So Will The Sky Fall If The UN Declare Palestine a State?

Great Debates
761

If a group - such as NRA or AIPAC - have the ability to prevent a political candidate not sufficiently aligned with either group’s demands from being elected (let’s hope average Doper can do their own Googling to determine this even though by now even birds on the trees sing about it) what happens is that candidate who was prevented to win by intervention into political process (i.e. election) was effectively prevented to represent his/her electirate because all other politicals positions of the candidate are ignored such as his/her stand on taxes, local infrastructure, education, healthcare and similar issues affecting his electorate in favor of one single issue that may or may not be in top 5 issues affecting given electorate. But, what happens, due to concentration of power in groups such as AIPAC or NRA, is that election process becomes bent by ideological stance and as a result electorate is not represented because the groups like this use resources from other places, perhaps even foreign resources to win given electorate.

That is a clear violation of representative democracy. Provided, of course, that we share the same definition of what representative democracy is as something tells me that that definition will change for some to suit their stated conclusion that groups like this actually operate within the idea of “representative democracy”.

In Soviet Union and many Iron Curtain countries political process had their group that operated isomewhat similar fashion; there was also ideological bent present - there was a group in every electorate that measured alignment of a candidate to the policies such as private vs. state property and this group was essentially vetting each candidate. So, it’s not that SU did not have a political process or that there were no candidates with fresh ideas - it’s just they didn’t pass the smell test of a powerful group. As the time goes by the pie will get ever smaller and at one point there will be no pie left. That’s what happened in SU - it’s not that their system was all that bad, they knew how to make stuff - they ran out of money to go around for special interest as all the good people who wanted to contribute were weeded out and only apparatchiks left.

762

Have you considered a political philosophy which has at least a tangential relationship to reality?

763

It might be that Israel is intensely popular in the United States.

I realize this may be a bit of a surprise to you. Probably you and the people you hang out with all hate Israel and you assume that your feelings are pretty much universal. Which they probably are in most of the world but not so much in the United States.

764

I hate to think that our election process is being distorted by ideology. This is clearly un-American and un-democratic. :dubious:

You mean, like the “Arab Lobby”?

According to Mitchell Bard, author of 2010 book The Arab Lobby: The Invisible Alliance That Undermines America’s Interests in the Middle East, the informal Arab lobby includes tens of millions of dollars donated to American Universities for Islamic studies, because these funds flow only to universities that teach courses and hire scholars whose work meets with the approval of the oil states, courses are not offered and research is not pursued on the ideology or structure radical Islam, Arab anti-Americanism, or Arab anti-Semitism, instead, courses are taught and studies pursued on such themes as Zionism as an illegitimate political movement, or form of European imperialism, and Jewishness is a largely mythological and invented history."

Most people probably would agree that the collection of pro-Arab, pro-Palestinian lobbies in the U.S. has not been as influential as AIPAC and other groups that lobby on behalf of Israel. So why is that? Might it have something to do with the relative appeal of competing messages?

765

Ah, yes, nothing takes the cake like the appeal of “end-of-days” and conversion to Christianity or death to those Jews who refuse when He comes back again. Or, a message of creating pure Jewish state as per Promise made 5000 years ago on the land given by His father.

Yeah, I agree, it’s hard to fight with beauty and humanity of these “messages”.

766

If you’re convinced the only messages you and like-minded truth seekers must fight involve religious doctrines which most Americans do not take seriously, then it should be easy to turn public opinion your way.

But it’s not happening. That might be a clue that your interpretation is flawed.

767

Assume I’m not an average Doper. Can you provide evidence that the NRA or AIPAC can flat-out “prevent” a candidate from being elected? And that this influence stems from something other than the electorate’s political beliefs?

All elections are determined, for the most part, by ideological stance. That’s why we have debates, party platforms, and political advertising: the candidates display their ideological stances, and try to frame those of their opponents.

I’ll use the NRA as an example. For each major-party candidate, the NRA’s Political Victory Fund compiles “grades”, into a “report card” for each, based on their voting history and stated positions. The information is presented to voters, to weigh against the other stances and distinctions between the candidates (such as experience, or a scandal) to make a choice. A voter who is strongly interested in gun rights might well choose the more gun-friendly candidate, regardless of all other factors. That is their choice to make.

A powerful lobby like the AARP can influence which candidates run or win, because they represent millions of voters. This is representative democracy in action. The electorate is, in fact, represented, though those voters who are the most organized and numerous will be the best represented. How could it not be so?

Ok, the vetting you speak of was done by the single political party of a one-party state. Calling such people “candidates” is a bit ludicrous as well. How is it in any way comparable to a free election in a representative democracy?

Yes, one-party totalitarian states produce poor outcomes. Their system was, in fact, all that bad.

Do you think this is the “message” people associate with Israel? Isn’t it far more likely that Americans support Israel because they are a liberal democracy, that they are similar to what Americans believe a nation should be?

768

We are not debating this. For me this is common knowledge. However, if you’d like to find out more, open a new thread or, GIYF.

NRA is using gun makers and their corporate funds. NRA members are just pawns. It’s like Facebook – you like it but you have no idea to what end will your ‘like’ be used.

So, instead of one, it’s two parties. Wow, what a difference - instead of one, it’s two. Not much of a difference, really as they will buy both.

lol

Oh, yeas, I can imagine two dudes from Midwest hotly debating this issue over a pint.

You are more naive than I thought.

769

Have you considered alternatives to GD?

In the Midwest, “dudes” don’t generally go down to their local for a pint of Guinness (or anything else). And when they go out for a few beers, the conversation doesn’t often include toasts to Hamas. :slight_smile:

770

Fair enough, I’d assumed you had something near to hand you could link to. Oh well.

“Pawns?” They aren’t actually sportsmen and gun enthusiasts, they’ve been duped into contributing to the NRA?

Consider the differences in ideology between a California Democrat like Nancy Pelosi, and a Kentucky Democrat like Ben Chandler. Why might that be the case? Because of the primary system, for one, and because elections are free, not declared by a politburo. Political parties in the U.S. do not remotely serve the same function that the Communist Party of the Soviet Union did. Because we have free elections, pressure is applied on the parties to come up with candidates that represent their districts. This is what they do.

As opposed to your idea, that the “message” of Israel is…

That must be what the Midwestern dudes associate with Israel, not a government and values that are close to ours. Perhaps Americans are supportive of Britain because we love the legends of King Arthur. That must be it.

Charming.

771

In what sense are Israel’s values closer to ours than any other developed state? :confused:

772

Ah, your post is your cite.
Good play sir, good play.

773

I’m confused as well, newcomer and Jackmannii didn’t mention Israeli values being appealing to Americans, so I guess you’re speaking to me. But I didn’t say Israeli’s values are closer to American ones than any other state’s, just that their values are close to ours, and that their form of government is close to what Americans generally view as ideal (liberal democracy).

774

Elected Parliament, rather than, say, the Saudi Arabian hereditary family monarchy.

(I suppose some might say that Saudi Arabia is not a developed state. I don’t.)

775

Google: David Steiner former Prez of AIPAC and tape recorded by Haim Katz about influence AIPAC has. Or, if you’d like to read about AIPAC spying, Google Lawrence Franklin. Sorry, but this is common knowledge as much as Columbine shooting is.

The thing is, however, people ignore it when debating stuff and pretend it don’t matter.

It would be like debating gun control and ignoring Columbine and Newton shootings and pretending it never happened so, yeah, if Columbine or Newton never happened in your mind then why control guns? Pretty logical, huh?

776

You mean Lawrence Franklin who passed information to AIPAC people against whom all the charges were dismissed?

As for AIPAC “buying” politicians - it’s very easy to check. Just look what AIPAC’s total contributions were to political campaigns in, say 2012. Or 2008. Or 2010. Then compare it to the total spending in those campaigns. Then start wondering how a small fraction of one percent of the total spent on the campaign can possibly “buy” a politician.

777

If anyone wishes to continue the hijack that began with newcomer’s perspective of lobbying within a republic, please open a separate thread to discuss it.

It really has no direct bearing on the topic of this thread.

[ /Moderating ]

778

It don’t matter, right?

Repeat after me… FBI is always making stuff up. Election funding is transparent. :o

779

As it was suggested I may not fully comprehend the purpose of GD. The following is my reasoning why AIPAC and similar entities lobbying on behalf of Israel is relevant to the thread. Let me know where the error in this line of reasoning is and I’ll give it a consideration as I do respect your opinion; heck, I might learn something.

The way I see it, when someone from US opens a thread with the title as it is, the first thing that comes to my mind is – why would someone feel that the “sky will fall if Palestine as a country is recognized by UN?”

My answer is that it means someone was compelled to question what they’ve been reading in the media as media portrayed the possible recognition of Palestine as the event that will fuel further complications in ME and quite possibly wide-ranging war and thus deteriorate overall situation (as if current situation is all fine and dandy but that’s a different story).

Now, the majority of media reporting has to do with what is being served to American people from the official Government channels such as Congress, Senate, its various committees and White House including Obama’s cabinet. That’s mostly what people will go by when making their mind about the overall situation.

My position is that if one side - such as Israeli side - has an enormous advantage in the way it can influence various elements of US Government conclusion is that American population will better align with Israeli position regardless of the degree to which media represents actual reality of “sky falling down”. Further to that, this same side, the Israeli side, has pushed consciously and strategically to designate the event as “sky falling” as a concept and an argument to get response from US Government as excepted (which is to oppose it).

My position goes further in that while Americans accept special interest Government lobbying to be as normal as school shootings, an argument could be made that the polls show “American support Israel” as a result of the way media presents event such as this (UN recognizing Palestine as a country) and then the polling results are consequence of the image “sky is falling”.

Bottom line, since the political process is corrupted the conclusion is that what polls show is also corrupted.

Once you remove or restrict the degree to which AIPAC and other entities are unduly influencing US Government there is a possibility that the polls would show different picture, the one more aligned with reality and common sense. Only then progress can be made.

“For decades, AIPAC, the Anti-Defamation League, and other such right-leaning groups have played an outsized role in American politics, pressuring members of Congress and Presidents with their capacity to raise money and swing elections. But Democratic Presidents in particular should recognize that these groups are hardly representative and should be met head on.”

  • David Remnick in The New Yorker
780

The ADL is right leaning? In what universe?