Hacker News Reader

Comment by cvccvroomvroom | Hacker News Reader

I'm wondering how long it will take, if ever, until:

1. we can put the wasted efforts of tribal cultural warfare behind us

2. we can have debates that may not and should not result in unanimous agreement without being disagreeable

3. voters are informed deeply about all issues and candidates presented before them from verified sources, not press releases from political operatives

4. Elimination of PACs

5. Private financing of political campaigns is either abolished or severed limited to small donations from named individuals to a particular candidate only. When funds go unused, they are fractionally returned to all donors

6. Prosecution of public officials who take thinly-veiled bribes and other considerations

View on HN

This is magical thinking. Those things will never happen. Your suggestions are at best incompatible with our current political ideals (restricting PACs and private campaign financing) and at worst utterly nonsensical.

For example: "voters are informed deeply about all issues and candidates presented before them from verified sources".

What does it mean for a voter to be "informed deeply about all issues and candidates"? How do you define that?

What do you do if a voter is not "informed deeply" -- prevent them from voting?

"verified sources" -- verified by whom? The fact-checkers at Snopes? What if I disagree with their standards for verification, of if they have some blatant political bias themselves? Okay, how about some "bipartisan" government committee? Who appoints the committee members?

etc. etc.

What is wrong with PACs? Political Action Committees. So instead of donating to support a certain candidate against an opponent, you support an issue, you support pro life against pro choice, or you support gay marriage against traditional marriage.

What does this have to do with the article?

They're unhappy whenever their political opponents make small, sensible steps towards treating people not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. In such cases, they will declare the system is unjust and must be abolished.

When their own political allies make their own gains, whether its by corruption, violence, intimidation, lies, defamation, or destruction, they will hide those actions, declare you should be outcast (or worse) if you believe they took place, or declare those actions were just and necessary.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com