Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 20th Feb 2012 11:22 UTC
Permalink for comment 507892
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-03-26
The UK (and America IIRC) demonstrated against the war on Iraq - yet we still went to war.
The UK demonstrated against student fees - yet student fees were still hiked up.
The whole world protested against SOPA - yet ACTA and other similar deals and legislation are still being pushed through.
So while I do agree with you in principle, I can't stop thinking that increasingly the general populous are powerless to change the government.
The problem we have is that it costs so much to run a successful campaign, that ultimately any leading party end up bought and paid for by corporate interest.
I'm not saying that all politicians are corrupt nor open to bribes, but the honest and selfless politicians just wouldn't have the funds to lead a successful campaign.
So ultimately we get stuck with a multitude of similar leaders pushing similar policies and we're left picking the lesser of n evils rather than the actual embodiment of a leader we'd aspire to have.
Edited 2012-02-20 15:01 UTC