4 ms·

"Today, corrupt politicians put on another dog and pony show while continuing business as usual. Is our democracy secretly a farce? Details at 11."

Covzire 3y ago
It's "our" democracy, not our democracy it seems.
- vGPU 3y ago
  The difference between a representative and a true democracy.
  - xkekjrktllss 3y ago
    A representative democracy would require at least some politicians representing working cutizens.
    - vGPU 3y ago
      We do have some of those. The only problem is that they have a rather unfortunate habit of dying.
howmayiannoyyou 3y ago
No. We cannot have our cake and eat it too. We cannot have unprotected, open borders for decades, and then expect to identify and track foreign internal threats AND not provide the USGOV the means to detect and surveil. We cannot assume that because we're an HN regular who thinks power corrupts (it certainly does) the cost of that corruption is greater than what we pay if/when a foreign adversary acts against the US. We simply cannot fulfill our obligations to our citizens or our allies if we cannot protect our home. We cannot have it all. Welcome to the ugly real world.
- kingkawn 3y ago
  So lets give up the "destructive expansionist ambitions lead to global threats" part
- stronglikedan 3y ago
  No. We can. Protect the citizens' rights. Detect and surveil non-citizens as a result of open borders all they want, but don't trample on the rights of the citizens in the name of safety.
- vGPU 3y ago
  Ok, so let’s deport everyone who came in through said unprotected open borders. That’s literally why borders exist. To keep foreign threats… foreign.
  - daveguy 3y ago
    Weird how the most prominent example of terrorism on American soil from foreign agents was perpetrated with completely legal non-land-border penetration. Seems like we have locals lot more dangerous than anyone coming through the land border with Mexico to work or seek asylum in the US. Actual foreign terrorists just aren't as ignorant as you want them to be.
    - seanw444 3y ago
      Okay so your solution is: open borders and heavier government surveillance to balance it? Fantastic.
      - daveguy 3y ago
        I think you missed the point.
    - Levitz 3y ago
      So what? Sorry but this is not even a bad argument, it's just not an argument at all. Most shootings are not in schools, so school shootings aren't a problem? Most drug addictions come from prescribed drugs, so heroin and fentanyl being sold on the street is fine?
stevespang 3y ago
[dead]
ethbr1 3y ago
Or, everyone could get off their asses and carry their weight as a citizen in a democracy. Nihilistic dismissal of the right to vote is lazy. Nobody said upholding your rights was going to be easy. Organization, affiliation, communication all take work. Get involved in primaries, for either party! Fewer voters and even more power there. Yard signs are cheap. Make your own. Make this an issue. Or, if you need to hear it in Tom Hanks' voice: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-c_ctZ4lUCk https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-c_ctZ4lUCk
- PKop 3y ago
  And belief that the masses organizing and voting can have power over Leviathan and its bureaucrats is delusional. They just keep pushing these policies and power grabs until they go through, and/or lie about the components of them. There's no practical check on deep state power such as this in today's so-called-democracy. You would need some counter-elite faction that already has foothold on power to oppose current power structure. Revolutions (and that's what is necessary to change current policies) never come from the bottom up.
  - unethical_ban 3y ago
    I don't think that American electoral systems allow proper accountability of political leaders. That isn't a criticism of democracy, it's a criticism of a two-party system with no ability for change from the outside.
- psychlops 3y ago
  Decades of a democracy that worked has created generations of complacent people who do not participate, follow the rules, and expect things to continue to work out as they always have. I highly doubt anything except absence of democracy will change this perception.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

Covzire 3y ago

It's "our" democracy, not our democracy it seems.

vGPU 3y ago
The difference between a representative and a true democracy.
- xkekjrktllss 3y ago
  A representative democracy would require at least some politicians representing working cutizens.
  - vGPU 3y ago
    We do have some of those. The only problem is that they have a rather unfortunate habit of dying.

howmayiannoyyou 3y ago

No. We cannot have our cake and eat it too. We cannot have unprotected, open borders for decades, and then expect to identify and track foreign internal threats AND not provide the USGOV the means to detect and surveil. We cannot assume that because we're an HN regular who thinks power corrupts (it certainly does) the cost of that corruption is greater than what we pay if/when a foreign adversary acts against the US. We simply cannot fulfill our obligations to our citizens or our allies if we cannot protect our home. We cannot have it all. Welcome to the ugly real world.

kingkawn 3y ago
So lets give up the "destructive expansionist ambitions lead to global threats" part
stronglikedan 3y ago
No. We can. Protect the citizens' rights. Detect and surveil non-citizens as a result of open borders all they want, but don't trample on the rights of the citizens in the name of safety.
vGPU 3y ago
Ok, so let’s deport everyone who came in through said unprotected open borders. That’s literally why borders exist. To keep foreign threats… foreign.
- daveguy 3y ago
  Weird how the most prominent example of terrorism on American soil from foreign agents was perpetrated with completely legal non-land-border penetration. Seems like we have locals lot more dangerous than anyone coming through the land border with Mexico to work or seek asylum in the US. Actual foreign terrorists just aren't as ignorant as you want them to be.
  - seanw444 3y ago
    Okay so your solution is: open borders and heavier government surveillance to balance it? Fantastic.
    - daveguy 3y ago
      I think you missed the point.
  - Levitz 3y ago
    So what? Sorry but this is not even a bad argument, it's just not an argument at all. Most shootings are not in schools, so school shootings aren't a problem? Most drug addictions come from prescribed drugs, so heroin and fentanyl being sold on the street is fine?

stevespang 3y ago

[dead]

ethbr1 3y ago

Or, everyone could get off their asses and carry their weight as a citizen in a democracy. Nihilistic dismissal of the right to vote is lazy. Nobody said upholding your rights was going to be easy. Organization, affiliation, communication all take work. Get involved in primaries, for either party! Fewer voters and even more power there. Yard signs are cheap. Make your own. Make this an issue. Or, if you need to hear it in Tom Hanks' voice: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-c_ctZ4lUCk https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-c_ctZ4lUCk

PKop 3y ago
And belief that the masses organizing and voting can have power over Leviathan and its bureaucrats is delusional. They just keep pushing these policies and power grabs until they go through, and/or lie about the components of them. There's no practical check on deep state power such as this in today's so-called-democracy. You would need some counter-elite faction that already has foothold on power to oppose current power structure. Revolutions (and that's what is necessary to change current policies) never come from the bottom up.
- unethical_ban 3y ago
  I don't think that American electoral systems allow proper accountability of political leaders. That isn't a criticism of democracy, it's a criticism of a two-party system with no ability for change from the outside.
psychlops 3y ago
Decades of a democracy that worked has created generations of complacent people who do not participate, follow the rules, and expect things to continue to work out as they always have. I highly doubt anything except absence of democracy will change this perception.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]