What makes people elect corrupt candidates?

This post is a response to a question posed in its complete format: “What makes people elect candidates for influential government positions while knowing them to be corrupt?”

Sadly, corrupt agents in government and media have succeeded in appealing to cynical minds enough for a significant proportion of people to believe everyone is corrupt, that there is no difference between parties or people in each party.

Misanthropic cynicism has always existed, but it began to define politics when Ronald Reagan claimed the government was the enemy.

It was a half-truth which appealed to enough people to begin choosing political leaders based less on who they supported and more on who they disliked.

As our societies have evolved from primitive states, most people have consistently found themselves at odds with those wielding the most powerful in society. Before arriving at our current state of global reach by a handful of centibillionaires and multinational corporations, the most powerful in society were always represented by the governing body of a society.

It has been relatively easy to convince people that the most powerful enemy in their lives is the government they comprise as individuals in a system of democracy. It is nearly impossible for people to grasp how a lone individual with a global reach can pull the levers of many governments worldwide. Even though this has been happening for decades now, we have been fortunate to have been given a glimpse behind the curtain when news of Musk’s meddling in the affairs of multiple nations around the globe reached our attention.

On a “quieter level,” Canadians have been experiencing the corruptive influence of oil billionaires such as the Kochs, which has resulted in the creation of an almost national crisis with a separatist movement in Canada originating within the province of Alberta.

Canada is not the first, but only one among many nations around the globe that have been assaulted by mostly American billionaires seeking to extend their reach and control the resources of other countries.

Example upon example of this corruption endorsed by the most powerful among us who transcend governments and destroy governments can be found almost everywhere, from Venezuela, to Iran, Iraq, Panama, and Vietnam.

Understanding how democracy is a system of the people remains challenging for a significant proportion of the population, who also remain susceptible to propaganda through their ignorance of governance today.

Many people still think of government as a ruling authority rather than a servant of the people.

The complexity of the dynamic and its layers throughout society, such as the distinctions between federal, municipal, and state/provincial governments, create barriers to understanding. Meanwhile, our corporate environments have grown to such degrees of influence that they, more than governments, shape our daily lives.

They have, since being permitted to rule by corporations supporting right-wingers throughout the world, defined life for all of us, and that has meant stealing the necessary time, resources, and education the people need to understand how our world functions.

The harsh reality of electing puppets to enable the corruption of the powerful among us is as simple as participating in an auction to establish ownership of a politician who wins their election primarily based on how much funding they get.

When 80 %+ of election winners win because they raise more money than their competitors, we create a feedback loop of corruption in our electoral systems. If winning a cushy job that one can leverage to become a millionaire is as simple as catering to billionaire whims, then we are inviting the most corruptible citizens among us to benefit from screwing us all over.

This dynamic, in turn, reinforces the perception that all candidates are corrupt.

By creating a two-party dynamic, the wealthy and powerful billionaires among us establish a see-sawing dynamic of opposites in our elections that makes it easier to manipulate the people while creating a horse race for their entertainment as they compete among themselves instead of allowing the people to exercise their democratic rights to self-governance.

Their deliberate manipulations of electoral dynamics turn political gamesmanship into a sporting event where those lacking the time, education, and energy to be vigilant dominate the political landscape. This leaves us all to be led by the whims of the most cynical, undereducated, and emotionally unhinged mental health patients among us.

Unless we change this dynamic on a fundamental level by eliminating the influence of the powerful among us, we will continue a trajectory of increasing conflicts, such that we will no longer be able to ignore the widespread destruction of modern society.

We are on a path to chaos, and the people standing in our way are the people we must retrain, but won’t because too many among us envy their wealth and power to such a degree that they fantasize about acquiring such wealth for themselves to empower them in acts of retribution toward their neighbours.

Why haven’t we seen more transparency?

This post is a response to a question posed in its complete format: “Why haven’t we seen a more transparent Federal Government until 47?”

Nothing is transparent about the obfuscating nonsense a grifter is dumping onto the public consciousness.

Anyone with a lick of sense who watched Elon Musk speaking from the Oval Office as if he were an unelected and self-appointed president, enacting broad changes to public infrastructure as if his words were intended to create the best outcomes for the people would have been horrified by how thick his petard was spread.

It was like watching a Fox entertainment talking head barf up a stream of irrational gibberish because he figures a gish gallop argument of nonsense is enough to sway 350 million people… and if it isn’t, it’s enough to sway 70 million people who will run defence on his behalf so that he can continue to destroy the nation.

The most obvious example of “transparency by obfuscating petard” was hiring child hackers with criminal histories to tap into the private records of 350 million people instead of forensic accountants with a clear mandate to identify waste and fraud. Their agenda, goals, and processes should have been made public before beginning his process. Instead, it was rushed through to get as far as they could into violating the nation’s protections before being stopped by the checks and balances built into the system.

The alarms should have been ringing loudly that he has overlooked the most obvious target of waste and fraud in the military budget — which has never been audited.

Why do you think that is?

Right… it’s because they’re counting on military support to rein in the disruptive elements in society when they need to ramp up their pogroms to the next level of insanity and round up citizens who get deemed dissidents by the state.

The Freedom of Information Act has already guaranteed government transparency. You can bet any effort to obtain details on the justifications of fraud and waste supporting the decisions of what has been cut will never be revealed to the public. Fortunately, it’s pretty easy to spot his motivations, considering that every target of his is a public institution designed expressly to protect the public interest, holding him accountable for his criminal behaviours.

Ask yourself this simple question:

If this administration cared about transparency, why is Trump the only president who has refused to make his taxes public?

Why did Trump lie about Project 2025 during his campaign while appointing a VP who called him Hitler? Why would the VP join someone they thought was Hitler, to begin with? Why is the VP not only a contributor to Project 2025 but also someone who publicly justifies lying to capture attention?

How does any of this constitute “transparency” in your worldview?

It’s not. It’s obfuscation and inveigling.

Why does the government sometimes support monopolists?

This post is a response to a question initially posed on Quora, and can also be accessed via “https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-government-sometimes-support-monopolists/answer/Antonio-Amaral-1

Why can a private citizen like Elon Musk address the nation from the Oval Office like he was elected president?

Government representatives support their donors because they owe them — plain and simple. For Elon Musk to support Donald Trump’s presidential campaign with a $270 million financial boost means he expected something in return. That something just happened to be the keys to the halls of power.

Made even worse by the Citizen’s United Ruling that money equals speech, the entire nation has been converted into a kleptocracy. Anyone with enough money can buy their representative who will institute laws favouring their wealth acquisition goals.

They will use fraudulent arguments like consolidation equals efficiency and lower consumer costs, but that’s just bunk.

The harsh reality is that the nation is no longer a democracy or a government of the people, for the people, and by the people.

The U.S. is currently being stripped for parts to be sold to the highest bidder, and the entire world will suffer from its dissolution.

It’s not the government that supports monopolies but the billionaires who buy government representatives who seek to hoard as much of the nation’s wealth as possible and support consolidation while claiming to be capitalists.

Meanwhile, the useful idiots in the crowd conveniently forget how one of the key components of capitalism is competition.

Monopolies not only kill competition, they kill innovation, and they gouge consumers.

For example, anyone who has had to purchase prescription glasses can attest to how badly Luxottica has screwed them over.

Monopolies are cancer for an economy and for society as a whole. Monopolies give rise to dynasties, which push us back to a time of being ruled by monarchs in a two-class society of rulers and serfs.

Democratic governments that have not been corrupted otherwise do not support monopolies and create legislation to break up monopolies.

Sherman Antitrust Act: Definition, History, and What It Does

What Are the Most Famous Monopolies?