SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
This story might be helpful to those tearing their hair out about the news lately:
I grew up believing that following the news makes you a better citizen. Eight years after having quit, that idea now seems ridiculous—that consuming a particularly unimaginative information product on a daily basis somehow makes you thoughtful and informed in a way that benefits society.
But I still encounter people who balk at the possibility of a smart, engaged adult quitting the daily news.
...
A few things you might notice, if you take a break:1) You feel better
A common symptom of quitting the news is an improvement in mood. News junkies will say it's because you've stuck your head in the sand.
But that assumes the news is the equivalent of having your head out in the fresh, clear air. They don't realize that what you can glean about the world from the news isn't even close to a representative sample of what is happening in the world.
...
2) You were never actually accomplishing anything by watching the newsIf you ask someone what they accomplish by watching the news, you'll hear vague notions like, "It's our civic duty to stay informed!" or "I need to know what's going on in the world," or "We can't just ignore these issues," none of which answer the question.
...
A month after you've quit the news, it's hard to name anything useful that's been lost. It becomes clear that those years of news-watching amounted to virtually nothing in terms of improvement to your quality of life, lasting knowledge, or your ability to help others. And that's to say nothing of the opportunity cost. Imagine if you spent that time learning a language, or reading books and essays about some of the issues they mention on the news.
Read on for the rest of the list.
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Tuesday December 13 2016, @09:29PM
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Tuesday December 13 2016, @11:49PM
Which is of course the American solution. Too bad we let the Progressives rise to power and "fundamentally transform" us.
Let us look at how a Republic solves these problems. If most decisions that impact your life are made at the town council / borough level then it becomes possible for a good fraction of the "responsible citizen" types to kinda know what is going on, attend a few of the meetings, follow events in the local paper (now websites / blogs) and be informed enough to do the only thing they need to do. Pick a candidate from the options offered in their Party Primary, for the mostly part time job of making the laws for their community.
Now that more decisions are local, the State Legislature is doing a small enough task list, that those same "responsible citizen" types and the local elected official (acting as taste makers / tribal elders) would probably be able to pick a Representative close to their views. This Representative can be paid enough to allow them the time to devote to understanding the more complex issues that need addressing from a Statewide level. The would have to go home and be prepared to explain why of course.
Same for electing a Representative to Congress. If the National government were returned to the original duties the members of Congress would have the time to fully understand the few issues that require a National solution. And with the Senate restored to a body representing the States, they would be mostly elder statesmen selected directly from the State Legislatures and thus actually know what is going on.
That design allows a People who don't have time to be a domain expert in a hundred different fields to still crowdsource up fairly effective government. The more we have drifted to universal franchise direct democracy the worse the results have been.