision.

[–]keenly_disinterested [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Can't have a genuine discussion... In /r/politics... Awwww, you're so cute!