4 ms·

Further proof many, many people don't understand democracy and think you're not allowed a voice. People, democracy is not the tyranny of the majority. Quite th

Further proof many, many people don't understand democracy and think you're not allowed a voice. People, democracy is not the tyranny of the majority. Quite the opposite actually.

ohstopitu 10y ago
how does democracy protect the minority? (not saying the minority does not have a voice, but how does it help, if they'll always be voted out?) And if so (and this being a political thread) - Trump being elected is totally legit even though he got less votes (as he was voted by the majority in more than half the states) ? Asking as an outsider - I just feel like everytime the popular opinion does not get voted in - there's an "justified" outcry (but if the majority had won - and there was an outcry by the minority - that's them being childish/not respecting democracy etc.)
- NetStrikeForce 10y ago
  > how does democracy protect the minority? (not saying the minority does not have a voice, but how does it help, if they'll always be voted out?) With separation of powers and the rule of law. > And if so (and this being a political thread) - Trump being elected is totally legit even though he got less votes (as he was voted by the majority in more than half the states) ? 1- Everywhere I've lived in, my vote has had less power than the average of the state / region. I'm OK with that because otherwise all policies will only favour the overpopulated areas. 2- I don't know all the US election details, but apparently you've got a big issue with corruption that in this case reflects on gerrymandering. 3- If the situation was the opposite, Hillary winning despite less votes, I guess you wouldn't consider it legit? Don't answer me, that's easy; answer internally to yourself. Be sincere. 4- Your problem with Trump is that your "left" candidate is so to the right, that there's no room for human decency at her right. Just think about it, what's a more right-wing policy that doesn't go against climate change, equality/equity, worker's rights, military intervention, radicalisation of your police force, for profit prison system, stupid healthcare system, ... Should I keep going? > Asking as an outsider - I just feel like everytime the popular opinion does not get voted in - there's an "justified" outcry (but if the majority had won - and there was an outcry by the minority - that's them being childish/not respecting democracy etc.) There are always outcries when there's a strong division on a topic. We need to make sure our values stand every single time, whether our opinion wins or we loses.
JohnStrange 10y ago
It is not the tyranny of the majority, because a modern democracy protects and respects minorities, and the concerns of the majority are also into account. At least, that's how it should be.
- NetStrikeForce 10y ago
  Yes, in an ideal world. However, "modern democracies" like Switzerland implement tyranny: http://www.thelocal.ch/20160609/immigrant-family-denied-swiss-citizenship-over-choice-of-clothes http://www.thelocal.ch/20160609/immigrant-family-denied-swis... http://www.thelocal.ch/20170109/annoying-anti-cow-bell-campaigner-denied-swiss-passport http://www.thelocal.ch/20170109/annoying-anti-cow-bell-campa... (There are more sources for both, in case you don't trust this one) Direct democracy is good, but we still don't seem to know how to implement it right or make a responsible use of it.
  - JohnStrange 10y ago
    My suggestion to make direct democracy (plebiscite) work is to turn it into a mild form of technocracy. You'd have to pass an easy test made of a small random selection of Q&A's about a limited number of published facts similar to the theoretical part of drivers license tests, before you can cast your vote. So participation would require some effort and some dedication, though not any higher education or a lot of time investment. This suggestion is unpopular among people who deny that there are facts and reality. These people exist both on the left (e.g. `social constructivism about science') and the right (e.g. recent trends among some Trump supporters) side of the political spectrum. Anybody who has no trouble with reality and has passed a drivers license should have no problems with it, though.
    - NetStrikeForce 10y ago
      I don't think it does matter though. Clever, wise and motivated people can also be arseholes and vote against you having local passport because you usually wear a tracksuit, are vegan or think cowbells not right.

Further proof many, many people don't understand democracy and think you're not allowed a voice. People, democracy is not the tyranny of the majority. Quite the opposite actually.

ohstopitu 10y ago

how does democracy protect the minority? (not saying the minority does not have a voice, but how does it help, if they'll always be voted out?) And if so (and this being a political thread) - Trump being elected is totally legit even though he got less votes (as he was voted by the majority in more than half the states) ? Asking as an outsider - I just feel like everytime the popular opinion does not get voted in - there's an "justified" outcry (but if the majority had won - and there was an outcry by the minority - that's them being childish/not respecting democracy etc.)

NetStrikeForce 10y ago
> how does democracy protect the minority? (not saying the minority does not have a voice, but how does it help, if they'll always be voted out?) With separation of powers and the rule of law. > And if so (and this being a political thread) - Trump being elected is totally legit even though he got less votes (as he was voted by the majority in more than half the states) ? 1- Everywhere I've lived in, my vote has had less power than the average of the state / region. I'm OK with that because otherwise all policies will only favour the overpopulated areas. 2- I don't know all the US election details, but apparently you've got a big issue with corruption that in this case reflects on gerrymandering. 3- If the situation was the opposite, Hillary winning despite less votes, I guess you wouldn't consider it legit? Don't answer me, that's easy; answer internally to yourself. Be sincere. 4- Your problem with Trump is that your "left" candidate is so to the right, that there's no room for human decency at her right. Just think about it, what's a more right-wing policy that doesn't go against climate change, equality/equity, worker's rights, military intervention, radicalisation of your police force, for profit prison system, stupid healthcare system, ... Should I keep going? > Asking as an outsider - I just feel like everytime the popular opinion does not get voted in - there's an "justified" outcry (but if the majority had won - and there was an outcry by the minority - that's them being childish/not respecting democracy etc.) There are always outcries when there's a strong division on a topic. We need to make sure our values stand every single time, whether our opinion wins or we loses.

JohnStrange 10y ago

It is not the tyranny of the majority, because a modern democracy protects and respects minorities, and the concerns of the majority are also into account. At least, that's how it should be.

NetStrikeForce 10y ago
Yes, in an ideal world. However, "modern democracies" like Switzerland implement tyranny: http://www.thelocal.ch/20160609/immigrant-family-denied-swiss-citizenship-over-choice-of-clothes http://www.thelocal.ch/20160609/immigrant-family-denied-swis... http://www.thelocal.ch/20170109/annoying-anti-cow-bell-campaigner-denied-swiss-passport http://www.thelocal.ch/20170109/annoying-anti-cow-bell-campa... (There are more sources for both, in case you don't trust this one) Direct democracy is good, but we still don't seem to know how to implement it right or make a responsible use of it.
- JohnStrange 10y ago
  My suggestion to make direct democracy (plebiscite) work is to turn it into a mild form of technocracy. You'd have to pass an easy test made of a small random selection of Q&A's about a limited number of published facts similar to the theoretical part of drivers license tests, before you can cast your vote. So participation would require some effort and some dedication, though not any higher education or a lot of time investment. This suggestion is unpopular among people who deny that there are facts and reality. These people exist both on the left (e.g. `social constructivism about science') and the right (e.g. recent trends among some Trump supporters) side of the political spectrum. Anybody who has no trouble with reality and has passed a drivers license should have no problems with it, though.
  - NetStrikeForce 10y ago
    I don't think it does matter though. Clever, wise and motivated people can also be arseholes and vote against you having local passport because you usually wear a tracksuit, are vegan or think cowbells not right.