How did things get this bad? Polarization, dysfunction and the collapse of

Okay, not to be snarky at all, but sincerely ask, did any of you read the article in the OP? It made the points that some of you have discussed that lobbyists, pork projects, rigging elections, etc is nothing new - it's been around our entire history. The difference is, "what's different about this time in history?" And the author put forth a very compelling argument for what the simple breakdown is. My question is: Do you agree, and if so, how does it get fixed?

HEARTLESS wrote: When society doesn't believe in God or some type of afterlife, the thought is what you said because there are no consequences.

Heartless, I disagree that one must believe in an afterlife in order to live an honorable life now (and that statement holds up in the mere fact that our jails would be filled with atheists only if that were the case and it's not. Atheists and agnostics are no more likely to commit a crime than a Christian or other religious-identifying person is). As an agnostic, I am MORE concerned with treating others with compassion and respect because the consequences are felt now, not in the next life.

Rick wrote: There was a time when we did expect our leaders to blaze a path, because we had leaders who were capable of putting country before ideology. We had leaders who didn't spend most of their time campaigning for themselves and for their party. We had leaders who did not vilify their opponents by calling them "the enemy", "terrorists", or "hostage takers". We had presidents that didn't pit the people against each other by race, gender, and economic class.

Oh hell yeah we did! Check the history books and how nasty the campaigns used to get. That's nothing new.

Rick wrote: If we can't expect, or even demand that our leaders put the country first

And I'd wager to bet you that every last congressman and woman would righteously proclaim that they "put country first". They'd argue until they are blue in the face to justify their choices and actions, votes, and pet projects about how it helps this nation. How pointing out how badly the other side is working is their duty to their constituents. There is no "demanding" people change when they have no incentive or motivation to do so otherwise. The point of the article I posted was that it provided a possible solution, whether it is one that can be implemented, and what the cons of it would be, are up for discussion.