4 ms·

This majority is totally fine to imprison unwanted minorities. This majority is totally fine to restrict my freedoms. This majority thinks they are right becaus

This majority is totally fine to imprison unwanted minorities. This majority is totally fine to restrict my freedoms. This majority thinks they are right because they are majority. So in short, the majority asks me to sacrifice myself for their sake because I'm in minority and they are in majority. If so, f##k them! P.S. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Shrugged https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Shrugged

kovrik 10y ago
I have left my parents and many friends and colleagues in Russia. They all are kind and smart and good people. They just can't leave the country as I did: they don't want to, they are bound to their family, they have business there, they don't work in IT, they don't know English etc. The fact that you've left Russia is not making you `special` or `elite`. There are bad and stupid people everywhere, as well as good and smart and awesome people. World is not black and white.
- mickronome 10y ago
  Being part of a minority is not the same as being 'elite' or 'special' in the sense you seem to imply, and I can't see that the author claims to be part of some kind of elite either? What are you trying to say ?
Dolores12 10y ago
That's how democracy works. Are you against democracy?
- DrJokepu 10y ago
  There's a difference between democracy and ochlocracy ("mob rule").
  - rangibaby 10y ago
    It's democracy (with a small d) when I agree with it, ochlocracy when I don't?
    - DrJokepu 10y ago
      No, this is a rather cynical thing to say. In a free society, the rule of the people is only one of the pillars of freedom. Other pillars include the rule of law, certain inalienable rights, etc. Without these, the rule of the people descend into majoritianism or ochlocracy. The textbook example of ochlocracy is the French Revolution between the Insurrection of 10 August 1792 and the Thermidorian Reaction.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
  - rhizome 10y ago
    Is the practical mechanism of ochlocracy that it's a democracy with sore winners?
- bzbarsky 10y ago
  Yes. Any thinking person should be against democracy in the sense of "any time we can get one vote over 50% for something we should pass the something". This is why the US government was set up with various undemocratic features. This is why there are things like constitutions that require supermajorities to modify. Protecting minorities from the tyranny of the majority is one of the main purposes of good governmenance.
  - mempko 10y ago
    Any thinking person recognizes that in the function "votes(issue) > X%" X isn't fixed to 50. I think people should get a say in proportion to how much it affects them and having X be 100% is a perfectly sane and optimal democratic decision process.
    - bzbarsky 10y ago
      Having X be 100% means nothing ever gets decided outside of very very small groups. See http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and-reptilian-muslim-climatologists-from-mars/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and-... for some actual data on what people do when presented with polls.
  - Dolores12 10y ago
    Yeah, thats why Trump won with minority of votes. Just as you like. And i like it too!
    - Broken_Hippo 10y ago
      The US isn't even a democracy so it doesn't really apply, does it? He'd not have won in a democracy. Democracy screws folks over very easily.
    - bzbarsky 10y ago
      Please don't make assumptions about what I like.
type0 10y ago
I think it is completely appalling how russian majority treats minorities, I'm not even talking about political parties or freedom of speech. Homosexuals and smaller ethnicities there are having hard time. A friend of mine lived in Russia, being half black - the constant racism from general populace forced him to leave. I like russian people but not russian society. Some psychologists say that societies have collective consciousness, whatever that is, in the case of Russia it has many scars and it just can't be pretty, that's probably one of the reasons russians are attached to their literary cultural identity. I give them that, their literature is great, although it's problematic that so many russians still think that their culture is somehow superior to others.
ivan_gammel 10y ago
(ethnic minority and progressive here) This majority can pretty easily be convinced that everything you are mentioning is bad. They are not dumb, they are misguided and they have very poor political education. It's not their fault they behave so, it's the legacy, they have to live with. It will take a lot of time to convince them all that their current way of thought is not right, not good and do not serve their interests, but this sacrifice of time and effort may worth it - for future generations, at least. You may say that it's not your war and you'll be right. But forgive them for they see not the full picture (Luke 23:34).

kovrik 10y ago

I have left my parents and many friends and colleagues in Russia. They all are kind and smart and good people. They just can't leave the country as I did: they don't want to, they are bound to their family, they have business there, they don't work in IT, they don't know English etc. The fact that you've left Russia is not making you `special` or `elite`. There are bad and stupid people everywhere, as well as good and smart and awesome people. World is not black and white.

mickronome 10y ago
Being part of a minority is not the same as being 'elite' or 'special' in the sense you seem to imply, and I can't see that the author claims to be part of some kind of elite either? What are you trying to say ?

Dolores12 10y ago

That's how democracy works. Are you against democracy?

DrJokepu 10y ago
There's a difference between democracy and ochlocracy ("mob rule").
- rangibaby 10y ago
  It's democracy (with a small d) when I agree with it, ochlocracy when I don't?
  - DrJokepu 10y ago
    No, this is a rather cynical thing to say. In a free society, the rule of the people is only one of the pillars of freedom. Other pillars include the rule of law, certain inalienable rights, etc. Without these, the rule of the people descend into majoritianism or ochlocracy. The textbook example of ochlocracy is the French Revolution between the Insurrection of 10 August 1792 and the Thermidorian Reaction.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
- rhizome 10y ago
  Is the practical mechanism of ochlocracy that it's a democracy with sore winners?
bzbarsky 10y ago
Yes. Any thinking person should be against democracy in the sense of "any time we can get one vote over 50% for something we should pass the something". This is why the US government was set up with various undemocratic features. This is why there are things like constitutions that require supermajorities to modify. Protecting minorities from the tyranny of the majority is one of the main purposes of good governmenance.
- mempko 10y ago
  Any thinking person recognizes that in the function "votes(issue) > X%" X isn't fixed to 50. I think people should get a say in proportion to how much it affects them and having X be 100% is a perfectly sane and optimal democratic decision process.
  - bzbarsky 10y ago
    Having X be 100% means nothing ever gets decided outside of very very small groups. See http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and-reptilian-muslim-climatologists-from-mars/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and-... for some actual data on what people do when presented with polls.
- Dolores12 10y ago
  Yeah, thats why Trump won with minority of votes. Just as you like. And i like it too!
  - Broken_Hippo 10y ago
    The US isn't even a democracy so it doesn't really apply, does it? He'd not have won in a democracy. Democracy screws folks over very easily.
  - bzbarsky 10y ago
    Please don't make assumptions about what I like.

type0 10y ago

I think it is completely appalling how russian majority treats minorities, I'm not even talking about political parties or freedom of speech. Homosexuals and smaller ethnicities there are having hard time. A friend of mine lived in Russia, being half black - the constant racism from general populace forced him to leave. I like russian people but not russian society. Some psychologists say that societies have collective consciousness, whatever that is, in the case of Russia it has many scars and it just can't be pretty, that's probably one of the reasons russians are attached to their literary cultural identity. I give them that, their literature is great, although it's problematic that so many russians still think that their culture is somehow superior to others.

ivan_gammel 10y ago

(ethnic minority and progressive here) This majority can pretty easily be convinced that everything you are mentioning is bad. They are not dumb, they are misguided and they have very poor political education. It's not their fault they behave so, it's the legacy, they have to live with. It will take a lot of time to convince them all that their current way of thought is not right, not good and do not serve their interests, but this sacrifice of time and effort may worth it - for future generations, at least. You may say that it's not your war and you'll be right. But forgive them for they see not the full picture (Luke 23:34).