Why does it feel that the evil sides globally are winning. Even evil people are winning. Why?

  • SabinStargem@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    30 minutes ago

    I think the issue in America, is that the Constitution only addressed political power, but failed to account for fiscal strength. Money is inherently a thing that manipulates the fates of individuals, companies, and nations alike. By not setting down rules, limitations, and expectations regarding economics, the Founding Fathers allowed a key form of power go unaddressed.

    The vast majority of Project 2025’s major backers are wealthy people, who have far beyond what any normal person can ever hope to possess. This imbalance means that workers have to sacrifice much time, money, and energy to be barely heard on a single issue, while a rich person can just hire experts to massage every aspect of their many messages and to deliver it everywhere with a mighty voice.

    IMO, we will need a Constitution v2.0 that fixes not only assorted political flaws like the voting system, but also prevents wealth from being a microphone that only a few can afford.

  • rational_lib@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    2 hours ago

    The internet. It led to the following:

    • Good social change occurred very rapidly from the 1990s-2010s, causing highly motivated pushback from those who didn’t like the changes
    • Rising wealth inequality caused by tech billionaires increased incentives and capability for a small number of extremely wealthy people to seize control of media and political power centers
    • Foreign dictator governments became more able to more easily spread pro-dictator propaganda
    • Media became more decentralized, leading to some good things but also the hijacking of our psychology to spread fear and disgust for the sake of grabbing attention
    • JOMusic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      I would just like to push back and say that the Internet was an open public project, and it has helped countless people across the world. Every single problematic tech that people are pointing to at the moment are closed-source commercial projects.

      That is Capitalism at work.

  • turnip@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    24 minutes ago

    My thoughts are that China is no longer recycling their profits into US treasuries, and the BRICS countries seemed to be heading down the same path. The US cant sustain high interest rates and needs people to buy this debt, hence there is a lot of talk of tariffs and a “green new deal” type of tariff system on emissions in order to derive additional revenue without increasing taxes on citizens. Citizens want entitlement programs that are ponzi schemes that have already been spent long ago, but they dont want additional taxes, and so you need a scheme to get around their votes.

    The same thing happened after the great depression where they rebased gold to a lower value after confiscating it, and some speculate it created an environment ripe for WWII. Our system of printing money tends to increase aggregate demand while misallocating capital, like houses in 2008, and thus it ends in suffering.

  • aordogvan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Surprised to read so many answers talking about capitalism, social media and wealth concentration. But no one mentioned that we’re at an unprecedented point in history of mankind. Ecological collapse, the lightening fast rise of AI. No example of past historical processes can be very useful in this very unique context.

    And don’t forget that with AI and, coming fast, robots, humans will not be needed for labor anymore. Most of you might feel this is rubbish about something you think is science fiction. I suggest you think again.

    Think again and you will quickly realize that the future is not rosy for 99.5% of us.

  • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    the hard answer: the voting populace is the single stupidest form of combined intelligence to ever exist, im pretty sure 3 children under the age of 7 in a room would have a higher average IQ than any state in america when measuring the voting populace.

    Voting is a joke. People don’t take it seriously, it’s all vibes based, and those vibes are horrendously unreliable and meaningless.

    the soft answer: it is, for now. It will change, just give it time. It’s inevitable.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        and yet, in most cases, it pretty roughly aligns with popular vote sentiment. The only difference is that the congress would have a significantly different makeup, whether or not that changes much is a different question.

    • Hylactor@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      56 minutes ago

      The perspective I subscribe to is that access and abundance has outpaced the average persons ability to choose. By which I mean, their talent at choosing. An overall inability to make quality decisions. I would say the issue really grew some teeth in maybe the 50’s and has been accelerating more or less exponentially. The art of exploiting this inability to choose first starts getting real traction in the evolution advertising. Getting people to buy cans of beans and cigarettes was the larval form of a much more sinister science of mass manipulation. The internet definitely threw gasoline on the fire. And now no one knows what is quality, or true, or nutritious, or sustainable, or important. The average person is completely overwhelmed and operating on a low-level fight-or-flight type reasoning. Unfortunately I don’t think there is a short term solution. People need to start learning at a very young age explicitly how to not be a mark. Which is antithetical to the wealthy and politically connected people whose bread and butter is hoards of unscrupulous consumers of products and rhetoric.

  • WhatSay@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Change requires a massive push, and apparently people need to suffer much much more, to inspire that momentum.

  • redwattlebird@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Wealth inequality caused by all the things mentioned here and more. It allows the wealthy to control narrative that is fed to the masses, control the amount of free time people have to think and control how much pressure is placed on your lives.

    The free thinking world is gone.

    But the ‘3 meals away from a revolution’ is always true and the rich will always get more greedy. When everyone no longer has the ability to free themselves, that’s when a lot of heads will roll.

  • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    Well, I’d say it’s because they don’t even hide it anymore. They know they can do whatever they want, and get away with it.

    Enshitification is a real thing, and companies and evil people are being blatant about it, because they know they don’t have to hide it because they know they can’t be stopped.

    It sucks. I hate it. I wish we could do something about it.

  • LeninOnAPrayer@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Because class war is being raged but most of the global north working class don’t have any class consciousness. Capitalism is working on doing what it has done to the global South for decades but this time to the global North. Fascism is Imperialism turned inward. Welcome to the rest of our lives.

    • phlegmy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      What has capitalism done to the global south?
      Is that just a metaphor, or are you literally talking about Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, South America and Antarctica?

      Sorry, I’m just a little confused about what you mean.

      • 10001110101@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Global South basically just means underdeveloped/developing nations.

        Capitalism results in the rich, mostly in developed countries, extracting resources for low prices and exploiting desperate workers for low wages in developing countries. The developing countries get little in return. Some of these countries have been able to muster some protectionism to mitigate so much transfer of wealth out if their country (such as China). Developed nations have purposely kept some developing nations destabilised to maximize exploitation.

        • phlegmy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 minutes ago

          Ah, gotcha.
          Just researched a bit and noticed it’s an official term used by the UN.

          It just sounds a little weird, as somebody from a southern nation that this doesn’t seem to apply to.

          China is also in the northern hemisphere, so it also seems strange that it’s called ‘global south’.

          Something like ‘low economic’ would have made a lot more sense to me, but I guess ‘global south’ is the official term.

  • ZeroOne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 hour ago

    This is a people/societal issue. People’s lack of willingness in investing in other people doing well.

  • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Because the slow decay of the capitalist order that has been occurring since the neoliberal turn has reached the point where it’s effects are being felt in the global North

    • LeninOnAPrayer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Just left a nearly an identical explanation. Refreshed and saw this comment. Well said. Fascism is Imperialism turned inward.