Quote from GZento

I feel that if there were no special interest groups, political lobbyists would have less influence over legislation, and citizens would be able to get they want more quickly. What do you guys think?

It's weird how you divide the interests of "citizens" and the groups they belong to. The people who are part of these special interest groups are citizens, and these groups serve as a way to collectively advance their interests. How would getting rid of these groups change anything?

The only group I have an interest in is probably the political group of the Republicans.
Although I don't have much knowledge about that group, I do know that they do what's best for the people but not entirely taking the opinions of the people. I think this makes sense since taking opinions from the government is a smarter idea than taking opinions from the people.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Quote from Exilement

It's weird how you divide the interests of "citizens" and the groups they belong to. The people who are part of these special interest groups are citizens, and these groups serve as a way to collectively advance their interests. How would getting rid of these groups change anything?

I thought it would be assumed that special interest groups are comprised of citizens. Sorry for the confusion. But the reason why I feel special interest groups are an inhibitor is because they are either too focused on competing for recognition with an opposing group, or one group ends up being divided, or indecisive about what issues could be highest priority. Maybe rather than "abolishing" organizations, there should be a way to encourage compromise, which is rarely found in our politics.


molgera, you aren't necessarily wrong since some are more qualified to handle certain types of information, and activities, but at the same time, we grow up in a culture that hard presses freedom and independence, especially when it comes to expressing our values, and having a say in how country is run. It is true that both republicans and democrats don't directly ask citizens "is it cool if I propose this bill? Or vote against it?" But doesn't that frustrate you a little? It isn't uncommon for politicians to "bargain" with interest groups besides republicans by saying "if you vote for for me, I'll vote for bill 'x'" I feel this deludes the purpose of having a voting system, and makes people support things for the wrong reasons

Ideally we would live in a society where interest/pressure groups aren't necessary for active influence, and the democratic process would be enough to have your voice heard. Sadly, that's not the case, and it may not even be possible considering the amount of conflicting opinions out there, notwithstanding the "tyranny of the majority". I think the question has to be the limits to such groups' powers and influences (I've heard it said that lobbying in the US is too predominant and significant in regards to the democratic process, but I'm not sure). For instance, Trade Unions in the UK have been known to, essentially, fuck shit up. One of Thatcher's greatest (in my opinion) achievements was to limit their power (and yes the TU's are a form of pressure group, only a sectional one).