Total Posts:53|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Need help with these ideas!

Nuzlocke4
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2016 1:43:29 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
Can someone tell me the basic tenants of each of these political views in America, without a biased bent or "clever" one sentence answer?

Libertarianism
Liberalism
Neo-Liberalism
Paleo-Conservatism
Conservatism
Neoconservatism
Democratic Socialist

Please use numerical bullet points for each ideologies different ideas
Ex:

"Communism
No private property
Strong Government
Blah blah blah"
tejretics
Posts: 6,094
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2016 1:59:19 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/26/2016 1:43:29 PM, Nuzlocke4 wrote:
Can someone tell me the basic tenants of each of these political views in America, without a biased bent or "clever" one sentence answer?

Libertarianism

Less government intervention economically and socially. That means right-wing on economic issues (e.g. audit the Fed, cut taxes, abolish the minimum wage, abolish welfare, no social security -- there are exceptions to all of them, obviously) and socially liberal (e.g. pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-drug legalization, con-smoking ban).

Liberalism

Achieving as much equality as possible; that means less government intervention on social issues, but large government on economic issues (e.g. health care, minimum wages, welfare, raised taxes). This means social equality (e.g. pro-gay marriage) and economic equality (trying to combat income inequality).

Neo-Liberalism

Right-wing economic views. That means cutting taxes, cutting government intervention, privatization, free trade, and so forth.

Paleo-Conservatism

Stress on tradition, Western identity and nationalism, with isolationism, anti-immigration, et cetera. Also, lack of government intervention in economic views.

Conservatism

Watch this: https://www.youtube.com...

Neoconservatism

A more globalized, interventionist, pro-free trade form of conservatism, which still believes in lack of government intervention on economic issues (cutting taxes, abolishing minimum wage requirements, reducing welfare).

Democratic Socialist

Political democracy alongside abolishing of private ownership of production (i.e. public property, public production).
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2016 6:34:24 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/26/2016 1:43:29 PM, Nuzlocke4 wrote:
Democratic Socialism

Here are the basic tenets of my views as a democratic socialist.

-Economic Democracy and Workers' Self-Managment
-Human Rights
-Democratic government*
-Social Justice
-Solidarity
-Civil Liberties
Dark-one
Posts: 211
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2016 6:49:38 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/26/2016 6:34:24 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 5/26/2016 1:43:29 PM, Nuzlocke4 wrote:
Democratic Socialism

Here are the basic tenets of my views as a democratic socialist.

-Economic Democracy and Workers' Self-Managment
-Human Rights
-Democratic government*
-Social Justice
-Solidarity
-Civil Liberties

Democratic gov= mob rule

We have a constitutional republic.
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2016 6:52:20 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/26/2016 1:43:29 PM, Nuzlocke4 wrote:
Can someone tell me the basic tenants of each of these political views in America, without a biased bent or "clever" one sentence answer?

Liberalism

Liberalism is harder to define as it encompasses a number of ideologies on the left and right, however, most tend to be around the center. The basic tenants of all types include

-Liberal Democracy
-Free Market Capitalism
-Secularism/Separation of Church and State
-Individualism
-Free Trade
-Popular sovereignty
-Civil Libertries

In the US, the variant that people usually mean when they are talking about Liberalism is Social Liberalism. Social liberalism is based on basic liberal principles, but it further includes egalitarian values, looking to strike a balance between personal liberty and social equality. They embrace Keynesian economics and Welfare capitalism as opposed to laissez-faire.
What separates socialists, like me, from social liberals, is that social liberals emphasize a balance between equality and liberty while we believe that freedom is nothing more than privilege unless everyone is able to enjoy those freedoms.
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2016 7:00:47 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/26/2016 6:49:38 PM, Dark-one wrote:
At 5/26/2016 6:34:24 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 5/26/2016 1:43:29 PM, Nuzlocke4 wrote:
Democratic Socialism

Here are the basic tenets of my views as a democratic socialist.

-Economic Democracy and Workers' Self-Managment
-Human Rights
-Democratic government*
-Social Justice
-Solidarity
-Civil Liberties

Democratic gov= mob rule

We have a constitutional republic.

I meant to elaborate on that, but I didn't feel it fit well into the original post, that is why I had the asterisk. When we say democratic government we mean the Democratic Republic/Representative Democracy, but with elements of participatory and grassroots democracy. We don't support absolute direct democracy as we feel this is impractical, this separates us from anarchists.
And for further reference here is the definition of a republic.
Republic (noun)
1. a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them.


And here is the definition of Democracy
Democracy (Noun)
1. government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.


Notice the similarities, and the fact that a synonym for Republic is "democratic state"
triangle.128k
Posts: 3,675
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 2:02:15 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/26/2016 1:43:29 PM, Nuzlocke4 wrote:
Can someone tell me the basic tenants of each of these political views in America, without a biased bent or "clever" one sentence answer?

Libertarianism
Bringing more liberty to people and lowering the government involvement in things. Generally fiscally far-right and free market Capitalists. The ideology is somewhat split on personal morality. (I.e nationalism, traditional values, religion, etc.)

Liberalism
Government to push forward for equality and progress, and generally somewhat socialist-leaning economics.

Neo-Liberalism
Generally another term for Libertarian economics, it's quite often used as an insult to mock government deregulation of the economy.

Paleo-Conservatism
"Traditional Conservatism" of slight economic libertarianism and upholding to traditional values. Also generally non-interventionist.

Conservatism
Quite a broad term, but it's generally used to refer to both neo and paleo-cons.

Neoconservatism
Less traditionalist than paleo-cons, more preference to corporations, and more military involvement in the world to spread American ideals.

Democratic Socialist
"Radical" Liberals that are more leaning to collective liberty, and have strong emphasis on Socialist ideals. Emphasis on collective liberty, globalization, and equality for people.

Please use numerical bullet points for each ideologies different ideas
Ex:

"Communism
No private property
Strong Government
Blah blah blah"
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 2:05:43 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/26/2016 6:49:38 PM, Dark-one wrote:
Democratic gov= mob rule
wrong

We have a constitutional republic.
you say that like it's a good thing
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
Dark-one
Posts: 211
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 4:03:22 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 2:05:43 AM, someloser wrote:
At 5/26/2016 6:49:38 PM, Dark-one wrote:
Democratic gov= mob rule
wrong

We have a constitutional republic.
you say that like it's a good thing

A total democracy only works if the populous has appropriate education, critical thinking and analytical skills.

Have you noticed how easy it is to rally people around an emotionally charged decision? That rarely ends well.
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 8:38:50 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 4:03:22 AM, Dark-one wrote:
At 5/27/2016 2:05:43 AM, someloser wrote:
At 5/26/2016 6:49:38 PM, Dark-one wrote:
Democratic gov= mob rule
wrong

We have a constitutional republic.
you say that like it's a good thing

A total democracy only works if the populous has appropriate education, critical thinking and analytical skills.

Have you noticed how easy it is to rally people around an emotionally charged decision? That rarely ends well.

Seems to have worked out so far for most western democracies.
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 8:44:02 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 4:03:22 AM, Dark-one wrote:
A total democracy only works if the populous has appropriate education, critical thinking and analytical skills.

Have you noticed how easy it is to rally people around an emotionally charged decision? That rarely ends well.
Democracies don't have to be total.
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 9:28:55 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 8:44:02 PM, someloser wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:03:22 AM, Dark-one wrote:
A total democracy only works if the populous has appropriate education, critical thinking and analytical skills.

Have you noticed how easy it is to rally people around an emotionally charged decision? That rarely ends well.
Democracies don't have to be total.

Exactly! Finally, someone on this site who understands the nuances of democracy! There are many types and not all of them are majoritarian or absolutely direct! Some direct democracy is good, but representative democracy is really the only practical thing at a national level.
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 9:41:32 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 9:28:55 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
Some direct democracy is good, but representative democracy is really the only practical thing at a national level.
Switzerland is doing fine without it
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 9:43:07 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 9:41:32 PM, someloser wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:28:55 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
Some direct democracy is good, but representative democracy is really the only practical thing at a national level.
Switzerland is doing fine without it

Switzerland still has a parliament. They have a good deal of direct democracy, but that is primarily on the local level. At the national level they are a representative democracy.
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 9:43:45 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 9:41:32 PM, someloser wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:28:55 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
Some direct democracy is good, but representative democracy is really the only practical thing at a national level.
Switzerland is doing fine without it

Switzerland still has a parliament.
They have a good deal of direct democracy, but that is primarily on the local level. At the national level, they are a representative democracy.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 9:45:25 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/26/2016 1:43:29 PM, Nuzlocke4 wrote:
Can someone tell me the basic tenants of each of these political views in America, without a biased bent or "clever" one sentence answer?

Libertarianism

Pro Freedom

Liberalism

Anti freedom

Neo-Liberalism

Anti freedom

Paleo-Conservatism

Anti freedom

Conservatism

Antifreedom

Neoconservatism

Anti freedom

Democratic Socialist

Anti freedom

Please use numerical bullet points for each ideologies different ideas
Ex:

"Communism
No private property
Strong Government
Blah blah blah"
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 9:48:00 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 9:43:07 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:41:32 PM, someloser wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:28:55 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
Some direct democracy is good, but representative democracy is really the only practical thing at a national level.
Switzerland is doing fine without it

Switzerland still has a parliament. They have a good deal of direct democracy, but that is primarily on the local level. At the national level they are a representative democracy.
There is some degree of "representativeness", but by and large the populace holds the most power.

Either way, direct democracies are generally preferable to "representative democracies" (which are not very representative or democratic).
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 9:49:54 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 9:48:00 PM, someloser wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:43:07 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:41:32 PM, someloser wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:28:55 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
Some direct democracy is good, but representative democracy is really the only practical thing at a national level.
Switzerland is doing fine without it

Switzerland still has a parliament. They have a good deal of direct democracy, but that is primarily on the local level. At the national level they are a representative democracy.
There is some degree of "representativeness", but by and large the populace holds the most power.

Either way, direct democracies are generally preferable to "representative democracies" (which are not very representative or democratic).

Well, I support more direct democracy, but not complete. I think legislative bodies should be more representative of the people's views, which is why I want legislative bodies to have more members and proportional representation. I also feel that the constitution should be amendable by popular referendum.
Dark-one
Posts: 211
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 12:03:10 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 8:44:02 PM, someloser wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:03:22 AM, Dark-one wrote:
A total democracy only works if the populous has appropriate education, critical thinking and analytical skills.

Have you noticed how easy it is to rally people around an emotionally charged decision? That rarely ends well.
Democracies don't have to be total.

The only form of "partial democracy" I know of is called a constitutional republic.
Dark-one
Posts: 211
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 12:05:42 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 9:48:00 PM, someloser wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:43:07 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:41:32 PM, someloser wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:28:55 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
Some direct democracy is good, but representative democracy is really the only practical thing at a national level.
Switzerland is doing fine without it

Switzerland still has a parliament. They have a good deal of direct democracy, but that is primarily on the local level. At the national level they are a representative democracy.
There is some degree of "representativeness", but by and large the populace holds the most power.

Either way, direct democracies are generally preferable to "representative democracies" (which are not very representative or democratic).

Direct democracies should have literacy tests so that voters can prove they're not idiots or lazy.

However, I can't think of a way to implement this without logistical problems.
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 12:14:07 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 12:03:10 AM, Dark-one wrote:
The only form of "partial democracy" I know of is called a constitutional republic.
Not total, as in, not absolute. So, one can have a constitutional monarchy, or a constitutional direct democracy.

republics in general are massively overrated.

At 5/28/2016 12:05:42 AM, Dark-one wrote:
Direct democracies should have literacy tests so that voters can prove they're not idiots or lazy.

However, I can't think of a way to implement this without logistical problems.
Why shouldn't constitutional republics?
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
Dark-one
Posts: 211
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 12:43:50 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 12:14:07 AM, someloser wrote:
At 5/28/2016 12:03:10 AM, Dark-one wrote:
The only form of "partial democracy" I know of is called a constitutional republic.
Not total, as in, not absolute. So, one can have a constitutional monarchy, or a constitutional direct democracy.

republics in general are massively overrated.

At 5/28/2016 12:05:42 AM, Dark-one wrote:
Direct democracies should have literacy tests so that voters can prove they're not idiots or lazy.

However, I can't think of a way to implement this without logistical problems.
Why shouldn't constitutional republics?

By all means...assuming you can make the grading of said tests unbiased, and the tests relevant to the voters critical thinking skills.
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 12:51:31 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 12:05:42 AM, Dark-one wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:48:00 PM, someloser wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:43:07 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:41:32 PM, someloser wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:28:55 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
Some direct democracy is good, but representative democracy is really the only practical thing at a national level.
Switzerland is doing fine without it

Switzerland still has a parliament. They have a good deal of direct democracy, but that is primarily on the local level. At the national level they are a representative democracy.
There is some degree of "representativeness", but by and large the populace holds the most power.

Either way, direct democracies are generally preferable to "representative democracies" (which are not very representative or democratic).

Direct democracies should have literacy tests so that voters can prove they're not idiots or lazy.

You do realize that even Democratic republics don't have this.
And if they were lazy why would they even bother to vote?
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 12:54:27 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 12:43:50 AM, Dark-one wrote:
At 5/28/2016 12:14:07 AM, someloser wrote:
At 5/28/2016 12:03:10 AM, Dark-one wrote:
The only form of "partial democracy" I know of is called a constitutional republic.
Not total, as in, not absolute. So, one can have a constitutional monarchy, or a constitutional direct democracy.

republics in general are massively overrated.

At 5/28/2016 12:05:42 AM, Dark-one wrote:
Direct democracies should have literacy tests so that voters can prove they're not idiots or lazy.

However, I can't think of a way to implement this without logistical problems.
Why shouldn't constitutional republics?

By all means...assuming you can make the grading of said tests unbiased, and the tests relevant to the voters critical thinking skills.

The supreme court ruled three times that literacy tests violate the constitution.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 3:58:35 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/26/2016 6:34:24 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 5/26/2016 1:43:29 PM, Nuzlocke4 wrote:
Democratic Socialism

Here are the basic tenets of my views as a democratic socialist.

-Economic Democracy and Workers' Self-Managment
-Human Rights
-Democratic government*
-Social Justice
-Solidarity
-Civil Liberties

So basically

Retarded
Retarded
Retarded
Retarded
Retarded
Retarded

That sums it up nicely right?
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 4:09:56 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 12:54:27 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 5/28/2016 12:43:50 AM, Dark-one wrote:
At 5/28/2016 12:14:07 AM, someloser wrote:
At 5/28/2016 12:03:10 AM, Dark-one wrote:
The only form of "partial democracy" I know of is called a constitutional republic.
Not total, as in, not absolute. So, one can have a constitutional monarchy, or a constitutional direct democracy.

republics in general are massively overrated.

At 5/28/2016 12:05:42 AM, Dark-one wrote:
Direct democracies should have literacy tests so that voters can prove they're not idiots or lazy.

However, I can't think of a way to implement this without logistical problems.
Why shouldn't constitutional republics?

By all means...assuming you can make the grading of said tests unbiased, and the tests relevant to the voters critical thinking skills.

The supreme court ruled three times that literacy tests violate the constitution.

Because they discriminate against minorities.... You should have to learn how to read and write to vote. I don't want to have parasites on welfare canceling out my vote when they cannot even read.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 4:17:43 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 9:48:00 PM, someloser wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:43:07 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:41:32 PM, someloser wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:28:55 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
Some direct democracy is good, but representative democracy is really the only practical thing at a national level.
Switzerland is doing fine without it

Switzerland still has a parliament. They have a good deal of direct democracy, but that is primarily on the local level. At the national level they are a representative democracy.
There is some degree of "representativeness", but by and large the populace holds the most power.

Either way, direct democracies are generally preferable to "representative democracies" (which are not very representative or democratic).

Direct democracy was not what the framers of the United States Constitution envisioned for the nation. They saw a danger in tyranny of the majority. As a result, they advocated a representative democracy in the form of a constitutional republic over a direct democracy. For example, James Madison, in Federalist No. 10, advocates a constitutional republic over direct democracy precisely to protect the individual from the will of the majority. He says:

"Those who hold and those who are without property have ever formed distinct interests in society. Those who are creditors, and those who are debtors, fall under a like discrimination. A landed interest, a manufacturing interest, a mercantile interest, a moneyed interest, with many lesser interests, grow up of necessity in civilized nations, and divide them into different classes, actuated by different sentiments and views. The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, and involves the spirit of party and faction in the necessary and ordinary operations of the government.

A pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit no cure for the mischief of faction. A common passion or interest will be felt by a majority, and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party. Hence it is, that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."

Direct democracies have to be one of the most easily corruptible forms of government there is. The majority can strip the rights of the minority and there is no legal backing that will say otherwise.

Government must be the way that the Founding Fathers imagined it: a classical liberal/minarchist Constitutional Republic.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 4:19:36 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 12:51:31 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 5/28/2016 12:05:42 AM, Dark-one wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:48:00 PM, someloser wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:43:07 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:41:32 PM, someloser wrote:
At 5/27/2016 9:28:55 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
Some direct democracy is good, but representative democracy is really the only practical thing at a national level.
Switzerland is doing fine without it

Switzerland still has a parliament. They have a good deal of direct democracy, but that is primarily on the local level. At the national level they are a representative democracy.
There is some degree of "representativeness", but by and large the populace holds the most power.

Either way, direct democracies are generally preferable to "representative democracies" (which are not very representative or democratic).

Direct democracies should have literacy tests so that voters can prove they're not idiots or lazy.

You do realize that even Democratic republics don't have this.
And if they were lazy why would they even bother to vote?

If they were lazy, they would find it in their best interest to vote for some Socialist that will allow them to be lazy off of the back of the producing non parasitic class.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.