3 ms·

Or revolt. Voting does nothing when the government has financial backers. 100,000 people on the governor's doorstep ready to riot will get bipartisan legislati

Or revolt. Voting does nothing when the government has financial backers. 100,000 people on the governor's doorstep ready to riot will get bipartisan legislation instilled immediately. The civil rights movement was obviously non violent. However, the unrest, economic effects, and disruption FORCED LBJ, a Democrat who really didn't want it to happen, signing that legislation. Voting in the US is a joke. No minority opinion survives in politics ever. If you go against the grain, you get forced out by other people.

NotSammyHagar 7y ago
You are wrong in your characterization of lbj on this. He schemed for years to get his great society stuff passed and he supported the civil rights act. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964#Johnson's_appeal_to_Congress https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964#Joh... It doesn't always take riots for great changes, maybe sometimes. Voting different leaders in, over time, that can change things.
csomar 7y ago
> 100,000 people on the governor's doorstep ready to riot will get bipartisan legislation instilled immediately. That doesn't sound like democracy.
- t-writescode 7y ago
  The assumption made here is that democracy is always good.
  - ferzul 7y ago
    democracy is better because in extreme situations it works. the u.s. is not exactly a democracy tho, because it is so hard for a third party to be viable it's practically illegal. fptp doesn't do that - see canada, india, the u.k. it's a deliberate choice by the powerful to prevent them from having to listen to the weak - which is exactly the point of democracy.
    - t-writescode 7y ago
      I would actually argue that a dictatorship is better in extreme situations than a democracy. Democracies are slow, dictators can produce edicts in a moment. Even the US has tricks to become an approximation if a dictatorship in times of urgency, with marshal law. You don’t put quarantines to a vote, you quarantine. Democracies are good because you need a lot of people’s buy-off to do something and in the general case, that’s a good thing. In the extreme case, it’s too slow.
- LeoTinnitus 7y ago
  And letting the bourgeoisie make up BS that just benefits the select few at the top is?
blackrock 7y ago
This isn’t the French Revolution anymore. 100,000 people are irrelevant, when the governor has machine guns. And if the people bring guns to the fight, then the governor will bring out the bigger guns: attack helicopters, fighter planes, bombs, etc. Gun ownership is to just make the individual feel better about himself. But, it doesn’t do anything to change the mind of the leadership.

NotSammyHagar 7y ago

You are wrong in your characterization of lbj on this. He schemed for years to get his great society stuff passed and he supported the civil rights act. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964#Johnson's_appeal_to_Congress https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964#Joh... It doesn't always take riots for great changes, maybe sometimes. Voting different leaders in, over time, that can change things.

csomar 7y ago

> 100,000 people on the governor's doorstep ready to riot will get bipartisan legislation instilled immediately. That doesn't sound like democracy.

t-writescode 7y ago
The assumption made here is that democracy is always good.
- ferzul 7y ago
  democracy is better because in extreme situations it works. the u.s. is not exactly a democracy tho, because it is so hard for a third party to be viable it's practically illegal. fptp doesn't do that - see canada, india, the u.k. it's a deliberate choice by the powerful to prevent them from having to listen to the weak - which is exactly the point of democracy.
  - t-writescode 7y ago
    I would actually argue that a dictatorship is better in extreme situations than a democracy. Democracies are slow, dictators can produce edicts in a moment. Even the US has tricks to become an approximation if a dictatorship in times of urgency, with marshal law. You don’t put quarantines to a vote, you quarantine. Democracies are good because you need a lot of people’s buy-off to do something and in the general case, that’s a good thing. In the extreme case, it’s too slow.
LeoTinnitus 7y ago
And letting the bourgeoisie make up BS that just benefits the select few at the top is?

blackrock 7y ago

This isn’t the French Revolution anymore. 100,000 people are irrelevant, when the governor has machine guns. And if the people bring guns to the fight, then the governor will bring out the bigger guns: attack helicopters, fighter planes, bombs, etc. Gun ownership is to just make the individual feel better about himself. But, it doesn’t do anything to change the mind of the leadership.