The (new, straight-from-scratch) Trump thread

[journo]

more blather about democracy

yeah because democracy means the will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government. if that is true then Americans love war in the ukraine, war in Palestine, war with Yemen, war with China, infinity illegals, high gas and food prices, and a daily diet of lies from the office of the vegetable-in-chief.

As for your secession suggestion, any attempt to do that would be met with lethal force and labeled an "insurrection".

i apologize for suggesting you might be brainwashed.

In countries without democracy you can't vote someone out when their policies are way worse than that stuff you mentioned. And even if you think you could get a 'good guy' as the non-democratic leader, doesn't mean the guy after him will be

As far as secession, i doubt a mere suggestion of succession from the bible belt would cause any show of lethal force. In the case the suggestion is struck down, that'd be the fault of whoever the national officeholders are. Regardless if there were to be something close to a run-up to a civil war, the bible belt states would first suggest is before millions take up arms. The bible belt states themselves wouldn't want to go to war for the sake of it like some of the more fringe and deranged people on the right and left.

A 2020 poll showed 41% of Biden supporters supported secession and 52% of orange man supporters did
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how- ... secession/
Doesn't take much for those numbers to reach an overall majority. And not sure than many northerners supported secession prior to the first civil war. So could be a much more peaceful process this time.

[Bbb23sucks]

in countries without democracy you cannot vote someone out when their policies are way worse than that stuff you mentioned. And even if you think you could get a 'good guy' as the non-democratic leader, doesn't mean the guy after him will be

as far as secession, i doubt a mere suggestion of succession from the bible belt would cause any show of lethal force. In the case the suggestion is struck down, that'd be the fault of whoever the national officeholders are.

A 2020 poll showed 41% of Biden supporters supported secession and 52% of orange man supporters did
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how- ... secession/

America is not a democracy anyway (in fact, it's the least democratic nation on earth), why care?

[journo]

in countries without democracy you cannot vote someone out when their policies are way worse than that stuff you mentioned. And even if you think you could get a 'good guy' as the non-democratic leader, doesn't mean the guy after him will be

as far as secession, i doubt a mere suggestion of succession from the bible belt would cause any show of lethal force. In the case the suggestion is struck down, that'd be the fault of whoever the national officeholders are.

A 2020 poll showed 41% of Biden supporters supported secession and 52% of orange man supporters did
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how- ... secession/

America is not a democracy anyway (in fact, it's the least democratic nation on earth), why care?

Unlike in fully undemocratic nations, and as of today, and for the last few hundred years, votes in the USA count and are not for show. And a vote for more than just a few people will actually count toward the total. Part of that is because the entire US voting process is delegated to dozens of individual states, making it harder for the federal gvmt or a few powerful entities to corrupt it to corrupt it.

Sure it's not direct democracy. There's also issues like the fact that it's a first past the post voting system that discourages third parties. But even third parties can win large offices and even the presidency.

There's more of an issue with disengaged and uninformed people than there is one of votes not being counted, which is barely a problem.

[Bbb23sucks]

Unlike in fully undemocratic nations

Please give an example and explain how it is less "democratic" than the USA.

as of today, and for the last few hundred years in tne USA, votes count and are not for show.

The vote count may not be (though you could argue that it is), but the entire media industry and all candidates are.

In more simple terms, people's vote does matter and people can choose who they want in and out of office. It's not direct democracy. There's also issues like the fact that it's a first past the post voting system that discourages third parties. But even third parties can win large offices and even the presidency.

There's more of an issue with disengaged and uninformed people than there is one of votes not being counted, which is barely a problem.

Why don't "disengaged and uninformed people" votes matter and who are these "disengaged and uninformed people"? To me, it sounds like these are the people most in need of true democracy and most truly in line with proletarian politics as they are the most disengaged from bourgeois idpol.

[suckadmin]

America is not a democracy anyway (in fact, it's the least democratic nation on earth), why care?

Pffft.. do you seriously believe that .. I say this jokingly but please move to one of the numerous countries that are truly not democracies

Screenshot_20240127_110338_Chrome.jpg (299.83 KiB) Viewed 308 times

[Bbb23sucks]

America is not a democracy anyway (in fact, it's the least democratic nation on earth), why care?

Pffft.. do you seriously believe that .. I say this jokingly but please move to one of the numerous countries that are truly not democracies

Screenshot_20240127_110338_Chrome.jpg

Yes. The USA is not only a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, but the center of global imperialism. Every country in that last far surpasses the US in democracy.

[journo]

I have a feeling he won't accept the organizations who make a living off computing this stuff as either too Western (read: democratic) Also asking it as he is below gives him the opportunity to say "are you comparing orange man to x country?". But I'm not, but here I'll go anyway.

Please give an example and explain how it is less "democratic" than the USA.

Saudi Arabia is a monarchy with 32 million citizens where succession is 100% determined by a few thousand family members, less than about 0.03% of the population. Local elections are rare and haven't taken place at all since 2015.

The only votes that can be cast in China by an ordinary citizen are for the very lowest levels, who in turn have to be approved arbitrarily by the CCP. In contrast, in the USA, any native citizen above x age can run for any office by simply collecting a few thousand signatures.

Brunei has only had 1 election since 1959.

Turkmenistan has no registered opposition parties.

The US has thousands of elections each year where votes count and people can vote out corrupt people. This applies to every level of government. The voting process is not controlled (or at the moment hijacked) by the federal government, but instead by over 50 separate federated states, who all can choose what voting apparatus to use. Any group of people can register a party and vie for political office, resulting in some states having more than 2 successful parties (eg Vermont) despite a mathematical issue in first past the post voting systems which deter them like in the UK. In the case where the restriction of 2 parties is an issue with too high a barrier to overcome, each party holds primaries. There is a genuine issue where these parties can override the count, but they cannot fudge the count. In the case of a corrupt party, there is no procedural issue with supplanting their entire party in any particular state beyond collecting signatures to appear on the ballot. Even though anyone can run in these party primaries and elections, voters are disinterested in running for local offices, resulting in apathy-caused uncontested local seats. If the main issue is electronic voting machines, only one Republican county has tried to move away from those since 2020. If other Republican counties truly had an issue with it, they are free to stop using them and use paper ballots. There are other issues with democracy in the USA like gerrymandering but the sum total of these issues makes the US more like the UK in terms of democratic structure than the aforementioned countries.

There also exist numerous organization that do a much more detailed analysis than I do and I'm not aware of a single one that puts the USA near the bottom.

But most importantly, suggesting America strip away what's left of American democracy is a very radical suggestion that would need more thought than just "lets put in whatever wealthy billionaire tries to strip it first".

[Bbb23sucks]

I have a feeling he won't accept the organizations who make a living off computing this stuff as either too Western (read: democratic) Also asking it as he is below gives him the opportunity to say "are you comparing orange man to x country?". But I'm not, but here I'll go anyway.

Replace "democratic" with imperialist and you are almost correct.

Saudi Arabia is a monarchy of 32 million where succession is 100% determined by a few thousand family members, less than about 0.03% of the population. Local elections are rare and haven't taken place at all since 2015.

Probably the least democratic of list and probably the only that is actually less democratic than the US. Basically a slave state.

The only votes that can be cast in China by an ordinary citizen are for the very lowest levels, who in turn have to be approved arbitrarily by the CCP. In contrast, in the USA, anyone can run for any office by simply collecting a few thousand signatures.

That is true democracy (technocratic socialism).

Turkmenistan has no registered opposition parties.

Opposition parties breed instability. Only one party should that represents the interests of the working class should exist.

[journo]

ctually less democratic than the US. Basically a slave state.

The only votes that can be cast in China by an ordinary citizen are for the very lowest levels, who in turn have to be approved arbitrarily by the CCP. In contrast, in the USA, anyone can run for any office by simply collecting a few thousand signatures.

That is true democracy (technocratic socialism).

Please explain how anyone above a certain age being able to collect signatures to appear on the ballot (at any level of government) is less democratic than a bureaucracy fully determining who can run at all and only at the local level.

[Bbb23sucks]

ctually less democratic than the US. Basically a slave state.

The only votes that can be cast in China by an ordinary citizen are for the very lowest levels, who in turn have to be approved arbitrarily by the CCP. In contrast, in the USA, anyone can run for any office by simply collecting a few thousand signatures.

That is true democracy (technocratic socialism).

Please explain how anyone above a certain age being able to collect signatures to appear on the ballot (at any level of government) is less democratic than a bureaucracy fully determining who can run at all and only at the local level.

China's system isn't bourgeois rule and isn't mob rule. It is a carefully calculated and balanced system designed to build the productive forces and eventually usher in communism. To do this, it must ensure an efficient state bureaucracy where every component has a specific, cooperative role. Unlike the chaos of the USA.