On the other hand, the industry learned so long as the turbines are out of sight, they are out of the NYMBY's minds.
The idea that powerful families are radically different because they support one side of politics or another is a great myth used to manipulate and control people. An average poor or middle class family has more in common with another such family on the other side of a political spectrum than with their respective party leaders.
Powerful families are chummy with other powerful people because power ends up being the most important status symbol, and ideology can hide behind it.
It's basically the reason that orthodox Republican economic policy can even exist. It's terribly debunked theory, but because the messengers are WSJ op-ed writers that went to fancy schools and wear bow ties to work, their view "couldn't possibly be just wrong".
There was some polls recently that showed that when asked about GOP tax plans, people refused to believe that the pollsters were even telling the truth on the facts, because it was so absurd. Of course there wouldn't be a tax break for private jet maintenance!
But politicians believe their friends, just like we all do. It's the base of "keep politics out of X".
Immigration, taxes, healthcare, these are all places where the final results would be massively different with a Democratic majority right now.
Perhaps in the 90s it was less different. But now there's such a clear difference.
Sure Democrats aren't asking for full blown socialism. But they're asking for stuff thats way different than what the GOP is pushing for.
Being in politics is supposed to mean being a public servant.
Well okay, how much power do you think Senators give their servants? They probably don't think of their housekeepers/sitters/chefs/etc's opinions at all. If their dog-walker objects to the dog that they get, what's going to happen? The dog sure isn't going to change.
> "It's all for the good of the city, sir. Do you know where the word 'policeman' comes from? It means 'man of the city', sir. From the old word polis."
> ...
> "You're a man interested in words, captain. I'd just invite you to consider something your predecessor never fully grasped."
> "Sir?"
> "Have you ever wondered where the word 'politician' comes from?" Said the Patrician.
These roles have a very specific purpose, and that purpose is service. They've veered sharply away from it, but that is still their job. Also, I think in real life the root is 'politia' or 'politika' or something, but the definition is similar.
And another word from that book: 'polite' apparently came from 'behavior befitting someone living in a city.' I guess social norms maybe became more important with the density?
These terms were thus all created in the first democracy we know of. However, that was then followed by millennia of monarchies. Modern democracies came into existence in an environment where monarchies were still the norm and it shows. I find it reminiscent of the fact that Christians celebrate Christmas which is supposedly a Christian holiday by following all kinds of pagan rituals like the entire Christmas tree thing.
politicians then use this wealth to divide the rest of the country to insure their continuance in power. they are loyal to their party before the people and it is that stranglehold that needs to be broken to bring accountability back.
disclaimer: I voted straight D in the last 4 elections
This uniparty allows fringes of either side some pet causes, but at the heart of it, both parties share the same values.
That's not all that bad either, it guarantees continuity and limited disruption --but we need to understand that's how it works and its consequent limitations.
The only non unipartarians the last 25 years have been Perot, perhaps Sanders and Trump. Prior to that JFK.
That's what the powerful tell the naive. Politics is about power and money.
NIMBY - Not In My Back Yard