So when did lobbying become a thing in US politics and how did pic related come to completely cuck the US government...

So when did lobbying become a thing in US politics and how did pic related come to completely cuck the US government? I didnt want to post this question on /pol/ because all they would do is shitpost about jews

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington's_Farewell_Address#Foreign_relations_and_free_trade
politico.com/blogs/media/2013/09/ny-times-scraps-aipac-from-syria-story-171669
washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/11/01/almost-no-americans-think-pro-israel-groups-are-washingtons-most-powerful-lobby/
foreignpolicy.com/2014/02/27/zionist-movement/
bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

"Washington makes an extended reference to the dangers of foreign nations who will seek to influence the American people and government; nations who may be considered friendly as well as nations considered enemies will equally try to influence the government to do their will. "Real patriots," he warns, who "resist the intrigues" of foreign nations may find themselves "suspected and odious" in the eyes of others, yet he urges the people to stand firm against such influences all the same. He portrays those who attempt to further such foreign interests as becoming the "tools and dupes" of those nations, stealing the applause and praise of their country away from the "real patriots" while actually working to "surrender" American interests to foreign nations. Washington had experience with foreign interference in 1793 when French ambassador Edmond-Charles Genêt organized American demonstrations in support of France, funded soldiers to attack Spanish lands, and commissioned privateers to seize British ships. Genêt's mobilization of supporters to sway American opinion in favor of an alliance with France angered President Washington who ordered him to leave."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington's_Farewell_Address#Foreign_relations_and_free_trade

Reminder that /pol/ is full of lobbyist scum.

If you have representative government, you're going to have lobbying. There's fundamentally no difference between any interest group you care to name and a concerned citizen writing his congressman about an issue and threatening not to vote for him again if he doesn't do something about it except scale.

AIPAC is far from the most influential lobby there is. Hell, there's zero correlation between U.S. mid-east policy shifts and AIPAC spending or efforts. If they really controlled the U.S. government, you'd think the Americans wouldn't send all that money to places like Egypt and Lebanon. Things like Agribusiness are way more influential, and nobody talks about that.

>There's fundamentally no difference between any interest group you care to name and a concerned citizen writing his congressman
Except money, access to said politician and chance to actually influence said politician.

>Things like Agribusiness are way more influential, and nobody talks about that.
I think the biggest and most influential lobby at the moment is the financial lobby.

So again, the KIND of action isn't wrong, just the scale of the action. Having a X amount of chance of influencing a politician is acceptable, but having more than X is not.

Don't you think that a group of people can circumvent the democratic process by paying big amelikan dorra to a lobbying firm that then goes and gets their legislation through because said firm has more possibilities to contact and push their (paid-for) viewpoint through than Concerned McCitizen?

Don't you think it's fucked*

It's not circumventing the democratic process. It is entirely part of the democratic process to attempt to apply specific interests of a given sub-set of the polity to their representatives.

All that "lobbying firm" is is a collection of people who have some degree of organization and funding. It's no different than if you get a large group of randos on the street together and got them to chip in cash and organize themselves for a political end.

All you're really doing (and probably unaware at that) is stating that some degrees of interests are worth pushing at legislators for and some aren't; or some amount of influence on a legislator is fine, but once you cross past a certain point, it somehow becomes a problem.