• db0OP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    21
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Just lol. Is that why there’s billionaires hoarding all the wealth while billions starve? Is that why Palestine is being genocided? Is that why we’re headed full-steam for a climate apocalypse?

    There’s no “democracy” nor “checks and balances”. There’s only a sad farce.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -17 months ago

      Yes, because the democratic nations have democratically decided, that we want to consume more than is wise, that we want to retaliate for Oct 7 and that private property is cool, even if a few have more.

      I agree, that mob-rule would remove billionaires, but how would it stop climate change, if there are no regulations against emissions?

      Palestinians idk. In nationless anarchy it would not be a structured military, but let’s not pretend there wouldn’t be massive amounts of bloodshed.

      • db0OP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        9
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        None of that is “democratically elected”. Those elections are a farce and I would go as far as to argue that no democracy which decides to kill 30.000 children and perform genocide is legitimate.

        And nobody is talking about “mob rule”. We’re talking about anarchism.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          07 months ago

          Idk, what to tell you m8, but your idea of what’s happening in the middle east seems way off.

          Among Jewish interviewees, 88% give a positive assessment of the performance of IDF forces in the war until now.

          source

          The majority of Israelis want the war.

          • db0OP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -1
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Which is why this “democracy” is a farce. Thanks for proving my point.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        8
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Half elected officials with power are appointed not elected. The Supreme Court took away women’s bodily autonomy. There was no popular vote for any of them not a single one. Also just because I vote someone in doesn’t mean I agree with everything they do. Wouldn’t it be more expedient to just use direct democracy so I can actually have a say?

        “Your options are conservative A or B, and whatever actions they take are necessarily ones you voted for and agree with!”

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -27 months ago

          OK, that’s some US issues.

          But if enough people want something, it’ll happen. It’s just that 50% of the US hates the other 50% and vice versa.

          Abortion has long been a contentious issue and will probably be a big part of the election. Republicans are currently shooting themselves in the foot with that.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            6
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            If enough people want something it’ll happen… how? Like no seriously how? Is there some reason that the people shouldn’t be allowed to directly vote on things? Are you saying that elected officials are reliable in implementing the needs of their constituents? Why is politics so contentious then?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              17 months ago

              I don’t think there is a moral reason against direct democracy. You just need enough people to get on board with the idea. But in america the Republicans would loose a lot of power, so they won’t vote for it.

              Elected officials are relatively reliable. Maybe not for needs, but for wants. Biden for example made increasing demands of Israel, as popular opinion (of his voterbase) shifted. Sadly nobody cares about smaller issues, so there isn’t really pressure to change e.g. right to repair. Maybe on local level smaller stuff can change.

              Politics is so contentious, because the algorithms feed us different realities. If I was reading conservative news 24/7 I might also start thinking that climate change doesn’t exist, the gays are coming for my children etc.

              There is similar stuff on the left, just not as widespread. Democratic voters are on average moderate CNN-watching boomers.

              No idea how to fix this. Similar issues are starting here in Germany, but a bit less. I think the “Tagesschau” and similar news are probably a big reason Germany is relatively moderate compared to others.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        47 months ago

        Yes, because the democratic nations have democratically decided, that we want to consume more than is wise, that we want to retaliate for Oct 7 and that private property is cool, even if a few have more.

        Which party is against this? I live in a blue state in America and will gladly vote for them.