[bayindirh]

> why does the progressive point of view typically argue in favor of giving more power over our lives to the ruling class?

Humans are interesting creatures. Many of them do not have conscience and don't understand the notion of ethics and "not doing of something because it's wrong to begin with". From my experience, esp. the people in US thinks that "if that's not illegal, then I can and will do this", which is wrong in many levels again.

Many European people are similar, but bigger governments and harsher justice system makes them more orderly, and happier in general. Yes, they can't carry guns, but they don't need to begin with. Yes, they can't own Cybertrucks, but they can walk or use an actually working mass transportation system to begin with.

Plus proper governments have checks and balances. A government can't rip people off like corporations for services most of the time. Many of the things Americans are afraid of (social health services for everyone) makes life more just and tolerable for all parts of the population.

Big government is not a bad thing, and uncontrollable government is. We're entering the era of "corporate pleasing uncontrollable governments", and this will be fun in a tragic way.

[inglor_cz]

"Many European people are similar, but bigger governments and harsher justice system makes them more orderly, and happier in general. Yes, they can't carry guns, but they don't need to begin with. Yes, they can't own Cybertrucks, but they can walk or use an actually working mass transportation system to begin with."

This comment is a festival of imprecise stereotypes.

Gun laws vary widely across Europe, as does public safety (both the real thing and perception of; if you avoid extra rapes by women not venturing outside after dark, the city isn't really safe), as does the overall lavel of personal happiness, as does the functionality of public transport systems.

And the quality of public services doesn't really track the size of the government even in Europe that well. Corruption eats a lot of the common pie.

[bayindirh]

> This comment is a festival of imprecise stereotypes.

I might be overgeneralizing, but I won't accept the "festival of imprecise stereotypes" claim. This is what I got with working with too many people from too many countries in Europe for close to two decades. I travel at least twice a year, and basically live with them for short periods of time. So this is not by reading some questionable social media sites and being an armchair sociologist.

> Gun laws vary widely across Europe...

Yet USA has 3x armed homicide cases in developed world when compared with its closest follower, and USA is the "leader" of the pack. 24 something vs. 8 something.

> as does public safety

Every city has safe and unsafe areas. Even your apartment has unsafe areas.

> as does the overall lavel of personal happiness, as does the functionality of public transport systems.

Of course, but even if DB has a two hour delay because of a hold-up at Swiss border, I can board a Eurostar and casually can see another country for peanuts money. Happiness changes due to plethora of reasons. Like Swedes' daylight duration problems in winter, or economic downturn in elsewhere.

> And the quality of public services doesn't really track the size of the government even in Europe that well. Corruption eats a lot of the common pie.

Sadly corruption in Europe is on the rise when compared to the last decade. I can see that. However, at least many countries have a working social security systems, NHS not being one of them, sadly.

[justwool]

Lmao attacking stereotypes with stereotypes.

Please what cities? You are just making up rape stats. That’s makes you the bigger idiot here.

Ohh yeah so much corruption I don’t literally enjoy Zagreb more than any US city I have been to and it’s not even special. Because if this is just have the shittiest argument ever there’s my anecdotal rebuttal.

[Jensson]

> We're entering the era of "corporate pleasing uncontrollable governments", and this will be fun in a tragic way.

Right, so the answer is not to make that bad government bigger, the answer is to replace it with a good government. Feeding a cancer tumor doesn't make it better.

[danans]

> Right, so the answer is not to make that bad government bigger, the answer is to replace it with a good government.

Bad government (where by bad I mean serving the interests of the wealthy few over the masses) is bad regardless of it's size.

If you believe in supply-side/trickle-down economics, you might use the opposite definition of "bad", in which case shrinking of government that restrains corporations (protecting the masses) by regulation or paying for seniors not to end up it total destitution (social security /Medicare)

The size of the government is less relevant than what it is doing, and whether you agree with that.

[ggregoryarms]

Trickle down economics isn't something you either "believe in" or "don't believe in". It's a disproven theory that does not work.