Trillion dollar company won't allow better antitrust laws to happen, because they are allied with the currently ruling party.
This is a true symbiosis: the Party will see that no laws that harm the Company are passed, and Company will stop the spread of any information harmful to the Party.
> This is a true symbiosis: the Party will see that no laws that harm the Company are passed, and Company will stop the spread of any information harmful to the Party.
Probably no relation with the 2014 Princeton study published on the Cambridge University Press that determined the United States of America to be an Oligarchy rather than a Democracy.
> But we believe that if policymaking is dominated by powerful business organizations and a small number of affluent Americans, then America’s claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened
If the Presidency were an oligarchy, neither Bill Clinton nor Barack Obama could have become President. And Trump could have never won, since most of the power groups were overwhelmingly against him winning, and he won solely due to his populist voter base - democracy in action in fact. Trump also raised drastically less money than Hillary Clinton did; if there's an oligarchy trying to pick presidents it was against him, not for him. His win partially invalidates the Princeton premise.
Neither Bill Clinton or Obama came from or had money. Neither had fathers in their lives or immediate great families of consequence. Neither had long-tenured national political experience. Oh yeah, and Obama is half black. The oligarchy chose Obama over Hillary Clinton? They had no choice is what actually happened.
Just because the study came from Princeton, that doesn't mean it's not idiotic.
you've just perhaps inadvertently explained why trump is/was so popular, despite being a self-centered idiot. he was able to stick a thumb in the eye of the american oligarchs, and that felt to many americans like a sliver of hope against the hegemonization of america.
but that our political system isn't a full-on autocratic aristocracy doesn't mean it isn't oligarchal. oligarchy implies an outsized influence by a small subset, not complete control, just as democracy doesn't mean complete control by the people. oligarchy seems a pretty apt characterization.
This is what I try to explain to people who don't understand how Trump got elected. Anyone who has little faith in the system can find something to like about Trump, and the establishment's hue and cry over him simply adds to their fervor.
A true countercultural president is rare, and the overlooked people in the country got one. His policy could be anything, as long as it makes the coastal folks angry.
They are the puppets of the people who hold true power. People so fabulously wealthy that they would never need to hold public office to get what they want. They can just buy it.
This is a true symbiosis: the Party will see that no laws that harm the Company are passed, and Company will stop the spread of any information harmful to the Party.