Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    In American politics people keep talking about the establishment.

    In my view it is the following..

    Special interest groups like AIPAC
    Big money from wallstreet and various oligarchs
    Backing by the mass media (who owns that?)


    The DNC leaks with Debbie Wasserman Schultz as the head exposed the system as being rigged in Hilary's favour.


    Now of the little I mentioned above what do they have in common?

    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fenix98)
    In American politics people keep talking about the establishment.

    In my view it is the following..

    Special interest groups like AIPAC
    Big money from wallstreet and various oligarchs
    Backing by the mass media (who owns that?)


    The DNC leaks with Debbie Wasserman Schultz as the head exposed the system as being rigged in Hilary's favour.


    Now of the little I mentioned above what do they have in common?

    People say it in the negative sense to mean anyone who gives/accepts bribes oh... excuse me 'lobbies' in politics in order to gain/maintain power - aka almost everyone in US politics
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Reptilian overlords
    Spoiler:
    Show
    But in all seriousness the Rothschilds
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    There all Satan worshipers (srs)
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    the establishment is essentially synonymous with "the system" of power and control, which is either in a national or international context
    the actors behind an establishment are those that keep their current order in position,usually for their own benefit
    this would include the government, civil service and chief bureaucrats, parliament, wealthy lobbies and large media and broadcast corporations. sometimes, one actor of the establishment will act as a mouth piece for other actors of it - and this can happen with numerous sets of actors at once - the media can be a mouthpiece for wealthy lobbies while the civil service can be a mouth piece for the government - that's the nature of human self-interest - our abilities to co-operate, even if would be in our ultimate advantage to do so, is limited by absences of trust, and self-prioritisation.
    the actors of the establishment don't necessarily have to act together for one purpose and plan - they can conflict internally
    the actors against the establishment don't fight politically as they are shut out - they act through media appeal, internet activity, unrest, mere discussions and debates between individuals, etc. and again, they don't necessarily all act as one whole, as there are different interpretations of what exactly is the "establishment", especially when it comes to questions of economic ideologies, feminism, "black lives matter", etc.
    usually the only way to undermine an establishment is through an undermining of law(s) (often through evasion of apprehension), threatening the authority and abilities of the establishment, or merely slow and gradual change, especially in a (pseudo) democracy. right now we are witnessing the very slow pace of democratic enpowerment, as issues that are important to democracy are always brushed off by the parliament and government, and the media and wealthy lobbies, whom benefit from undemocratic institutionality, also brush off democratic-based issues in the system (when they cannot resist democracy, they often still control much of their audiences' political views simply via a hyperdermic needle effect) - hence we haven't fully debated full lords reform, PR electoral reform (not AV), the right of recall, etc. it's all clear if you consider how the establishment is set up and operates right in front of you.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    The establishment is the status quo; the individuals and interest groups who focus more on the few and less on the masses. Clinton and Hillary are one and the same and they are both part of the establishment.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    the establishment is essentially synonymous with "the system" of power and control, which is either in a national or international context
    the actors behind an establishment are those that keep their current order in position,usually for their own benefit
    this would include the government, civil service and chief bureaucrats, parliament, wealthy lobbies and large media and broadcast corporations. sometimes, one actor of the establishment will act as a mouth piece for other actors of it - and this can happen with numerous sets of actors at once - the media can be a mouthpiece for wealthy lobbies while the civil service can be a mouth piece for the government - that's the nature of human self-interest - our abilities to co-operate, even if would be in our ultimate advantage to do so, is limited by absences of trust, and self-prioritisation.
    the actors of the establishment don't necessarily have to act together for one purpose and plan - they can conflict internally
    the actors against the establishment don't fight politically as they are shut out - they act through media appeal, internet activity, unrest, mere discussions and debates between individuals, etc. and again, they don't necessarily all act as one whole, as there are different interpretations of what exactly is the "establishment", especially when it comes to questions of economic ideologies, feminism, "black lives matter", etc.
    usually the only way to undermine an establishment is through an undermining of law(s) (often through evasion of apprehension), threatening the authority and abilities of the establishment, or merely slow and gradual change, especially in a (pseudo) democracy. right now we are witnessing the very slow pace of democratic enpowerment, as issues that are important to democracy are always brushed off by the parliament and government, and the media and wealthy lobbies, whom benefit from undemocratic institutionality, also brush off democratic-based issues in the system (when they cannot resist democracy, they often still control much of their audiences' political views simply via a hyperdermic needle effect) - hence we haven't fully debated full lords reform, PR electoral reform (not AV), the right of recall, etc. it's all clear if you consider how the establishment is set up and operates right in front of you.
    I thought is was more about self serving than that. The fact that Clinton's wife is now running for the presidency. The fact that three Bushes have been senators or presidents. One has to ask, in a free and fair democracy, why is it a select few families / social groups who end up at the highest echelons of power? That, surely is "The establishment". A group of self serving people who keep power within their own circle and do everything to ensure no one else gets in.

    To some extent you can see this with Trump. Despite him being elected democratically there are still some that don't like him, not because of what he stands for but because he is basically an independent.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    I thought is was more about self serving than that. The fact that Clinton's wife is now running for the presidency. The fact that three Bushes have been senators or presidents. One has to ask, in a free and fair democracy, why is it a select few families / social groups who end up at the highest echelons of power? That, surely is "The establishment". A group of self serving people who keep power within their own circle and do everything to ensure no one else gets in.

    To some extent you can see this with Trump. Despite him being elected democratically there are still some that don't like him, not because of what he stands for but because he is basically an independent.
    well that's the thing - let's take the example of george bush senior - he wasn't in the establishment to begin with, but then became a part of it after becoming president. his name was given establishment status especially when his sons entered politics with their father's brand. with bill clinton, again, he wasn't in the establishment at first. but his wife automatically, after he got in, became a part of the establishment as well simply for the clinton brand - that's how she became a senator. and although I didn't list "family connections" in my list of actors, they would be in the "government" category because their family members were previous (and settled, in terms of history) government officials.

    and yeah, donald trump is anti-establishment in the sense that he embodies a rejection of the status quo of selecting politicians (i.e. clinton because she's a woman, and the wife of a former president, and jeb bush for similar reasons). he's also not a script reader for wall street or the republican-democrat political cartel. he was obviously very different to everybody - both republicans and democrats. I wouldn't even call him a republican, even though he's the republican nominee. I'd actually call him a third party candidate de facto.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Simply pit, the upper middle class white blob that make up most of the political class, whether that be politicians themselves, or the people "buying" the politicians, representing the political status quo, with all involved broadly wanting to do the same thing even though when playing party politics they pretend otherwise.

    Mainstream politicians, lobbyists, wealth party donors, whether individual or corporate, basically everybody on the gravy train who is seen as dabbling in politics for their own interests rather than that of the general population.

    How accurately the concept describes said political class is questionable however.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.