This is incorrect. IIn democracies, the majority tells the minority "how it will be". And if the minority does not comply, the majority simply forces the minority to comply (under the threat of violence). If power is centralized, the minority has no way to escape the majority tyranny. Democracy means that the majority is the absolute ruler and can do whatever the hell it wants.
The two best examples I can think of: The holocaust and the jab mandates. Both were supported by the majorities. Both are perfect democratic decisions.
Too bad for you if you happened to be a jew among a majority of Germans, or a clean blood among the majority of corona karens. It makes no difference.
Democracy is a hoax. As I said, only idiots fall for it (and I admit I was an idiot some time ago).
PS: The fact that the majority supported the holocaust and jab mandates (and this is a fact, although we don't need to debate that) is not necessary for the argument. They are just (concrete) examples.
Okay. I should have said DIRECT democracy. But maybe there should also be some personal sovereignty rules, which there are... which is like Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.
We long lost out on any REAL democracy, tho... If you live in Murka, like me, you know by now, probably, that it's all a big lie. And it got much, much, much worse just a short while back, like in the 70's, 80's, and then of course, VERY recently...
No, but this is the point. You did not lose democracy... Democracy has always been what it is: Mob rule. Direct democracy is *also* mob rule. Its only advantage with respect to nazism/fascism, and communism, is that tyrannical power is less centralized (at the hands of the majority, which can change over time, instead of being at the hands of "the party").
But it is still a tyrannical system like any other. This is a feature of the system, not a bug. These rules that you mentioned (i.e., individual rights) are completely inconsistent with any form of democracy.
The solution is to decentralize. Break down large countries into way smaller ones. Into the size of neighborhoods at least. Then people simply flee when commies, nazis, or karens take over.
democracy is the mob rule. classic dictatorship and monarchy is the rule of powerful minority.
and what we have now is totalitarianism: the rule of powerful minority with the help of brainwashed masses :) the XXcent. invention. this is what happens when democracy is taken for granted and isnтАЩt monitored anymoreтАж
I understand what you are saying, but I disagree. The mob still does as it wants in most democracies (except in the US, Brazil, etc, where the vote count has been compromised). Everywhere else, the mob is still in charge.
What we see unfolding in the US since this nonsense of democracy started is mob rule. It has only gotten worse since 1800's and it will get worse still.
But I agree that the mob is easily manipulated by the elites, in addition to being composed of a bunch of idiots. So you can argue that the elites are effectively in charge for now. Yet, if the mob one day wakes up and say that we are going to decapitate everyone in the elite, this will be perfectly consistent with democracy.
Of course, (for the US in particular) you need a large mob, 2/3 of the senate, to make a new constitution and erase defense for this type of law. But a big mob can legally make a "holocaust" of the elites: Literally chop their heads off. Thinking about it now, maybe this fear is the way to make the elites behave better. Not that I hold my breath waiting for it, tho.
In addition, the mob can easily decide to chop our heads off and we will not have anywhere to run. This is why centralized democracy is so dangerous.
I agree with decentralization, absolutely. Local, local, local, for most things.
But democracy has never really been... not because it's "mob rule," but because it's been oligarchy, from the git go, at least here in Murka, and probably most places. I think Sweden had a pretty cool thing for a while, and other places, briefly...
I think the problem is WEALTH DISTRIBUTION.
As long as everything is run by the wealthy, who tend to be a lot of sociopaths/psychopaths, we're going to have the same problems forever. I think we need to address the issue of WEALTH and think about a cap, and some other glaring issues that spring from that.
Even if we assume that "real democracy has never been implemented", just like "real communism", it is still a fact of democracy that the majority can do whatever the hell it wants: The majority is the absolute ruler. Like an absolutist king.
If 50% + 1 decide to kill 50% -1 (or maybe a supra majority instead of 50%, so they can re-write the constitution from scratch), this will be a perfectly democratic decision. Absolutely nothing within the democratic system prevents this. Everything that prevents this from happening is outside the democratic sphere.
This massacre did not happen exactly like that yet because not enough people want. But we are almost there. The jab mandates are a great recent example, as I said.
If we had democracy, we wouldn't be TOLD how it will be, we'd be voting on it.
This is incorrect. IIn democracies, the majority tells the minority "how it will be". And if the minority does not comply, the majority simply forces the minority to comply (under the threat of violence). If power is centralized, the minority has no way to escape the majority tyranny. Democracy means that the majority is the absolute ruler and can do whatever the hell it wants.
The two best examples I can think of: The holocaust and the jab mandates. Both were supported by the majorities. Both are perfect democratic decisions.
Too bad for you if you happened to be a jew among a majority of Germans, or a clean blood among the majority of corona karens. It makes no difference.
Democracy is a hoax. As I said, only idiots fall for it (and I admit I was an idiot some time ago).
PS: The fact that the majority supported the holocaust and jab mandates (and this is a fact, although we don't need to debate that) is not necessary for the argument. They are just (concrete) examples.
Okay. I should have said DIRECT democracy. But maybe there should also be some personal sovereignty rules, which there are... which is like Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.
We long lost out on any REAL democracy, tho... If you live in Murka, like me, you know by now, probably, that it's all a big lie. And it got much, much, much worse just a short while back, like in the 70's, 80's, and then of course, VERY recently...
No, but this is the point. You did not lose democracy... Democracy has always been what it is: Mob rule. Direct democracy is *also* mob rule. Its only advantage with respect to nazism/fascism, and communism, is that tyrannical power is less centralized (at the hands of the majority, which can change over time, instead of being at the hands of "the party").
But it is still a tyrannical system like any other. This is a feature of the system, not a bug. These rules that you mentioned (i.e., individual rights) are completely inconsistent with any form of democracy.
The solution is to decentralize. Break down large countries into way smaller ones. Into the size of neighborhoods at least. Then people simply flee when commies, nazis, or karens take over.
Example: https://mises.org/wire/secession-coming-state-near-you
democracy is the mob rule. classic dictatorship and monarchy is the rule of powerful minority.
and what we have now is totalitarianism: the rule of powerful minority with the help of brainwashed masses :) the XXcent. invention. this is what happens when democracy is taken for granted and isnтАЩt monitored anymoreтАж
I understand what you are saying, but I disagree. The mob still does as it wants in most democracies (except in the US, Brazil, etc, where the vote count has been compromised). Everywhere else, the mob is still in charge.
What we see unfolding in the US since this nonsense of democracy started is mob rule. It has only gotten worse since 1800's and it will get worse still.
But I agree that the mob is easily manipulated by the elites, in addition to being composed of a bunch of idiots. So you can argue that the elites are effectively in charge for now. Yet, if the mob one day wakes up and say that we are going to decapitate everyone in the elite, this will be perfectly consistent with democracy.
Of course, (for the US in particular) you need a large mob, 2/3 of the senate, to make a new constitution and erase defense for this type of law. But a big mob can legally make a "holocaust" of the elites: Literally chop their heads off. Thinking about it now, maybe this fear is the way to make the elites behave better. Not that I hold my breath waiting for it, tho.
In addition, the mob can easily decide to chop our heads off and we will not have anywhere to run. This is why centralized democracy is so dangerous.
I agree with decentralization, absolutely. Local, local, local, for most things.
But democracy has never really been... not because it's "mob rule," but because it's been oligarchy, from the git go, at least here in Murka, and probably most places. I think Sweden had a pretty cool thing for a while, and other places, briefly...
I think the problem is WEALTH DISTRIBUTION.
As long as everything is run by the wealthy, who tend to be a lot of sociopaths/psychopaths, we're going to have the same problems forever. I think we need to address the issue of WEALTH and think about a cap, and some other glaring issues that spring from that.
Even if we assume that "real democracy has never been implemented", just like "real communism", it is still a fact of democracy that the majority can do whatever the hell it wants: The majority is the absolute ruler. Like an absolutist king.
If 50% + 1 decide to kill 50% -1 (or maybe a supra majority instead of 50%, so they can re-write the constitution from scratch), this will be a perfectly democratic decision. Absolutely nothing within the democratic system prevents this. Everything that prevents this from happening is outside the democratic sphere.
This massacre did not happen exactly like that yet because not enough people want. But we are almost there. The jab mandates are a great recent example, as I said.