Changing requires mobilization of resources . Writing won’t do it if ,you can’t get action. Plus money. Money=power.
Money isn’t power. Belief is power. Belief can motivate money.
Organize people to work with you. Inspire them to believe in your cause. Spread your word, and your will shall be done.
(rasserfrazzerdupe)
Any of them can work. If you start an organization that attracts millions of committed members, you’re going to have a strong political voice with all those votes. If you’re a powerful speaker or writer, your words alone may change the way people think and vote. And if you’ve got several million dollars you’re willing to give to your cause, you’ll find there are plenty of people willing to vote the way you say.
You don’t change the nation. You can cite the facts, experts, what works in other places, world opinion, etc. until you’re blue in the face but it doesn’t matter. On the whole, those who agree with you on an issue would’ve migrated to your position eventually without your help and those who disagree will nearly never recant. Moderates are flaky and can not be trusted for long term planning – they can only be counted for short term change or a reaction to current events.
Similarly, the amount of money most groups could accumulate would be laughably trivial compared to any corporation who wants to throw their muscle around. Money can certainly help spread the message but see my first point.
As I see it, there’s only two things which can work. The first is for the patient: wait. Eventually, all the old people will die. I’m not sure what sort of society will emerge but it will surely be a wee bit more liberal.
Second: control the school boards and the other levers of powers behind the education of the next generation. This one is iffy but I think it could work if done on a mass scale.
What gives you the right to change the nation? Your views are not necessarily right and don’t necessarily represent anyone but you.
In that case, my efforts will go nowhere and affect nothing. It’s a nice, self-correcting system.
Although my first thought at seeing “How do you change the nation?” was “hijack an airplane and fly it into a building.”
That’s the reason democracies work better than the alternatives. You don’t change a nation single-handedly - you have to persuade a bunch of other people your idea is good. Granted, sometimes the majority of people will agree with a bad idea. But the only alternative to allowing the majority to implement a bad idea is to deny the majority the right to implement an idea - which brings us back to a system where a minority runs the country and the smaller the group the easier it is to convince it to listen to a bad idea.
Furthermore, when a minority runs the country, it tends to define “good idea” and “bad idea” in terms of what serves or does not serve that minority’s interests. So does a popular majority – but in the latter case, that’s how it should be.
OTOH, money can motivate a great deal, irrespective of anybody’s beliefs.
Actually, insofar as legislation is responsive to voting behavior, I think it responds to how the legislators expect the people to vote in the next election, not how they voted in the last one. (The dynamics are different in states that allow for direct-democracy legislation by referendum. Different, but not necessarily better.)
Yeah, but without the belief, who’s going to spend the money on useless crap like ideals?
You’re missing the point. The folks who have big money to invest in politics mostly (with some exceptions) spend it on advancing their interests, not their ideals.
I think the key is to get back to consumerism.
This is close enough to my real preference, populism.
At least then the middle class will be treated fairly.
One tenant of consumerism is transparency.
You get to see all the facts. Hiding facts is a societal no-no.
This is true of golden parachutes, that should be disclosed while there is still time to undo them.
And it’s true of hidden deals that create monopolies and trusts.
When did we ever abandon it?
Denial works for me.
Titorian, I’m guessing you aren’t using the term consumerism in its most common sense. Are you talking about something like neoliberalism or libertarianism?