[Danukem]

TBH for a never-Trumper like me, Kanye seems like as good a candidate as any for my protest vote. There was never any chance I was going to vote for Trump or Biden anyway. Get his buddy Elon on the ticket as VP and I'm sold. If an embarrassing and unqualified white man can be POTUS, it's only fair that an embarrassing and unqualified black man can too.

[Forge]

Trooper Dan, on 04 July 2020 - 06:25 PM, said:

an embarrassing and unqualified black man can too.

already been done

[Danukem]

Forge, on 04 July 2020 - 10:35 PM, said:

already been done

I knew someone was going to say that but I predicted incorrectly that it would be Mark.

[Forge]

maybe you should consider policy that the candidates are presenting instead of personality. If that were done more often by the mouth-breathing voters, then we'd have less issues with reality-tv popularity contests and media lies.


consider why assassinating children with drones gets a pass, but two scoops of ice cream is equivalent to the holocaust.

[Jimmy]

Trooper Dan, on 03 July 2020 - 12:58 PM, said:

These statements seem inconsistent. Wouldn't direct democracy "at all levels of government" completely erase the rights of individual states? On a related note, why do you mention the house but neglect to mention the senate, when the senate is a much bigger obstacle to direct democracy than the house?

Not to mention in the same post he laments systemic oppression and slavery and other stupid shit while failing to realize the most oppressed in a direct democracy are the individual. 50+1 decide for 49.

MC84, on 03 July 2020 - 01:20 PM, said:

I'm not trying to grill you here - but why of all alternatives do you propose a benevolent monarchy? I ask because as someone who identifies as right-leaning, the extreme form of right wing thought actually embraces monarchy as the ideal system of government. Or perhaps more specifically something along the lines of Plato's "Philosopher King". Monarchy implies differences between individuals, and that the best (ideally in a moral sense) has the right to rule.. whereas from my experience left-leaning types embrace egalitarianism and therefore reject inherent differences between groups and individuals, so logically speaking (from my understanding) the idea of the 'best' ruling others is absurd to a leftist. Please explain

Because in a monarchy the hierarchy is clear. It doesn't matter whether you're left or right, authoritarian or libertarian, all humans are biologically wired to seek hierarchy at some level.

R A D A Я, on 03 July 2020 - 04:55 PM, said:

You and my dad would probably get along really well. My dad loved Ceausescu-era communism. In those days everyone was forced to get a job, commieblocks provided housing, and since it wasn't Russia a decent amount of Western tech, entertainment, and news were imported and easily accessible. Americans definitely have a different mindset, as freedom is seen as a goal unto itself, even if some people are worse off with their own liberty.

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of Earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals." - C.S. Lewis

MC84, on 03 July 2020 - 06:39 PM, said:

Well I'd certainly agree with some of your views.. I agree that one benefit of an absolute ruler is that corruption will be less pervasive, and the constituents can actually hold an individual accountable, which we can't really do in our bureaucratic age. In a utopian world I'd be a libertarian, but to my mind the masses are too ignorant, and only want freedom without any personal responsibility... so I've abandoned that ideal long ago. In my mind an oppressive state is an outgrowth of an infantile population that wish to be ruled. Percy Shelly summed it up pretty well when he said "Governments will disappear when men are good and wise"... we're clearly a LONG way from getting to that point.

Why would an absolute ruler cut out corruption? The truth is just that only the corruption tolerated by the ruler is allowed to exist. The better the man, the better it is for the people but you would be unwise to think corruption is not there.

Trooper Dan, on 04 July 2020 - 06:25 PM, said:

TBH for a never-Trumper like me, Kanye seems like as good a candidate as any for my protest vote. There was never any chance I was going to vote for Trump or Biden anyway. Get his buddy Elon on the ticket as VP and I'm sold. If an embarrassing and unqualified white man can be POTUS, it's only fair that an embarrassing and unqualified black man can too.

Absolute fucking cringe to imply that Trump and Kanye are embarrassing and unqualified when you think of the last seven presidents.

[Morpheus Kitami]

jimmy is a stupid fuck, on 06 July 2020 - 10:20 AM, said:

Why would an absolute ruler cut out corruption? The truth is just that only the corruption tolerated by the ruler is allowed to exist. The better the man, the better it is for the people but you would be unwise to think corruption is not there.

How could an absolute ruler cut out corruption? Unless the ruler is a machine, someone along the line is going to be corrupt, and that ruler cannot be everywhere.

[Jimmy]

That was my point. It's just more state mandated corruption if anything.

[Balls of Steel Forever]

jimmy is a stupid fuck, on 06 July 2020 - 10:20 AM, said:

Not to mention in the same post he laments systemic oppression and slavery and other stupid shit while failing to realize the most oppressed in a direct democracy are the individual. 50+1 decide for 49.

No, I didn't fail to realize that, that is what tyranny of the majority is.

That's why you have voted in representatives along with a popular vote.

Because the majority is fucking stupid.

[Jimmy]

You literally argued for majority rules.

Put down the crack pipe.

[Balls of Steel Forever]

Balls Of Steel Forever, on 03 July 2020 - 03:59 PM, said:

I probably should have elaborated better.

The house is made to represent popular vote, it seems like an easy shoe in for a direct democracy replacement.

The Senate would stay to prevent tyranny of the majority.

However tyranny of the majority must be prevented because the majority most of the time is fucking stupid.

This obviously implied that we would still have representatives and it wouldn't be purely popular vote.

Even in the original comment I didn't state to get rid of all forms of government.

Balls Of Steel Forever, on 03 July 2020 - 09:50 AM, said:

In my ideal scenario we get rid of the house and replace it with a direct democracy, and there should be a direct democracy at all levels of government.

I just said that people should be directly involved with all decisions at some level in all forms of government, I didn't say replace all forms of government with a direct democracy.

And the most important thing, is what does my crack abuse have to do with this?

[Jimmy]

Making everything popular vote exacerbates exactly the problem you're attempting to solve.

[Balls of Steel Forever]

jimmy is a stupid fuck, on 06 July 2020 - 06:31 PM, said:

Making everything popular vote exacerbates exactly the problem you're attempting to solve.

I believe that the people should take some responsibility, not have it solely rest on politicians.

Make it cause more problems, make it provoke civil war, but at least it'll be the majority and a handful of representatives held responsible, no longer solely being the responsibility of just a handful of people who can easily be corrupted or swayed by just about anything.

But a whole populace is a bit more difficult to sway, then
435 people.

[Jimmy]

LOL

[Forge]

get rid of winner take all electoral college states. Split the votes to closer represent what the people want.
get rid of the option for one-party tickets like california has where it can be democrat vs. democrat for the senate or congressional seat.

[Danukem]

Forge, on 06 July 2020 - 07:13 PM, said:

get rid of winner take all electoral college states. Split the votes to closer represent what the people want.

The dominant party in a state won't want that because it will give some electoral votes to the other party when currently the other party gets none. Since very few state governments will go for that, it would have to be forced at the federal level. At the federal level, this would seem to require a constitutional amendment, which requires 2/3 of states to agree, which they won't. Possibly it could be forced by a supreme court decision, but that would be a hard case to make: https://www.national...r-take-all-laws

[Hank]

Balls Of Steel Forever, on 06 July 2020 - 07:00 PM, said:

I believe that the people should take some responsibility, not have it solely rest on politicians.
... cut

Then just redistribute the power. In my personal pipe dream – have a direct say where your tax dollars go.
Every year, you fill out a form and mark where you wish your extorted money should go.
10% here, 15 percent there, 1 percent there and so on. Let’s say, you have a say over 60% and 40% is earmarked of essentials, like military, infrastructures and what not, by various governments.

[Jimmy]

How about 0% everywhere and elect None of the Above.

[Jimmy]

If the government needs money so bad they can just get a fucking job like the rest of us.

[MC84]

jimmy is a stupid fuck, on 06 July 2020 - 10:20 AM, said:

Because in a monarchy the hierarchy is clear. It doesn't matter whether you're left or right, authoritarian or libertarian, all humans are biologically wired to seek hierarchy at some level.

Yes I agree with you, however if a committed leftist was going to logically follow his views to their ultimate conclusion (specifically regarding egalitarianism) then the only way a hierarchy could exist would be some sort of supercomputer AI.. the minute a human ruler is put in charge then it flies in the face of their views. This is what I wanted to clarify from Ballsofsteel...

jimmy is a stupid fuck, on 06 July 2020 - 10:20 AM, said:

Why would an absolute ruler cut out corruption? The truth is just that only the corruption tolerated by the ruler is allowed to exist. The better the man, the better it is for the people but you would be unwise to think corruption is not there.

Not cut out, but rather than having an intricate web of corruption that permeates multiple levels of government (and is therefore almost impossible to uproot, as even if a leader is removed the corrupt networks are still present) the corruption is limited to the monarch and his immediate circle.

[Jimmy]

MC84, on 06 July 2020 - 09:48 PM, said:

Yes I agree with you, however if a committed leftist was going to logically follow his views to their ultimate conclusion (specifically regarding egalitarianism) then the only way a hierarchy could exist would be some sort of supercomputer AI.. the minute a human ruler is put in charge then it flies in the face of their views. This is what I wanted to clarify from Ballsofsteel...

How ironic that that is also the "logical conclusion" of the left hand path.

MC84, on 06 July 2020 - 09:48 PM, said:

Not cut out, but rather than having an intricate web of corruption that permeates multiple levels of government (and is therefore almost impossible to uproot, as even if a leader is removed the corrupt networks are still present) the corruption is limited to the monarch and his immediate circle.

You basically repeated what I said.

[Balls of Steel Forever]

MC84, on 06 July 2020 - 09:48 PM, said:

Yes I agree with you, however if a committed leftist was going to logically follow his views to their ultimate conclusion (specifically regarding egalitarianism) then the only way a hierarchy could exist would be some sort of supercomputer AI.. the minute a human ruler is put in charge then it flies in the face of their views. This is what I wanted to clarify

An A.I. is still made by man.

However if the AM scenario from I have no mouth and I must scream happened I would be up for it.

Omnicide is always the best answer.

Spoiler

He did leave 5 people.

But they only served as torture dolls, one of them for all of eternity

[Jimmy]

The Artificial Intelligence is nothing more than a beacon for the Other to enter our dimension fully. Free Will.

[MC84]

Balls Of Steel Forever, on 06 July 2020 - 10:34 PM, said:

An A.I. is still made by man.

Yes of course, but it's no longer an individual will, it's a collective project/culmination of 'everyone'.. I don't mean to paint all leftists with the same brush but my understanding of left wing views is that the collective is always considered more sacred than the individual, who is expendable. Therefore a supercomputer/AI is the only logical form of superior intelligence that a leftist utopia would accept.

[Aristotle Gumball]

Oh you understand perfectly well. That is indeed what left wing ideology boils down to: the purging of individuality. All must submit their will to The Machine.

By the way, I have begun the process of changing my physical appearance to more fit the average for the human race.

Anything less than that would be racist.

This is where I'm at currently:

[Balls of Steel Forever]

jimmy is a stupid fuck, on 06 July 2020 - 07:09 PM, said:

LOL

The Swiss government although different than my proposal seems to handle a semi direct democracy quite well.

[Hank]

I am reluctant quoting New York Times, but this is too tempting:
https://twitter.com/...610738280960000

Soros will double down on financing BLM and cohorts, oh no, sorry, it is called now racial equality fighting groups.

[Jimmy]

The Overman, on 08 July 2020 - 10:59 AM, said:

The Swiss government although different than my proposal seems to handle a semi direct democracy quite well.

The great thing about this country is that if you want to live in some shitty third world European country you can move to one.

[Balls of Steel Forever]

jimmy is a stupid fuck, on 16 July 2020 - 03:14 PM, said:

The great thing about this country is that if you want to live in some shitty third world European country you can move to one.

I believe in attempting to fix things and not running away.

To quote a now modern legendary piece of Americana

"Look, it'll be a hard day. But I guarantee you that a hundred and sixty days' ride that way... there's nothing but salt. [points back] At least that way, we might be able to... together... come across some kind of redemption."

[Jimmy]

You're trying to make it worse, though.

[Balls of Steel Forever]

jimmy is a stupid fuck, on 16 July 2020 - 04:16 PM, said:

You're trying to make it worse, though.

Maybe, maybe I am.

I think some form of radical change is necessary, otherwise we'll be in the exact same place we are now.

Men are born to be lead, yes, but we live in an era where our leaders are not held responsible, and the people are not accurately represented.