5 ms·

> the majority realizes they can't tyrannize the minority because the minority can run away and work under their own system of law Keep going. What happens whe

by dpark 10mo ago

> the majority realizes they can't tyrannize the minority because the minority can run away and work under their own system of law Keep going. What happens when the majority refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of the minority government? Go down the hole deep enough and you’ll figure out why everyone who doesn’t want to be a dictator or a dictator’s lackey prefers democracy.

mothballed 10mo ago
Why would the minority prefer to live under a 'democracy' when the majority have decided they would kill them because they don't acknowledge their 'legitimacy'? That's when they need to avoid monopolistic democracy the most! You present the strongest case for my argument! Under the split model they at least have a chance; the minority can bind together, form alliances, and frustrate the 'majorities' force. This is what we see on the world stage -- minority populations like USA or India form alliances and somehow survive without a world government to force the will of a vote of the majority of the world. The USA population is a minority and most are extremely happy it's not a world democracy which is what the logical conclusion of your argument leads to, based on your implied threat that minority USA would experience. Under your proposal, they all simply are voted into being democracy's 'lackey' assuming the majority don't simply vote them dead. Not to mention you're contradicting yourself in your statement -- a dictatorship is a minority rule yet you imply they can't exist because the majority would destroy the minority in power. In reality even in the incredibly unlikely case minorities can't form alliances strong enough it's not worth the risk to try to crush them -- even then in the real world it's often better off for both sides to engage in trade and coexistence rather than to simply kill each other. Of course, even in democracies, war exists, and they would under all other forms of governance.
- dpark 10mo ago
  You can read all about the actual stories of minorities rising up to fight majorities in history books. This isn’t some hypothetical we have to approach from a purely philosophical standpoint. All modern functioning democracies I’m aware of have a set of rights they have agreed everyone has a right to. This has largely been achieved through bloodshed. Your idea that we’re should devolve into feudal tribes seems quite obviously destined to result in a great deal of bloodshed. We have the term warlord to describe those who frequently end up in charge in this sort of arrangement. > a dictatorship is a minority rule yet you imply they can't exist because the majority would destroy the minority in power. Nowhere did I say or imply that. Those in power usually stay in power because they have power. Numbers are only one sort of power.
  - mothballed 10mo ago
    Taiwan is considered by the Chinese to be part of China. Their strongest hypothetical allies, USA, when added to their population doesn't even come close to reaching the population of China. By all counts, they lose the popular vote of China (which again, considers Taiwan part of it). And China does not recognized their 'minority' government. Yet Taiwan still exists, all while having less military power than China. How is that? Seems to throw a bone in your whole idea that a rogue minority government in the envelope of a majority that considers them encompassing part of their country, is destined to fail or devolve into some pre-civilization caveman situation. >>> Keep going. What happens when the majority refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of the minority government? >> a dictatorship is a minority rule yet you imply they can't exist because the majority would destroy the minority in power. >Nowhere did I say or imply that. Those in power usually stay in power because they have power. Numbers are only one sort of power. And here we get to the truth of what you're saying. We can just handwave away 'numbers are only one sort of power' to mean literally anything could happen if the majority refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of the minority government. Including, most common on the world stage, simply carrying on with trade while maintaining a tenuous balance and the occasional wars that happen even on inter or intra democracy lines. Because most often, it's not worth a violent fight. So basically, nothing of interest beyond the status quo to note here. "Go down the hole deep enough" and you’ll figure out why my assertions are true -- the world is a collection of minorities in various alliances that manage to by those means still exist.
    - dpark 10mo ago
      How’s Tibet doing? How’s it going in Georgia? Ukraine? How about the southern United States? Remember when they formed a confederacy and how well that worked out? Taiwan is largely protected by the US. I expect that absent some other interesting developments, Taiwan will indeed eventually be absorbed into China. And I already addressed the population comment. Population alone is not the only factor to power consolidation. I do wonder where you imagine all these disenfranchised minorities are expected to flee to in order to establish their independent nations or whatever. There’s literally no unclaimed land on the Earth aside from Antarctica. Are they going to flee to extremely undesirable areas of their existing country and hope the originating country just doesn’t care enough to stop them? Are they going to break away and take valuable land with them? It’s pretty rare for part of a nation to successfully cleave itself away. Even more rare without a massive war.

by dpark 10mo ago

mothballed 10mo ago

Why would the minority prefer to live under a 'democracy' when the majority have decided they would kill them because they don't acknowledge their 'legitimacy'? That's when they need to avoid monopolistic democracy the most! You present the strongest case for my argument! Under the split model they at least have a chance; the minority can bind together, form alliances, and frustrate the 'majorities' force. This is what we see on the world stage -- minority populations like USA or India form alliances and somehow survive without a world government to force the will of a vote of the majority of the world. The USA population is a minority and most are extremely happy it's not a world democracy which is what the logical conclusion of your argument leads to, based on your implied threat that minority USA would experience. Under your proposal, they all simply are voted into being democracy's 'lackey' assuming the majority don't simply vote them dead. Not to mention you're contradicting yourself in your statement -- a dictatorship is a minority rule yet you imply they can't exist because the majority would destroy the minority in power. In reality even in the incredibly unlikely case minorities can't form alliances strong enough it's not worth the risk to try to crush them -- even then in the real world it's often better off for both sides to engage in trade and coexistence rather than to simply kill each other. Of course, even in democracies, war exists, and they would under all other forms of governance.

dpark 10mo ago
You can read all about the actual stories of minorities rising up to fight majorities in history books. This isn’t some hypothetical we have to approach from a purely philosophical standpoint. All modern functioning democracies I’m aware of have a set of rights they have agreed everyone has a right to. This has largely been achieved through bloodshed. Your idea that we’re should devolve into feudal tribes seems quite obviously destined to result in a great deal of bloodshed. We have the term warlord to describe those who frequently end up in charge in this sort of arrangement. > a dictatorship is a minority rule yet you imply they can't exist because the majority would destroy the minority in power. Nowhere did I say or imply that. Those in power usually stay in power because they have power. Numbers are only one sort of power.
- mothballed 10mo ago
  Taiwan is considered by the Chinese to be part of China. Their strongest hypothetical allies, USA, when added to their population doesn't even come close to reaching the population of China. By all counts, they lose the popular vote of China (which again, considers Taiwan part of it). And China does not recognized their 'minority' government. Yet Taiwan still exists, all while having less military power than China. How is that? Seems to throw a bone in your whole idea that a rogue minority government in the envelope of a majority that considers them encompassing part of their country, is destined to fail or devolve into some pre-civilization caveman situation. >>> Keep going. What happens when the majority refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of the minority government? >> a dictatorship is a minority rule yet you imply they can't exist because the majority would destroy the minority in power. >Nowhere did I say or imply that. Those in power usually stay in power because they have power. Numbers are only one sort of power. And here we get to the truth of what you're saying. We can just handwave away 'numbers are only one sort of power' to mean literally anything could happen if the majority refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of the minority government. Including, most common on the world stage, simply carrying on with trade while maintaining a tenuous balance and the occasional wars that happen even on inter or intra democracy lines. Because most often, it's not worth a violent fight. So basically, nothing of interest beyond the status quo to note here. "Go down the hole deep enough" and you’ll figure out why my assertions are true -- the world is a collection of minorities in various alliances that manage to by those means still exist.
  - dpark 10mo ago
    How’s Tibet doing? How’s it going in Georgia? Ukraine? How about the southern United States? Remember when they formed a confederacy and how well that worked out? Taiwan is largely protected by the US. I expect that absent some other interesting developments, Taiwan will indeed eventually be absorbed into China. And I already addressed the population comment. Population alone is not the only factor to power consolidation. I do wonder where you imagine all these disenfranchised minorities are expected to flee to in order to establish their independent nations or whatever. There’s literally no unclaimed land on the Earth aside from Antarctica. Are they going to flee to extremely undesirable areas of their existing country and hope the originating country just doesn’t care enough to stop them? Are they going to break away and take valuable land with them? It’s pretty rare for part of a nation to successfully cleave itself away. Even more rare without a massive war.