Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

delrem

(9,688 posts)
15. You are right about that.
Thu Apr 16, 2015, 09:54 AM
Apr 2015

The syllogism is a different thing. It's a "spin" argument that works backward from the existing facts, the citizens united decision, the facts about corporate spending, to suggest that there's no other choice, no alternative, esp. in this incredibly extended and outrageously funded US primary season. It's a spin argument that I read everyday on DU, and recently made by the site owner - it's that ubiquitous. In fact, it seems to be the only substantial argument being made by those who seek to benefit from the situation. (edited to add: of course those making this spin argument don't express it so bluntly, and the accurate term 'oligarch' is avoided like the plague)

Hope that's clearer. If not, I'll just let the matter go. There are plenty of others who explain these things much more simply and clearly than I can.

I'll repeat my first response:
Other democracies work to change things for the better, through elections.
That's the whole purpose of elections.
When did that change into the syllogism "you can't win an election if you don't have the money, only the oligarchs have the money, so only the oligarchs can win elections"?

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»No Matter Who Wins the Wh...»Reply #15