3 ms·

>Representative democracy doesn't mean that every possible policy could be enacted by some realistic configuration of elected representatives, even if any parti

>Representative democracy doesn't mean that every possible policy could be enacted by some realistic configuration of elected representatives, even if any particular policy is supported by a majority of the electorate. that is only true if you flatten your system to two parties.

School-Cotton 1y ago
> that is only true if you flatten your system to two parties. Again with the "you". "We" did not flatten anything into anything; we were born into an unfair and broken system that we have no power to change.
- MarceColl 1y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_you
  - School-Cotton 1y ago
    Huh? This is a completely different thing.
- Xelbair 1y ago
  blame English language on lack of distinction between plural(referring to 'your society' in this case) and singular you. I don't think that's a hard concept to grasp.
  - School-Cotton 1y ago
    No, this has nothing to do with English grammar. I understand that you are using "you" in the plural, here. What I reject is the premise that "Americans" is an identifiable group that is collectively responsible for any particular thing, extending to people who never supported or voted for that thing. This is a philosophical disagreement, not an issue of language.
    - Xelbair 1y ago
      In democratic system(please spare me "we're republic not a democracy" adage that every American spewes) every citizen votes, and shares responsibility in decision making process. You can become politically active and try to convince others if you don't like current status quo, inaction is also a choice. Unless you think US isn't a democratic country but authoritarian one(either oligarchy, technocracy or whatever - does not matter) then it is definitely not a philosophical disagreement, but lack of responsibility and wishful thinking.
      - School-Cotton 1y ago
        > every citizen votes, and shares responsibility in decision making process Why? I never consented to be a part of the system, don't agree with it, and in practice can do nothing to change it. Saying I'm responsible for it because I happened to be arbitrarily born with a particular citizenship is meaningless. > In democratic system... There is no reason why I, an unrelated individual, should have to ascribe to the ideals espoused by proponents of the system imposed on me without my consent.
        Xelbair 1y ago
        You might not believe in system and ignore it - your choice. but it exists. You live in it, and it is part of your reality so your only choices are to emigrate somewhere undemocratic, or be part of it. It is pure denial of reality otherwise.
- Planktonne 1y ago
  This is also true of Iranians. People are pointing out the hypocrisy of demonising Iranians for the actions of their government while insisting that Americans are unwilling victims of theirs.
  - bigstrat2003 1y ago
    I'm not demonizing Iranians. I have no beef with them whatsoever.
pirates 1y ago
But you know that in this case it’s true since the discussion is about the US in particular. So this “enlightened” take is really just snide time wasting.

School-Cotton 1y ago

> that is only true if you flatten your system to two parties. Again with the "you". "We" did not flatten anything into anything; we were born into an unfair and broken system that we have no power to change.

MarceColl 1y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_you
- School-Cotton 1y ago
  Huh? This is a completely different thing.
Xelbair 1y ago
blame English language on lack of distinction between plural(referring to 'your society' in this case) and singular you. I don't think that's a hard concept to grasp.
- School-Cotton 1y ago
  No, this has nothing to do with English grammar. I understand that you are using "you" in the plural, here. What I reject is the premise that "Americans" is an identifiable group that is collectively responsible for any particular thing, extending to people who never supported or voted for that thing. This is a philosophical disagreement, not an issue of language.
  - Xelbair 1y ago
    In democratic system(please spare me "we're republic not a democracy" adage that every American spewes) every citizen votes, and shares responsibility in decision making process. You can become politically active and try to convince others if you don't like current status quo, inaction is also a choice. Unless you think US isn't a democratic country but authoritarian one(either oligarchy, technocracy or whatever - does not matter) then it is definitely not a philosophical disagreement, but lack of responsibility and wishful thinking.
    - School-Cotton 1y ago
      > every citizen votes, and shares responsibility in decision making process Why? I never consented to be a part of the system, don't agree with it, and in practice can do nothing to change it. Saying I'm responsible for it because I happened to be arbitrarily born with a particular citizenship is meaningless. > In democratic system... There is no reason why I, an unrelated individual, should have to ascribe to the ideals espoused by proponents of the system imposed on me without my consent.
      - Xelbair 1y ago
        You might not believe in system and ignore it - your choice. but it exists. You live in it, and it is part of your reality so your only choices are to emigrate somewhere undemocratic, or be part of it. It is pure denial of reality otherwise.
Planktonne 1y ago
This is also true of Iranians. People are pointing out the hypocrisy of demonising Iranians for the actions of their government while insisting that Americans are unwilling victims of theirs.
- bigstrat2003 1y ago
  I'm not demonizing Iranians. I have no beef with them whatsoever.

pirates 1y ago

But you know that in this case it’s true since the discussion is about the US in particular. So this “enlightened” take is really just snide time wasting.