Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #40 on: December 08, 2021, 04:27:36 PM »
Why would understanding of a political party's policies be a deciding factor anyway? We're ostensibly supposed to be voting for the individual candidate whose goals most closely align with our own
So that's interesting.
Because in theory in the UK you're right, you don't vote for the PM or the party, you vote for a local MP who is supposed to represent your interests.
But...in practice, the local MPs represent a party in almost all cases. And that party has a leader who will be the PM if their party wins the election.
So it's basically impossible to separate the individual you vote for from the party they represent and the PM you'll end up with.
So having some idea of what those parties stand for might be a good idea.
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

*

Offline Dr David Thork

  • *
  • Posts: 5027
  • https://onlyfans.com/thork
    • View Profile
Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #41 on: December 08, 2021, 04:37:48 PM »
The point of democracy is that no one stays in power for too long. No other system works like that. Monarchy lasts a life time. Communism always gives you a dictator etc.

Democracy accepts that the person running the country is a self serving asshat ... but will also ensure that they won't be in power for too long. No one can get to good a grip on power before someone else knocks them off their perch. Even if it is someone in their own party. Russia have had Putin for over 20 years. That just isn't possible with democracy and that is why it is the best system. Not because you let imbeciles vote, but because there will always be a change at the top before anyone can become a proper tyrant.

So we have a system that more or less works. Now you have to get everyone to agree to it. And you do that by letting them have a say. No matter how dumb the say because it doesn't matter ... all the parties are shit. There are no good parties to choose from. This isn't a fluke. It doesn't matter who you vote for, you still have the same civil service and legal people. So nothing really changes and no one is in power long enough to change it.

But if you tell people "You failed a test, you didn't get a say" when they wanted one ... well then they will burn things until you have a change of heart.
Rate this post.      👍 6     👎 1

*

Online xasop

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8400
  • Professional computer somebody
    • View Profile
Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #42 on: December 08, 2021, 04:43:38 PM »
Russia have had Putin for over 20 years. That just isn't possible with democracy and that is why it is the best system.
What the hell are you on about? There are plenty of democracies around the world with long-serving leaders. Lukashenko has been President of Belarus for nearly 30 years, Orbán has been Prime Minister of Hungary for over a decade and his popularity is showing no sign of waning, and in South Africa the same party has been in charge (albeit with changes of leadership) since 1994. Even in your own country, the longest-serving Prime Minister lasted 20 years.
when you try to mock anyone while also running the flat earth society. Lol

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 9039
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #43 on: December 08, 2021, 04:46:48 PM »
Russia have had Putin for over 20 years. That just isn't possible with democracy and that is why it is the best system.
What the hell are you on about? There are plenty of democracies around the world with long-serving leaders. Lukashenko has been President of Belarus for nearly 30 years

Imagine thinking Belarus is a functioning democracy.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

*

Online xasop

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8400
  • Professional computer somebody
    • View Profile
Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #44 on: December 08, 2021, 04:50:27 PM »
Imagine thinking Belarus is a functioning democracy.
It isn't now, but it was when Lukashenko gained power. If it weren't possible for someone to become a tyrant under democracy, then he'd be long gone.
when you try to mock anyone while also running the flat earth society. Lol

*

Offline Dr David Thork

  • *
  • Posts: 5027
  • https://onlyfans.com/thork
    • View Profile
Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #45 on: December 08, 2021, 05:17:20 PM »
Even in your own country, the longest-serving Prime Minister lasted 20 years.
???

Britain wasn't a democracy 300 years ago. We didn't have a democracy until the reform act in 1832. Less than 3% of people could vote when Warpole was in power. We don't become a fully fledged democracy until 1918 when women get the vote.

Imagine thinking Belarus is a functioning democracy.
It isn't now, but it was when Lukashenko gained power.
What the actual fuck are you talking about? Belarus gained its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. They create the office of President (read dictator) in 1994 and Lukashenko becomes the first and only President they have ever had.

Quote from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Belarus
Lukashenko heads an authoritarian government and has often been referred to by media outlets as "Europe's last dictator".[1] Elections are not considered to be free and fair by international monitors, opponents of the regime are repressed, and the media is not free.[2][3]
^That is not a democracy. That is the exact thing a democracy is pretty good at preventing.
Rate this post.      👍 6     👎 1

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 6621
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #46 on: December 08, 2021, 05:24:48 PM »
The point of democracy is that no one stays in power for too long. No other system works like that. Monarchy lasts a life time. Communism always gives you a dictator etc.

Democracy accepts that the person running the country is a self serving asshat ... but will also ensure that they won't be in power for too long. No one can get to good a grip on power before someone else knocks them off their perch. Even if it is someone in their own party. Russia have had Putin for over 20 years. That just isn't possible with democracy and that is why it is the best system. Not because you let imbeciles vote, but because there will always be a change at the top before anyone can become a proper tyrant.

So we have a system that more or less works. Now you have to get everyone to agree to it. And you do that by letting them have a say. No matter how dumb the say because it doesn't matter ... all the parties are shit. There are no good parties to choose from. This isn't a fluke. It doesn't matter who you vote for, you still have the same civil service and legal people. So nothing really changes and no one is in power long enough to change it.

But if you tell people "You failed a test, you didn't get a say" when they wanted one ... well then they will burn things until you have a change of heart.

This is probably one of the best explinations of Democracy.

The issue America has is twofold.

1. There's only two parites.  So itsiterally "this party or its exact opposite." There isn't a realistic middle ground or alternative.

2. The president has term.limits.  no one else does.  So a senator, who has alot of power, can be in power for decades without issue.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #47 on: December 08, 2021, 05:31:03 PM »
That is the exact thing a democracy is pretty good at preventing.
Why do you think it would be less good at preventing it if there was a simple (emphasis on that word) test to ensure that you have some clue what you're voting for.
Why can't under 18s vote? They can do other things like drive and (at the moment) get married.
There's already a principle that people need to have a certain maturity before they can vote, is it such a leap to extend that to making sure they have a vague understanding of what they're voting for?
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

*

Offline Dr David Thork

  • *
  • Posts: 5027
  • https://onlyfans.com/thork
    • View Profile
Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #48 on: December 08, 2021, 05:38:23 PM »
That is the exact thing a democracy is pretty good at preventing.
Why do you think it would be less good at preventing it if there was a simple (emphasis on that word) test to ensure that you have some clue what you're voting for.
I don't know what you think a test would achieve? People will grow weary of Boris Johnson and eventually vote him out. They don't need a test on the lies he put in his manifesto to do that.

Why can't under 18s vote?
It is a good question. There should be no taxation without representation. Personally I think 18 y/os shouldn't be able to vote, but that they should also be tax exempt as well should they choose to work.

There's already a principle that people need to have a certain maturity before they can vote, is it such a leap to extend that to making sure they have a vague understanding of what they're voting for?
No. Again, it isn't important that people know what they are voting for. They aren't really voting for anything. Let us suppose Russia invades Ukraine. Whether we go to war or not is not going to be down to whether we have a Labour or Conservative government in power. Our response will be the exact same. The civil service and military advisors ... fiercely corralled by lobbyists and investors, will determine a course of action that leads to the greatest wealth opportunity for those investors. It is that simple. It doesn't matter what you think you voted for. You are not important. All that matters is that you shut up and stop burning important things that are owned by rich people. If giving you a vote for a puppet achieves that ... so be it.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2021, 05:39:59 PM by Dr David Thork »
Rate this post.      👍 6     👎 1

*

Online xasop

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8400
  • Professional computer somebody
    • View Profile
Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #49 on: December 08, 2021, 06:25:26 PM »
Britain wasn't a democracy 300 years ago. We didn't have a democracy until the reform act in 1832. Less than 3% of people could vote when Warpole was in power. We don't become a fully fledged democracy until 1918 when women get the vote.
No, that's not how this works. Our standards for democracy in the West have changed over the years, mostly for the better, but you don't get to pick an arbitrary point in time at which 40% of women were granted the right to vote and claim a sudden transition from not-democracy to democracy.

Quote from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Belarus
Lukashenko heads an authoritarian government and has often been referred to by media outlets as "Europe's last dictator".[1] Elections are not considered to be free and fair by international monitors, opponents of the regime are repressed, and the media is not free.[2][3]
^That is not a democracy. That is the exact thing a democracy is pretty good at preventing.
It isn't now, but it was when Lukashenko gained power. If it weren't possible for someone to become a tyrant under democracy, then he'd be long gone.
when you try to mock anyone while also running the flat earth society. Lol

*

Offline Dr David Thork

  • *
  • Posts: 5027
  • https://onlyfans.com/thork
    • View Profile
Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #50 on: December 08, 2021, 06:52:39 PM »
you don't get to pick an arbitrary point in time at which 40% of women were granted the right to vote and claim a sudden transition from not-democracy to democracy.
I'm not picking an arbitrary point in time. Historians are picking a point in time and telling you ... 'this is when Britain became democratic'.

We were not democratic in the 1700's.
Quote from: https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/houseofcommons/reformacts/
For centuries, Parliament consisted of a small landowning elite whose priorities were their own power and prosperity.

From the 18th century onwards, the social changes brought about by industrial growth and the decline of agriculture meant that the demographic landscape of Britain was altered.

With these changes came demands from the working and middle classes for equality and fairness. It took many years for a more representative Parliament to be achieved.
A small landowning elite is not a democracy. It is a plutocracy. We need the great reform act before we can even begin to consider ourselves a democracy. But we also need the Second reform act (suffrage) and the third (women's emancipation) before we can consider ourselves a modern democracy. Be we absolutely were not by any definition a democracy when Warpole was Prime Minister.

Quote from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Belarus
Lukashenko heads an authoritarian government and has often been referred to by media outlets as "Europe's last dictator".[1] Elections are not considered to be free and fair by international monitors, opponents of the regime are repressed, and the media is not free.[2][3]
^That is not a democracy. That is the exact thing a democracy is pretty good at preventing.
It isn't now, but it was when Lukashenko gained power. If it weren't possible for someone to become a tyrant under democracy, then he'd be long gone.
Really? Belarus being a functioning democracy is a hill that you are willing to die on? Again, When Lukashenko gained power, he was installed as the first President after the fall of the Soviet Union. Belarus has never had a free and fair election in its sovereign history.
Rate this post.      👍 6     👎 1

*

Online xasop

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8400
  • Professional computer somebody
    • View Profile
Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #51 on: December 08, 2021, 07:11:28 PM »
I'm not picking an arbitrary point in time. Historians are picking a point in time and telling you ... 'this is when Britain became democratic'.
Can you find me a single historian saying that Britain became a democracy in 1918?

A small landowning elite is not a democracy. It is a plutocracy.
What difference does it make whether you have a million people or 67 million people voting, in terms of the likelihood of one person staying in power for a long time?

Be we absolutely were not by any definition a democracy when Warpole was Prime Minister.
No, that's not correct. The word "democracy" comes from Greek δημοκρᾰτῐ́ᾱ, which was used over 2000 years ago to describe a system in which women, slaves and foreigners could not vote. What you mean is that you were not a democracy by modern standards, standards which did not exist in that time.

But even if we accept your deeply flawed position, the longest-serving Prime Minister after the 1832 Reform Act had a tenure of nearly 14 years. Not quite 20, but not far off either.

Really? Belarus being a functioning democracy is a hill that you are willing to die on?
No. Read what I said.

Again, When Lukashenko gained power, he was installed as the first President after the fall of the Soviet Union. Belarus has never had a free and fair election in its sovereign history.
Wrong again.
The election in 1994 that brought Alyaksandr Lukashenka to power in Belarus was arguably the first and last election in the former Soviet republic that met some Western norms. In fact, a U.S. commission hailed it as a “first step toward more pluralistic democracy and a free market system.”
when you try to mock anyone while also running the flat earth society. Lol

*

Offline Dr David Thork

  • *
  • Posts: 5027
  • https://onlyfans.com/thork
    • View Profile
Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #52 on: December 08, 2021, 08:19:57 PM »
I'm not picking an arbitrary point in time. Historians are picking a point in time and telling you ... 'this is when Britain became democratic'.
Can you find me a single historian saying that Britain became a democracy in 1918?
They are telling you that Britain definitely wasn't a democracy when Warpole was Prime Minister. Pick the bones out of that.

A small landowning elite is not a democracy. It is a plutocracy.
What difference does it make whether you have a million people or 67 million people voting, in terms of the likelihood of one person staying in power for a long time?
Well, a small group of people with the same interests (wealthy landowners) are aligned on most policies and would look for unending stability. An entire country is full of people with different needs. Winners and losers. And those losers will demand a change when there are enough of them.

Be we absolutely were not by any definition a democracy when Warpole was Prime Minister.
No, that's not correct. The word "democracy" comes from Greek δημοκρᾰτῐ́ᾱ, which was used over 2000 years ago to describe a system in which women, slaves and foreigners could not vote. What you mean is that you were not a democracy by modern standards, standards which did not exist in that time.
We didn't even have public elections when Warpole was appointed Prime Minster BY THE KING (George I).

But even if we accept your deeply flawed position, the longest-serving Prime Minister after the 1832 Reform Act had a tenure of nearly 14 years. Not quite 20, but not far off either.
14 years and done. There is no end in sight for Putin. Its not the same thing at all.

Really? Belarus being a functioning democracy is a hill that you are willing to die on?
No. Read what I said.
I read it. You are wrong.

Again, When Lukashenko gained power, he was installed as the first President after the fall of the Soviet Union. Belarus has never had a free and fair election in its sovereign history.
Wrong again.
The election in 1994 that brought Alyaksandr Lukashenka to power in Belarus was arguably the first and last election in the former Soviet republic that met some Western norms. In fact, a U.S. commission hailed it as a “first step toward more pluralistic democracy and a free market system.”
Yeah, nah.
Rate this post.      👍 6     👎 1

*

Online xasop

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8400
  • Professional computer somebody
    • View Profile
Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #53 on: December 09, 2021, 09:00:49 AM »
We didn't even have public elections when Warpole was appointed Prime Minster BY THE KING (George I).
Who do you think appointed Boris Johnson PM, genius?

Yeah, nah.
Wow, what a brilliant refutation.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2021, 09:07:01 AM by xasop »
when you try to mock anyone while also running the flat earth society. Lol

*

Offline Dr David Thork

  • *
  • Posts: 5027
  • https://onlyfans.com/thork
    • View Profile
Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #54 on: December 09, 2021, 09:03:46 AM »
Yeah, nah.
Wow, what a brilliant refutation.

You: Belarus was a credible democracy.
Me: No it wasn't, here is why.
You: Belarus was a credible democracy.
Me: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Rate this post.      👍 6     👎 1

*

Online xasop

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8400
  • Professional computer somebody
    • View Profile
Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #55 on: December 09, 2021, 09:08:59 AM »
You: Belarus was a credible democracy.
Me: No it wasn't, here is why.
You: Belarus was a credible democracy.
Me: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
You didn't provide any "here is why". Perhaps you'd like to try addressing the source I provided if you want to change that.
when you try to mock anyone while also running the flat earth society. Lol

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 14035
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #56 on: December 09, 2021, 09:21:32 AM »
I say it's objective because there are certain traits which one would fairly reasonably associate with being a good leader.
I know what you're saying. Really, I do. However, it is my opinion that you've fallen into the trap of mistaking things that are eminently reasonable to you for things that hold universally. There are people out there who hold the opposite views to you, and they're not a small fringe, either. To some, for example, personality is more important than policy, because leaders also perform a representative role. It's one of the things that gave Reagan an edge.

So, no, it's not objective, regardless of how obvious it seems to you and me.

Well. I don't think there are many objectively good or bad policies.
That's why I slapped it in between quotation marks. It's as "objective" as your view on who makes a better leader. In other words, not at all.

Without wishing to go all Godwin's Law, I don't think there's any party extreme enough to have "exterminate the Jews" as a policy
Maybe not today (and even then, I'm not sure that's the case), but you're proposing a replacement for democracy. It's only been 100 years since NSDAP's rise to power. Maybe it won't be anti-semitism next time, but terrible views gain prominence all the time.

Finally, c'mon. Work with me at least a tiny bit. I asked you to pick a terrible view and imagine people are voting for it. Decide for yourself what the worst possible outcome is. If you just say "no", we can't really look at how robust your proposal is.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice

Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #57 on: December 09, 2021, 11:11:40 AM »
I'm not picking an arbitrary point in time. Historians are picking a point in time and telling you ... 'this is when Britain became democratic'.
Can you find me a single historian saying that Britain became a democracy in 1918?
Dude, come on.
Obviously Thork is wrong about basically everything, but not on this occasion.
You are stretching the word "democracy" to breaking point if you're going to claim that a country where half the adult population had no right to vote was a democracy. Even if it does fit the dictionary definition of the word (and it does) in common understanding pretty much everyone would expect a democracy to mean that everyone gets a vote. There are some limits on that of course, I think it's sensible that kids under x years old don't get a vote - you can debate what x is. And there are a few other exceptions. But eyebrows would be raised if there was a country which called itself a democracy where women couldn't vote, or black people couldn't.
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

*

Online xasop

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8400
  • Professional computer somebody
    • View Profile
Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #58 on: December 09, 2021, 11:45:40 AM »
You are stretching the word "democracy" to breaking point if you're going to claim that a country where half the adult population had no right to vote was a democracy.
You mean like the UK after 1918?
when you try to mock anyone while also running the flat earth society. Lol

Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« Reply #59 on: December 09, 2021, 11:59:53 AM »
You are stretching the word "democracy" to breaking point if you're going to claim that a country where half the adult population had no right to vote was a democracy.
You mean like the UK after 1918?
Possibly. Had a quick look and it looks like it wasn't till 1969 when the vote was extended to all men and women over 18. Gosh.
But anyway, the point remains that you started this by claiming we were a democracy a couple of hundred years ago when almost no-one had a vote. Come on dude, there are better ways to score internet points against Thork.
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis