4 ms·

Some sort of democracy means the various types of democracy deployed in the world. Switzerland to US, whatever. When did it take away citizens right to vote? Y

Some sort of democracy means the various types of democracy deployed in the world. Switzerland to US, whatever. When did it take away citizens right to vote? You're talking about felons not being able to vote? Yeah I agree with getting rid of that, getting rid of gerrymandering etc. You can be a critic of implementations the system and yet still support the underlying mechanism. You're supposed to feel like you have a say and not BE in control. Yes minority groups will have less power, that is fine. "There's nothing making this system better..." "I grant you there are clearly far more freedoms in the western..." The US will basically spread democracy and capitalism. True capitalism is bad for the entrenched CCP, Russia oligarchs, etc because the US multinationals will inject their capital in the system and take control of everything. Of course they want to keep power. I think there should be some guarantees of the country keeping some ownership over their production. CCP and Russia are trying to lock down their systems and increase their competitive output, so that when they clash with the West they can compete on value/innovation. I'm not saying the system is perfect, it's obviously coopted by different groups. But it is as close to perfect as exists in the world today.

buran77 6y ago
> You can be a critic of implementations the system and yet still support the underlying mechanism So the theory is great if only we ignore the practice? A protection racket works on solid mechanisms and even principles in theory. The implementation just needs the small detail of breaking the law. It also looks great from inside if you benefit even the least bit from it, but criminal from the outside. > The US will basically spread democracy and capitalism. Lots of countries became democratic and capitalistic because the US explosively "spread" them? What was the cost for those countries to still not achieve that? Protection rackets might have more satisfied customers. > True capitalism is bad for the entrenched CCP I'm not sure you understand what "true capitalism" means. Short version, it's not great for the regular person. There's no room for protections and you're only as valuable as your contribution to someone else's bottom line. Sounds familiar? Now I honestly wonder what happens if you apply "pure capitalism" to a country of 1.5 billion knowing that either the theory or the practice encourage lobbying (buying) for laws to favor the few, and selectively adjust the democratic process to eliminate the most inconvenient votes. > But it is as close to perfect In theory. But you'd have to be naive to believe that the US goes anywhere just to spread the good word, especially considering the current track record doing that and that since as you agreed they themselves are far from nailing the practice. Other countries have nailed both, take Scandinavian countries where people are treated equal, the GDP per capita is similar to the US's (+/- $10k), and the democratic process works in practice. Why isn't the US importing that rather than being concerned with exporting theirs? Look, I don't know where you get your facts, your opinions, your education from but it's not the right place. The system failed you and hasn't prepared you for this conversation.
- throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
  He asked: > When did it take away citizens right to vote? You chose not to answer that. It is key. > Look, I don't know where you get your facts, your opinions, your education from but it's not the right place. The system failed you and hasn't prepared you for this conversation. Again, I've flagged your post.
  - buran77 6y ago
    > Again, I've flagged your post. Ah, the revenge flag from the throwaway account of a throwaway account. That must carry a lot of weight around here. But your other statement muddles your argument. > You chose not to answer that. It is key. You're implying I have the answer, the "key". This would make the very statement you flagged my previous comment for (that you are unprepared for this conversation) a matter of fact, rather than opinion. And I asked why you'd need to use a throwaway account if you trusted your opinions are decent and here we are with yet another throwaway who happened to stumble across an HN post that was already buried away very deep. Asking for "the answer" is a typical method of bogging down any conversation. I'll answer nonetheless but know that needing answers from me is admitting your opinions lack this information.* So what about the 3 million citizens who's vote was ignored in order for the current president to win? That "close to perfect" system is made in such a way that the many can vote but in the end it's the few that actually choose the winner. By this definition Russia is just as much a democracy, people got to vote. Even in China the leader was voted... just by a very, very small minority within the party. A democracy is more than the exercise of going to a voting booth, it's enacting the will of the majority. And it's enabling your citizens to exercise their right. People lose their right to vote for the most minor of infractions (like being unable to pay a parking fine and the the avalanche of extra costs that pours on them)? Voter ID laws take away the possibility to vote from hundreds of thousands of people in almost each state. Obstacles are put in their path when trying to obtain voter ID cards (asking for more and more ridiculous documents with every visit, or having offices that are open 5 non-consecutive days per year!!). Black or latino will know this better. You can't say the US has to focus on bringing democratic values to China while its citizens still have to go in the street to shout BLM in 2020. For a right so basic as voting you'd expect the country to do its best to enable the voters, not to deter them. But millions of people are taken that right away, millions more are deterred as much as possible from exercising it, and many, many more get to exercise it but it doesn't count. What good is perfect theory if the practice is so deeply flawed? Theories are usually perfect, communism, planned economies, benevolent dictatorships, they're all perfect in theory. But we live in practice. * You ask me for answers to questions that form the basis of this conversation. I think saying that you are unprepared for it is simply an objective confirmation of your admission that (in your words) I have the key and you do not.

buran77 6y ago

> You can be a critic of implementations the system and yet still support the underlying mechanism So the theory is great if only we ignore the practice? A protection racket works on solid mechanisms and even principles in theory. The implementation just needs the small detail of breaking the law. It also looks great from inside if you benefit even the least bit from it, but criminal from the outside. > The US will basically spread democracy and capitalism. Lots of countries became democratic and capitalistic because the US explosively "spread" them? What was the cost for those countries to still not achieve that? Protection rackets might have more satisfied customers. > True capitalism is bad for the entrenched CCP I'm not sure you understand what "true capitalism" means. Short version, it's not great for the regular person. There's no room for protections and you're only as valuable as your contribution to someone else's bottom line. Sounds familiar? Now I honestly wonder what happens if you apply "pure capitalism" to a country of 1.5 billion knowing that either the theory or the practice encourage lobbying (buying) for laws to favor the few, and selectively adjust the democratic process to eliminate the most inconvenient votes. > But it is as close to perfect In theory. But you'd have to be naive to believe that the US goes anywhere just to spread the good word, especially considering the current track record doing that and that since as you agreed they themselves are far from nailing the practice. Other countries have nailed both, take Scandinavian countries where people are treated equal, the GDP per capita is similar to the US's (+/- $10k), and the democratic process works in practice. Why isn't the US importing that rather than being concerned with exporting theirs? Look, I don't know where you get your facts, your opinions, your education from but it's not the right place. The system failed you and hasn't prepared you for this conversation.

throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
He asked: > When did it take away citizens right to vote? You chose not to answer that. It is key. > Look, I don't know where you get your facts, your opinions, your education from but it's not the right place. The system failed you and hasn't prepared you for this conversation. Again, I've flagged your post.
- buran77 6y ago
  > Again, I've flagged your post. Ah, the revenge flag from the throwaway account of a throwaway account. That must carry a lot of weight around here. But your other statement muddles your argument. > You chose not to answer that. It is key. You're implying I have the answer, the "key". This would make the very statement you flagged my previous comment for (that you are unprepared for this conversation) a matter of fact, rather than opinion. And I asked why you'd need to use a throwaway account if you trusted your opinions are decent and here we are with yet another throwaway who happened to stumble across an HN post that was already buried away very deep. Asking for "the answer" is a typical method of bogging down any conversation. I'll answer nonetheless but know that needing answers from me is admitting your opinions lack this information.* So what about the 3 million citizens who's vote was ignored in order for the current president to win? That "close to perfect" system is made in such a way that the many can vote but in the end it's the few that actually choose the winner. By this definition Russia is just as much a democracy, people got to vote. Even in China the leader was voted... just by a very, very small minority within the party. A democracy is more than the exercise of going to a voting booth, it's enacting the will of the majority. And it's enabling your citizens to exercise their right. People lose their right to vote for the most minor of infractions (like being unable to pay a parking fine and the the avalanche of extra costs that pours on them)? Voter ID laws take away the possibility to vote from hundreds of thousands of people in almost each state. Obstacles are put in their path when trying to obtain voter ID cards (asking for more and more ridiculous documents with every visit, or having offices that are open 5 non-consecutive days per year!!). Black or latino will know this better. You can't say the US has to focus on bringing democratic values to China while its citizens still have to go in the street to shout BLM in 2020. For a right so basic as voting you'd expect the country to do its best to enable the voters, not to deter them. But millions of people are taken that right away, millions more are deterred as much as possible from exercising it, and many, many more get to exercise it but it doesn't count. What good is perfect theory if the practice is so deeply flawed? Theories are usually perfect, communism, planned economies, benevolent dictatorships, they're all perfect in theory. But we live in practice. * You ask me for answers to questions that form the basis of this conversation. I think saying that you are unprepared for it is simply an objective confirmation of your admission that (in your words) I have the key and you do not.