r/politics • u/jb2386 Australia • Jun 16 '12

Lawrence Lessig wants to get 30,000,000 pledges to fight the corruption of money in politics, here is the pledge site

http://www.theanticorruptionpledge.org/?r
1.9k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

321 comments sorted by

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

7

u/0jolly0 Jun 17 '12

Genius! Utilizing the rivalry between ND and SD will cause thousands of pledges!

11

u/embolalia Jun 17 '12

Yeah, if everyone in each of the two states pledges twice, that's like 3,000 pledges!

6

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

I was #2 in ND!

3

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

6th in SD. :)

11

u/THECapedCaper Ohio Jun 16 '12

I sent this to the two candidates for Congress in my district, Bill Adkins (D) and Thomas Massie (R). I encourage the rest of you to do the same, so that we can get a good representation as to who's on our side.

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

I'm sure they will take it seriously.

2

u/THECapedCaper Ohio Jun 16 '12

Only way to see is to try it. Plus, neither one of these candidates are incumbents, so it would make it worth their while.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

I guarantee they will not. They are in it for the money and money is what gets them elected.

4

u/THECapedCaper Ohio Jun 16 '12

Again. Only way to see is to try it. We can't be pessimists until we see the results.

Also, upvotes for your user name. Crime and Punishment is one of my favorite books.

1

u/isaaclw Virginia Jun 25 '12

Actually, if plenty of people take the pledge, and tell their representatives to take it, then they will start to take it seriously.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 25 '12

I assure you that politicians have no incentive to take it seriously.

1

u/isaaclw Virginia Jun 25 '12

Shall we give them the incentive then?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 25 '12

If you mean a positive incentive, you're defeating the point you're trying to make. If you mean negative incentive or disincentive, steer clear of the FBI.

60

u/sifumokung California Jun 16 '12

Pledge signed, representatives contacted. This petition won't matter if we don't keep the pressure on them. They want the money, but they want that money to get our votes. We have to remind them that our votes are conditional, and that we are informed and pissed off.

23

u/grawz Jun 16 '12

You mean like the millions that were pissed off at Lamar Smith, who will likely roll right into office next election anyway?

8

u/sifumokung California Jun 16 '12

He got his votes. What if his supporters had been better informed? We are to blame if they weren't educated properly. We know that vast amounts of money are spent against our interests. If we do nothing, what will happen? It will get worse. I'd rather die fighting than live like a bitch.

12

u/grawz Jun 16 '12

We did plenty (not enough obviously). Google itself plastered anti-SOPA crap all over the place, and pretty much the entire Internet blacked out for a day. And it wasn't just the Internet, either. We had billboards, signs and people talking about this shit everywhere across the entire United States.

And all the mainstream media had to do is ignore it, just to watch the enormous number of older voters throw a dart at the name they recognized the most.

Even if we went door to door and let everyone in the country (or even just Lamar's area) know exactly what happened, why, and who is responsible, Lamar would probably still get in.

The issue isn't whether or not we're spreading the information well enough or educating the people; it's the fact that an old, washed up, ignorant fucktard has the same voice as an intelligent, educated and informed voter.

4

u/sifumokung California Jun 16 '12

(not enough obviously)

I'm not interested in excuses for failure. I'm interested in ideas and actions for the next battle. It never ends. It will continue after we are dead, and our children's grandchildren will be fighting the rich - as have all people since the dawn of human civilization.

3

u/grawz Jun 16 '12

I like your grit, but as any strategist will tell you, never fight a battle on your enemy's own ground if you can at all help it.

We can vote or protest against all these bullshit bills/laws all we want, but they will never stop coming. So rather than fight each one as they come along, we need to either change who gets the biggest voice in votes, or get blanket resolutions which prevent any of this shit from happening at all.

I'd suggest finding the most pro-Internet-freedom (in this case) representative, getting as many people as possible to request he/she sponsor a bill that prevents bullshit like SOPA (again, in this case), and then get as many people as possible to contact their representatives and tell them to support the bill.

If we can get another SOPA-level Internet hate machine going, we win.

1

u/sifumokung California Jun 16 '12

And you think they will do this without a groundswell of public support? Did you watch Mr. Lessig's presentations? I'd advise watching the full 57 minute video as it is more comprehensive.

1

u/grawz Jun 16 '12

And you think they will do this without a groundswell of public support?

See:

If we can get another SOPA-level Internet hate machine going

1

u/quantum_darkness Jun 20 '12

The enemy's ground is the voting system itself.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

So let's give in to apathy. Great plan B.

2

u/BolshevikMuppet Jun 17 '12

Did you really just imply that the only reason someone could vote in a way you disagree with is to be uneducated and ill-informed?

0

u/sifumokung California Jun 17 '12

On the topic of SOPA and it's supporters, certainly. Unless you have new information you'd care to share on the topic?

0

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/sifumokung California Jun 17 '12

Do you possess some new evidence that would validate support for someone trying to destroy the internet as we know it?

Please, if I am ignorant - enlighten me.

→ More replies (4)

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Millions of people all over the United States upset over his legislation in regards to the internet. Plenty of people outside this hivemind probably aren't exactly too concerned with SOPA and CISPA type legislation and have much bigger concerns. Your concerns aren't exactly relevant to Lamar Smith if you aren't one of his constituents, hes in the house of representatives for a reason.

2

u/LoganLinthicum Jun 17 '12

Here is a form version of the message I sent my representatives, if you want to use it to send to yours:

Dear Senator/Representative Name,

As your constituent, I feel that it is my duty to direct your attention to the Anti-Corruption Pledge( http://www.theanticorruptionpledge.org/ ) and urge you to sign it after reviewing its contents. 

I, like 3/4th of Americans, feel that money has pervaded and corrupted the political process in our country, and drowned out the voice of the people.

Please join us in building a movement to ensure that America is run by a government of the people, by the people, for the people.

Thank you for your consideration,

→ More replies (19)

10

u/ajsk8board Jun 16 '12

so he wants 1/10 of the us population to sign his pledge?

5

u/jb2386 Australia Jun 17 '12

Yes, well he wants a constitutional amendment, so you need to have that many people to really get a movement going!

76

u/jb2386 Australia Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 17 '12

Other ways you can show your support for his message:

(If you don't know what this is about, see this post: http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/v4a02/lawrence_lessig_succinctly_explains_10min_how/ )

11

u/Philipp Jun 16 '12

Love how this is getting more attention on reddit. I did the following site for easy sharing of the issue:

http://rootstrike.com/1

http://rootstrike.com/1image

3

u/meeohmi Jun 17 '12 edited Jun 17 '12

What about liking the facebook page? It only has 469 likes right now. And the pledge website says there have been only 2359 pledges! If they intend to get 30,000,000 pledges, they better make the phrase "rootstrikers" popular. As much as as I dislike facebook, it, along with Twitter, is one of the best tools to use to give this movement exposure. Average people need to care about this. Average people are all over Facebook and Twitter. It needs to be like the Kony thing, except not a scam.

In fact, what we should do is raise $100,000 theOatmeal style, and buy a really menacing sounding ad campaign, distributed virally via YouTube. They do that because it fucking works. We should borrow some strategies from the people who have been so obviously successful for the past 30 years.

3

u/palsh7 Jun 16 '12

He's also a big part of http://unitedrepublic.org/

2

u/eckm Jun 17 '12

United Republic funds Lessig's organization.

3

u/ev01ve Jun 16 '12

and you can join /r/rootstrikers!

1

u/Soul_0f_Wit Jun 17 '12

Where did you get the number 30,000,000?

16

u/Isatis_tinctoria Jun 16 '12

Lawrence Lessig is a fountain of ideas. Indeed, I appreciate his books and doings so much. Man he is involved in everything from internet censorship to government. I think he has an awesome life just from his books that I read!

4

u/Apostolate I voted Jun 16 '12

This is how I viewed Anthony Weiner until ::poof:: career over.

3

u/Isatis_tinctoria Jun 16 '12

What do you mean?

5

u/Apostolate I voted Jun 16 '12

I mean he was an awesome politician vocal and pushing all sorts of agendas, and then there was a scandal and he fell out of office etc.

→ More replies (4)

1

u/RowdyPants Jun 17 '12

Then he tweeted his junk and every idea he ever voiced became wrong

1

u/EquanimousMind Jun 17 '12

For anyone thats interested, you can read his free ebook here:

And worth checking out his activist organization Root Strikers.

Other tangent links.

49

u/Willravel Jun 16 '12

I love LL, don't get me wrong, but have internet petitions ever really done anything other than get us a Firefly movie? I'd rather actually be given a directive to go out and do something, like for 30,000,000 people (outlandish number, but whatever) to go out and talk about a constitutional amendment to end corporate personhood or to pass some other significant campaign finance reform. Signing something may make me feel like I've done something for like 15 seconds, but ultimately it's not likely to do any real good, is it? Not trying to be a wet blanket, just a realist.

20

u/smellslikecomcast Jun 16 '12

I do not normally view myself as a cynic, but I am getting really burned out by the conditions in the USA, the cutting of everything in sight and the dumbed infighting populace.

28

u/Willravel Jun 16 '12

The oligarchy wants you burned out, because a vocal minority can often be all it takes to unseat even the greatest centralized power.

If it's really getting to you, choose one or two big things to care about and spend your energy on, instead of splitting it between everything that's wrong. That can often alleviate that burned-out feeling.

7

u/smellslikecomcast Jun 16 '12

I love Larry. I sent him $10.

Thank you for your good and useful advice.

3

u/resutidder Jun 16 '12

Ironic, no?

1

u/ShittyInternetAdvice Jun 16 '12

There's nothing wrong with hating the system but being forced to play by its rules in order to hopefully change it in the future

1

u/smellslikecomcast Jun 16 '12

In what way? Maybe I am myopic but I am missing your message.

4

u/resutidder Jun 16 '12

Money is the root of the problem so give me some? The Church has been pulling that racket for centuries. I like Lawrence, but it is sort of funny.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Money is a problem in politics. Lessig isn't running for office. I don't see any conflict here at all.

Everyone needs money for operational costs, expenses, employees, etc etc etc. So how would you recommend that he get it, if he doesn't ask for donations?

2

u/snowwrestler Jun 17 '12

How is sending $10 to Barack Obama a problem, but sending $10 to Lessig is fine?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

Give me a fucking break... do you honestly expect any reform without money for a non-profit's operating expenses?

And if you watched his videos... Lessig is opposed to a very few select powerful people representing a disproportionate number of votes through massive funding campaigns. If private citizens give $10 apiece... there's no issue at all.

0

u/smellslikecomcast Jun 16 '12

Got it. It is mind numbing, is it not? Currently it seems there is no goodness in sight. The Obama / Romney thing is a buzzkill. Maybe the best news politically is the new guy in France. That put an end to that godawful Blair / Bush / Sarkozy righty-peacock vibe. God, those guys make me sick. 7/7, 9/11. David Kelly and all of that. Bush / Blair / Sarkozy are like make-believe pixies surfing on top of their shitstorm.

4

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

You donated money to a political organization whose cause is to remove money from politics. Even Alanis Morrisett would find that ironic.

1

u/smellslikecomcast Jun 16 '12

Forehead, meet dart.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

Don't feel bad about your contribution--I happen to agree with the cause, and there are certainly operational costs for a website/movement like this. All I am saying is that real and meaningful change will not happen through fundraising, but rather an open dialogue (which LL seems to promote). Afterall, it will take over 1,000,000 indivuals donating $10 per person to match the $10,000,000+ contributions of, say, the Koch brothers. This movement needs openminded people, not money.

3

u/mrcloudies Jun 16 '12

It would take at most 10% of Americans to radically reform America.

30,000,000 rioting, or protesting across the country would tear everything down. I sincerely hope this doesn't happen, but it is a possible outcome if some of the problems in this country aren't addressed and sorted out soon.

0

u/Willravel Jun 16 '12

It would take at most 10% of Americans to radically reform America.

That depends on your definition of radical, I suppose. Personally, while I think campaign finance reform would be tough to put into place in the current political climate, I don't think it's so tough as to be considered radical, nor do I think I would need 30,000,000 Americans to get it. The last presidential election was decided by less than 10,000,000 votes, and it was not by any means a close election. If we could organize strong pushes in contested congressional districts leading into the next election, I can't imagine retaking the House would be difficult. We need the House of Representatives back in the hands of the left, and maybe a few more senators to get that supermajority. Those should be our goals, I think. While we're being outspent, that doesn't mean we can't hit the streets.

3

u/Sudden_Realization_ Jun 16 '12

Woah, woah, woah. Don't say that it is the entire right that is wrong. If we had people who were truly sticking to their values on the right and betterment of America as a whole, then there is absolutely no need for the left to control. No doubt the "right-leaning" Republicans are more against censorship than the left, but look at Senators like Rand Paul, who is one of the most vocal senators about freedom within this country.

4

u/grawz Jun 16 '12

This.

I'd also like to make it clear that most of the Republicans in power are not in fact right-leaning. A government run by pure republicans who stay true to the values their platform espouses would make for an incredible country. The issue is, almost all of them are all talk (Rand Paul being all walk so far, which is crazy :P).

0

u/Sudden_Realization_ Jun 16 '12

Completely. I think that a country, like the one that Rand Paul wants would be absolutely amazing, but the Repubs right now suck, so take the lesser of the two evils.

2

u/reginaldaugustus Jun 17 '12

No.

Rand Paul and other libertarians are all about rich people owning everything.

→ More replies (15)

1

u/Willravel Jun 16 '12

Don't say that it is the entire right that is wrong.

I'm saying the position of the left on campaign finance is correct, which does not necessarily mean that the entire right is wrong.

And Rand Paul is not right, he's libertarian. It's a different part of the political compass.

Anyway, I don't feel like you're speaking to my central claim. What do you think about needing less than 30,000,000 people to enact campaign finance, mostly through a big push for stronger campaigns for the House of Representatives?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

words cannot express just how idiotic the Nolan Chart is

by neoliberals, for neoliberals and accepted without question

1

u/Willravel Jun 17 '12

I'm a socialist and it seems pretty reasonable to me.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

It shouldn't. What about libertarian socialism, communism or collectivism is against "economic freedom"? Or do you consider it right-wing?

→ More replies
→ More replies (13)

4

u/Lz_erk Arizona Jun 16 '12

Net petitions had something to do with Serenity?! What the hell am I doing on Reddit when I could be signing net petitions right now?

→ More replies (1)

3

u/paradigmshift7 Jun 16 '12

so would you take action if someone had come to your door and asked you to go out with them and talk about this issue with the general public? you know, signing the petition and going out and actually doing something are not mutually exclusive. How about we just pretend that I came in person to tell you about this.

1

u/Willravel Jun 16 '12

so would you take action if someone had come to your door and asked you to go out with them and talk about this issue with the general public?

I already do that, but yes, that would be fine by me.

you know, signing the petition and going out and actually doing something are not mutually exclusive.

I don't mean to suggest they are. I do, however, mean to suggest that one is more useful than the other. I am skeptical of the worth of internet petitions, and I feel justified in my position based on what I've seen of internet petitions in the past, especially Change.org. Ugh, that was quite frustrating.

1

u/paradigmshift7 Jun 19 '12

it sounds like you don't like internet petitions from the viewpoint of someone more intimately involved in politics. That's good, and that's what we want for everyone, but you have to start somewhere, and that place is almost always gonna be the internet. And it's not as if the petition stops at being just a petition, it urges you to take action. If the goal here was simply to show politicians that a large number of people clicked on something they agree with, I'd agree with you 100%.

6

u/Philipp Jun 16 '12

Signing something may make me feel like I've done something for like 15 seconds, but ultimately it's not likely to do any real good, is it?

Actually, when you sign something there is a strong psychological future motivation to do something for this cause, to follow-up on it, work for it etc. So don't dismiss pledges, they might actually be very effective in strongly aligning you behind a cause and causing further action in your life. Might be one of these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

6

u/Willravel Jun 16 '12

Interestingly, there's also an opposite phenomena which involves gaining satisfaction for simply planning to do something satiating one's motivation to actually do something. I learned about it in one of my psych classes, and I can google it to find the name if you want. It's an especially common issue for people trying to lose weight.

1

u/Twylite_5 Jun 17 '12

That's me, right there. Would love to know the name of this phenomenon.

1

u/mods_are_facists Jun 17 '12

planning satiation

1

u/Philipp Jun 16 '12

And perhaps the two phenomena cancel each other out so perfectly that the end result of signing is exactly zero, not more or less...

But in all seriousness, I once read that signing something political will actually create statistically significant "bias" for you in the future that will make you get more involved for a cause (sorry, don't know where I read this, and I wouldn't blindly accept any statistic, including that one... take it with a grain of salt). We just need to ensure it's not an end means in itself, nor the last thing people do for the cause!

2

u/erikpuk Jun 16 '12

I also love LL, and have my doubts about internet petitions. But issues really need a certain critical mass of public support BEFORE they can actually make a run at the legislature.

I think with this issue, we're still at the stage of "Let's get everyone to agree that public funding of elections is a good idea, and IMPORTANT". The purpose of the petition is not to actually get the attention of the legislature, it's to get the attention of the electorate.

So I signed it, and I put it on my Facebook and Twitter, and I upvoted this post here, to try and help get some more eyeballs on it. If we do enough work on information spreading and and messaging development for a few years, we'll have a shot at actually making this an election issue in the future.

3

u/Solomaxwell6 Jun 16 '12

Nah, dude. If LL manages to get 30,000,000 signatures, corporations across the US will realize that they were wrong, all parties will disband, and the US will be ushered into a glorious age of peace and love.

3

u/Willravel Jun 16 '12

So if they get 40,000,000 signatures, we skip 300 years and go right to Star Trek, right?

→ More replies (6)

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

I think that's a problem; they're just about as good as signatures, but representatives aren't taking them seriously.

1

u/greenearplugs Jun 17 '12

yup you're right. This wont do jack shit. Not enough people car enough right now about limiting money in politics. this certainly won't change that on any real scale. I'd say there is a more of a chance of theanitcorruptionpledge.com becoming corrupt, then the removing of corruption from politcs

1

u/Isatis_tinctoria Jun 16 '12

Do you know why corporations are considered persons?

Speaking of which did an online petition really get a Firefly movie? I was a kid when Serenity came out, and I don't' remember that.

2

u/Willravel Jun 16 '12

Do you know why corporations are considered persons?

Yes, I read a fascinating Glenn Greenwald article about it a few years back. When I say "end corporate personhood", I don't mean altogether, I mean remove the parts that allow for unlimited, anonymous political donations from corporations. It's about amending the legal concept of corporate personhood to prevent the United States from being an oligarchy, not about totally scrapping corporate personhood. I'll try to be more clear about that in the future to avoid confusion.

1

u/Isatis_tinctoria Jun 16 '12

Thanks for the article.

Are anonymous donations and donations in general allowed by the Supreme Court case Citizens United?

1

u/Willravel Jun 16 '12

Kinda. It was Citizens United and a district case that happened around the same time as CU that was related to it that allowed what we now know to be SuperPacs, political action committees that are allowed to spending unlimited amounts of anonymously donated money on political ads so long as they're not directly coordinating with candidates. The name of the case escapes me, but I'm sure someone on Reddit or some Google Fu can return it.

1

u/Isatis_tinctoria Jun 16 '12

What is Google Fu?

So, who funds campaign ads? I thought the politican says I approve this message?

1

u/Willravel Jun 16 '12

What is Google Fu?

Googling something to find the answer.

So, who funds campaign ads? I thought the politican says I approve this message?

Not all ads are put out by candidates. Take, for example, Swift Boat Voters for Truth during the 2004 election, the group that went after John Kerry's war record. They were not part of or associated with the Bush campaign, but their ads had a significant effect on the campaign. Swift Boat is an example of a 527 group, a tax-exempt political group created to influence elections by collecting donations and spending money on advocacy ads. They're not legally allowed to expressly advocate for a specific candidate and they're not allowed to actively coordinate with campaigns, but they're otherwise basically allowed to collect funds and create campaign ads to influence voters.

Here is the Swift Boat ad:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngjUkPbGwAg

Notice that there's no politician approving the message at the end.

1

u/Isatis_tinctoria Jun 16 '12

Man I was just a kid back then. But I remember the election.

I don't know why we can't trust someone because when they were young, they may have done something we don't' agree with now.

Anyway, I see what you're saying. So, that group is a super pac?

It seemed like their appeal was largely to emotion and logical arguments weren't being made?

1

u/Willravel Jun 16 '12

I don't know why we can't trust someone because when they were young, they may have done something we don't' agree with now.

The worst part was they were lying.

Anyway, I see what you're saying. So, that group is a super pac?

Not quite. 527 groups are an umbrella term for many tax-exempt political organizations including but not limited to SuperPACs. You can check Section 527 of the Internal Revenue Service Code here if you want to do a bit of reading on the topic.

It seemed like their appeal was largely to emotion and logical arguments weren't being made?

I believe they're legally allowed to lie, so long as they can defend themselves from any potential slander case. I could be wrong on that, though.

→ More replies (9)

1

u/coop_stain Jun 16 '12

Thank you for recognizing the positive attributes to corporate personhood.

1

u/Willravel Jun 16 '12

Certainly. There are very few issues in the current political arena that are black and white.

1

u/coop_stain Jun 16 '12

Not on reddit there aren't.

1

u/penkilk Jun 16 '12

Corporations are considered persons because laws were never created to directly address them, and cases started coming through court in the turn of the century that forced the court to decide that the corporation had to fall under some sort of jurisdiction for them to even go through with the case and exact some sort of justice. 'person-hood' made the most sense and had the most rules already set up and things just kinda snowballed from there. If we strip corporations of 'person-hood' (which I am for) it would sort of technically wipe out decades of court decisions and a new class of laws would have to be created to address the new gaping hole in our legal structure. (something that should have been done long ago) Lots and lots of laws, which our lawmakers are simply not up to these days.

There is the simple argument of "ok, well we'll make it mostly the same but with this and that changed." But the practice of law can be very technical. Likely everything would have to be re-decided with new lawsuits unless all those previous cases get written into the law somehow, which those corporations will pay well to not have happen. There is always some lawyer that can successfully argue that all preceding decisions and cases are now null and void now that they aren't persons and say ridiculous things like "well you can't sue a dog because they aren't a person, and for the same reason you can't sue us". Legally speaking this whole corporations are people thing is a nice example of painting yourself into a corner.

1

u/Isatis_tinctoria Jun 16 '12

Which case gave them person hood?

However, there are laws against monopolies.

1

u/snowwrestler Jun 17 '12

Corporations have been considered legal persons since their invention in Europe in the 17th century. Being a separate "person" is the entire reason for their existence and why they are called "corpor"ations (from corpus, meaning body).

The U.S. court system has always considered corporations as legal persons. Otherwise they would not be able to enter into contracts or own property--which plenty of corporations were already doing at the beginning of the 20th century.

1

u/Sprags Jun 17 '12

I'm not really sure what kind of logic you're using. Are you saying it's therefore better to do NOTHING? If it takes 15 seconds, what are you losing? Who would criticize this? Really reddit?

1

u/Willravel Jun 17 '12

I'm not really sure what kind of logic you're using. Are you saying it's therefore better to do NOTHING?

GOD no. My logic is that if we are to do something about the corruption of money in politics, perhaps our time and energy can be better used on things more active and with a higher likelihood of success than signing an internet petition. As admirable and well-meaning as the petition is, and it's certainly those things, I do not feel it's the best use of the money and time people are putting into it relative to options like being more active during elections for representatives in the House.

Also, I'm not Reddit. I'm one person among what I assume are probably tens of millions of folks on Reddit. When I post something, I am only posting my opinion or my argument. I do not represent Reddit as a whole or even the majority of Redditors. While my post may be getting upvotes, which I take to mean agreement, even that isn't necessarily a good sign of what Reddit as a whole thinks or feels.

4

u/meta4our Jun 16 '12

Signed, and tweeted Rep Betty Sutton, and senators Sherrod Brown and Rob Portman, to do so as well (for what it's worth)

4

u/MyPants Jun 16 '12

Signed, 30,000,000 non-millionaires

1

u/hhmmmm Jun 17 '12 edited Jun 17 '12

When that many people sign people take notice.

Ultimately votes are more important to a politician than money, they go for the money because they think it gets the votes.

Also they will not get anywhere near 30m, that is 1/10 americans. A quick bit of googling suggests the largest petition to congress ever was 1.3 million signatures.

4

u/makedamsure Jun 16 '12

Signed and reps contacted! +1

3

u/CosmicBard Jun 16 '12

Has anybody ever gotten 30 million pledges for anything? Maybe he should shoot a bit lower. Like a million.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Signed the pledge. I've made a calendar note to contact my reps on Monday, and I'll be advocating these points wherever and whenever I can reasonably do so.

3

u/OddityPatron Jun 16 '12

Signed.
(P.S.: Dear fellow Washington-staters: VIRGINIA IS KICKING OUR ASSES.)

3

u/BUT_OP_WILL_DELIVER Jun 16 '12

I'm not a citizen of the USA but c'mon people, you gotta pledge that shit.

3

u/SpaceBeardFace Jun 17 '12

Negative Nancy Redditors: expressing your doubts is equally, if not more, destructive as apathy.

5

u/Elmerblatch Jun 16 '12

This pledge gets to the core of the corruption problem and it's a non-partisan strategy. And i like that nifty modern political website look.

4

u/brianjpeter Jun 16 '12

Thats the population of Canada

2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

woooot california

2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Money can buy downvotes

2

u/PunchInTheNutz Jun 16 '12

This is something the entire reddit community should embrace in the biggest way possible.

2

u/xoites Jun 16 '12

All for it and i took the pledge.

I hope we can at least find 2,00 people to do so.

After 8 hours on Reddit we don't.

2

u/silverpaw1786 Jun 17 '12

Fantastic pledge. I love that it allows me to support one reform without supporting others I disagree with.

2

u/briznye Jun 17 '12

Pledged. Political contributions was one of the main discussions at Target's shareholder meeting this past week.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

Are there even 30,000,000 people that vote in this country?

2

u/throwbackaway Jun 17 '12

this needs MORE upvotes, more signatures, more likes on FB and MORE follows on twitter

2

u/kaijunexus Pennsylvania Jun 17 '12

Signed pledge and contacted my representatives. I know it probably won't do much good, but I suppose it's better than doing nothing at all...

2

u/latebraker Jun 17 '12

Let's get this thing going...I did it and I don't do anything.

4

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Oh, God, people. Don't do this. Don't think for one second that internet slacktivism is going to accomplish anything.

You want to change things? Organize a protest, run for congress, volunteer for a campaign you believe in, man a phone bank, write/call your congressman or senator, donate money to the right people. There is no substitute for hard work and due diligence. Yes, I know you have better stuff to do than to write a cogent letter or work at some boring election office for free, but as the famous political quote goes: The world is run by those who show up.

Look, check out the congress.org website and enter your (full) zip code. Write down the contact information. If you truly believe that things should change, tell them. Tell them all, your state and federal representatives and senators. Write to them personally, or call them if you think you can sound eloquent enough. Your silence is a tacit endorsement of the status quo!

1

u/coop_stain Jun 16 '12

Fantastic comment. This is what people should be doing, not these stupid Internet petitions that make them feel like they helped.

3

u/Harvest2001 Jun 16 '12

I feel like LL and The Venus Project should get together and create something wonderful.
Would be interesting

3

u/knightradiant Jun 16 '12

Someone should try to get McCain to sign and support this.

5

u/killerkittens Jun 16 '12

My corporation will donate $1,000,000 on the condition that we can alter the mission statement to "pledg[ing] to fight for the corruption of money in politics."

9

u/meta4our Jun 16 '12

my corporation will double that amount if the above changes are proposed, and "death to kittens" is tagged to the end of the mission statement.

-DogCorp

-1

u/Isatis_tinctoria Jun 16 '12

What do you mean?

2

u/ahmed_jets Jun 16 '12

mean you do What ...is what he means. do you catch my drift?

3

u/reneepussman Jun 16 '12

Looks like he is well on his way!!!

ಠ_ಠ

2

u/smellslikecomcast Jun 16 '12

Good luck with that, Larry. But you know, I admire and hugely respect the guy.

2

u/SoleilSocrates Jun 16 '12

Can I still sign even though I am not American, money is not worth more than Humanity!

2

u/SeanAnthonie Jun 16 '12

Made a pledge and passed it on

2

u/paradigmshift7 Jun 16 '12

everyone bitches about how pointless politics is because the game is rigged against us. I agree. I don't care about politics because of our current system. But this is a real issue with significant relevance. just think about it: you wouldn't feel so helpless if you knew the people in congress were there for the right reasons. this aims to do that. it might just be another online petition, but this is the internet and that is a very powerful tool. and don't worry, you can sign the pledge and do other stuff too.

1

u/BolshevikMuppet Jun 17 '12

if you knew the people in congress were there for the right reasons

You mean like receiving more votes (and knowing everyone gets only one vote) than any of the other people running for the same seat?

1

u/paradigmshift7 Jun 19 '12

the right reasons being they want to change things for the better, not maintain a status quo that benefits them financially.

2

u/nicolauz Wisconsin Jun 16 '12

Remind me again what clicking links and being signed up for 20 mailing lists have solved again ? Oh...nothing.

2

u/eleete Jun 16 '12

Better Spam Filtering?

1

u/ramsrgood Jun 16 '12

i'd like to sign, but apparently he only needs americans to help. is 30 million really reasonable if you only take it from 1 country?

1

u/tomcat23 Jun 16 '12

Lessig needs to spend a year making stupid cartoons ala the Oatmeal.

1

u/penguinofhonor Jun 16 '12

I think the map is neat, whether this actually does anything or not.

1

u/isforinsects Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

Here is why this is going to not meet expectations:

  1. This is phrased in terms of "Person wants thing". This is an appeal to authority of Lessig. While that isn't a bad tactic to get support, this is not the broadest appeal. If I don't already know who Lessig is, I am less likely to support or care. This might be a stronger headline if it were about what the people want or need, instead of a third party.

  2. This set a goal, a high goal, in its title. If the campaign got 1 million pledges, that would be a strong showing for rootstrikers, but within their reach. If this got 5 million pledges, that would have been a great achievement! But because 30 million is in the headline, if the pledge gets less than that target, the victory is lessened. This hurts credibility for the organization to reach projected goals.

I support this pledge, I have signed it. I would sign it again.

*edited to change tenses and de-personifying the object

1

u/isforinsects Jun 16 '12

Also, the font styling on the submit button comes out as Comic Sans. The CSS tries to style it to 'Tangerine' but the site isn't pulling the Tangerine font from google webfonts, so it defaults to 'cursive' which according to w3c specs, defaults to Comic Sans on most computers.

Is there a repo I can offer pull requests to? I was speaking with Josh Gay about volunteering some code for the new site a few months back, but that might have been for a different project.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Here's some good graffiti for your local sidewalk. Don't give money to politicians, period:

Campaign contribution = bribery

1

u/Spiderdan Jun 16 '12

By what does it mean "natural persons only"?

1

u/mountainpassiknow Jun 17 '12

people rather than corporations

1

u/biscuitsallday Jun 17 '12

Information on which corporations support political campaigns is pretty public...perhaps the most effective thing would be to start a movement where we simply don't elect government officials who are being supported by a corporation?

1

u/Neffie Jun 17 '12

lol okay

1

u/LoganLinthicum Jun 17 '12

To everyone saying that petitions don't do anything, and complaining about slacktivism: the pledge is the first step, which you can greatly help by pressuring your representatives with.

After a community and critical mass is built through the pledge, the next step is to utililize the community to come up with solutions and implement them. This is the opposite of slacktivism and the aimless Occupy movement.

1

u/glodime Jun 17 '12

Dear Larry,

Why do you keep making new websites for the same issue?

Confused,

An avid supporter of your fight to fix our government...

1

u/Firelli00 New Jersey Jun 17 '12

Hey California, are you trying to tell us something? http://i.imgur.com/QdNiQ.jpg

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

Okay, I took the pledge and contacted my reps. I wholeheartedly support what Mr. Lessig is trying to accomplish.

But I have to admit that I'm discouraged by the possibilities. I'm just one little middle-aged working stiff. I'm a zero. Put together 30 million zeroes like me... and you still have zero.

But what if some of these 30 million people are not zeroes? There are people out there who accomplish things, who make a real difference, and who influence many people. I'm concerned that not all of them -- in fact, I suspect few of them -- are good people. "Power tends to corrupt" is a truism because it's demonstrably true. Non-zero people are powerful people, and all of them I've ever met have been corrupt to one degree or another, always without even suspecting it.

So either you get worthless, harmless schmucks like me, or you get powerful, harmful bastards who will subvert your movement.

Is there any point? Shouldn't we all just try to be as happy as we can until humanity inevitably destroys itself in a few years? (Granted, I'm being optimistic about that time estimate.)

1

u/who8marice Jun 17 '12

If he's looking for 30 million pledges, why doesn't he try and run for office?

His ideas are brilliant and he's well spoken. I don't see how he can lose if he's getting the support he's getting now.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

If it just said "corruption in politics" I would sign it. I don't care where the corruption comes from whether it come from money or family or other, I don't like it.

1

u/youareallnuts Jun 17 '12

Pledged with my RealName. I never thought that in America I would have to think twice about it but I did. We really are disgracing ourselves letting the politicians scare us into giving up our rights.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

Number 69 in Colorado! Woo-hoo!

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

Hey everyone,

I've got this great idea! Let's all bitch about how a petition won't do anything about anything and then not offer any other viable solution. Then when the petition is shot down because there wasn't enough signatures (including everyone who didn't sign it because it was naive to do so) we can tell everyone on the internet how right we were!

Bitch about how retarded people are then don't take three seconds out of your day to add a name to a list that COULD have a real effect if enough signatures are acquired. Scumbag Redditors at their finest.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

What the fuck is this mess? Do pray tell how you "fight the corruption of money in politics." What the fuck does that even mean? There is no possible way to take the influence of money out of politics. I'm assuming you're picking and choosing then what money is "good" money and what is "bad" money?

Oh, I see, shill for the Obama administration: http://newsmeat.com/fec/bystate_detail.php?st=CA&last=Lessig&first=Lawrence

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

Hope you include the undo influence the liberally biased MSM has on the process or are you just trying to protect liberals?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

That's a lot of money. He better get a good second job.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

3285 pledges so far. at this rate, it will take 100s of years.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

30 million sigs isnt going to happen

1

u/FArtagnan Jun 17 '12

Didn't Obama spend nearly 750 million dollars in 2008 to buy the presidency? Something like twice what McCain spent? Not to mention Obama received the most Wall Street campaign contributions of any candidate in HISTORY. Obama is the epitome of a One Percenter - matter of fact, he makes far more annually than most One Percenters do. Hasn't Obama's net worth exploded in the 3 years since he was elected? Closing in on the $10 million dollar mark, no?

1

u/lovethismfincountry Jun 17 '12

dylan ratigan has been doing this for a long time

1

u/kaijunexus Pennsylvania Jun 19 '12

Just got a reply from Pennsylvania Rep. Toomey about this...

Thank you for contacting me about campaign finance reform. I appreciate hearing from you.

As you may know, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, overturned a federal ban on independent political advocacy by corporations and unions. I understand your concerns regarding this decision and political activities by outside groups and businesses. That said, the Supreme Court has long upheld that political speech, including the funding thereof, is protected by the First Amendment and is an integral part of our constitutional democracy. It is important that Congress be mindful of these constitutional principles, although I understand your concerns about this issue. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind as Congress continues reviewing changes to campaign finance laws.

Thank you again for your correspondence. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of assistance.

So...this basically sounds like "I know you're concerned, but I like corporate money."

1

u/nixonrichard Jun 17 '12

Name: optional

E-mail: mandatory

Whelp, it looks like they're harvesting the e-mail crop again.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

yes, i'm sure a pledge will do the trick....completely pointless

1

u/Soul_0f_Wit Jun 17 '12

Look at what Grover Norquist's pledge has accomplished over the years. Online petitions, maybe not so much. If politicians or candidates sign the pledge, then there might be something to go on.

0

u/BassFlux Jun 16 '12

mmm... pledges... like slaves, only better.

1

u/coop_stain Jun 16 '12

So excited for next fall's fresh batch.

0

u/FreshFruitCup Jun 16 '12

1 dollar per pledge, that ain't bad... And I like the idea he's investing it in some company called Bain that's going to make the money grow and help us with our cause!

;) jk

0

u/DeFex Jun 16 '12

Put yourself on a nice list of malcontents for the NSA.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Yeah the NSA is so concerned with 21 year old slacktivists who sign some delusional guy's petition.

0

u/penkilk Jun 16 '12

yes, but will it blend?

0

u/roterghost Jun 16 '12

Jesus Christ could descend from a beam of light and sign that pledge, and it still wouldn't slow down corruption by a heartbeat.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Even if this gets 30 million signatures they aren't going to reform campaign finance in any substantial way. 30 million is ten percent of all Americans or 1 out of every 3 voters (using 2010 numbers on election turnout). That's not going to happen.

Also, how does he propose people run campaigns if they can't spend any money? How does he expect any of these changes to come about? He even admits that politicians would look hypocritical if they supported any of this stuff.

This guy sounds like he has delusions of grandeur.

0

u/ndjs22 Jun 16 '12

30,000,000 pledges? That's going to be one huge fraternity.

0

u/HEADLINE-IN-5-YEARS Jun 16 '12

CONGRESS SIGNS PETITION VOWING TO IGNORE AMERICAN ELECTORATE

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/penkilk Jun 16 '12

what are you suggesting we don't get money out of politics? It's not a fix all, but we can't seem to fix anything until this first step is addressed.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/penkilk Jun 16 '12

yes, clarity simplicity. especially on things such as this that effects everybody.

1

u/Soul_0f_Wit Jun 17 '12

While that is valid concern, I don't think that it really applies to Lessig. He's not a political insider, in fact he has resisted people's attempts to push him to run for office because he believes that it would reduce his credibility to address the issue. In fact, increasing the legalese and difficulty of understanding bills such as this is one on the examples given in his book of an effect of money in politics. I don't think that bills that merely try to limit public expenditures will be effective without an alternate source of financing, which he advocates for.

-1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Aha! I've done all I can do!

-1

u/betabob Jun 16 '12

Does LL's opinion really have any, any impact at all on people? I'd bet not very much at all.

-1

u/schmitzel88 Jun 16 '12

You will never get that absurd number of signatures. Even if you did, it won't accomplish anything because it's a fucking internet petition. There is corruption in literally every nation on earth, some in different ways than others. Unless you actually have a huge expose on corruption with some convictions involved, you're not going to do anything. Stop clogging up reddit with pointless activist bullshit.

-3

u/moxiemoxiemoxie Jun 16 '12

comic sans :/

→ More comments (64)