The problems with democracy and alternatives

Quick clarification... “Empires” can be democratic to their citizens. I should have said I disagree with democracy and prefer autocratic rule, for the most part. That or just full anarchy.

Phoenix Vidensia wrote:

Gisteron wrote: I'm sure you have something interesting/productive to contribute. What's stopping you?

Interesting? Maybe. Productive? No. Useful? Not at all. Why do I not participate in this circle jerk? Waste of time.

As you can see, I didn't ask why you wouldn't participate in the discussion. But even if I had, is this a sincere response? Whether you find it a waste of time or not, you do take some of your time for the wasting to snark on about how ridiculous the rest of us are being, so clearly a shortage of spare time is not a problem you have. What I did ask was, if you are going to waste your time one way or another, why not in any way that would contribute something worth reading to the thread in place of the non-childish finger pointing at all the childish folks.

Granted, I'm not exactly one to talk with all the lack of useful contributions I have made to this thread in particular thus far...

Gisteron wrote:

Phoenix Vidensia wrote:

Gisteron wrote: I'm sure you have something interesting/productive to contribute. What's stopping you?

Interesting? Maybe. Productive? No. Useful? Not at all. Why do I not participate in this circle jerk? Waste of time.

As you can see, I didn't ask why you wouldn't participate in the discussion. But even if I had, is this a sincere response? Whether you find it a waste of time or not, you do take some of your time for the wasting to snark on about how ridiculous the rest of us are being, so clearly a shortage of spare time is not a problem you have. What I did ask was, if you are going to waste your time one way or another, why not in any way that would contribute something worth reading to the thread in place of the non-childish finger pointing at all the childish folks.

Granted, I'm not exactly one to talk with all the lack of useful contributions I have made to this thread in particular thus far...

Snarky remarks don’t take much time and I enjoy them? Going on about political science would require sources, research, and half a day worth of writing. I’ll just stop and stay out of this thread.

I’ll also reconsider how I interact in public threads. Perhaps my journal is better suited. Pardon my semi trolling.

Actually Phoenix is correct. The USA is not a democracy. It is a republic. Things like the Electoral college make it a republic. If the USA was a democracy then Clinton would be president right now. Thank Goddess we are not a Democracy, right!

I thought functionally we were an Oligarchy ruled by the biggest pocket books.

rugadd wrote: I thought functionally we were an Oligarchy ruled by the biggest pocket books.

Families and money, actually. However, that’s the “unseen” part.

Truthfully - where I am in my life at the moment - our goal is homesteading- and very off grid type of thing. Plans for land and such are in the works but a few friends of mine and some family are just gonna all pool together and see what happens with all that! Currently - it’s a not a far away idea but me personally - the less some one can rely or even ... count on Government or things the sooner one can become independently able the better and I don’t mean wealthy or money - just less dependent of a lot of things. That’s my plate though - the less I ask for the more I can do for myself. That’s what I try to do with the cops and government where I live. I try not to let it dictate my every move. I don’t think that’s what it’s for.
I made a joke with by lil brother “all these people talking about right they’ve never used” maybe it’s a good moment to practice them rather than argue about them. What the alternatives for me in real life is to use them actually. I get to teach my son at home any curriculum I choose in my state and all he has to do is a few exams for a homeschool status. Too easy. I’m free as well as any one here to do the same. That’s my solution to my own problems though, wish the world could take a free education about some stuff.

rugadd wrote: I thought functionally we were an Oligarchy ruled by the biggest pocket books.

Nope, If that was the case we would not have the powerful political parties that we have. Countries like Russia or North Korea or China are Oligarchy in nature.

Phoenix Vidensia wrote: Grow up. Please, just mature to the point you stop using asinine internet slang or whatever that is.

Never! :laugh:

VixensVengeance wrote:

rugadd wrote: I thought functionally we were an Oligarchy ruled by the biggest pocket books.

Nope, If that was the case we would not have the powerful political parties that we have. Countries like Russia or North Korea or China are Oligarchy in nature.

IMO each of you (VixensVengeance and rugadd) have a point here.

In American's origin, it was not set up as a democracy (where popular public will determines every policy) but a republic (where representatives are elected, to represent segments of the public in a structured way). I don't quibble about that much with people as when the term "democracy" is applied to the United States, it's more from an undisciplined use of language than a belief that we really have a democracy; I think those who use that term actually understand that our national decisions are made by senators, representatives, and the President.

That said, rugadd's assertion that we are, today, a functioning oligarchy - despite our embattled political parties - seems pretty much the case. A study from Princeton University four or five years ago concluded as much; former U.S. President Jimmy Carter has explicitly made the same claim. Our political parties in the modern era are very heavily influenced by the demands of their corporate donors, and ownership of those corporations is fairly concentrated in the hands of a relatively small number of people. It's why some political observers focus so much on the influence of the Koch brothers on the right, and George Soros on the left; they represent individuals whose influence over the political process is all out of proportion to their status as American citizens.

We see the results in our national policies. Polls show that the vast majority of Americans want some form of universal health coverage (even 53% of Republicans), yet we don't have it. A Reuters poll shows that 70% of Americans - including a majority of Republicans - want the government to take aggressive action to combat climate change, but we're expanding offshore drilling and fracking instead. Our structure of taxation continues to evolve in ways that predominately benefit large businesses and a relatively small number of wealthy individuals. Those aren't the outcomes you'd expect in an authentic republic or democracy, but fit the expectations from an oligarchy pretty well.

I hope that doesn't sound harsh or edgy. I'll admit my emotional stability can get uncentered during discussions about our unfolding reality. My hope is to add some insight to the discussion, or inspire some illuminating content if I am in error.