General / Off-Topic Blatant and Obvious !!!

[TheAntitheist Crusader]

I voted remain, i don't like the Tories or Trump, yet i fully respect they won the day, however, Hitler was democratically elected as well, look what happens when the right was allowed to steamroll their agenda through in that case. I'm simply saying that we should criticize and protest the other side, as per our rights. Does that make me a "neofascist in disguise as a libtard" ? I think not.

 

[Monk]

Well now there are quite a few attempting to challenge the legitiacy of the referendum in the UK with several court cases which might now go to the EU courts...irony.

These folks doing this have very little interest in actual democracy, even going as far as saying that only highly educated people should have the right to vote in the first place. A discussion about this actually took place on the brexit thread a while back with some remainers suggesting this very thing.

And then they wonder why we dont really take them seriously and poke fun at them. Its the fault of the right wing after all...thats the current mantra which they have gone to great lengths to rationalize. Its kinda sad tbh...thankfully though, those who make the choices in westminister more or less ignored them entirely. Ones faith in democracy and our right to choose has been upheld, much to the disapproval of some ^

I should limit myself, I shouldn't conflate the two. As for the US, I'm looking at lawsuits against Trump and none involve the legitimacy of his winning of the office. Now, there are many calling for impeachment but that is in regards to his actions post-inauguration.

There were some people dealing in false hope that his election was stolen or fraudulent but I take issue to our fellow poster up there that all liberals are behind such efforts...they aren't. Typical tribal behavior labeling the "other" as an evilly motivated enemy.

There are reasons to oppose and even some potential justification for impeachment. This has nothing to do with reversing the election results.

 

[TheAntitheist Crusader]

My earlier point being, we are not saying Trump should be overthrown, but we are saying he should be opposed when he behaves like a fascist.

 

[Don Alvarez]

My earlier point being, we are not saying Trump should be overthrown, but we are saying he should be opposed when he behaves like a fascist.

I agree with the latter, but on the former I don't believe you speak for everyone.

 

[TheAntitheist Crusader]

I agree with the latter, but on the former I don't believe you speak for everyone.

Most people on the left (in the UK and USA) value democracy, but the left is not without it's own hypocrites. I know i don't speak for everyone on the left, but i'd like to hope i speak for most.

 

[FuzzySpider]

Most people on the left (in the UK and USA) value democracy, but the left is not without it's own hypocrites. I know i don't speak for everyone on the left, but i'd like to hope i speak for most.

Being against democracy does not necessarily a hypocrite make. I am dead against it, thus I never vote. You don't actually speak for a lot of the left. You do speak for the liberal left, but not the "hard-hat" left. Those types from the poorer areas of Sunderland or Stoke. The types of people generally called the "salt of the earth", perhaps because they're square, hard, and bad for your health.

They generally align their views with the liberal left fiscally and when it comes to government involvement in public services, but they'd be a million miles away from you on the need for civil rights for gays or women. The right has a similar split. Many on the right advocate things like relaxed drug laws, or liberalized prostitution laws, whilst others would see people involved in such things publicly executed.

The left has it's problems just as the Right does. But seeking Trumps removal is not one of them. The man isn't qualified for the position he occupies and it has become apparent, in just days, that he is a deranged menace.

 

[TheAntitheist Crusader]

Being against democracy does not necessarily a hypocrite make. I am dead against it, thus I never vote. You don't actually speak for a lot of the left. You do speak for the liberal left, but not the "hard-hat" left. Those types from the poorer areas of Sunderland or Stoke. The types of people generally called the "salt of the earth", perhaps because they're square, hard, and bad for your health.

They generally align their views with the liberal left fiscally and when it comes to government involvement in public services, but they'd be a million miles away from you on the need for civil rights for gays or women. The right has a similar split. Many on the right advocate things like relaxed drug laws, or liberalized prostitution laws, whilst others would see people involved in such things publicly executed.

The left has it's problems just as the Right does. But seeking Trumps removal is not one of them. The man isn't qualified for the position he occupies and it has become apparent, in just days, that he is a deranged menace.

Understood, but you would think poorer folks and working class people would be all for the rights to protest, just as those protesters would almost certainly support right to strike, both of which are pretty darn democratic. So i'd like to think the entire left would want to respect democracy. And how anyone who refuses to vote can ever complain about anything confuses me, no offense intended to you.

 

[Adept]

Understood, but you would think poorer folks and working class people would be all for the rights to protest, just as those protesters would almost certainly support right to strike, both of which are pretty darn democratic. So i'd like to think the entire left would want to respect democracy. And how anyone who refuses to vote can ever complain about anything confuses me, no offense intended to you.

I am also puzzled by the "I do not vote" stance from somebody clearly interested in politics and social developments.

There's a person I used to consider a friend. He fashions himself an anarchist, and refuses to "legitimise the political system by voting". This guy is a very well paid computer engineer (software, not hardware), and not some penniless graffiti artist.

Thing is, it turned out that he has a huge problem with the idea of anything or anybody having authority over him, but he wasn't above using authority positions himself. He has a huge need to be in control.

I ultimately found his position to be juvenile and contradictory, and not really any better than that of some Ayn Rand fanboy Libertarian sophomore.

We're still somewhat cordial, but I avoid spending time with him. The world view is just too hypocritical, and it ends up effecting almost everything now that I can see through it.

***

To some degree I'd say, if you didn't even try to vote, you don't really have much grounds to complain about the outcome.

 

[TheAntitheist Crusader]

I am also puzzled by the "I do not vote" stance from somebody clearly interested in politics and social developments.

There's a person I used to consider a friend. He fashions himself an anarchist, and refuses to "legitimise the political system by voting". This guy is a very well paid computer engineer (software, not hardware), and not some penniless graffiti artist.

Thing is, it turned out that he has a huge problem with the idea of anything or anybody having authority over him, but he wasn't above using authority positions himself. He has a huge need to be in control.

I ultimately found his position to be juvenile and contradictory, and not really any better than that of some Ayn Rand fanboy Libertarian sophomore.

We're still somewhat cordial, but I avoid spending time with him. The world view is just too hypocritical, and it ends up effecting almost everything now that I can see through it.

***

To some degree I'd say, if you didn't even try to vote, you don't really have much grounds to complain about the outcome.

I'm with you, but some days i wake up thinking, what's really going on ? Am i right about my political views ? should i change my way of thinking ? I mean, i try not to be on the left just for the sake of it, some of my views are despised by the left and right these days such as pro intervention (not in Iran) pro Israel (but i'm still anti settllement building) and quite frankly i'd support a Burqa ban and faith school ban (which i consider a left wing combo). I pride myself with this ability to not be dictated to by the Corbyn/Galloway elements of the left, but ultimately i will allways vote, and allways vote for the left wing or center left candidate, i'll tolerate another Blair or Brown, but prefer the likes of Ed Milliband and Hilary Benn, but i'm sure you would agree that whilst the tories (If you are in the UK, or any other right wing party from any nation) are bad, a worse fate would be undemocratic removal, just like if the Article 50 Brexit vote had failed it would be a disaster for democracy (from a remainer)......i may have gone off on another rant about my politics here (this time with someone i agree with lol) but my basic message to everyone else is please vote, then respect the win, but fight the opposing agenda democratically.

 

[jmp470]

Being against democracy does not necessarily a hypocrite make. I am dead against it, thus I never vote. You don't actually speak for a lot of the left. You do speak for the liberal left, but not the "hard-hat" left. Those types from the poorer areas of Sunderland or Stoke. The types of people generally called the "salt of the earth", perhaps because they're square, hard, and bad for your health.

They generally align their views with the liberal left fiscally and when it comes to government involvement in public services, but they'd be a million miles away from you on the need for civil rights for gays or women. The right has a similar split. Many on the right advocate things like relaxed drug laws, or liberalized prostitution laws, whilst others would see people involved in such things publicly executed.

The left has it's problems just as the Right does. But seeking Trumps removal is not one of them. The man isn't qualified for the position he occupies and it has become apparent, in just days, that he is a deranged menace.

When did becoming President require any qualifications, except US citizen and 44? It's the dumb US citizens that say he is not qualified. Isolationist policies will hurt economy, sure, but, our youth are pathetic and weak!!!

since the US is trying desperately to become the EU, should we also have mandatory service and a 40% tax rate?

 

[afreeflyingsoul]

I was inviting people who like trump, to debate these issues, obviously if that's not possible, i get it.

That's the problem, most of the people who voted for him don't like him, the wanted one thing from him: jobs.

He spoke to their situation, just like ol' Bernie did. Bernie Sanders was speaking to the same group, and a whole lot of them would have voted for Bernie, but took Trump because it was the best they could get (from their perspective). The Democrat's messed up by running Hilary Clinton, the Republicans messed up by losing touch with their core values.

One last thing, if someone looks like they're doing something stupid from a distance, before you laugh and point, get a little closer and find out the context of their actions, maybe it's not as stupid as it looks.

 

[FuzzySpider]

Understood, but you would think poorer folks and working class people would be all for the rights to protest, just as those protesters would almost certainly support right to strike, both of which are pretty darn democratic. So i'd like to think the entire left would want to respect democracy. And how anyone who refuses to vote can ever complain about anything confuses me, no offense intended to you.

No offense taken. Also no offense intended, but, turn that argument around. You voted in the referendum for Brexit, and lost. Why do you have a right to complain?

Thought experiment time: There is a national lottery. 50% of the country are going to get castles to live in, unfortunately 50% of the country are going to have their houses bulldozed. You go to the numbers boothe, you pick your numbers, you hope for a castle. You lose, your house is getting bulldozed and you're going to be out on the street. I, on the other hand, find the concept of randomness and the way this is being done objectionable, so I refuse to participate. My house is also getting bulldozed.

Who has the bigger right to complain? The argument could be made that you simply don't like that you lost, and had the result gone the other way you'd have been fine with the situation. I don't like what's happening from the get-go.

Furthermore, voting is not the same thing as complaining, protesting, having an opinion, voicing an opinion or seeking political representation.

This is what I find so puzzling about the almost religious-like fervour of commitment to the modern version of democracy (not accusing you of this, but some people scream the village down when I reveal I don't vote) - it's all about the vote. A properly functioning representative democracy (something I would support) is not just about the vote. It would be about proper debate of the issues, not popularity contests and propaganda. It wouldn't be a complete one-sided "we win, you lose, we take it all", but would be representative of the outcome. Democracy wouldn't roll around once every 4 or 5 years and the rest of the time people have to put up with whatever the winners decide, it would be constant and ongoing.

Case in point: Brexit. A 51/49 way split. There is clearly a mandate to change the relationship with Europe, democratically undeniable. Is there a mandate to completely drag the UK away and sell it to Trump? Yet what is happening? And anyone who disagrees is being called an "enemy of democracy", even by people who voted to remain. And what was that Brexit vote about? Was it about kicking out foreigners? Was it about the single market? Was it about sovereignty or refugees? It was a million things to millions of people, but the actual ballot was binary.

So modern democracies have become purely about votes, which are easily manipulated and completely lack nuance and even context.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm with you, but some days i wake up thinking, what's really going on ? Am i right about my political views ? should i change my way of thinking ?

The fact you think this way demonstrates you are suitably qualified to participate in a political system. Considering you may be wrong, and being willing to change how you think based on new information, is a rare quality in these anti-intellectualist times. Much respect.

 

[TheAntitheist Crusader]

Thanks for that last part Fuzzy, i have in fact changed my mind before as well, i used to hold blanket Anti Muslim views (around 10 years ago when i was too young to understand properly) whereas now i judge on an individual basis (while still holding a particular hatred for the religion of Islam itself) but i changed because i realized my own hypocricy, if i was still like i was then i would be a trump fan right now, but historical education (realizing i couldn't be both anti fascist and anti Muslim) and personal maturity helped me think more objectively, now i despise how judgemental i was then, however my views on the socialistic part of me have not changed , i naturally want to compromise with the right on some issues though given that i want things like personal wealth, i mean yes, i think there should be NHS, right to strike, higher taxes on the rich, nationalised important services, on the other hand i'm not a communist, i like stuff, if people are rich that's great, i would love to be rich, so as left wing as i am, i'm still somewhat of a contradiction (who isn't right ?). Anyway, yes it's great to have both principles and an open mind, the fact that you don't vote does not give you any less right to complain, i have a close friend who has never voted and he likes a good rant about the injustice, i said the same thing to him and he said, "i don't vote because i don't know anything about politics, and there is no point anyway" the latter of which as you know, i disagree with respectfully. Also i'd like to clarify that whilst i admit being wrong if it is called for, i think i'll allways be on the left of the spectrum. o7 CMDR, would rep you but i allready did too many times recently, same with adept, so there must be a lot of agreement here.

 

[Adept]

since the US is trying desperately to become the EU, should we also have mandatory service and a 40% tax rate?

Since when is it attempting that? The question of effective tax rates is a curious one. On the highly taxed North European countries we get a lot of stuff for free or cheaply, that is ruinously expensive for many in the States. Personal bankruptcies due to medical emergencies just do not happen here. Mandatory service? While Finland still has that, we're the outlier. Most of EU are in NATO, and most have just professional, career soldiers, just like the US.

 

[Adept]

it's all about the vote. A properly functioning representative democracy (something I would support) is not just about the vote. It would be about proper debate of the issues, not popularity contests and propaganda. It wouldn't be a complete one-sided "we win, you lose, we take it all", but would be representative of the outcome. Democracy wouldn't roll around once every 4 or 5 years and the rest of the time people have to put up with whatever the winners decide, it would be constant and ongoing.

There's still a logical flaw here. It's not just about the vote. I never said that, nor do I think anybody else here has made that claim. Democracy is indeed about the contest of ideas and ideals, and an endless debate about how we should govern ourselves. It's pretty meaningless without the vote though. That is where the rubber meets the road, and where the success and support of those ideas is measured at a point in time.

I have a strong suspicion that you have some kind of a hypocritical position that you may not feel comfortable in admitting to yourself either, just like my former friend. You seem to feel that you gain some moral high ground, or an exemption from personal responsibility by not voting, despite wanting to participate in the other ways.

Sorry, I'm not impressed so far. If you have some brilliant and well reasoned defence of this position, I'm listening.

- - - Updated - - -

The fact you think this way demonstrates you are suitably qualified to participate in a political system. Considering you may be wrong, and being willing to change how you think based on new information, is a rare quality in these anti-intellectualist times. Much respect.

You seem pretty certain about not wanting to vote. Let's hear an equally well reasoned argument for it.

 

[Ian Skippy]

I should limit myself, I shouldn't conflate the two. As for the US, I'm looking at lawsuits against Trump and none involve the legitimacy of his winning of the office. Now, there are many calling for impeachment but that is in regards to his actions post-inauguration.

There were some people dealing in false hope that his election was stolen or fraudulent but I take issue to our fellow poster up there that all liberals are behind such efforts...they aren't. Typical tribal behavior labeling the "other" as an evilly motivated enemy.

There are reasons to oppose and even some potential justification for impeachment. This has nothing to do with reversing the election results.

I wouldnt worry about it. Leper has only one way to respond to anything and that is ranting and namecalling like a 5-year old. At some point he yelled he wanted billions of people dead. Because people said NMS was disappointing.

 

[TheAntitheist Crusader]

Since when is it attempting that? The question of effective tax rates is a curious one. On the highly taxed North European countries we get a lot of stuff for free or cheaply, that is ruinously expensive for many in the States. Personal bankruptcies due to medical emergencies just do not happen here. Mandatory service? While Finland still has that, we're the outlier. Most of EU are in NATO, and most have just professional, career soldiers, just like the US.

Yep, i thought that most western countries were professional military only, in fact the only reason i knew Finland still had it was the FDF campaign mod for Operation Flashpoint. Also i agree that the United States should join Europe in the 21st century by looking after it's most vulnerable, and giving them a fighting chance. Damn the democrats, if only they hadn't fought Bernie......Warren 2020 i hope.

 

[FuzzySpider]

There's still a logical flaw here. It's not just about the vote. I never said that, nor do I think anybody else here has made that claim.

Yes, but I am talking about my own philosophy of not voting and how it pertains to the overall system. I am not talking about anyone here, nor am I rebutting anyone elses opinions or saying they're wrong.

Democracy is indeed about the contest of ideas and ideals, and an endless debate about how we should govern ourselves. It's pretty meaningless without the vote though. That is where the rubber meets the road, and where the success and support of those ideas is measured at a point in time.

I have a strong suspicion that you have some kind of a hypocritical position that you may not feel comfortable in admitting to yourself either, just like my former friend. You seem to feel that you gain some moral high ground, or an exemption from personal responsibility by not voting, despite wanting to participate in the other ways.

Absolutely not. I claim no moral high ground. If someone else want to vote and feels the system works, good for them.

Sorry, I'm not impressed so far. If you have some brilliant and well reasoned defence of this position, I'm listening.

You seem pretty certain about not wanting to vote. Let's hear an equally well reasoned argument for it.

Preface: Try to read this without instinctively supporting democracy, lower the veil of ignorance and try to imagine yourself as someone who has never heard of political institutions before.

Ok, so let's look at Brexit. There was a question "do you want in or out of the EU". That was all. Nothing else. No context, no nuance, nothing more than a simple question which, to most of the people who looked at that ballot paper, was something they were completely unqualified to decide or even understand. It had come at the end of a massive campaign of destructive lies, and it had only come about because Cameron wanted to rule the plebs for 5 more years and needed to control the lunatic fringes of his party.

Now, on the basis of those votes, the UK government is set on a course which everyone with knowledge of the situation knows to be objectively wrong and self destructive, simply because more people didn't believe them than did. Even worse, due to the vote this can't be reversed, it can't even be properly debated or amended. It's the whole thing, even though it's not what people thought they were voting for. We watch the other day as politicians knowingly made the wrong decision because of voting.The democratic vote is actually preventing the correct decisions from being made.

"But Fuzzy! How do you know that staying in the EU is correct? That's sheer arrogance!"

Experts? But ok, let's take something totally objective. Trump has been elected president of the USA. Environmental legislation is gone, the person charged with protecting the environment is a nutter who doesn't think it's important, and several projects which are going to create massive destruction have been revived. Got a complaint? Wait four years, try to campaign. Lose again? Tough, you lost.

As a result of that the future of much of the planet is imperilled. And due to the fact that experts can't overrule bad decisions we've got to just sit and watch it happen.

So as I said, in modern democracies it seems to me that the vote is all that matters.

I think a huge part of the problem is that voting has become synonymous with freedom in the minds of people today, which I think is a false equivalence. People get their vote, and that's what freedom they have. If it doesn't go the way they want? Suck it up, you lost, get over it. You can't deny that is the prevalent attitude. And I have to admit had Clinton supporters won, or had remain won in Brexit, they'd have said the same to the other crowd.

Real political engagement has to be more nuanced and it has to be conducted by people who know what they are doing. Environmental secretaries should be people with degrees in the subject, not people with shares in EXXON. People in charge of vaccines should be people with medical knowledge, not people who believe vaccines cause autism (who can not now be removed for at least 4 years unless Trump changes his mind).

A vote is always going to be a binary, or at best overly simple, method doing things. But when we're dealing with massively complex societies it simply fails.

 

[TheAntitheist Crusader]

Maybe democracy is failing us, you are certainly right about the environment, but what other system can work for humanity ? anarchy ? communism ? fascism ? No, democracy is not perfect, but it's the best we can ever hope for.

 

[FuzzySpider]

Maybe democracy is failing us, you are certainly right about the environment, but what other system can work for humanity ? anarchy ? communism ? fascism ? No, democracy is not perfect, but it's the best we can ever hope for.

I'm not actually completely against democracy, I'm against uninformed "mobocracies", which is what passes for democracies today. There are several ways to improve upon what we have.

What about voting licenses? People have to prove a certain level of knowledge of history and an interest in learning about politics before they're granted the right to vote? "But Fuzzy! That could be abused!" Really? Have you seen the guy in the Whitehouse right now? It might not be a nirvana of politics but it's better.

Or what about Eurovision? In Eurovision the voting public count for half of the votes, and the music experts count for the other half. As a result stuff like this doesn't make it too far.

Spoiler

[video=youtube;nTLAzDVu80E]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTLAzDVu80E[/video]

(My apologies to the people of Belgium but that was utter complete and total crap).

Also, what about having a real go at a technocracy? The EU is allegedly a technocracy, but it really isn't at all. If it was I'd be even more enthusiastic about it though. What about a blend of democracy/technocracy?

Or maybe there is some, as yet, unthought of system waiting to come along. We, just like all the humans who came before us, have the belief that we're pretty much as good as we can be and are vastly superior to everyone who went before. But the reality is that (hopefully) future generations will be far smarter and find ways to solve these problems. But the reality is also that we can't wait. We're now so powerful a force on the planet we can't just leave things and hope the next generation finds a solution. Yet that is what democracy seems to be giving us.