Modern illusion of democracy

[Onyx]

Do not forget the significance of the sheep.

Real democracy, or power of the people, is nonexistent within the framework of the state. The endless struggle has always been human beings pitted against machines, and the machines won out.

 

[washamericom]

Do not forget the significance of the sheep.

Real democracy, or power of the people, is nonexistent within the framework of the state. The endless struggle has always been human beings pitted against machines, and the machines won out.

i like the red white and blue...

 

[Rustic]

Do not forget the significance of the sheep.

Real democracy, or power of the people, is nonexistent within the framework of the state. The endless struggle has always been human beings pitted against machines, and the machines won out.

No doubt
Democracy = mob rule - egged on by one party rule of Washington... the progressive party.

 

[320 Years of History]

Real democracy, or power of the people, is nonexistent within the framework of the state.

The quoted remark intimates that your preferred form of democracy is a direct democracy. That is not ever what the U.S. implemented and anyone who thinks it was is sorely mistaken.

The U.S. was created as a place whereby the folks who paid monies to their government also have the main say in what that government does or refrains from doing. That's what it was when the colonists cried "taxation without representation" -- colonists didn't as much mind paying taxes as they minded that they had no say in whether or how those taxes were used for their benefit; they didn't want to pay taxes to support government initiatives performed exclusively in England, that even as the colonists actually paid very little in taxes (sound familiar?) -- and that has not changed, nor should it.

One need not like that the U.S. is a nation founded by and for wealthy entrepreneurs and profit seeking landed gentry, but then one is not as in other nations, bound to remain a citizen under the form of democracy the U.S. and its founders implemented. If one doesn't like it, if one wants to live in nation designed to function more in the interests of the proletariat, fine. Emigrate. If one is of a mind to join the ranks of enterprising capitalists of and for whom the nation was created, stay and enjoy the spoils thereof.

I don't particularly care which option one picks, but I am truly weary of all the griping about what doesn't work when the fact is that the American system works quite well for the the folks for whom it has always been intended to work: entrepreneurs, speculators, risk takers, producers and creators of economic value, and others who from their earliest years exhibit implacably the verve to "make it" on their own and in turn successfully make exactly that happen.

The promise of America is that it is a place where everyone is given opportunity. That chance to "make it" is what many other nations simply do not make available in any regard to all their residents. Of course, some folks will, by dint of their birth, be given more opportunity than others; that cannot be avoided. A person born to parents who fully availed themselves of the opportunities they were given begins life bestowed with more opportunity and resources -- tangible and intangible -- and persons so born will necessarily have more opportunity accorded to them. That said, the basic level of opportunity given to most in America is sufficient for any given individual to realise the Dream that accrues from one's not taking for granted the opportunity, whatever nature and whatever extent it takes.

So, is the state of affairs in the U.S. that of lambs vs. wolves? Perhaps, but then that is an aspect of the very notion of capitalism, which is what drove people to come to the New World and later found the U.S. of America. In nature, a smart lamb flees rather than hang around to be consumed by the wolves. That example is a good one to heed if one genuinely perceives oneself a lamb within the American polity.

Sidebar:

Perhaps the greatest disservice to the cause of the American democratic republic is that beginning in grade school, Americans are inculcated with an inaccurate depiction of what motivated the founders and the Revolution. Grade school texts spew the romantic notion of Puritans having fled religious oppression in England and they imply that is the freedom that colonists most sought; moreover, they fail to note that the America founded with the Constitution has more incommon with the Jamestown colonists aims than it does with the Plymouth colonies'.

Quite simply, the majority of our foundational education about the U.S. elides the reality that the Jamestown colony's settlers came to America for one reason: entrepreneurial profit seeking. I suppose that's not too surprising...What charming pictures are there to depict the dogged businessman? We don't have adorable Halloween costume visages of merchants as we do of somberly dressed Puritans in their black and white habits, do we? The harsh realities of commerce are not among the topics to which many folks want to introduce to, say, ten year olds. That said, perhaps we should rethink our sensibilities about what ideas children should discover earlier rather than later.​

End of sidebar.

​

 

[Onyx]

The quoted remark intimates that your preferred form of democracy is a direct democracy. That is not ever what the U.S. implemented and anyone who thinks it was is sorely mistaken.

You should be weary about implying positions.

While direct democracy works great outside the statist structure, within the state structure it is nothing more than majoritarianism. While majoritarianism has never existed, it is an undesirable way for human lives to be governed nonetheless.

One need not like that the U.S. is a nation founded by and for wealthy entrepreneurs and profit seeking landed gentry, but then one is not as in other nations, bound to remain a citizen under the form of democracy the U.S. and its founders implemented. If one doesn't like it, if one wants to live in nation designed to function more in the interests of the proletariat, fine. Emigrate. If one is of a mind to join the ranks of enterprising capitalists of and for whom the nation was created, stay and enjoy the spoils thereof.

Dishonestly, you made my opposition to state centralized power as being an attack on capitalism. Yep, strawman is not your friend.

The argument that if one does not like government abuse in their homeland, that they should pack up and leave, is an outrageous notion.

Why should I leave my land, my livelihood, and my people, when it is the government that sucks? That is an excuse used to bypass human abuse and government atrocities, and anyone with the slightest shred of intellectual honesty would be above such fallacies.

I don't particularly care which option one picks, but I am truly weary of all the griping about what doesn't work when the fact is that the American system works quite well for the the folks for whom it has always been intended to work: entrepreneurs, speculators, risk takers, producers and creators of economic value, and others who from their earliest years exhibit implacably the verve to "make it" on their own and in turn successfully make exactly that happen.

False.

The government disadvantages the vast majority of capitalists in favor of the smallest minority of individuals engaged in the power trade,

Now while it is true that the vast majority of countrymen are living like kings on blood money, they are also being denied greater prosperity by their government, which works for the .5% with the highest capital in the power trade.

If you want to argue economics, I am all game. Market anarchism is the most well founded evolution of heterodox market theory.

The promise of America is that it is a place where everyone is given opportunity.

Not exactly.

8 out of 10 small businesses fail in several years, because the government has instituted excessively high barriers of entry for aspiring capitalists. The government instituted stabilizing force has allowed the few to climb on the backs of the many.

This trend is becoming progressively worse overtime, as the ruling class consolidates power behind the state.

So, is the state of affairs in the U.S. that of lambs vs. wolves? Perhaps, but then that is an aspect of the very notion of capitalism,

Again, this topic is not about capitalism. Somehow you are conflating centralized state power with capitalism, and that false premise is a fallacious mockery of the intellectual discourse I am looking to have.

Secondly, the United States is not a capitalist nation. Analyzing the origin of the word capital, which was defined as "Having ownership of capital" in 1853, it becomes abundantly clear that the United States allows nothing of the sort for the vast majority of people.

As long as the state controls capital, there is only socialism. The means of production were collectivized for the ruling class.

Most of the wars waged by western military-industrial complexes were designed to ensure stabilizing force and global control over currency, so statism and socialism are worldwide. Just another point against your "pack up and leave" excuse.

which is what drove people to come to the New World and later found the U.S. of America. In nature, a smart lamb flees rather than hang around to be consumed by the wolves.

The cowards mantra.

Statists are self aware of the philosophical shortcomings in their beliefs, so their only recourse is to make a plea that ones association with the state is voluntary and contractual.

End of sidebar.

You got some compensation issues. These irrevelent ranting walls may well be a good cover for stupidity, but nonetheless they are a distraction from the much more compact central idea.

Someone incapable of narrowing a topic to its root is incapable of intellectual honesty.

 

[occupied]

Democracy is not a form of government, it is an activity and a quality a government must respect in order to have a free society. Whenever I see someone disrespecting democracy it reminds me of every fascist dictatorship ever who called democracy mob rule as they scared/tricked the people into surrendering their voice to an asshole who decided to exclusively take the burden of speaking for the people upon his own shoulders, then he sets to shutting people up.

 

[320 Years of History]

The argument that if one does not like government abuse in their homeland, that they should pack up and leave, is an outrageous notion.

I don't know why you think that an argument I'm making. It is most certainly not. What it is a recommendation. If I thought I could credibly deliver it as a command, I would.

 

[Onyx]

Democracy is not a form of government, it is an activity and a quality a government must respect in order to have a free society.

Agreed, and it should be noted that no state respects democracy.

I believe in democracy, but not within the framework of the state.

Whenever I see someone disrespecting democracy it reminds me of every fascist dictatorship ever who called democracy mob rule as they scared/tricked the people into surrendering their voice to an asshole who decided to exclusively take the burden of speaking for the people upon his own shoulders, then he sets to shutting people up.

Like the United States.

There are already those in this country admitting that the United States is not a democracy, but rather a constitutional republic. They are using the same excuse that democracy is mob rule.

None of you take democracy, or power of the people, seriously. In the words of American hero Edward Abbey, "Anarchism is taking democracy seriously." None of you guys are anarchists, so....

 

[Norman]

Democracy is the shittiest system that works...

And the last part is questionable. It certainly doesn't work if DNC decides to commit fraud.

 

[eagle7_31]

Do not forget the significance of the sheep.

Real democracy, or power of the people, is nonexistent within the framework of the state. The endless struggle has always been human beings pitted against machines, and the machines won out.

The United States is not a direct democracy. We are a republic made up of 50 states and territories. Over the years government has gotten larger. Some of which was needed, some of which goes to far. Now we are in something of a high tech social media driven enviorment. Interest groups of both competing ideologies gaining more of strong hold on today's public debate giving way to some very off the wall results.

 

[320 Years of History]

Now while it is true that the vast majority of countrymen are living like kings on blood money, they are also being denied greater prosperity by their government

Excuse me? If "the vast majority" live like kings, what pray tell precisely constitutes living better than "like kings" and thus serves as a legitimate basis for dissatisfaction among the "vast majority" who are indeed, per your statement, "living like kings?"

 

[Onyx]

I don't know why you think that an argument I'm making. It is most certainly not. What it is a recommendation. If I thought I could credibly deliver it as a command, I would.

Don't bullshit people when you are on record....

one doesn't like it, if one wants to live in nation designed to function more in the interests of the proletariat, fine. Emigrate. If one is of a mind to join the ranks of enterprising capitalists of and for whom the nation was created, stay and enjoy the spoils thereof.

Translation: If you do not like it, then leave.

In nature, a smart lamb flees rather than hang around to be consumed by the wolves. That example is a good one to heed if one genuinely perceives oneself a lamb within the American polity.

Translation: If you do not like it, then leave.

As I will reassert, that is an excuse used by statists to make up for their philosophical shortcomings. No one can defend the evils of the state, therefore they must contend that those subject to abuse from the state are party to a voluntary and contractual relationship with the state.

 

[norwegen]

Democracy is the shittiest system that works...

And the last part is questionable. It certainly doesn't work if DNC decides to commit fraud.

Quite true.

Monarchy, oligarchy, democracy - rule by the one, the few, or the many - is in the end, rule by men. It is contrary to America's republican principles, that law and equity shall govern her.

 

[320 Years of History]

Again, this topic is not about capitalism. Somehow you are conflating centralized state power with capitalism, and that false premise is a fallacious mockery of the intellectual discourse I am looking to have.

Secondly, the United States is not a capitalist nation. Analyzing the origin of the word capital, which was defined as "Having ownership of capital" in 1853, it becomes abundantly clear that the United States allows nothing of the sort for the vast majority of people.

Red:
My, dear fellow member, in order to have an "intellectual discourse," one needs to be well informed enough to be intellectually competent about the topic under discussion as well as others. To whit, I cite the 10th Amendment.

 

[occupied]

Democracy is not a form of government, it is an activity and a quality a government must respect in order to have a free society.

Agreed, and it should be noted that no state respects democracy.

I believe in democracy, but not within the framework of the state.

Whenever I see someone disrespecting democracy it reminds me of every fascist dictatorship ever who called democracy mob rule as they scared/tricked the people into surrendering their voice to an asshole who decided to exclusively take the burden of speaking for the people upon his own shoulders, then he sets to shutting people up.

Like the United States.

There are already those in this country admitting that the United States is not a democracy, but rather a constitutional republic. They are using the same excuse that democracy is mob rule.

None of you take democracy, or power of the people, seriously. In the words of American hero Edward Abbey, "Anarchism is taking democracy seriously." None of you guys are anarchists, so....

The progressive left is the only bloc of voters who take democracy seriously enough to fight for it having been the target of practically every attempt to limit speech and voting rights. Well over half this country can vote only because progressives went to the streets, fought and sometimes died for these rights. We even had to fight for the right to take to the streets to protest.

 

[Onyx]

machines won out.

The United States is not a direct democracy. We are a republic made up of 50 states and territories.

Like I said, this is not a real democracy. The topic is tiled "Modern illusion of democracy."

Over the years government has gotten larger.

The state consolidates power overtime, until it collapses when the cycle of violence comes full circle.

Some of which was needed, some of which goes to far.

It was all going to far.

Expanding an illegitimate institution does not make it any less illegitimate.

Now we are in something of a high tech social media driven enviorment. Interest groups of both competing ideologies gaining more of strong hold on today's public debate giving way to some very off the wall results.

My observation is that no state can avoid being governed by special interests for a period of more than ten years.

The same questions I direct against the liberalized political processes of today, were debated over 100 years ago when the second enlightenment got off the ground.

 

[320 Years of History]

I don't know why you think that an argument I'm making. It is most certainly not. What it is a recommendation. If I thought I could credibly deliver it as a command, I would.

Don't bullshit people when you are on record....

one doesn't like it, if one wants to live in nation designed to function more in the interests of the proletariat, fine. Emigrate. If one is of a mind to join the ranks of enterprising capitalists of and for whom the nation was created, stay and enjoy the spoils thereof.

Translation: If you do not like it, then leave.

In nature, a smart lamb flees rather than hang around to be consumed by the wolves. That example is a good one to heed if one genuinely perceives oneself a lamb within the American polity.

Translation: If you do not like it, then leave.

As I will reassert, that is an excuse used by statists to make up for their philosophical shortcomings. No one can defend the evils of the state, therefore they must contend that those subject to abuse from the state are party to a voluntary and contractual relationship with the state.

Red:
??? You think I'm BS-ing when I wrote, "I don't know why you think that an argument I'm making. It is most certainly not. What it is a recommendation. If I thought I could credibly deliver it as a command, I would." You truly are mistaken. Indeed your "translations" are spot on. That is precisely what I'm recommending.

 

[Rustic]

Again, this topic is not about capitalism. Somehow you are conflating centralized state power with capitalism, and that false premise is a fallacious mockery of the intellectual discourse I am looking to have.

Secondly, the United States is not a capitalist nation. Analyzing the origin of the word capital, which was defined as "Having ownership of capital" in 1853, it becomes abundantly clear that the United States allows nothing of the sort for the vast majority of people.

Red:
My, dear fellow member, in order to have an "intellectual discourse," one needs to be well informed enough to be intellectually competent about the topic under discussion as well as others. To whit, I cite the 10th Amendment.

The federal government no longer sees the 10th amendment as part of the constitution… Fact
...or for that matter even respects the constitution

 

[Onyx]

The progressive left is the only bloc of voters who take democracy seriously enough to fight for it having been the target of practically every attempt to limit speech and voting rights.

Nope, not really.

Expanding an institution which is directly in opposition to democracy is not taking democracy seriously at all.

Well over half this country can vote only because progressives went to the streets, fought and sometimes died for these rights. We even had to fight for the right to take to the streets to protest.

I have always admired the left wings tendency to commit to direct action, but when that direct action is applied to unjust ends, it is all for naught.

 

[Onyx]

Typical.

320 Years of History is entirely focused on defending the attacks I directed at his intellectual dishonesty. That just proves I was correct in accusing him of overcompensating.

He should get off the ego trip and start acting like an intelligent human being. The walls are annoying, not impressive.