• ceenote@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    I’m not optimistic the Supreme Court will decide to start being an impartial arbiter of the law and let this stand instead of continuing to be actively pro-corruption.

            • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 days ago

              Where did they incite violence? They posted a list of state legislative leaders after stating that the power to regulate how corporations behave is a power left to the states. Seems like what they are advocating is that people contact their state legislators and demand state level regulation of these corporations.

              • youcantreadthis@quokk.au
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                10 days ago

                Well excuse me for assuming it wasn’t a wacky bit where you just tell the government your subversive beliefs. I still think recommending self harm is scary

      • Cenotaph@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 days ago

        The Roberts court has no problem overturning precedent, no matter how “upheld” it has been, so long as it is convenient for conservatives.

        • Canaconda@lemmy.caOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          10 days ago

          fuck you. this is important. take a break from the internet if its bothering you so much.

          • Tanis Nikana@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 days ago

            I’m subscribed to these communities because I do pay attention to politics. I read what you wrote the first time. Lemmy is small enough that I get to see everything each day, same as you. Repeating your message as often as you do blunts it to the same emotional effect as a mattress commercial.

            Why are you trying to personally attack me? What did I do to you, except encourage you to follow the rules on lemmy.world?

              • Tanis Nikana@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                10 days ago

                You’re full of personal attacks. You came right out of the gate with a “fuck you”, then you think I’m a main character. Man, I hope you find some peace, cause you don’t have any lately.

                Really though, spamming is against the rules. You should stop if you want to continue participating on this instance.

                • Canaconda@lemmy.caOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  10 days ago

                  yea cuz you’re being annoying and contributing nothing. Also hypocritical by choosing to engage me after complaining that I was spamming. I’m going to block you now.

      • freagle@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 days ago

        Yeah, it always has been. We know. The legal framework of corporations and their ability to donate to campaigns is just not the actual problem here.

          • freagle@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 days ago

            Nihilism is when you think nothing has any meaning, not when you critique someone’s theory of action as delusional

            • Canaconda@lemmy.caOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              10 days ago

              Criticism requires substance. One can be nihilistic without it being your central world view.

              You have nothing to lose writing your state level contact. You’ve already wasted significantly more time espousing defeatist propaganda.

              • freagle@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                10 days ago

                You have no idea what I have or have not done. How many letter writing campaigns I have participated, how many representatives I have contacted about what topics. Moralizing will get you nowhere with me.

                The reality remains that legal restraints on corporate funding of candidates is deck chairs on the Titanic and no appeals to the importance of Feng Shui on the psychology of the passenger is going to move that iceberg.

    • cmbabul@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 days ago

      I really appreciate that you can stay optimistic at this point in time. Precedent kinda stopped meaning anything to the Supreme Court a while back, Roberts still plays the act of being legitimate but that’s just his ego trying to protect his tarnished legacy as Chief Justice.

      If they don’t take this case and deem it a limitation on free speech I will be fucking shocked. And when they do take it the amount of money that gets thrown at them will be outlandish

        • notabot@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 days ago

          They don’t want to rein in the senile clown, they’re pulling in the same direction. States getting the idea that they can limit corporations is an idea that, I suspect, they will want to quash.

            • cmbabul@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 days ago

              You’re describing a constitutional crisis and potentially a civil war, and it’s been building since even before Trump launched his campaign.

              I hope that states start standing up to the Supreme Court about this and other issues, i don’t think they will at least for this issue, state governments can be paid off just like feds, and additionally standing up to the Supreme Court will be a huge risk to whichever state tries to do so. Even though we are all aware they are illegitimate, there’s so much loyalty to the process and decorum

              I see what you’re hoping for I just don’t have any faith in any section of the United States governments actually doing anything that brash to stand up for what’s right

              • Canaconda@lemmy.caOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                10 days ago

                I just don’t have any faith

                Jesus said the faith of a mustard seed can move mountains. That’s more than enough to contact your state rep and be a part of the solution.

                Americans still have power on the state level. That’s why we’re seeing them pass bills ensuring their electoral college votes go to the president that gains the majority of votes.

                • cmbabul@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  10 days ago

                  Well Jesus can use his then lol, but until he stops being a superstition I don’t see how that’s possible. We ain’t voting our way out of this shit

        • Canaconda@lemmy.caOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          10 days ago

          I thought you meant in the title.

          I watched it once before switching to articles. Except for the part I’ve been linking from 3:20 onward that explains how it’s a constitutional power.

          I must have missed the part about the comma. TBH I haven’t delved into the minutia of the laws themselves. IMO if Hawaii already passed it based on the analysis of legal experts than my role is to get the word out.

  • Capt. Wolf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 days ago

    We all know how this is gonna go. We’re all aware that corporations are people and that money talks and is therefore speech. Stopping corporations from using their money to influence politics is therefore a first amendment violation…

    Wish I was joking, but I guarantee someone will argue this.