2 ms·
> "People we don't agree with, often representing views we don't like, often get into power! Democracy has failed us" > And yet the logical conclusion never se
by tablespoon 5y ago
> "People we don't agree with, often representing views we don't like, often get into power! Democracy has failed us"
> And yet the logical conclusion never seems to be embracing a small limited government.
Come on. A big chunk of the disagreement itself is about the desirability of a "small limited government," so you're basically saying that when there's political disagreement, people should solve it by giving up and just adopting your politics. That's not a "logical conclusion."
- readflaggedcomm 5y agoIt is when the disagreement can be eliminated by reducing a vote's consequences.
- tablespoon 5y ago> It is when the disagreement can be eliminated by reducing a vote's consequences. But that "solution" fails to understand the crux of the disagreement, so it doesn't solve it at all. It's like trying to solve a disagreement over tax rates by abolishing private property.