Beyond Labels

A 360° Discussion of Foreign, National and Local Policy Issues

Scott Miller

Money and Politics

With the 2024 elections gearing up, we’ll return to one of the topics that our participants keep circling back to—the role of money in politics.

  • How much of a problem is the Citizens United decision, which provides that corporations and other outside groups can spend unlimited amounts of money on elections.
  • Is the problem really with “corporate” speech, or is it “moneyed” speech (regardless of the form of the speaker)?
  • Does money equate to speech? (Can money supporting speech be regulated without running afoul of the First Amendment?)
  • Should wealthy people be able to purchase advertising (whether broadcast, cable, social media, “swag,” or otherwise) to express their views?
    • Does it matter if those views are about an issue in general versus a candidate in particular? How can we tell the difference?
  • Should anonymous speech be allowed, or should every speaker (or money behind the speaker, advertisement, etc.) be publicly identified?
  • Bottom line: if this is a problem to be solved, how can it be done without infringing on other rights? Where’s the middle ground?

March 25: Is U.S. Foreign Policy Effective?

This coming Monday, we will discuss the question: “Is the U.S. still effective in influencing global events?”

As supplied by one of our regular participants:

We have discussed various individual conflicts and touched on potential political differences in approach to some of the situations like NATO, Russia, China and the Middle East.  Regardless of politics over the years, the U.S. foreign policy has held a remarkably uniform consensus.  The Executive and Legislative branch implements foreign policy, but what are the determinants of U.S. foreign policy – the Council on Foreign Relations, State Department bureaucracy, established think tanks, international corporations, academic establishment, “military-industrial complex”, global elites (Davos)?often discuss U.S. foreign policy in the context of a specific world event or challenge—Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the war in Gaza, U.S. strategy toward China’s various initiatives.

If not, is U.S. effectiveness diminished because of lack of will, competence, loss of economic and military power, international status, or just the inevitability of the multipolar international forces.  What should be the response – disengagement or reengagement – or another paradigm?

Thank you to Richard for the above topic. Here’s an Op-Ed piece with one person’s view to get us started. Richard notes the obvious…that there are plenty of other perspectives, sources, and pundits with a view. We have six days before the next meeting to curate our favorites.

3/18: Propaganda and Disinformation

As we head into the core of the U.S. election season, the media (rightly) is refocusing on the prevalence of “disinformation” or propaganda to which voters (and children, and others) are exposed. So we’ll revisit the subject on Monday.

  • What is “disinformation”–does it depend on the “eye of the beholder?”
  • How do Americans obtain their “news”–cable TV, newspapers, social media, word of mouth?
  • If social media is as important and influential as many think, should the providers be regulated in some way? (And, if so, how?)
    • Is the TikTok hubbub a special case, or are many of its issues endemic to the entire social media space?
  • Do media “fact checkers” make a difference?
  • What can be done to diminish the influence of disinformation within our society?

Here are a few potentially relevant readings (from amongst many):

  • Subscribe via Email

    Receive email notification of new posts/announcements about our weekly meeting.

    Join 240 other subscribers
  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments