5 ms·

Looking at the 2020 results, it seems like a remarkably good outcome to me. The trouble is that any leader who tries to expand term limits gets a relatively goo

Looking at the 2020 results, it seems like a remarkably good outcome to me. The trouble is that any leader who tries to expand term limits gets a relatively good deal probability wise, while the society gets a lot of uncertainty followed by a high probability of dictator. Consequences of trying to raise term limits should be many and more severe.

boomboomsubban 6y ago
>Consequences of trying to raise term limits should be many and more severe More severe then a foreign backed coup? I don't disagree that raising term limits is sketchy, but the punishment seems far more worthy of condemnation.
- foolmeonce 6y ago
  The power of foreign governments wax and wane, a permanent president is eventually a dictator and has all the necessary local resources to stay put. It is unfortunate for other countries that the precedents haven't been severe. I don't think Putin, Erdogan or Morales can reasonably regret not taking their standard ex-President package.
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    So democracy doesn't really mean much to you, people making the "wrong" choice need their betters to step in and correct that choice.
    - foolmeonce 6y ago
      Democracy is important to me, and therefore republics that have limits to maintain it. If killing a leader who increases his power within a republic is a problem for you then you value a world where democracy for one generation can choose dictators for the next. That is a world that can't maintain democracy.
      - boomboomsubban 6y ago
        A foreign coup to overthrow a popularly elected president is the antithesis of democracy, even if you worry the person may be gathering too much power. It's the right of the governed to decide their government, and sacrificing democracy for this generation does not help democracy in future generations. And this all ignores that it is ridiculous to claim this coup had anything to do with Morales bring president too long. We have no problems associating with open dictatorships.
        foolmeonce 6y ago
        Right, and to mirror your stance, I must claim you are against republics limiting the will of a people, so you are pro-genocide?
        boomboomsubban 6y ago
        Yep, genocide and having another term in office are completely equivalent. Neither government nor people should have the right to kill, outside interference to save someone's life is completely different from outside interference to undue a democratic vote. Out of curiosity, do you regret that the USSR did not launch a coup to stop FDR's third term?
        foolmeonce 6y ago
        Yes Stalin was the perfect person to enforce non-existent civil rights. But I think not wanting the 22nd amendment to come to pass and restrict the majority's essential right to self ungoverning, was your position? It would be great to have spent my whole life living in fear of the Reagan youth. Don't forget to eat your ketchup!
        boomboomsubban 6y ago
        The US does not have a track record that gives them the right to "enforce civil rights" in South America either, yet you don't fault their interference. And if you don't object to it as FDR technically broke no law why do you object to what either Morales or Putin did?

boomboomsubban 6y ago

>Consequences of trying to raise term limits should be many and more severe More severe then a foreign backed coup? I don't disagree that raising term limits is sketchy, but the punishment seems far more worthy of condemnation.

foolmeonce 6y ago
The power of foreign governments wax and wane, a permanent president is eventually a dictator and has all the necessary local resources to stay put. It is unfortunate for other countries that the precedents haven't been severe. I don't think Putin, Erdogan or Morales can reasonably regret not taking their standard ex-President package.
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  So democracy doesn't really mean much to you, people making the "wrong" choice need their betters to step in and correct that choice.
  - foolmeonce 6y ago
    Democracy is important to me, and therefore republics that have limits to maintain it. If killing a leader who increases his power within a republic is a problem for you then you value a world where democracy for one generation can choose dictators for the next. That is a world that can't maintain democracy.
    - boomboomsubban 6y ago
      A foreign coup to overthrow a popularly elected president is the antithesis of democracy, even if you worry the person may be gathering too much power. It's the right of the governed to decide their government, and sacrificing democracy for this generation does not help democracy in future generations. And this all ignores that it is ridiculous to claim this coup had anything to do with Morales bring president too long. We have no problems associating with open dictatorships.
      - foolmeonce 6y ago
        Right, and to mirror your stance, I must claim you are against republics limiting the will of a people, so you are pro-genocide?
        boomboomsubban 6y ago
        Yep, genocide and having another term in office are completely equivalent. Neither government nor people should have the right to kill, outside interference to save someone's life is completely different from outside interference to undue a democratic vote. Out of curiosity, do you regret that the USSR did not launch a coup to stop FDR's third term?
        foolmeonce 6y ago
        Yes Stalin was the perfect person to enforce non-existent civil rights. But I think not wanting the 22nd amendment to come to pass and restrict the majority's essential right to self ungoverning, was your position? It would be great to have spent my whole life living in fear of the Reagan youth. Don't forget to eat your ketchup!
        boomboomsubban 6y ago
        The US does not have a track record that gives them the right to "enforce civil rights" in South America either, yet you don't fault their interference. And if you don't object to it as FDR technically broke no law why do you object to what either Morales or Putin did?