124

Social scientists thought that patrimonialism had been relegated to the dustbin of history. And for good reason: Such regimes couldn’t compete militarily or economically with states led by the expert civil services that helped make modern societies rich, powerful and relatively secure.

But a slew of self-aggrandizing leaders has taken advantage of rising inequality, cultural conflicts and changing demography to grab power. The result has been a steep decline in the government’s ability to provide essential services such as health care, education and safety.

top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 55 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Oh is it, NYTimes? Is it now?
Probably should have hammered that home before the election.

[-] anarchrist@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 3 days ago

I can't believe people work for that rag. I'd tell people I made a living slinging coke or something honest.

[-] futatorius@lemm.ee 2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

NYT journalists should take a year-long break to give blowjobs in bus station toilets to regain their integrity and self-respect.

[-] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works -2 points 3 days ago
[-] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 7 points 3 days ago

You and I read a very different NYTimes.

[-] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 29 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

But Do They Really Want This?

I think a significant subset of Americans have been waiting on real help from the government for so long that they're just ready to let it all burn down because they simply don't have the education to know how bad that really will be.

There's a massive difference between the organized anarchy of political anarchists and the disorganized anarchy of a state collapsing. I trust groups like anarchists to be able to organize in a disaster scenario, but frankly anarchist groups are in the minority, and so most people will still be foolishly looking for leaders instead of accepting that we must all lead and follow at the same time. I'd have more hope if there were more true dyed-in-the-wool anarchists and decentralization proponents, but the majority of the country is deeply ingrained into the ideology of hierarchy.

So no, the Americans absolutely do not really want this, but the vast majority of them are too uneducated to really know and understand that they just voted for the slow collapse of their own nation. This is how nations become relegated to the dustbin of history. What's worse is Americas position and its decades long crowing about freedom and democracy have really soured a lot of the planet on the idea of "democracy" which is fucking scary to say the least. No one takes the American ideology seriously anymore, clearly seeing it was lies told to secure and promote the US empire while only really paying lip-service to the idea of democracy.

[-] ZMonster@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

I think a significant subset of Americans have been waiting on real help from the government for so long that they're just ready to let it all burn down because they simply don't have the education to know how bad that really will be.

Are we just waiting for the capitalists to throw their hands up and relinquish control back to the people??? What alternate mandela dimension did I just teleport to? Hopefully febreeze is still spelled with two e's. But don't get me wrong, I would love to live in a place where naivety solves problems - but I just don't believe I live in that place. So regardless of the damage, regardless of the harm, regardless of the rationale or logic of more "sensible" people:

jtfc

You just let me know when you're done voting for your best hope, Joe fucking Biden. I'll be with the crowd ready to rip the fucking bandaid off.

[-] uberdroog@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

O fucks. Burn it all down. It's not working and we all know it.

this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2024
124 points (98.4% liked)

politics

19271 readers
1602 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS