4 ms·

> I think every human being should be given equal weight. Do you disagree? If so, what is your standard for deciding that one person should be given more of a v

> I think every human being should be given equal weight. Do you disagree? If so, what is your standard for deciding that one person should be given more of a voice than another? Tyranny of the majority can manifest itself in a lot of different ways. That's one of them.

landryraccoon 9y ago
That doesn't really answer the question though. Tyranny of the majority is when the rights of the minority are trampled on by the majority. What rights are being trampled on here? I hear lots of buzzwords being thrown around like "hate" and "tyranny". Is it just that you are a member of a privileged minority (members of rural areas or lower population states) that have institutionalized greater representation, and you wish to protect that privilege, or what?
- DashRattlesnake 9y ago
  > What rights are being trampled on here? That's really not that hard of a question to answer, if you're willing to have some empathy and look at things from someone else's point of view. I say that as someone who has always lived in a large city. Clearly, it's the rights of small communities, with significant material and cultural differences from large cities, to have a degree of self-determination and a real say in how they are governed. Your choice of words shows a view that it's somehow unjust for these communities not to be dominated by distant, populous, and likely unsympathetic overlords.
  - gnaritas 9y ago
    Please stop talking about land and talk about people. Urban voters are the ones who deserve empathy, they're the ones being put upon by rural voters. You talk as if the rural voters are the victims here, they are not, they are the minority that is currently privileged by having far more say in the system than they should have because their votes count for more than an urban vote. Why don't you have some sympathy for the majority who is being disenfranchised by a screwed up system? > Your choice of words shows a view that it's somehow unjust for these communities not to be dominated by distant, populous, and likely unsympathetic overlords. Yes, like how small towns are dominating the politics of cities by being heavily favored in elections, oh those poor small towns. Tyranny of the minority indeed. Small communities aren't being trampled upon, they're the ones doing the trampling. A fair system would be one where everyone's vote is equal, not one where people count less because they live too closely together. Rural voters currently have far far too much power given their numbers. A vote in Wyoming is worth 3.6 votes in California, and you're claiming small towns are the victims? Really?
    - DashRattlesnake 9y ago
      > Small communities aren't being trampled upon, they're the ones doing the trampling. lol. You have an hilariously parochial point of view.
      - gnaritas 9y ago
        Perhaps you forgot the question, and your answer >> What rights are being trampled on here? > Clearly, it's the rights of small communities, with significant material and cultural differences from large cities, to have a degree of self-determination and a real say in how they are governed. Your choice of words shows a view that it's somehow unjust for these communities not to be dominated by distant, populous, and likely unsympathetic overlords. That's rich and hilariously wrong. My choice of words reflected the original question.
gnaritas 9y ago
Tyranny of the majority if vastly preferable to tyranny of the minority which is what generally what anyone claiming "tyranny of the majority" is actually trying to promote. I think all votes should count equally... do you not agree?
- DashRattlesnake 9y ago
  FYI, "tyranny of the majority" means the majority gets what it wants, and damn the minorities. > tyranny of the minority If that's how you want to characterize having rights that are protected, go ahead, but it's embarrassingly simplistic.
  - gnaritas 9y ago
    That's how I'm characterizing the current system, currently a rural vote is worth way more than an urban vote; urban voters are currently disenfranchised. We have Trump because the system discriminates against urban voters, i.e. currently the majority is being damned.
    - DashRattlesnake 9y ago
      > urban voters are currently disenfranchised That's an odd way to complain about not being utterly dominant. > We have Trump because the system discriminates against urban voters, i.e. currently the majority is being damned. That's a pretty myopic read of the situation, and not very valuable. The solution to something like Trump is not to create a permanently disenfranchised and forgotten hinterland, which really seems like your desired outcome.
      - gnaritas 9y ago
        What a warped view to interpret my call for a fair system where everyone's vote is equal into creating a "permanently disenfranchised and forgotten hinterland". You're either not listening at all, or you're just too bias to see how biased the system currently is in favor of rural areas. Loss of privilege is not oppression, making the system more fair where all votes are equal does not make the system unfair to rural folk and does not disenfranchise them. You use words you don't seem to understand the meaning of, the only people disenfranchised right now are urban people. Treating every vote equally does not disenfranchise anyone.

landryraccoon 9y ago

That doesn't really answer the question though. Tyranny of the majority is when the rights of the minority are trampled on by the majority. What rights are being trampled on here? I hear lots of buzzwords being thrown around like "hate" and "tyranny". Is it just that you are a member of a privileged minority (members of rural areas or lower population states) that have institutionalized greater representation, and you wish to protect that privilege, or what?

DashRattlesnake 9y ago
> What rights are being trampled on here? That's really not that hard of a question to answer, if you're willing to have some empathy and look at things from someone else's point of view. I say that as someone who has always lived in a large city. Clearly, it's the rights of small communities, with significant material and cultural differences from large cities, to have a degree of self-determination and a real say in how they are governed. Your choice of words shows a view that it's somehow unjust for these communities not to be dominated by distant, populous, and likely unsympathetic overlords.
- gnaritas 9y ago
  Please stop talking about land and talk about people. Urban voters are the ones who deserve empathy, they're the ones being put upon by rural voters. You talk as if the rural voters are the victims here, they are not, they are the minority that is currently privileged by having far more say in the system than they should have because their votes count for more than an urban vote. Why don't you have some sympathy for the majority who is being disenfranchised by a screwed up system? > Your choice of words shows a view that it's somehow unjust for these communities not to be dominated by distant, populous, and likely unsympathetic overlords. Yes, like how small towns are dominating the politics of cities by being heavily favored in elections, oh those poor small towns. Tyranny of the minority indeed. Small communities aren't being trampled upon, they're the ones doing the trampling. A fair system would be one where everyone's vote is equal, not one where people count less because they live too closely together. Rural voters currently have far far too much power given their numbers. A vote in Wyoming is worth 3.6 votes in California, and you're claiming small towns are the victims? Really?
  - DashRattlesnake 9y ago
    > Small communities aren't being trampled upon, they're the ones doing the trampling. lol. You have an hilariously parochial point of view.
    - gnaritas 9y ago
      Perhaps you forgot the question, and your answer >> What rights are being trampled on here? > Clearly, it's the rights of small communities, with significant material and cultural differences from large cities, to have a degree of self-determination and a real say in how they are governed. Your choice of words shows a view that it's somehow unjust for these communities not to be dominated by distant, populous, and likely unsympathetic overlords. That's rich and hilariously wrong. My choice of words reflected the original question.

gnaritas 9y ago

Tyranny of the majority if vastly preferable to tyranny of the minority which is what generally what anyone claiming "tyranny of the majority" is actually trying to promote. I think all votes should count equally... do you not agree?

DashRattlesnake 9y ago
FYI, "tyranny of the majority" means the majority gets what it wants, and damn the minorities. > tyranny of the minority If that's how you want to characterize having rights that are protected, go ahead, but it's embarrassingly simplistic.
- gnaritas 9y ago
  That's how I'm characterizing the current system, currently a rural vote is worth way more than an urban vote; urban voters are currently disenfranchised. We have Trump because the system discriminates against urban voters, i.e. currently the majority is being damned.
  - DashRattlesnake 9y ago
    > urban voters are currently disenfranchised That's an odd way to complain about not being utterly dominant. > We have Trump because the system discriminates against urban voters, i.e. currently the majority is being damned. That's a pretty myopic read of the situation, and not very valuable. The solution to something like Trump is not to create a permanently disenfranchised and forgotten hinterland, which really seems like your desired outcome.
    - gnaritas 9y ago
      What a warped view to interpret my call for a fair system where everyone's vote is equal into creating a "permanently disenfranchised and forgotten hinterland". You're either not listening at all, or you're just too bias to see how biased the system currently is in favor of rural areas. Loss of privilege is not oppression, making the system more fair where all votes are equal does not make the system unfair to rural folk and does not disenfranchise them. You use words you don't seem to understand the meaning of, the only people disenfranchised right now are urban people. Treating every vote equally does not disenfranchise anyone.