[CamperBob2]

Almost every voter puts pocketbook issues near the top of their list, but not so far up that they’re willing to be civically active about it unless it’s a crisis.

We're not in a crisis now, but people voted in the last national election as if we were, because Fox News told them that we were.

[JumpCrisscross]

> because Fox News told them that we were

This is my problem with the “elites in control” hypothesis. It seems to rely on voters’ power existing, but being circumvented because said voters are too stupid to handle it.

[ImPostingOnHN]

> This is my problem with the “elites in control” hypothesis. It seems to rely on voters’ power existing, but being circumvented because said voters are too stupid to handle it.

You are correct (except that it need only be a subset of voters).

Now that you've done a good job of elaborating on the hypothesis, what exactly is your problem with it?

[JumpCrisscross]

> what exactly is your problem with it?

It doesn't work. Its testable predictions preclude a good amount of extant politics, including practically all populism. Elites the world over are losing in democracies because they presupposed, from afar, that they knew what their constituents wanted. Voters' interests are complex, and they can't be so easily bought.

[ImPostingOnHN]

> Its testable predictions preclude a good amount of extant politics, including practically all populism.

How so?

> Elites the world over are losing in democracies because they presupposed, from afar, that they knew what their constituents wanted

Elites the world over are winning in democracies (take the US for example), which could feed into the hypothesis. Indeed, nonzero voters of these elites were easily bought.

[llamaimperative]

That is a huuugely presumptive interpretation.

Here’s another possible interpretation: our information environment makes people extremely vulnerable to actual bullshit in massive volume.

[JumpCrisscross]

> Here’s another possible interpretation: our information environment makes people extremely vulnerable to actual bullshit in massive volume

That is also true. People get angry and then misdirect it. But the anger is real, and it filters up through the political system when the valves aren't clogged. They aren't, not anywhere in the West. Voters across the West have essentially begun a wholesale replacement of their stable of elites. That is not what happens in an oligarchic system.

[ImPostingOnHN]

> That is not what happens in an oligarchic system.

The person USAns just voted in is literally an oligarch, as is his co-president, and he has indicated that he will populate his cabinet and advisory board with still more oligarchs. His "inauguration" slush fund has already received hundreds of millions of dollars from other oligarchs to secure their place in the new oligarchy*

*: Pure or otherwise

[llamaimperative]

That is absolutely how oligarchic systems supplant democracies.

Hitler was elected, Orban was elected, Bukele was elected.

[CamperBob2]

Elites the world over are losing in democracies because they presupposed, from afar, that they knew what their constituents wanted.

... or perhaps because you've misidentified the "elites."

Voters' interests are complex, and they can't be so easily bought.

No need to buy cattle you already own. You just herd them.

[JumpCrisscross]

> perhaps because you've misidentified the "elites."

If the elites are constantly changing then the 'elites' being in power is about as threatening as the 'people' holding it.

[CamperBob2]

If the elites are constantly changing

Honestly I don't think there's a rivalry among equals in play. I think the previous "elites" slacked off on the job. What's happening now looks less like a transfer of power than a vacuum being filled.

Regardless, it is the height of absurdity to argue that the "elites" aren't in charge now. A New York billionaire teamed up with the world's wealthiest man and the country's most influential cable news network to buy the Presidency, and the rest are now lining up to pay tribute.

The other "elites," to the extent there are any, are short on ambition, short on cash, and short on media reach.

[CamperBob2]

Well, that's pretty much the size of it, isn't it?