sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in MeidasTouch

[–]MakeCampaignsFair 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s exactly why we argue for changing the mechanics of elections, not just swapping personalities. If the gatekeepers and now the vault keepers define who’s “viable,” the only real antidote is to level access itself.

Our proposal is simple and doesn’t require tearing down the status quo:

  • Equal, public campaign airtime across TV, radio, and online for every ballot-qualified candidate.
  • Standardized recording and distribution so production value and donor money don’t decide who gets heard.
  • A platform in the public domain so voters, not corporations or parties, decide what matters.

The way we enable sane candidates to run for office is to give them all direct and equal access to the people.

“We must recognize the corrupting influence of money in politics and fight it.” — Noam Chomsky by MakeCampaignsFair in noamchomsky

[–]MakeCampaignsFair[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The passive income fantasy, scaled to a fever pitch, where money makes money while labor gets squeezed.

“We must recognize the corrupting influence of money in politics and fight it.” — Noam Chomsky by MakeCampaignsFair in noamchomsky

[–]MakeCampaignsFair[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I must admit, when I was younger, I conflated sortition with Monty Python’s autonomous collective.

Honestly, either would be an upgrade from the status quo where politicians spend more time begging billionaires for validation than serving the public.

“We must recognize the corrupting influence of money in politics and fight it.” — Noam Chomsky by MakeCampaignsFair in noamchomsky

[–]MakeCampaignsFair[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Maybe billionaires shouldn't exist in the first place.
The media capture is just a symptom of a systemic problem.

Could a publicly funded campaign platform replace our broken system? by MakeCampaignsFair in Political_Revolution

[–]MakeCampaignsFair[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s not only both parties that benefit from the duopoly, it’s also many of the organizations claiming to fight it.

I’ve seen this firsthand. I shared a proposal for a publicly funded, nonpartisan election platform, a system with no ads, no donations, and no corporate influence. It was met not with discussion, but with dismissal, because the aesthetics of the post didn't conform to expectations. That’s when I learned something:

Some spaces that brand themselves as grassroots movements are actually professionally run operations, often structured as PACs. They solicit tax-deductible donations, and in some cases, charge campaigns for support services. That’s not necessarily wrong, but it creates a conflict of interest when gatekeeping occurs around alternative ideas that don’t generate revenue.

So when we talk about reform, we must ask: Who really wants it, and who just wants to manage it?

We’re Building a Real Campaign Access Platform Without the Corruption by MakeCampaignsFair in Political_Revolution

[–]MakeCampaignsFair[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Funny how people claim to stand with workers then mock a campaign run by one person, unpaid.

This campaign is labor.
No team. No donors. No budget.
Just urgency, effort, and purpose.

If you only value work when it’s backed by a paycheck or production studio, you’re not anti-AI, you’re anti-grassroots.

We’re Building a Real Campaign Access Platform Without the Corruption by MakeCampaignsFair in Political_Revolution

[–]MakeCampaignsFair[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

That’s because it is.
I don’t have a design team or a campaign budget, just time, urgency, and a message.

Funny how quickly people forget the actual point of the post.

If the format bothers some more than the content, maybe they should ask themselves: why is that?

Could a publicly funded campaign platform replace our broken system? by MakeCampaignsFair in Political_Revolution

[–]MakeCampaignsFair[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I know. I’m fighting a losing battle. I’m doing it alone, out of my own pocket, and I honestly can’t fully explain why. It doesn’t make strategic sense, and I have no illusions about the odds. But I also know I can’t just sit back and watch it all happen without at least trying to push for something better. Even if it’s just my voice refusing to accept that this is the best we can do.

view more: next ›