4 ms·

> If the US is a bad political experiment, which one is good? Switzerland, one the only real democracy.

by vidoc 7y ago

implements 7y ago
Not if you define democracy as rule that occurs within a framework of fundamental human rights. The Swiss were denying women the vote in federal elections until the early 1970s. And that's the problem with 'tyranny of the masses' - popular isn't the measure of good, just or rational.
- DubiousPusher 7y ago
  I think people overstate the problems witr Democracies vs. Republics. Looking at the history of the U.S. there is very little evidence to suggest that Republicanism has resulted in a non-tyranical majority rule. In fact, the only thing I can see that has maintained any rights for social, political and racial minorities in U.S. history is the Bill of Rights Andrew that frequently ignored or tempered until the post WWII era.
AnimalMuppet 7y ago
To address crawfordcomeaux's point: Does Switzerland let you peacefully revoke your consent to be governed? No, I'm pretty sure it does not. Does any country allow that? No. So why pick on the US?
- crawfordcomeaux 7y ago
  Cause it's where I live and it's where the cultures and legal systems I'm attempting to hack are located. It's the state asserting itself over my child in some way, which I don't recognize as mine to give away on their behalf. And that's a religious standpoint, so I'm curious how the US might handle this situation. It does beg broader questions about potentially every government, as well.
  - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
    Well, a good hack has to actually work. I think you need a different avenue of attack, because the one your trying isn't going to work, ever, anywhere.
    - crawfordcomeaux 7y ago
      A good hack is experimental and scientific, designed to test hypotheses. "the one your trying isn't going to work, ever, anywhere" is an assumption worth converting into an hypothesis and testing the shit out of cause it's a super disempowered stance to take. What leads you to say it isn't going to work, ever, anywhere?
      - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
        Government is that which can make its rules apply to you, even if you don't want them to. Saying "I never consented to these rules" works only if the government says it does. And for the government to say that the rules don't apply to you, while you remain within the area ruled by that government, is to ask for the government to become a voluntary organization, that is, no longer really a government. Since more of us what a functioning government than want what you want, that would be asking the government to abdicate its responsibility. So... yeah. You're not going to get it. And, "deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed" didn't mean the consent of each individual. It meant the consent of the group. Back to hacks. A hack, in my book, is an unconventional, unexpected way of doing something. A way that breaks the rules, even. But not a way of beating your head against a wall. For it to be a hack, it has to work.

> If the US is a bad political experiment, which one is good? Switzerland, one the only real democracy.

by vidoc 7y ago

> If the US is a bad political experiment, which one is good? Switzerland, one the only real democracy.

Not if you define democracy as rule that occurs within a framework of fundamental human rights. The Swiss were denying women the vote in federal elections until the early 1970s. And that's the problem with 'tyranny of the masses' - popular isn't the measure of good, just or rational.

DubiousPusher 7y ago
I think people overstate the problems witr Democracies vs. Republics. Looking at the history of the U.S. there is very little evidence to suggest that Republicanism has resulted in a non-tyranical majority rule. In fact, the only thing I can see that has maintained any rights for social, political and racial minorities in U.S. history is the Bill of Rights Andrew that frequently ignored or tempered until the post WWII era.

AnimalMuppet 7y ago

To address crawfordcomeaux's point: Does Switzerland let you peacefully revoke your consent to be governed? No, I'm pretty sure it does not. Does any country allow that? No. So why pick on the US?

crawfordcomeaux 7y ago
Cause it's where I live and it's where the cultures and legal systems I'm attempting to hack are located. It's the state asserting itself over my child in some way, which I don't recognize as mine to give away on their behalf. And that's a religious standpoint, so I'm curious how the US might handle this situation. It does beg broader questions about potentially every government, as well.
- AnimalMuppet 7y ago
  Well, a good hack has to actually work. I think you need a different avenue of attack, because the one your trying isn't going to work, ever, anywhere.
  - crawfordcomeaux 7y ago
    A good hack is experimental and scientific, designed to test hypotheses. "the one your trying isn't going to work, ever, anywhere" is an assumption worth converting into an hypothesis and testing the shit out of cause it's a super disempowered stance to take. What leads you to say it isn't going to work, ever, anywhere?
    - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
      Government is that which can make its rules apply to you, even if you don't want them to. Saying "I never consented to these rules" works only if the government says it does. And for the government to say that the rules don't apply to you, while you remain within the area ruled by that government, is to ask for the government to become a voluntary organization, that is, no longer really a government. Since more of us what a functioning government than want what you want, that would be asking the government to abdicate its responsibility. So... yeah. You're not going to get it. And, "deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed" didn't mean the consent of each individual. It meant the consent of the group. Back to hacks. A hack, in my book, is an unconventional, unexpected way of doing something. A way that breaks the rules, even. But not a way of beating your head against a wall. For it to be a hack, it has to work.