Jedi and the Threat to Democracy

Fyxe wrote: well that just seems like a stupid idea. and apparently the ones that did it found out it was stupid as well and so that idea is dead. not seeing how it is valid for the president enforcing laws today though?

Illegally crossing the border... is a misdemeanor.

"Jay-walking" is against the law, but the public would be justifiably irate if a law enforcement agency began assaulting people, kidnapping and killing their children for doing it, especially if it was endorsed so openly and enthusiastically as present by the commander in chief...

You know who else was all about "law and order" in this vein? Darth Vader. The same guy who, canonically had to be told point blank by the emperor himself "Hey, we kind of need the officers to be loyal, and since they'd presently accept life as a fugitive for going awol rather than be on the same ship as you, maybe knock it off with killing officers at every opportunity".

Do you want to end up like The Galactic Empire? Because this is how you end up like The Galactic Empire.

Oh, and the Nazis were upholding the law, too, that's painfully relevant, so maybe just "enforcing the law" regardless if it is done unjustly is not the best argument?

I don't think anyone here has equivocated justice and legality (although the two should be the same). But how do we find what's just: both in individual circumstances and in a larger sense?
If we don't have a basis for our actions how do we know we're not the baddies?

Trump is purely a symptom of the underlying issues; rampant ideological bias/blindness (on both sides of the aisle), an unreliable political system promoting uncaring and dishonest officials, and a wide-spread corporate oligarchy using underhand means such as lobbying (WHY IS THIS LEGAL) to twist the laws to their own selfish benefit and our detriment.
I don't know the answers (complex problems require complex solutions), but the issues are as clear as day for anyone really looking for the truth of the situation.

In the US, we do not have a democracy. We have a representative republic. That is to say, we have the foolish notion that individual "leaders" can and will accurately represent the will of the people and be free of self-interest and be immune to corruption and so on and so on. We offer praise to politicians when they make the decisions that would be made if we had an actual democracy (that is, we praise them when they make popular decisions) and decry them when they make the decisions which would not be made if we had an actual democracy. It's nonsense, through-and-through. American politics, to me, is and always has been a theater of the absurd.

The options you have presented to you aren't even legitimate options. It isn't as if the best option is put forward by the country to go up against the second best option. We all know that the DNC screwed Bernie Sanders in 2016. Because of the strong systematic support for Clinton, she was given a blatantly unfair advantage. The outcome of that election was certainly impacted by the DNC, and that should be taken just as seriously as any Russian interference. If the person with the most financial and vocal support from the establishment wins in almost every primary, there isn't any point in voting. The establishment candidate will win 99% of the time, and sitting presidents/senators/congresspeople/etc always have an advantage over any challenger due to the scope of their influence.

I support democracy, yes, actual democracy -- I see a representative republic as a sham of a system which can only result in more Trumps, more Obamas, more Clintons, more Bushes. Public policy should not be a matter of a purity test of individual politicians, nor should it be popularity contest between individual politicians! It should be a matter of a contest between ideas, not personalities!

As for Trump -- I don't see the Hitler comparison. There isn't a literal genocide going on. He seems to be a pretty run-of-the-mill politician. Obama bombed children. So did Bush. I expect heinous, murderous, tyrannical behavior from literally any person who holds the office of POTUS. But so far none of them have been quite Hitleresque, or Maoesque, or Stalinesque.

There was a bit in KOTOR I think is relevant here, just switch "Malak" with "Trump". Jolee Bindo said:
"Malak is a tyrant who should be stopped. If he conquers the galaxy, we're in for a couple of rough centuries. Eventually it'll come around again, but I'd rather not wait that long. So we do what we have to do and we try to stop the Sith. But don't start thinking this war, your war, is more important than any other war just because you're in it."

Well actually Hitler lost the last election in Germany before a war happened. That's democracy working. But it was fear that turned the tides, that is fascism. Fear sent the last president out, just like they want to do to the president today. It seems that by rights the Democrats are the Hitler party trying to take over at all costs. Maybe that's who needs some stopping?

I think this thread should of been called "why you should hate Trump " . Personally I am a trump supporter and most of what was said is actually fake news and can also be debunked . Now in a previous post in a different topic I said why I support him and what I don't like about him so I'm not gonna re-explain myself . Personally I think Jedi as a whole should stay out of politics but the individual themselves can feel free to do as they wish . In the end if the Jedi stayed out of politics in the movies palpatine never could of taken control . Trump isn't a Hitler of sorts if anything he is trying to get the corrupt politicians to adhere to law . Also he isn't running on hatred of Latinos , people here illegally needs to be in prison . If I did something illegal I would go to prison so if someone comes here illegally I would expect them to be in prison as well . Trump has no problems with immigrants but if they come here illegally then they need to be in prison then sent back to there home country and come here legally . They take American jobs , and taxpayers money without paying taxes or contributing to the economy . And yes in a conversation he did ask if it was ok to shoot them but the conversation was about if they attacked boarder agents was it ok for the boarder agents to shoot them . He ain't trying to exterminate them that's just the far left fake news trying to get ratings or politicians trying to take aim at our elected president . If it was a republican trying to make the same lies and accusing Obama when he was president the Democrat would of had him tried and convicted for treason but why ain't it happening now you might ask ? Well I will tell you why because the main stream media is controlled by the Democrats so of course it won't happen . Yes Donald did ask if the Ukrainian president knew anything about Biden , but there was no quid pro quo , and Biden even admitted that he used his position to get his son a high paying job for a gas company in Ukraine and that he had a prosecutor fired for trying to convict his son for corruption which is true . So what other presidents have done similar things this ain't no impeachable crime . The Democrats just want to proform a coup d'etat because they don't like Trump honestly if you would watch an actual non bias news channel then you would know the truth stop watching fake news and spreading lies that I know you don't think them to be lies but they are . Here I will even recommend a news Network it's One American News Network or OANN for short watch a few segments of this and you will know what actually news is .
Also sorry if this comes out aggressive or hurts ones feelings but it needed to be said .
MTFBWY !

Fyxe wrote: Well actually Hitler lost the last election in Germany before a war happened.
That's democracy working.

Not by the official numbers he didn't. 99,59% voter turnout and 99,01% of that in favour. Now, granted, those numbers are not realistic at all. But that's all we can say on the issue. In fact, such ridiculous numbers is how we can suspect that democracy was not working in the Third Reich at that time...

TheDude wrote: In the US, we do not have a democracy. We have a representative republic. That is to say, we have the foolish notion that individual "leaders" can and will accurately represent the will of the people and be free of self-interest and be immune to corruption and so on and so on. We offer praise to politicians when they make the decisions that would be made if we had an actual democracy (that is, we praise them when they make popular decisions) and decry them when they make the decisions which would not be made if we had an actual democracy. It's nonsense, through-and-through. American politics, to me, is and always has been a theater of the absurd.

The options you have presented to you aren't even legitimate options. It isn't as if the best option is put forward by the country to go up against the second best option. We all know that the DNC screwed Bernie Sanders in 2016. Because of the strong systematic support for Clinton, she was given a blatantly unfair advantage. The outcome of that election was certainly impacted by the DNC, and that should be taken just as seriously as any Russian interference. If the person with the most financial and vocal support from the establishment wins in almost every primary, there isn't any point in voting. The establishment candidate will win 99% of the time, and sitting presidents/senators/congresspeople/etc always have an advantage over any challenger due to the scope of their influence.

I support democracy, yes, actual democracy -- I see a representative republic as a sham of a system which can only result in more Trumps, more Obamas, more Clintons, more Bushes. Public policy should not be a matter of a purity test of individual politicians, nor should it be popularity contest between individual politicians! It should be a matter of a contest between ideas, not personalities!

I actually very much agree. However, I have to say and ask, what is the solution to not having the electoral college? I honestly do believe and think there is historical precedence to stopping urban areas from dominating over rural areas based strictly on population. Would the union be better suited in with more individual state power in this case? How do we do this and maintain a level of fairness to rural areas? I ask because I live in IL where this idea is on open display. What Chicago wants the state gets. Every county in the state could go red and the 3 major ones around Chicago are enough to sway the state in full. So how do we solve this?

On a side note, I brought up media because, look at IL the urban media is much much stronger than the local papers in rural areas. So, how many people in rural areas get news related to them picked up on a national level? Does this further effect the democratic institutions we do have?

Much Love,
Kobos

Kelrax Lorcken wrote:

Fyxe wrote: well that just seems like a stupid idea. and apparently the ones that did it found out it was stupid as well and so that idea is dead. not seeing how it is valid for the president enforcing laws today though?

Illegally crossing the border... is a misdemeanor.

"Jay-walking" is against the law, but the public would be justifiably irate if a law enforcement agency began assaulting people, kidnapping and killing their children for doing it, especially if it was endorsed so openly and enthusiastically as present by the commander in chief...

You know who else was all about "law and order" in this vein? Darth Vader. The same guy who, canonically had to be told point blank by the emperor himself "Hey, we kind of need the officers to be loyal, and since they'd presently accept life as a fugitive for going awol rather than be on the same ship as you, maybe knock it off with killing officers at every opportunity".

Do you want to end up like The Galactic Empire? Because this is how you end up like The Galactic Empire.

Oh, and the Nazis were upholding the law, too, that's painfully relevant, so maybe just "enforcing the law" regardless if it is done unjustly is not the best argument?

um... this entire post is magnificent. Thank you.

Fyxe wrote: Well actually Hitler lost the last election in Germany before a war happened. That's democracy working. But it was fear that turned the tides, that is fascism. Fear sent the last president out, just like they want to do to the president today. It seems that by rights the Democrats are the Hitler party trying to take over at all costs. Maybe that's who needs some stopping?

The point in the comparison is about HOW they both rose to power by stoking fear and hatred. This is why I think we should be discussing politics more not less. Because if there's any one thing that is detrimental to the entire democratic process, its bubbles that stop information from getting in. And then we become more partisan, only able to hear the frequency that our "side" is putting out. And even though we're more alike than we are different, our world views are being influenced by people who really don't care about us or our community or how well we interact with each other.

I talk about Trump stoking fear and hatred because I see that as fact. We have seen a rise in facsist groups in this country since 2016 and it has a lot to do with Trump rhetoric.

Now I understand Trump has supporters and defenders. That's okay. However, I'd like to know WHY that support exists and that it still is capable of seeing what he does wrong. Or put simply, have you drunk the koolaid to the point of cult member status where you believe everything he says? And is it POSSIBLE... that the truth is somewhere in the middle?