So far, it has been.
Maybe you can show me those piles of skulls in the Nordic countries.
Voter Suppression and Why The Republicans Love It So Much?
- Thread starter Gameface
- Start date
Maybe you can show me those piles of skulls in the Nordic countries.
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
I see the author’s thought to be so naïve as to be almost silly. What they say is that we can’t rely on the US Constitution, but instead all citizens must have forbearance and mutual respect. Uh, yeah. If people on the internet are mean to each other or unaccepting of other’s ideas then Republicans will kill democracy.
They devote a whole chapter to it in their book (copy is on 1337x.to) or you can see the thought echoed in the teacher’s guide downloadable for free.
The authors also think we need to end our bicameral Legislative Branch by dissolving the Senate because Senators representing low population states have a disproportionate amount of representational power when compared to Senators from high population states. They also think the Electoral College must be ended because Democracies require everyone’s vote to count equally.
The authors believe we must burn the village to save it, that everyone has to be nice to each other on the internet, and that we can’t rely on a written constitution. In listing off their pile of democracies that all died, what I think is how much foresight our founders had in making us a republic. The authors look at the pile of dead democracies and think “we need even more democracy!”
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
That isn't Democratic Socialism. The Nordic countries are Social Democracies. They have stock markets and big business. It is just a quirk of translation that reverses the words in their native language, but if you like what the Nordic countries are doing then you are a fan of capitalism with lower corporate taxes than the US currently has. Their personal tax curves are also a lot more flat than ours, with their poor paying more in taxes than our poor.
D
Deleted member 365
Guest
Oof…
im just too tired…
im just too tired…
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
I did have one for you as well seeing as you seem particularly upset over larger governmental bodies overturning the results of local elections. What are your thoughts on the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact? That is the effort to use a quirk in the US Constitution to effectively end the Electoral College.
For it? Against it? And how do you reconcile that with your distaste for overturning local election results seeing as that is exactly what NPVIC does?
Red
Well-Known Member
Phew, I hear ya! Anyone who can read that Atlantic article and not realize it perfectly describes what the Big Lie has wrought in the Republican Party, but instead finds the most important thing to take from the article is that the authors are naive, well, I’m just too tired as well.
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
When an author (or authors in this case) presents a problem and present a solution to that problem, I do examine their proposed solution. If A, B, and C are wrong but we can fix it by doing X, then I want to know about X. What is X? Will X cause problems of its own? That isn't to say that A, B, and C aren't true or a problem, but to me X is the interesting thing because it is new. I'm interested enough to download books and do background research. What does history say happened to those who tried X?
If bathing in A, B, and C is your thing then carry on, but doesn't X arouse some curiosity if X is said to solve A, B, and C?
D
Deleted member 365
Guest
It sadly ruins discussion. Because it makes it clear that they aren’t serious about discussing these issues in an honest and fact driven way. It’s like trying to play chess with a player who rather than make moves, eats the pieces. it’s just a waste of time. If all you're getting from my writings and sources of, "He wants unregulated online voting" and "Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt are naive" then there's really no point in discussing things further.
They are either far in over their heads and too stupid or ignorant about these issues to discuss them in a serious manner or they’re just trolls just making a really lame attempt pretending to be serious about these topics. Either way, it’s a complete waste of time to engage. I’m just curious if he’s babes alt or that one guy who got banned alt. I can’t remember his name but he posted nonstop anti socialism videos and memes all the time.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 365
Guest
More and more people are catching on. We’re dealing with a fascist movement that is setting itself up to take over the house in 22 via gerrymandering and winning the 2024 presidential election regardless of the voting results.
There’s a Word for What Trumpism Is Becoming
The relentless messaging by Trump and his supporters has inflicted a measurable wound on American democracy.
www.theatlantic.com
Red
Well-Known Member
I offered an opinion of The Atlantic essay by Levitsky and Ziblatt that was largely positive. I honestly found it to be one of the better summaries of what the Republican Party is attempting that I have come across recently. I fwd. it to several of my friends and family and urged them to read it. You offered an opinion that differed from my own. Substantially differed, by the sounds of it.
But, here’s the thing. Our difference of opinion is of absolutely no consequence or importance to me. Whatsoever. And I would hope that would also be the case for yourself. At least I’m fine with these differences of opinion. Frankly, I don’t really understand you. But, so what? You’re free to analyze and interpret and question that particular article as you wish. I’m fine with that. I support it.
I also feel the solutions they pointed to should be part of the approach we need to adopt to prevent a dictatorship of the minority, which, IMO, is precisely what the Republican Party wishes to establish in the United States. I don’t expect you to agree, and obviously you don’t, but neither of us should care that we differ. I offered my opinion when I posted the article last Saturday. I’m not required to address your concerns with their “solutions” or any other thoughts they offered in that essay. I respect you, you seem an intelligent and well read individual.
But, I am tired, and it should be clear by now that I’m nothing if not long winded. Rip the essay to shreds. Be as scathing as you wish in your critique. I’m not required to explain why I find that same essay of value.
D
Deleted member 365
Guest
He either didn't read your article, didn't understand anything about it, or is purposely misinterpreting it so badly that it renders discussion of it impossible. Either way, it's a waste of time to engage. Until he decides to discuss in good faith, you're essentially playing chess with a player who's going to eat your pieces.
Actually, it uses the Electoral College to reinforce the popular vote.
I reconcile it by remembering that the Constitution does not allow for the direct election of a President, unlike all the local offices.