this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2024
146 points (96.8% liked)

Asklemmy

43392 readers
1593 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)
[โ€“] Carighan@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Keep in mind that the person you reply to isn't wrong: Big corpos would still be lobbying, as they got the resources to hide it effectively and keep everyone trying to sue them over suspicions of lobbying stuck in litigation hell.

Anybody less affluent would however find it impossible to do any lobby work. Environmental agencies etc.

This is one of those situations where just outlawing something does the least affect the very party you would want to hit most.

[โ€“] 0stre4m@lemmy.wtf 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[โ€“] Carighan@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

That's a better approach I think, yes. It'll be difficult to prevent collusion but effectivey capping the size of most companies and maybe their across-border reach would be a good way to keep a tighter leash on them.

[โ€“] stoy@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

You'd accept possibly loosing the right to demonstrate or to hold a manifestation or protest?

That is not the world I want to live in.

[โ€“] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Wut? It is supremely American to think you can only talk to politicians if you have money... and only because so many other people are willing to purchase a slice of their time.

I can just walk to Peter Julian's office and, assuming I'm not rude, talk to him about something that matters to me. I've had conversations with Peter Welch and Bernie Sanders - I used to board game with a state senator. It it might be hard to get a lunch date with Joe Biden but politicians spend the majority of their time just talking to folks... it's only when the rich can use their money to monopolize time that shit breaks down.

[โ€“] stoy@lemmy.zip 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Those meetings you have had with politicians could absolutely be classified as lobbying, and would be made illegal if lobbying was outlawed.

A company have the resources to make a smokescreen around meetings like that, making it harder to prove lobbyism, the lobbyist just happened to stay at the same hotel as the politician did, they even arrived a week before, and left two days after the politician arrived, it's not like a meeting was set up on the one overlapping day, that would be crazy....

[โ€“] Ziggurat@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 month ago

Those meetings you have had with politicians could absolutely be classified as lobbying, and would be made illegal if lobbying was outlawed.

It's not just classified as lobbying, it's litterally what Lobbying is about. Meeting politician to tell them that the environmental law reforms means that the factory will close or that the consumer need better protection regarding toxic chemical in their food is what Lobbyist do. It's sometimes get even funnier when they change employer and therefore political side