• Null User Object@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    change dot org petitions have 0 influence on Congress. It’s a distraction and a waste of time. I’m half convinced they’re a misinformation campaign by the opposition to get people to sign a worthless petition instead of doing what they should be doing, which is…

    👏 Call 👏Your 👏 Representatives (House AND Senate)👏 And 👏 Tell 👏 Them 👏 Directly. 👏

    https://5calls.org/

      • Null User Object@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Anyone (eg. people who’ve never even been to the US) can sign one of those as many times as they want. There’s no verification so it’s not even representative of US voters, much less any particular Congress person’s constituents. Congress people want to know what their actual constituents think, not what could just be Chinese bot farm. Your congressional representatives are not paying any attention to online petitions. Period.

    • Final Remix@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      They’re sitting there passively mining Peoples’ information.

      And people just hand it over. No need for a poll or data crunching if people willingly get incensed about a cause and provide contact info.

    • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyzOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Okay then. After you sign it, send a link to your senators and representatives so they know you’re not speaking alone when you tell them how you feel about Schumer and Jeffries.

      …you are emailing your congresspeople, right? …or did you only come here to be a naysayer?

    • freagle@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Wow. You literally just described voting in liberal democracies founded by land-owning white supremacist men who sought to hoard wealth without the masses having any power to stop them

        • freagle@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Oh look, a lemmy.world user who’s never wondered why fascism has only ever emerged from liberalism. Shocker.

      • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyzOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Yeah I suppose you would prefer a system where nobody gets to vote or own any land or cooking utensils, and everyone is entirely dependent upon a highly centralized authoritarian government that collects all their grain and sells it overseas, leaving the masses to starve while building mansions for themselves and calling it “communism”?

        You know, cause judging by your instance you probably look up to the likes of Stalin and Mao, who did those things.

        • freagle@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 hours ago

          You’re so funny. You do realize that for 100 - 150 years after every Euro-liberal revolution the masses of people were destitute while the elite became insanely rich? You think the robber barons were an anomaly? Why do you think the labor movement happened? It wasn’t because people were well taken care of.

          Meanwhile in every communist revolution mass poverty alleviation was the primary driver of economic organization, ending centuries of famine cycles, lifting 100s of millions out of abject poverty, and it only took them between 10 and 30 years to establish the industrial and economic base to do it. In the USSR rent was less than 10% of person’s income. In China, a child laborerer on a rice farm in 1949 is today sitting in a car that park itself.

          Stalin came from poverty and ethnic minority, became the most powerful man in the USSR and died with almost nothing to his name except some clothes and few pieces of furniture.

          Would I prefer a system that governs for the benefit of the masses? Absolutely.

          What’s funny is that you are so adamant that having a vote in a liberal democracy matters so much that it’s evil to not have exactly the type of voting system from liberal democracy, and yet that self same voting system is exactly what allowed the oligarchs to maintain and grow their power for 250 years without anyone ever being able to stop them.

          Yes, I would gladly abandon this farce of a democracy for something that actually helped the masses instead of the system that protects the opulent minority from the will of the majority (to use the words of American founding father and 5th president James Madison).