pulaskiwasright @ pulaskiwasright @lemmy.ml

Posts

0

Comments

449

Joined

2 yr. ago

I think the current climate of digging up anything someone has ever done or said that is against the current accepted morality and punishing them for it severely makes a lot of people not want to stick out their neck. This probably isn’t an accident.

You realize this wasn’t meat eaters but cheese makers, right?

This article is complete trash who’s upvoting this garbage?

What isn’t covered by HIPPA?

But the alternatives that people are proposing leaves people with no representation at all. You can’t have representation when you aren’t even allowed to discuss ideas that the government already disagrees with.

Bu what metric does that system work though? It’s hard to judge it because the info is all unreliable and the government doesn’t share data. We don’t know how bad or good wealth inequality is there.

It doesn’t define how leaders are chosen or how laws are enacted. It can’t be a system of government. Unless you have selected a specific implementation of government that uses it and are conflating the term with that government system. If that’s the case, then I agree that arguing over the definition is pointless. So what implementation or design do you think is better.

It’s it though. It’s a principle applied to Chinese communism. It’s not a required part of communism and it isn’t form of government on its own. It’s not even the most major part of a government system.

That could be a nice improvement to the US’s representative democracy also. The nice thing about ranked choice voting is that it forces people to have more than one choice. People may only approve of exactly their favorite choice.

Name one. One actually concrete form of democracy that would work better.

You’re talking about an implementation of representative democracy and you’re not offering any concrete alternative. So I refer you to my first comment where I said that representative democracy is bad, but still better than the others.

What definition of proletarian democracy? It’s not well defined and means vastly different things to different people.

Worse than what form of democracy exactly?

That’s not a political system at all. It’s a process that could be implemented in many styles of government. It is not incompatible with representative democracy either. It is a bad idea though. It means that a government has a hard time changing course, even when it needs to. Because it silences people from questioning decisions.

That’s not a political system at all. It’s a process that could be implemented in many styles of government. It is not incompatible with representative democracy either. It is a bad idea though. It means that a government has a hard time changing course, even when it needs to. Because it silences people from questioning decisions.

One problem in the US is that the purpose of the House of Representatives has been completely subverted. It was supposed to scale up with the population so the representatives really would be part of the community they represent. But we stopped increasing the number of representatives and that lets the ruling elite control them better. The representatives no longer come from their community and the wealthy have less candidates they have to prop up. And the lower count means that gerrymandering is far more effective.

What’s better?

It’s still the best way even if it’s bad. Ranked choice voting would make it better.

It’s not easy. And league is free. So banning people won’t work well either. They can’t ban ip addresses either without banning college campuses, some apartment buildings, and Internet cafes.

If you saw us get overthrown by a dictator, as Trump attempted to do, you’d see the difference between a flawed democracy and no democracy at all.