“Money is not speech. All these decisions Citizens United, McCutcheon) have done is to make sure that congress does not represent people, which is what it is supposed to do. Rather, Congress represents people who have the money to finance campaigns”. Former Justice of the Supreme Court, John Stevens)

One can argue that an army invading your country is “speech”. Or a gangster with a loaded gun, demanding your wallet, is “speech”, but it is not common sense to do so. What follows from the sloppy thinking of the justices of the US Supreme Court is a form of anything-goes anarchy. This destructive development turns people off politics and hands the real power to the super-rich.

What the good ‘ole boys were doing was to make it up on the hoof, probably prompted by some so-called “think”-tank. Tank “thinkers” please read and comment! Explain where this idea of money as speech is mentioned in the Constitution, quoting page and paragraph. (Nobody will, because the ability to buy elections is not mentioned as a form of speech in the US Constitution). Democracy, rest in peace and farewell.

At the very best it is anti-democratic and is perceived as party political. Epicurus would dismiss the Supreme Court as just another bunch of political appointees, undermining the Constitution they purport to uphold, and would have retired into his garden to smell the roses.