Americans have had over 200 years to prove democracy can work, but...

[BackAgain]

To "say" my arguments are not existing and to stay in the own opinion means nothing. Why do you say so? "Democracy" for example has not really something to do with political parties. Democracy means to accept the political will of the very most people. The very most people of the USA don't vote for a special president for example. A president is only elected from about 20% of all living US-Americans. But a president of the USA has to be president of all US-Americans - or he is no president at all.

You need to educate yourself.

A democracy is a form of government.

A Constitutional republic is a form of government.

Both are governments of the people. But the former allows for the tyranny of a simple majority. The latter offers singular roadblocks to the more obvious risks of that tyranny of any temporary majority.

At the founding of the United States of America, the latter option was chosen and carefully crafted to avoid the perils associated with the former.

You can argue to the contrary all you wish. But the historical record is already clear and proves that you are mistaken.

 

[zaangalewa]

You need to educate yourself.

A democracy is a form of government.

A Constitutional republic is a form of government.

Analogy: A united democracy is the sun a parlamentarian and federal republic turns around.

Both are governments of the people.

The souvereign in a democracy is "the people" - no one else.

But the former allows for the tyranny of a simple majority.

Or with other words: A democacy is able to do suicide. A government never is worth to be fighting for. A democracy is worth.. Who tries to eliminate the democracy tries to eliminate the power of the people and to replace it with anything else. All "anything elses" which ever had existed in history had been much more bad. Democracy is the only thing which really works in politics.

The latter offers singular roadblocks to the more obvious risks of that tyranny of any temporary majority.

Good grief. I doubt you know only a litle what you try to speak about. Are you an artificial stupidity program?

At the founding of the United States of America, the latter option was chosen and carefully crafted to avoid the perils associated with the former.

You can argue to the contrary all you wish. But the historical record is already clear and proves that you are mistaken.

Okay: From my point of view you like to destroy the democracy USA. So you are an enemy of the western world. XXXXXXXXXX

Mod Edit: No threats against other forum members are allowed, implied or otherwise.

 

[BackAgain]

The deonmdf

Well that was clear.

 

[BackAgain]

Well that was clear.

 

[ralfy]

Reminds me of Thoureau's view about democracy being a tyranny of the majority.

 

[Curried Goats]

You need to educate yourself.

A democracy is a form of government.

A Constitutional republic is a form of government.

Both are governments of the people. But the former allows for the tyranny of a simple majority. The latter offers singular roadblocks to the more obvious risks of that tyranny of any temporary majority.

At the founding of the United States of America, the latter option was chosen and carefully crafted to avoid the perils associated with the former.

You can argue to the contrary all you wish. But the historical record is already clear and proves that you are mistaken.

You think the Constitution and the Founders didn't allow for tyranny.....

 

[zaangalewa]

Reminds me of Thoureau's view about democracy being a tyranny of the majority.

What's an absurde thought because our democracies suffer an overwhelming support for individuality and minorities.

 

[zaangalewa]

You think the Constitution and the Founders didn't allow for tyranny.....

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

 

[Stryder50]

What do the economic musings of a man who died more than 200 years ago in Scotland, have to do with the 21st Century American economy.

"Alexander Fraser Tytler, Lord Woodhouselee, was a Scottish lawyer, writer, and professor. Tytler was also a historian, and for some years was Professor of Universal History, and Greek and Roman Antiquities, in the University of Edinburgh. Tytler's other titles included Senator of the College of Justice, and George Commissioner of Justiciary in Scotland. Tytler was a friend of Robert Burns, and prevailed upon him to remove lines from his poem Tam o' Shanter which were insulting to the legal and clerical profession"

Basics of economics haven't changed since then.
There are two poles in economics; Wealth Creation and Wealth Redistribution.
In the USA our politics is polarized by the "extremes" of one side wanting to focus on wealth creation and the other side focused on wealth redistribution.
If we use the metaphor of The Economy being a pie, the Democrats focus on wealth redistribution means looking for ways to keep adjusting the slices so their is equity of size of pieces going out to all. The Republicans focus on wealth creation and on the other hand suggest we should make more pie instead.

 

[zaangalewa]

Stryder50

What do you call a lie (fake news) in this context?

 

[Stryder50]

Wikipedia isn’t a source.

1) Check the bottom of a wiki link and see what sources were used for the content.
2) Counter with what you think is a source.
3) Consider the difference between "a source" and "a good and accurate source".

 

[Stryder50]

Stryder50

What do you call a lie (fake news) in this context?

Reference a post number.

 

[zaangalewa]

Reference a post number.

#307, idiot. Americans have had over 200 years to prove democracy can work, but...

 

[Stryder50]

Marxism died in 1989. The USA is currently in danger authoritarian white supremacists and anti-democratic forces seeking to create a Christian Taliban government.

You're busy rewriting and re-interpreting the US Constitution, US history, and even the Bible in an effort to try to justify your right wing extremism.

Marxism is alive and well, thriving not just among the Left-wing in the USA, but also in Europe and many other parts of the World. Such as CCP China.
The USA is in danger of a Left-wing fascism claiming to to be "marxism",, but in reality something even more sinister and elitist.

 

[Stryder50]

#307, idiot. Americans have had over 200 years to prove democracy can work, but...

Well dumbass, the tab for emoji response is rather limited so I use "fake news" to also show I think the poster and/or their post is bullshit.
In the case of #307, history shows that Democracies ARE mob rule of the majority hence demand lockstep compliance at expense of individual expression and rarely respect or preserve rights of the minorities or individuals.
This thread is thread is 300+ posts debating if the OP is correct or not, and much hinges on whether "democracy" is the correct concept or not. Hence the issue of Republic versus Democracy, etc.
Invest ten and a half minutes and learn something about the American(USA) form of government;

 

[Stryder50]

You saying it doesn't make it true Jackson. The American Constitution was the most radical leftist documents in world history. Just the idea that all men were created equal and could decide who they wanted to lead the nation was a hair on fire radical concept at a time when the USA was one of two democracies in the world and every European nation was ruled by monarchs and their nobility, and class and power was determined by birth, and birth order.

The King's army were the Conservatives. The British political parties are the Conservatives and Labour. The Conservatives are the monarchists, and the nobility. The House of Lords in Great Britain is still appointed by the King.

Keep trying to make over your Founders in the mold of a 21st Century evangelical Christian extremists and you will fail every single time. They were men of their time, and the Constitution reflects their wish to create an land of opportunity, where religion and status at birth didn't foreclose your chances of improving your station. Freedom of religion was a principle because of the Spanish Inquisition, and the persecution by the Catholic Church in the Reformation. They eschewed war and conquest by having no standing army because of the toll the unending wars of succession and conquest in Europe.

The US Constitution is a document of its time, written by men of their time. This is a different time and a different world.

And the current expression of that different time and different world is how the Left has co-opted the language and misused and distorted the meanings of words, "correct-speak".
The Left claims to be the "Liberals" of this era and the "progressives", yet seek fundamental change away from the USA Constitution and our Nation's founding principles. Along with their lies and disinformation, the Left/socialists are more in the form of the older, traditional conservatives, seeking to regress (not pro-gress) to where Rule is by an Elite Minority whom know better than we common folk in the basket of deplorables. America's Left is the new version of the National Socialists, USA style.

 

[Stryder50]

To be replaced by WHAT pray-tell?

By the REPUBLIC, which already exists in the USA.

 

[Curried Goats]

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. —

Let's me stop you right there Dingus. There's a difference between rhetoric and action. The Founders were slavers so obviously the Constitution didn't work as a force field against tyranny.

 

[zaangalewa]

Well dumbass, the tab for emoji response is rather limited so I use "fake news" to also show I think the poster and/or their post is bullshit. ...

What exactly, master of weirdness, do you call bullshit on what reason - from this what I - and the declaration of independence - said to you? And by the way: What is your nationality?

 

[Stryder50]

Let's me stop you right there Dingus. There's a difference between rhetoric and action. The Founders were slavers so obviously the Constitution didn't work as a force field against tyranny.

Not all Founders were "slavers". Not even most were.
You may want to read Article I. Section 9. It counters the disinformation of "1619".