Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,247,685
@previous (D)
Democracy is easily manipulated. Elections are won by running meaningless ads to fence-sitters.
Combine all the votes of people who actually think about policies and critically examine candidates, it's not even significant.
The capitalist class likes democracy because it gives the illusion of consent, while selling the presidency to whoever can buy the most billboards with their face on it.
Dictatorships are not so arbitrary, and money is not the primary factor. The stronger, more intelligent men, who've fought and won end up in charge.
Corruption, anti-intellectualism, using tax coffers to buy votes, political division, and appeal to popularity define bourgoies democracies.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 29 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,247,687
@1,247,685 (E) > Dictatorships are not so arbitrary, and money is not the primary factor. The stronger, more intelligent men, who've fought and won end up in charge.
lmao
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 28 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,247,691
@1,247,686 (D)
Elected dictators also oppress people horribly.
> Why would you want to live in North Korea or Venezuela?
North Korea is a cherry picked example, and most of their problems stem from being shut off from the world because of US sanctions. The US, a democracy, likes to sanction nations that resist colonialism like NK or Cuba.
Venezuela has an elected leader: Maduro. If you don't like him, and you'd prefer someone like Juan Guiado take over, then you are siding with coups over democracy.
Anonymous D replied with this 2 years ago, 47 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,247,694
@1,247,691 (H)
Maduro is a dictator. Hitler was elected, too. That is not the point. How dictators rise to power is not the point. The point is what they do when they are in power. Trump clearly wants to be a dictator.
Anonymous E replied with this 2 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,247,695
@1,247,689 (F)
It's bait because I don't think a popularity contest, that's easily manipulated by oligarchs, isn't the ideal form of government?
Other system have flaws too, but I'd prefer the alternatives to a system that enables the 51% to oppress the 49%. Or more realistically, the 1% using a gullible 50% to oppress everyone.
How many good policy changes have consistently polled in the majority in USAmerica but never get put in law because the politicians refuse to cater to the will of the majority?
The one thing democracy is supposed to do, and it fails over and over again.
Anonymous E double-posted this 2 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,247,696
@1,247,694 (D)
So you do understand that democracy leads to tyrants.
A coupe by an organized, disciplined guard of benevolent elites would be 100x better than making someone the leader because the idiot masses voted based on appearance, accent, false promises, and targeted ad campaigns.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 2 years ago, 45 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,247,697
@1,247,689 (F)
I'm not sure. We have very many profoundly stupid people here. @1,247,693 (E)
In the last german federal election before the Nazis ran a one party state (1933) the nazis got a plurality of the vote at around 45%. If it's not even true of the Nazis you might want to tone it down a notch.
Anonymous D replied with this 2 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,247,698
@1,247,696 (E)
Any system can lead to a tyrant. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. Again, that is not my point. My point is that Trump wants to be a dictator, and Bert wants that, too.
Anonymous E double-posted this 2 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,247,701
@1,247,698 (D)
Trump, who rose to power in an electoral system? Lol
I'd rather have a vanguard that protects human rights, popular or not.
A mob of idiot, sadistic voters destroying their own futures because some psychological consultant figured out what keywords in a commercial would bring voters to the polls is not the basis for a civilized government.
Anonymous E replied with this 2 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,247,704
@previous (D)
It absolutely matters how they got there.
When people learn that giving power to people who run successful ad campaigns isn't the basis for a government we will have made a huge stride towards preventing this to begin with.
What's your solution? Ignore the conditions that create the problem, and try and remove someone after they've grabbed power?
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 2 years ago, 18 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,247,710
@1,247,700 (E)
Democracies do not lead to Nazi governments generally (hence why there has only been one Nazi government). And when the Nazis took power one of the first things they did was eliminate meaningful democracy. Which sounds a lot more like what you're advocating for. Really makes you think.
Anonymous E replied with this 2 years ago, 6 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,247,711
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU) > Democracies do not lead to Nazi governments generally (hence why there has only been one Nazi government)
You can say that about any government formed in a non-democratic way.
There was only one Maoist government, only one Myanmar Junta.
Naziism, under new names (DNC) still exist, in slightly altered forms.
> And when the Nazis took power one of the first things they did was eliminate meaningful democracy.
Democracy sows the seeds of its own destruction, correct.
I'd rather a vanguard install a beneficial government, rather than have a TV personality get elected and install whatever is beneficial to their particular ideology.
Anonymous E replied with this 2 years ago, 1 hour later, 4 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,247,723
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
You are correct, naively swallowing whatever your bourgoies millionaire physician tells you WOULD make one stop caring about political justice and does quiet the voice that questions the fundamental assumptions our culture instills in us.
Recognizing problems in the world means using our brain. Serotonin is critical in that, and SSRIs disrupt the natural ability for people to recognize threats.
Anonymous D replied with this 2 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#1,247,882
@1,247,854 (A)
Quoting things is not evidence of anything. Trump is not strong. He's a whiny bitch who constantly complains, weighs over 300 pounds, cannot walk a single block, and cowers before Putin and Kim. I do not understand how anyone thinks he is strong.