Rethinking How Congress Pushes Copyright Laws 228
pigrabbitbear writes "Lamar Smith just can't get a break. The Texas congressman and widely despised author of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) ruffled the Internet's feathers once again this week with the quiet unveiling of a new piece of legislation that's drawing criticism for being plucked out of SOPA's language and rushed through Congress. The Intellectual Property Attaché Act (IPAA) would streamline the process by which the U.S. protects its intellectual property by enforcing U.S. copyright law abroad through specially assigned diplomats or attachés. These officers would report to a new agency-level position, the Assistant Secretary for Intellectual Property and push agendas that, according to the bill's language, are 'consistent with the economic interests of the United States, both domestically and abroad.'"
I for one (Score:5, Funny)
Welcome our new RIAA/MPAA SS Troup overlords
Re:I for one (Score:5, Interesting)
It may be interesting to check how much he has been paid by lobbyists to drive this.
Maybe it's time to study Lamar Smith in detail for any kind of inappropriate behavior. Everyone is guilty of something.
Re:I for one (Score:5, Insightful)
One has to wonder why the $2 trillion+ in taxes we pay every year don't buy us as much influence over the legislative process as $100,000 in campaign contributions by various corporate interests. Why aren't election campaigns funded by tax dollars instead of private donations?
Re:I for one (Score:4, Insightful)
That's how it is in my country. You get more than 2% of the votes, you get your campaigning costs refunded. It does actually not only level the playing field, it also lessens to some extent the reliance on bribery.
Sadly, it does not eliminate it. Politicians are simply greedy, they take money where they can get it. The only cure would be to outlaw bribery.
Re: (Score:2)
The only cure would be to outlaw bribery.
Bribery is legal where you live?
Re: (Score:2)
It's legal in the US. Why would it not be legal elsewhere as well?
Re: (Score:2)
One has to wonder why the $2 trillion+ in taxes we pay every year don't buy us as much influence over the legislative process as $100,000 in campaign contributions by various corporate interests. Why aren't election campaigns funded by tax dollars instead of private donations?
Excellent point! My way of stating this is that those who buy our government through various contributions are getting control of the biggest economy and largest army on the planet for a dirt cheap price.
Re:I for one (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe someone should start a kickstarter campaign to buy a senator?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Basically you have no options for the $2 trillion+ in taxes you either pay it or you go to jail. The people giving the campaign contributions have a choice who they give that money to. Which forces the politicians to listen to them.
Political contributions are not all bad. The need of politicians to raise money does force them to be somewhat responsive to the public. In countries where the public funds campaigns out of the treasury politicians know they only need enough supporters to qualify for support and
Re: (Score:2)
Political contributions are not all bad. The need of politicians to raise money does force them to be somewhat responsive to the public.
But only to the part of the public willing to pay (bribe) them.
Re: (Score:2)
NRA fights weak organizations in US and not anything like the MAFIAA. Even a organization as big and as well financed as NRA wouldn't stand a chance against the kind of money MPAA and RIAA can put on the table.
Having strong organizations to fight them would cert
Re: (Score:2)
During the hearings the people on the left did everything they could to try to push it through
Really? SOPA was not a leftist law. I think you are confused about the meaning of "left wing," perhaps because you have spent so much time focusing on Democrats and Republicans...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe it's time to study Lamar Smith in detail for any kind of inappropriate behavior.
He's a politician. If he were NOT corrupt it would be inappropriate.
Re: (Score:2)
Welcome our new RIAA/MPAA SS Troup overlords
Watch out for their black helicopters !!
Re:I for one (Score:5, Informative)
The discussion system understands HTML (this post is written with <p>'s around the paragraphs).
When you link, just use HTML:
<a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00001811">OpenSecrets<a>
...displays as:
OpenSecrets [opensecrets.org]
If you just want the link displayed and clickable, here is pseudo-html:
<url:"http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00001811">
...displays as:
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00001811 [opensecrets.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I for one (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I for one (Score:5, Funny)
No, I think you have to explicitly mention Hitler.
Oops.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly I have to wonder if Hitler would have been against file sharing if they had the technology at the time. Assuming file sharing is as bad for the media industry as the media industry thinks it is, and that a certain race dominates almost all aspects of it, wouldn't Hitler rejoice file sharing? The only reason I can think of that he would want to ban file sharing is because of the multicultural and degenerate propaganda contained in the content.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I for one (Score:5, Insightful)
By the way, the public domain exists for a reason too, and was intended 'to embiggen a vibrant and creative economy'. Take a look at what has happened to it in the past few decades.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Copyright was seen as necessary evil to protect investments into expensive R&D.
But tell me what "investment" is needed to come up with idea of:
1) Showing an animated icon in browser's loading area.(by Microsoft)
2) That tablet is a rectangular shape with rounded corners (by Apple)
3) Searching in multiple sources (by Apple)
Apparently patents like this exist only to be used as legal weapons vs competitors.
A
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Copyright was seen as necessary evil to protect investments into expensive R&D.
Those are patents, not copyright. Copyright is intended to help content creators profit from their work so they can make a living and create more content.
Re:I for one (Score:4, Insightful)
Copyright is intended to help content creators profit from their work so they can make a living and create more content.
You've got that backwards.
Copyright is designed to encourage creators to create more content by enabling them to make a living from creating content if they're good at it.
Being able to live off selling media is the side-effect not the goal.
Re: (Score:2)
Copyright is intended to help content creators profit from their work so they can make a living and create more content.
You've got that backwards.
Copyright is designed to encourage creators to create more content by enabling them to make a living from creating content if they're good at it.
Being able to live off selling media is the side-effect not the goal.
This point must be made over and over again.
Please mode AC parent up to increase visisbility.
Re: (Score:2)
Copyright has nothing to do with sharing ideas. In fact, copyright specifically does not affect "ideas", only the specific embodyment of something. You can't copyright the idea of a boy wizard but you can copyright a novel written about a boy wizard. Similarly, you can't copyright the idea of displaying a calendar in a program but you can copyright the code that displays a calendar. If someone else writes code that displays a calendar in exactly the same manner copyright does not apply.
Patents are quite
Re:I for one (Score:5, Insightful)
Go back and read it again because that's not what it says. What you've written are the means by which copyright fulfills its *actual stated* reason, "to promote the progress of science and useful arts". Everything that is created is supposed to enter the public domain and enrich society as a whole. Letting the creator have a limited (key word: LIMITED) time to make money on his works is the way by which society encourages that.
Re:I for one (Score:5, Interesting)
There is no problem with copyright per se. The problem is that copyright got way out of hand, and I doubt that's what the founding fathers of the US had in mind when they thought that it's a good idea to give the creator of content the sole right to reap the fruits from it.
Back in those days, the "unfairness" was on the other side of the swing. Creators had to hurry to publish as fast as they could because if it was even remotely some kind of success, others would copy and sell it. Back then, the "bad guys" were not the users of content, the publishers were. They would not sign up artists, they'd wait for the artist to have success with their limited ability to publish, then rip them off by copying their creation and quickly reproducing it. The idea was to protect the artists against the publishers.
The system has been perverted into the one we have today. Copyright no longer protects the artist either, rather, it protects the publishers now.
And I am quite certain that this is exactly the OPPOSITE of what the inventors of copyright had in mind.
Re: (Score:2)
Article 1 Section 8
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
Doesn't say anything about making it profitable or about the economy, rather congress may make laws grant
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I wish they'd teach people not to focus on the irrelevant.
Re: (Score:2)
Or to put their foot in their mouth by makign the same sort of mistake
My own typo left in on purpose.
Re: (Score:2)
Great (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Our judges are from the same law schools, and they are all good friends... what now?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Throw in the judges too? >.>
Hear, hear... I do prefer to keep alive a passivized (locked in a prison) parasitic life form than an active and aggressive one (still paid from taxes, therefore parasitic).
Re: (Score:2)
You DO still have those guns, yes? Just asking...
How? (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is not how these laws are being pushed.
The problem is the content of these copyright laws.
Lamar Smith (R-TX) obviously thinks that the copyright lobbyists are his constituents
and not the masses of citizens which protested and sank PIPA (Patrick Leahy (D-VT))
which in turn lead directly to SOPAs death
Wasn't life + 90 years enough copyright?
Re: (Score:2)
Wasn't life + 90 years enough copyright?
"Wasn't life + 90 years enough copyright?"
It's not about copyright term length. It's about increasing the profits of the failing companies behind him, no matter how much any individual, or any other business in the country, has to suffer in any way.
It should also be noted that only one of the Hollywood companies is an American company, all the rest (BMG, News Corp, Sony, etc.) are foreign companies.
Re: (Score:2)
It should also be noted that only one of the Hollywood companies is an American company, all the rest (BMG, News Corp, Sony, etc.) are foreign companies.
How this is relevant? I mean, they still pay taxes and lobbying in US, aren't they?
Re:How? (Score:5, Insightful)
It shits all over the rhetoric about protecting "American" interests and intellectual property if the relevant interests and intellectual property do not belong to Americans.
Not even the anti-protectionism crowd would bother defending the use of American political and legal machinery to specifically and disproportionately benefit foreign business.
Re: (Score:2)
It shits all over the rhetoric about protecting "American" interests and intellectual property if the relevant interests and intellectual property do not belong to Americans.
The fact that the politicians interest and citizens' interest aren't aligned doesn't make the the politicians less Americans than the citizens, nor precludes them from having an interest on the matter. Granted, they are "more Americans than the rest", but... is not unconstitutional and/or making profit is not immoral nowadays, is it now?
</large_grin>
Re: (Score:2)
How is News Corp. a foreign company?
Incorporated in Delaware; headquartered in NYC; its primary listing is on the NASDAQ; the chairman/CEO (Murdoch), president/COO (Carey), CFO (DeVoe), and about 1/2 the rest of the board are US citizens; its primary listing is on the NASDAQ ...
How much more "American" do you want it to be?
Re: (Score:2)
How is News Corp. a foreign company?
Incorporated in Delaware; headquartered in NYC; its primary listing is on the NASDAQ; the chairman/CEO (Murdoch), president/COO (Carey), CFO (DeVoe), and about 1/2 the rest of the board are US citizens; its primary listing is on the NASDAQ ...
How much more "American" do you want it to be?
Me? Let it be 100% american and even a bit more.
The only thing I'd wish for: keep it there (together with the ex-Ozzie Murdoch) and don't let it outside... but that's not going to happen, is it now?
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, it's good for the economy if foreigners bribe you! Money coming in from abroad is good, isn't it?
Re: (Score:3)
Two terms of fourteen years each was enough.
The length of the copyright term isn't even the primary battleground - except for Disney, what company is still profiting from exclusive use of stuff created more than ninety years ago? The bulk of profit is made from content that was created in the last 10-20 years (maybe longer for books). The current trench warfare lies in the control of computers and the internet. The aim of the lobbyists pushing these bills is not primarily a perpetual copyright (though that'
Re: (Score:2)
[QUOTE]The length of the copyright term isn't even the primary battleground - except for Disney, what company is still profiting from exclusive use of stuff created more than ninety years ago? The bulk of profit is made from content that was created in the last 10-20 years[/QUOTE]
Marvel and DC would tend to disagree... although marvel is Disney now I guess.
Re: (Score:3)
Either way, I'm willing to bet that a campaign of, "the Internet hates him because of copyright law!" isn't going to get him out of office.
Re: (Score:2)
If you think a politician is bad, consider just how much worse the other guy must've been to let that guy win...
Re:How? (Score:5, Insightful)
How these laws are pushed leads to their content. There is a reason Lamar is treating them like his constituents.
Campaign Contributions should not only be public, but limited as being from citizen/residents of the level of office that is representing that district. Would-be representatives should only be allowed to accept funds coming from citizens from within that district and Senator from within the state. This will, in theory, make them more likely to honestly represent the area in question. I doubt Lamar Smith's own district in TX is clamoring for this shit.
Superpacs should not be allowed. I don't think anyone but citizens should be allowed in the campaign contribution process. No groups like megacorps, superpacs, NRA, no unions, nothing. At best, special interest groups should be allowed to notify members in the specific area to give to candidate X or Y. That keeps freedom of association.
The way it works now, with the structure of the Congress, special interest groups like the MPAA/RIAA entertainment cartel just have to target a few special senators/representatives that head pertinent the committees and have seniority, like the Bidens/Lamars of the world for bribes campaign donations, and they can usually railroad what they want through unless the apathetic public makes a special effort to counter it.
The problem is that the general public has a life besides watching Congress like a hawk and protesting. These groups can just keep advancing their agendas patiently, like a person playing chess, despite any one-time setbacks.
Re: (Score:2)
How difficult do you think it is to create a letterbox company in every state of the US if you're an international corporation?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:How? (Score:4, Insightful)
As a result, lobbyists have gained more power. This problem isn't insurmountable, but we still have it here in California.
Re: (Score:3)
In other words, changing the sock puppet doesn't improve the quality of the show.
Sovereignty (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Sovereignty (Score:5, Insightful)
Can't wait until China starts sending diplomats into our country to enforce their intellectual property laws. I'm sure our esteemed legislator from Texas will be overjoyed to cooperate with Chinese business interests acting within his state.
This may well be: I reckon is only a matter of how much they'd contribute to their electoral funding.
Re:Sovereignty (Score:5, Insightful)
This may well be: I reckon is only a matter of how much they'd contribute to their electoral funding.
My point is that we act like we own the world. America, fuck yeah! But the truth is, other people own us. They've got us by the balls, and anytime they want, they just have to squeeze and it's the end of the line for us. We can't manufacture most of the goods and services we depend on. The only thing we have in abundance is fresh water, farmable land, and a lot of nuclear missiles. Everything else is decaying. It's been outsourced. There's a few hundred thousand in this country that are rich, and the rest of us are, or soon will be, dirt poor. We're dependant on the 3rd world to provide everything, they're starting to realize they have everything. It's just a matter of time until they can (and will) take the lead and do away with our exploitations.
Intellectual property is the (failed) attempt to delay this fate of ours... but they saw through it. They're ignoring it. And although we can destroy the world a hundred times over with our military... they are still saying no. And rather than using this antebellum moment to prepare, to maybe even reverse our fate... we're letting those select few rich people ride headlong into our own destruction. And we put them on the cover of Fortune magazine and call them heroes even as they destroy it all.
Years from now, America will be nothing but a lighthouse, telling other countries where not to sail if they want to avoid a ruinous fate.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
A brilliant strategy which has no obvious downsides.... except for reduced levels of employment which you are going to need to support through a benefits system or risk increasing social instability and crime.
Re: (Score:2)
Numbers may be misleading, just like that infamous "average national income". You know anyone who makes that magical number of dinero? No? But you know a lot of people who make less, right? Simple reason: If 10 people each earn 1000 a month and one earns 100.000, the average is still 10.000. Now, isn't an average income of 10.000 just great? How can this country have poverty if its people earn that load of money? Hell, I could easily support a family of 5 on 10 grand a month, couldn't you? Where is the prob
Re: (Score:2)
Who would that be, and how are they going to do it without destroying their own economy?
Well, setting aside the fact that you can't manufacture services (one of the many logical errors you make), you confuse "don't" with "can't".
Re: (Score:2)
I think the "can't" in his sentence is a matter of economic ability, not so much one of technical. It is an economic impossibility to manufacture a good sensibly domestic if it is cheaper to get from abroad. You will not sell it. Worse, nobody will be able to buy it.
I can only offer you an example from my country, not knowing how it worked in the US, but here, in the 70s, a TV could easily cost you the equivalent of 2 months income. And we're not talking about some kind of fancy 100" bleeding-edge technolog
Re:Sovereignty (Score:5, Interesting)
Sorry to burst your ideology, but pretty much all your facts are wrong.
>>There's a few hundred thousand in this country that are rich, and the rest of us are, or soon will be, dirt poor.
The US has the most millionaires of any country in the world, with 3M (about 1 out of 100 Americans is a millionaire!): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millionaire#Number_of_millionaires_by_country [wikipedia.org]
The real median household income rose steadily from 1947 to the present day (not counting the current recession): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:United_States_Income_Distribution_1947-2007.svg [wikipedia.org]
This includes all levels of income earners in America.
>>We can't manufacture most of the goods and services we depend on.
Manufacturing is doing fine: http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2011/08/us-industrial-production-resumes-growth.html [blogspot.com]
>>It's just a matter of time until they can (and will) take the lead and do away with our exploitations.
If China stops exporting to us, there will be a disruption of our market as we shift production around. But China's economy would be destroyed.
Re: (Score:2)
People tend to forget that we are an agricultural superpower. It must be all that cheap dirt everyone likes to eat. The fact that we are an agricultural superpower is not a bad thing. You've got to be able to feed yourself first. Everything on Maslow's heirarchy of needs has to take a back seat if you can't even feed yourself.
It's also not true that we don't have our own resources to handle the rest. Quite often it's just cheaper or simpler to let somene else run the sweat shop factories or scar the earth.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends. How much does the Chink pay in campaign contribution?
Re: (Score:2)
The bin Ladin family does not operate gas stations, they operate a construction and holding conglomerate [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
So ... Ozzi just tried to get into the family business by starting a demolition enterprise and we just got it all wrong?
Ya know, cultural differences and such...
Economic interests of the United States (Score:5, Insightful)
Haha. Whoever said that the economic interests of the copyright cartel were the same as that of either:
1) the US government (I'm not talking about the Obama or Bush campaigns when they inhabit the White House). The copyright cartel is pushing the US into forcing other governments to do stuff they don't want to do, leading to blowback, leading to anti-Americanism. Hollywood films already routinely make more abroad than domestically, and it'll only increase as the world gets richer. What's the problem?
2) the United States (i.e., the States, united). State and local governments are the ones who have the most to gain from a freer copyright regime. They're usually strapped for money.
3) people (RIAA lawyers are not counted among these). IP is strangulating innovation and increasing prices. What's the upside? Avatar wouldn't have been made if copyright expired before James Cameron's death?
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't seen Avatar, but I have to watch it now. By that description, it has to be at least twice the hoot that Plan 9 was.
Re: (Score:3)
even Matrix 3 is better
You lost all credibility right there.
My right to opinion.
The elaborate my POV: both of them have childish story lines, to the point in which I can remember none of them after a while (other than: some oppressed population decides to fight back with the help of the powers of some "comics-like heroes"). But... Matrix 3 was pure 2D... less headaches for me after I wasted the time watching it, thus a slightly more enjoyable experience.
Re:Economic interests of the United States (Score:4, Funny)
In SPAAAACE!
Re: (Score:2)
even Matrix 3 is better
You lost all credibility right there.
Exactly. Everyone knows there was only one Matrix movie ever made.
Just. One. Movie. Made.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you nuts? How the heck am I supposed to bribe 200 million people?
ugly american agents... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No doubt when these extortion and espionage agents start to disappear or become "accident prone," the US will declare it a casus belli for more foreign adventures. Foreign nationalism and impatience should not be underestimated with this type of invasion.
Sustaining a war in two third-world countries (Iraq and Afghanistan) for 10+ years and running out of money... and you still think "invasion" is a viable solution for US? I mean... the so-called IP is almost the last merchandise US may have chances to export to cover the deficit... and this not for very long.
Re: (Score:2)
Erh... rethink that.
Trying to enforce copyright in countries you could have a "war" with (with "war", n: Where we dump a ton of weapons without having to fear too much of a problem because the enemy has some bb guns at best) is pointless, because countries that have no money to defend themselves are usually also countries where the population doesn't have money to buy content.
And waging war against China, Russia or the EU... uh... you might want to reconsider that. Not so much that you might lose it, but it
Follow The Money (Score:4, Informative)
Idiots won't give up (Score:5, Insightful)
ACTA->CETA->
SOPA->IPAA->
They'll keep renaming it until people stop paying attention long enough for it to pass. They've still got almost 17576 four-letter acronyms ending on -A that they haven't used yet.
(All this keeping in mind that they already pushed the DMCA through.)
Lamar... (Score:2)
Lamar smith needs a very hard kick in the pants just prior to being thrown out of government onto his ass in the street.
How long are we going to put up with his shit?
Re: (Score:2)
Lamar smith needs a very hard kick in the pants just prior to being thrown out of government onto his ass in the street.
How long are we going to put up with his shit?
Wanna bet? I say: longer than Lamar is goin' to get his pants kicked... what do you think?
Re:Lamar... (Score:5, Insightful)
It won't matter. Kick Lamar out of Congress this year and he'll be back next year as a lobbyist for the MAFIAA. Just like Chris Dodd and countless other members of the Revolving Door Club.
Re: (Score:2)
Ask the Texans.
Then again, I don't know who he ran against. Maybe the other one was even worse?
Re: (Score:2)
The other man was probably a Democrat.
So the Republican gets to be the biggest dirtbag he can just because he knows the demographics of his district allows for it.
Its funny. (Score:2, Interesting)
Sad. They put more effort into styming our nation, then they do into solving unemployment, high deficits, and our on-going illegal issue (though they will no doubt introduce HR-2885 in the next couple of months; an e-verify bill that is so bad (basically, little penalties on the
Re: (Score:2)
He has only got to get one though, then he does not care if he gets kicked out.
They will give him a job for a stupidly high salary somewhere and then get someone else to get the next one though.
Is this his last chance before elections?
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't neocons, it's neoliberals who sometimes overlap with neocons. Neoliberals like Clinton who signed DMCA and Obama who voted yes on telecom immunity. Ironically it is the Democrats who often push for greater abuses of government power over communications media, and then the Republicans who merely consolidate that power with some new legal fiction about how it helps promote American prosperity. Rinse and repeat every decade.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
HOWEVER, it is the neo-cons that continue to bring it up in different fashions. And it is fuck heads ACs like you that are worthless and serve to retard all down to your level
Re: (Score:2)
He uses the term neo-con a lot:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2957783&cid=40547637 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2957783&cid=40547125 [slashdot.org]
But states he's a libertarian - so he can't be all bad. Although he does defend Obama - make of that what you will.
What's good for Disney is good for... (Score:2)
when do we start talking about (Score:2)
intellectual property free products?
like hormone free milk or pesticide free fruit?
Vote Him Out (Score:5, Informative)
Lamar Smith's Democratic opponent in the 21st Congressional District of Texas is Candace Duval (http://www.candaceduval.com/). I'm sure donations are welcome.
when is this guy running for office again? (Score:3)
How To Explain This Bill To Your Right-Wing Inlaws (Score:3)
"Didya hear about Lamar Smith's bill to create another Obama-appointed czar?"
Re: (Score:2)
If only it was uncontrolled, or at least unintentional. One could hope that there would be an end at some point.
Re: (Score:2)
Why stuff your puppet in your pocket?
Sounds kinky, but then ... have you taken a look at the guy?
Re:FUCK YOU AMERICA (Score:5, Insightful)
The US are already seen as some kind of "international schoolyard bully". He goes around and he wants your lunch money, and if you don't give it to him on his terms, he comes and beats you up. There are of course some kids that suck up to him to, partly to be safe from his fists, partly because they hope that he'll drop some crumbs for them. And of course there are those that dare to stand up against him and get beaten to a pulp, either directly or, if the bully can somehow manage to have a teacher, in the form of the UN, see how someone dares to strike back, even with the blessing of the teacher, to show that no good punk kid that there are some rules.
The problem with such bullying is that there is always the chance that some other kid comes along who is in some way tougher, who can actually stand up to the bully and beat HIM down into a pulp. Then the bully usually get to notice how his "friends" suddenly turn around and don't know him anymore, worse, they may even help that other guy, either to just get that bully out of their way or because they think they'll be better off with him. Bullies don't have friends. They have sycophants. And they'll suck up to whoever is the biggest.
I'd be wary to cheer for the new guy that beats the bully up, though. Rarely, he's any better.
Also, murdering US people is not going to help here. These poor people don't have a choice, you know? Their political system is rigged so only people who accept the absolute corporate rule have a chance to be elected. It's a bit like in the Muslim countries where people who want to be elected have to accept that laws have to be in sync with Muslim laws, but it's more insidious. It's not stated outright, but it's implied. You don't support corporate rule, you don't get campaign money. Without campaign money, no chance for you to be elected.
If anything, you should attack the system, but attacking the people who can't do much to change it isn't going to help. Quite the opposite, they might see you as their enemy and put their support behind their crooked system.