Nameless Voice on 23/11/2020 at 18:04
I say that it's a false equivalence to equate the specific form of representative "democracy" in the USA, with all of its flaws, with the concept of democracy in general.
Most democratic systems, as implemented, are problematic, with the model in the USA (electoral college, FPTP, state senate, etc.) being especially bad. That doesn't meant that the concept itself - of countries making decisions based on the voting of their people - is flawed, it just means that all the current implementations are flawed.
A lot of those flaws are intentional, of course - written into the systems during their inception by the people who were in power and wanted the new systems to let them stay in power.
heywood on 24/11/2020 at 18:31
Direct democracy is only feasible on the small scale. Either small in terms of the number of stakeholders and decision makers, or small in terms of the number of decisions to be made. Examples such as town halls and ballot initiatives. Democracy on a bigger scale requires representation. We can argue the pros and cons of different forms of representation. Some allocate power in different ways. Some require a greater degree of consensus than others. Et cetera. But no matter what democratic system you have, there will always be people who condemn it because it doesn't produce the outcomes they want.
In any group decision, there's usually a losing side. And some stakeholders on the losing side will always blame the process, and try to change the process so that they can win. But changing the process itself requires a group decision, and your representatives aren't always going to agree. So you can replace them, or you can try to change the process via ballot initiative, but then you have to convince the voters. In Massachusetts, there was an initiative on the ballot this year to adopt ranked choice voting. It was supported by state party leaders, it had a well funded campaign behind it, and no real opposing campaign, but the voters rejected it. In Missouri, voters passed an anti-gerrymandering ballot initiative in 2018, and then passed another ballot initiative repealing it this year. The difference was that turnout was in favor of Democrats in 2018, but in favor of Republicans in 2020.
That doesn't mean democracy is necessarily flawed. If you can't get enough people to agree with you, that's not a flaw of the system. A democracy doesn't mean mob rule either. The instruments through which we form governments (constitutions etc.) enumerate, apportion, and limit the powers of said governments. And people have rights.
One disturbing trend I see here in the US is partisan groups trying to get around our directly-elected representatives and change democratic processes via the courts. There's been a lot of that going on this year.
Pyrian on 24/11/2020 at 18:45
Welp, the writing on the wall has been outlined and underlined. Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin have all certified Biden's win. Georgia's re-re-count is now virtually irrelevant to the result. Even the GSA has certified Biden's win and the transition is beginning; almost 3 weeks later than they should've but still about 8 weeks earlier than I was expecting, lol.
heywood on 24/11/2020 at 19:54
I was surprised to see that even Trump tweeted support for the GSA. While still conceding nothing of course.
Pyrian on 24/11/2020 at 20:44
Yeah, me too. Good to see, though. Credit where credit is due - in this case to whoever tweeted that for Trump, 'cause he sure didn't write it himself, lol.
Emily Murphy at GSA: "I was never directly or indirectly pressured by any Executive Branch official..."
Trump: "...I am recommending that Emily and her team do what needs to be done..."
Nicker on 25/11/2020 at 03:08
I suspect that T***p is thinking, "If something happens to Sleep Joe and Phony Kamala, I will be president".
demagogue on 25/11/2020 at 06:10
I think the end game is he's going to immediately start planning his 2024 campaign on a "stabbed in the back!" platform. Constitutionally he's still eligible for a 2nd non-consecutive term. If nothing else, I imagine him doing it just to keep having campaign rallies over the next four years (assuming he's not in prison), which like all such narcissist supply is like crack for him.
SubJeff on 25/11/2020 at 10:23
He's a bit like Homelander, innit?
lowenz on 25/11/2020 at 13:14
Quote Posted by demagogue
I think the end game is he's going to immediately start planning his 2024 campaign on a "stabbed in the back!" platform. Constitutionally he's still eligible for a 2nd non-consecutive term. If nothing else, I imagine him doing it just to keep having campaign rallies over the next four years (assuming he's not in prison), which like all such narcissist supply is like crack for him.
Exactly.
And yes, of course the character of Homelander is similar but Homelander has (false, non-genuine) "high" values inoculated in him by design.
High values indeed but not learned through personal experiences - pay attention to this detail - but simply inoculated in him (and it's only the painful reality experience that can give something the status of a "real" value, not a design - but it's debatable if you're a religious person of course, 'cause everything is "by design" in a doctrinal perspective, the "right" set of values too ).
A classic narcissist has only is ego tortured by the constant need of approval.
SubJeff on 27/11/2020 at 08:34
He's still insisting there was massive fraud.
He'll go to his grave believing that.
