I like Charlie Stross essays, and I'm glad this one was submitted here, but when Stross writes,

"The range of choices available at the democratic buffet table have therefore narrowed until they're indistinguishable. ("You can have Chicken Kiev, Chicken Chasseur, or Chicken Korma." "But I'm vegan!") Indeed, we have about as much choice as citizens in any one-party state used to have,"

then I have to say no. Evidently Stross has no lengthy experience in living in a one-party state. I do. The range of choice for voters in the United Kingdom, and especially the range of channels for dissent there or here in the United States, far exceed the range of choice available to citizens in a one-party state. Been there, done that. (The one-party state I lived in during the early 1980s, Taiwan, still had rigid mass media censorship and political assassinations both at home and abroad, but even at that was rather benign compared to many current one-party states. Taiwan has transitioned to democracy. Throughout Stross's lifetime and mine, the U.K. and the U.S.A. have offered far more political choice to citizens than has any one-party state anywhere in the world.)

Stross is a science-fiction author by occupation, and maybe the next stage of his self-education for spicing up his science fiction stories is to learn more about political science, especially public choice theory.

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/PublicChoice.html

http://www.gmu.edu/centers/publicchoice/pdf%20links/Booklet....

http://perspicuity.net/sd/pub-choice.html

http://pileusblog.wordpress.com/2012/01/30/the-left-and-publ...

Stross's point is quite correct that people developing their careers in politics look for channels to increase their influence on the system, whatever their ideological proclivities. That is human nature--why work hard in political activism to NOT end up with influence? But the counsel of despair in the interesting article kindly submitted here is an exaggeration. There is still diversity of point of view in the system, and plenty of opportunity for activists to make meaningful changes, including the example he gives: "Marriage equality is a fundamentally socially conservative issue, but reflects the long-term reduction in prejudice against non-heteronormative groups." Choices still abound. Advocate for those that you desire.