Virtual Teen Forums
 

Go Back   Virtual Teen Forums > >
Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read Chat Room

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 17th, 2020, 01:19 PM   #21
Snowfox
Great Poster
 
Name: Pyry
Join Date: May 23, 2017
Location: Finland
Age: 17
Gender: Male
Default Re: The lesser evil fallacy?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BJade View Post
Well in the uk the system has adapted over time, we started with a king (and occasionally queen) ruling, then went to an elected lord, then to an elected commoner. The problem is now all those commoners are nearly all educated at the same schools so have theoretical created there own class of society. Why there is such a north south divide and most decisions are London central. Unless you experience something how can you make a decision on it? So how do you change a system where even with mass protests a real common person would no be able to change things. And if the country is only 50/50 on everything, just have to look at Brexit votes or Scottish independence votes

And each area (Scotland, Wales and Ireland) of the uk has it's own government to do what it wants in certain policies so its modernised in areas, but it's made things a lot less efficient as now you have multiple leaders making different decisions on stuff confusing and contradicting eachother. Just because something is modern doesn't always make it efficient. As you could replace the electricity grid with a nuclear reactor in everyones house, but that would cause a lot of problems
So what happened to shining beacon of freedom called UK
How did UK turn out to be caliphate of ISIS as I have heard

Who is John Galt
Snowfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17th, 2020, 02:06 PM   #22
BJade
Nice Poster
 
BJade's Forum Picture
 
Name: Jade
Join Date: May 23, 2019
Location: England
Age: 18
Gender: Female
Default Re: The lesser evil fallacy?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowfox View Post
So what happened to shining beacon of freedom called UK
How did UK turn out to be caliphate of ISIS as I have heard
Not sure as the country that started the British empire can ever say to be a shinning beacon of freedom. Not to say that we haven't had individual or group that helped (with groups from other countries) to progress the freedom of all individuals of the world. But also many former colonial countries would not say the British empire gave freedom, but hopefully when they got independence they have had the help to be a free country

But no idea what anything has to do with ISIS


Good Friend Kinda Romantic Ready to Rock
BJade is online now   Reply With Quote
Old October 17th, 2020, 04:22 PM   #23
Stronk Serb
Kebab Remover
 
Stronk Serb's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: November 3, 2012
Location: Serbia (FYR)
Age: 22
Gender: Male
Blog Entries: 2
Default Re: The lesser evil fallacy?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BJade View Post
Well in the uk the system has adapted over time, we started with a king (and occasionally queen) ruling, then went to an elected lord, then to an elected commoner. The problem is now all those commoners are nearly all educated at the same schools so have theoretical created there own class of society. Why there is such a north south divide and most decisions are London central. Unless you experience something how can you make a decision on it? So how do you change a system where even with mass protests a real common person would no be able to change things. And if the country is only 50/50 on everything, just have to look at Brexit votes or Scottish independence votes

And each area (Scotland, Wales and Ireland) of the uk has it's own government to do what it wants in certain policies so its modernised in areas, but it's made things a lot less efficient as now you have multiple leaders making different decisions on stuff confusing and contradicting eachother. Just because something is modern doesn't always make it efficient. As you could replace the electricity grid with a nuclear reactor in everyones house, but that would cause a lot of problems
Well, of course the commoners in Parliament and government now are from the same economic class as the lords. That's late capitalism for you. Politics are dictated by money, not public needs.

The thing is, in Serbia's case, in order to really change the system, you first need to let it sink down more and then overthrow it through force of arms, rewrite a constitution and most of the legal codes.

Then literally commit a purge of the state apparatus and enterprises, because 10% of the population are in the Progressive party, and most of them are because of their personal benefits.

I don't know if the UK has a minimal voter turnout threshold for parliamentary elections, but if it does, simply not attending in your voting disctrict could throw a wrench in the gears, or cast invalid ballots. Depends on the legal characteristics. For example, in the elections here, there were 6% of invalid ballots. They essentially denied the parliament to radical parties and other Progressive satellite scum.

The USSR had similar parliamentary "elections" like the UK, where it was divided into voting districts. Now you had 1-3 party members to vote for to send to the Supreme Soviet. Now, you could either vote or give an invalid ballot, a candidade needed 50% of the vote to win. People actually did give invalid ballots en masse several times, forcing the government to act and meet demands of the locals.

VT's most likely to become president of 2017 & 2019
VT's leading expert on Slavology and anything Slavic-related, if you have some questions of Slavic nature, just send me a VM or a PM
Stronk Serb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17th, 2020, 04:54 PM   #24
BJade
Nice Poster
 
BJade's Forum Picture
 
Name: Jade
Join Date: May 23, 2019
Location: England
Age: 18
Gender: Female
Default Re: The lesser evil fallacy?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stronk Serb View Post
Well, of course the commoners in Parliament and government now are from the same economic class as the lords. That's late capitalism for you. Politics are dictated by money, not public needs.

The thing is, in Serbia's case, in order to really change the system, you first need to let it sink down more and then overthrow it through force of arms, rewrite a constitution and most of the legal codes.

Then literally commit a purge of the state apparatus and enterprises, because 10% of the population are in the Progressive party, and most of them are because of their personal benefits.

I don't know if the UK has a minimal voter turnout threshold for parliamentary elections, but if it does, simply not attending in your voting disctrict could throw a wrench in the gears, or cast invalid ballots. Depends on the legal characteristics. For example, in the elections here, there were 6% of invalid ballots. They essentially denied the parliament to radical parties and other Progressive satellite scum.

The USSR had similar parliamentary "elections" like the UK, where it was divided into voting districts. Now you had 1-3 party members to vote for to send to the Supreme Soviet. Now, you could either vote or give an invalid ballot, a candidade needed 50% of the vote to win. People actually did give invalid ballots en masse several times, forcing the government to act and meet demands of the locals.
I just looked up online and as far as I can tell there is no minimum turn out (though I'd guess if it was low enough it would be publicised by the media and something would happen) but I also found the turn out for the last election

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk...-2019-turnout/

And from the look of it turn outs are nearly alway just above 60%. So nearly half the population don't vote, and the winning party had about 40% of the votes (as only need a majority to win) That's only a quarter of the population so 3 quarters of the population didn't vote for the government. Doesn't sound right to me


Good Friend Kinda Romantic Ready to Rock
BJade is online now   Reply With Quote
Old October 17th, 2020, 06:30 PM   #25
Sinanju
Junior Member+
 
Join Date: August 13, 2020
Location: There
Age: 14
Gender: Male
Default Re: The lesser evil fallacy?

Protesting against a political party makes sense. Protesting against representative democracy itself is stupid and dangerous if you have no better system to offer. And so far, nobody found yet a better idea to manage a country than indirect democracy where leaders are elected by vote.

Also, for a revolution to be successful, you need strong leaders heading it. What guarantees you that those leaders are "fighting for freedom", and not for their own selfish interests, using the population as a tool to reach absolute power? Nothing. History is full of dictators starting their career as rebellious leaders.

A revolution gives no guarantee that the resulting government would be any better or more representative than the previous one. It seems to me that improvements in freedom, in equal rights, in justice and so on were always the result of slow, long term trends, using mechanisms internal to the system in place. Violent revolutions create highly unstable organizations that don't last long in their primary form.

And finally, I don't see why current democracies would be broken and unable to adapt to current needs. So far, they managed to do a good job, much better than anything before them. I don't get why they'd be obsolete just because they cannot solve every single problem quickly and perfectly, or because they take decisions that are not popular.
Sinanju is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 18th, 2020, 12:09 AM   #26
Snowfox
Great Poster
 
Name: Pyry
Join Date: May 23, 2017
Location: Finland
Age: 17
Gender: Male
Default Re: The lesser evil fallacy?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinanju View Post
Protesting against a political party makes sense. Protesting against representative democracy itself is stupid and dangerous if you have no better system to offer. And so far, nobody found yet a better idea to manage a country than indirect democracy where leaders are elected by vote.

Also, for a revolution to be successful, you need strong leaders heading it. What guarantees you that those leaders are "fighting for freedom", and not for their own selfish interests, using the population as a tool to reach absolute power? Nothing. History is full of dictators starting their career as rebellious leaders.

A revolution gives no guarantee that the resulting government would be any better or more representative than the previous one. It seems to me that improvements in freedom, in equal rights, in justice and so on were always the result of slow, long term trends, using mechanisms internal to the system in place. Violent revolutions create highly unstable organizations that don't last long in their primary form.

And finally, I don't see why current democracies would be broken and unable to adapt to current needs. So far, they managed to do a good job, much better than anything before them. I don't get why they'd be obsolete just because they cannot solve every single problem quickly and perfectly, or because they take decisions that are not popular.
Swiss did found better system. Direct democracy

Who is John Galt
Snowfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 18th, 2020, 04:44 PM   #27
lliam
VT Lover
 
lliam's Forum Picture
 
Name: Liam
Join Date: July 29, 2015
Location: The new ground on the hill with the Pacific beach nearby and the great wild beyond.
Gender: Male
Blog Entries: 9
Default Re: The lesser evil fallacy?

works only for countries with lower population.





"Life is that prison you'll never leave alive."



lliam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 19th, 2020, 05:57 PM   #28
Stronk Serb
Kebab Remover
 
Stronk Serb's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: November 3, 2012
Location: Serbia (FYR)
Age: 22
Gender: Male
Blog Entries: 2
Default Re: The lesser evil fallacy?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BJade View Post
I just looked up online and as far as I can tell there is no minimum turn out (though I'd guess if it was low enough it would be publicised by the media and something would happen) but I also found the turn out for the last election

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk...-2019-turnout/

And from the look of it turn outs are nearly alway just above 60%. So nearly half the population don't vote, and the winning party had about 40% of the votes (as only need a majority to win) That's only a quarter of the population so 3 quarters of the population didn't vote for the government. Doesn't sound right to me
Exactly. Here the voter turnout threshold is abolished, except for the referendums because that is in the constitution, and to change it you need to hold a referendum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinanju View Post
Protesting against a political party makes sense. Protesting against representative democracy itself is stupid and dangerous if you have no better system to offer. And so far, nobody found yet a better idea to manage a country than indirect democracy where leaders are elected by vote.

Also, for a revolution to be successful, you need strong leaders heading it. What guarantees you that those leaders are "fighting for freedom", and not for their own selfish interests, using the population as a tool to reach absolute power? Nothing. History is full of dictators starting their career as rebellious leaders.

A revolution gives no guarantee that the resulting government would be any better or more representative than the previous one. It seems to me that improvements in freedom, in equal rights, in justice and so on were always the result of slow, long term trends, using mechanisms internal to the system in place. Violent revolutions create highly unstable organizations that don't last long in their primary form.

And finally, I don't see why current democracies would be broken and unable to adapt to current needs. So far, they managed to do a good job, much better than anything before them. I don't get why they'd be obsolete just because they cannot solve every single problem quickly and perfectly, or because they take decisions that are not popular.
For a democracy to be successful, you need people loyal to democracy and not people loyal to their pockets or influence they garner by promissing everything to get elected, so the same argument can be easily used for representative democracies too.

VT's most likely to become president of 2017 & 2019
VT's leading expert on Slavology and anything Slavic-related, if you have some questions of Slavic nature, just send me a VM or a PM
Stronk Serb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 23rd, 2020, 04:28 PM   #29
Sinanju
Junior Member+
 
Join Date: August 13, 2020
Location: There
Age: 14
Gender: Male
Default Re: The lesser evil fallacy?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stronk Serb View Post
For a democracy to be successful, you need people loyal to democracy and not people loyal to their pockets or influence they garner by promissing everything to get elected, so the same argument can be easily used for representative democracies too.
So what? That's true regardless of the form of government you choose. Do you think most dictators were not driven by greed? Do you think they didn't promise everything to their supporters (soldiers, priests, whatever powerful industry) to reach power, then to keep it?

And what makes you think populist leaders are different?

Our politicians grab huge personal benefits from their position. Some are probably idealists, but most are just interested by power, wealth, or popularity. All our government systems somehow take that into account in a way or another. The edge democracies have is that it makes it harder for a single person to grab all the power; it forces leaders to watch each other, and their competition forces them to get popular support to stay in the fight. I'm pretty sure a modern democracy requires greedy, sellfish, or arrogant leaders to keep working, because that's what gives them the drive to do their job.
Sinanju is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24th, 2020, 03:27 AM   #30
Stronk Serb
Kebab Remover
 
Stronk Serb's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: November 3, 2012
Location: Serbia (FYR)
Age: 22
Gender: Male
Blog Entries: 2
Default Re: The lesser evil fallacy?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinanju View Post
So what? That's true regardless of the form of government you choose. Do you think most dictators were not driven by greed? Do you think they didn't promise everything to their supporters (soldiers, priests, whatever powerful industry) to reach power, then to keep it?

And what makes you think populist leaders are different?

Our politicians grab huge personal benefits from their position. Some are probably idealists, but most are just interested by power, wealth, or popularity. All our government systems somehow take that into account in a way or another. The edge democracies have is that it makes it harder for a single person to grab all the power; it forces leaders to watch each other, and their competition forces them to get popular support to stay in the fight. I'm pretty sure a modern democracy requires greedy, sellfish, or arrogant leaders to keep working, because that's what gives them the drive to do their job.
So you essentially say that in a modern democracy a leader needs to be tainted and corrupt? Sure, there are term limits in democracies, but there it's not one man who rules. It's a rich collective who decide with their money who they will make president/premier. It's them who decide which representative will get money in exchange for passing laws beneficial to the rich elites and detrimental to the people. Capital dictates more than votes ever could, so why would we subject to someone who's only purpose is to make us poorer while enriching himself?

Sure, people pride themselves in their democracies for having the freedoms to say what they want, but, can a farmer boy ever dream of becoming an astronaut and succeed? In Soviet Union one such man did. His name was Yuriy Gagarin. Could a person literally have an open career choice? Where they simply decide what they want to do, work for it and becoming respected in their academic circles? Now, the USSR had its shortcomings, but in some regards it was far more developed than the west now.

VT's most likely to become president of 2017 & 2019
VT's leading expert on Slavology and anything Slavic-related, if you have some questions of Slavic nature, just send me a VM or a PM
Stronk Serb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24th, 2020, 04:58 PM   #31
lliam
VT Lover
 
lliam's Forum Picture
 
Name: Liam
Join Date: July 29, 2015
Location: The new ground on the hill with the Pacific beach nearby and the great wild beyond.
Gender: Male
Blog Entries: 9
Default Re: The lesser evil fallacy?

Democracies don't need corrupt and certainly too no strict democratic loyalists.

Democracies need citizens who have more than a minimum amount of education and administrations who objectively implement what needs to be done.

Above all, democracies need individual representatives who speak the truth to all citizens without making up stuff.

And if the truth is that most citizens are idiots, then administration officials should speak this fact out loud too. Above all, democracies need citizens who understand what it means to live in a society and who therefore accept limitations if they make sense, etc.

So all in all citizens with good educated social skills.





"Life is that prison you'll never leave alive."



lliam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 07:56 PM   #32
Stronk Serb
Kebab Remover
 
Stronk Serb's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: November 3, 2012
Location: Serbia (FYR)
Age: 22
Gender: Male
Blog Entries: 2
Default Re: The lesser evil fallacy?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lliam View Post
Democracies don't need corrupt and certainly too no strict democratic loyalists.

Democracies need citizens who have more than a minimum amount of education and administrations who objectively implement what needs to be done.

Above all, democracies need individual representatives who speak the truth to all citizens without making up stuff.

And if the truth is that most citizens are idiots, then administration officials should speak this fact out loud too. Above all, democracies need citizens who understand what it means to live in a society and who therefore accept limitations if they make sense, etc.

So all in all citizens with good educated social skills.
Except people with undeveloped critical thinking and lack of education are easier to sway than an educated population. Plus no elected politician will call the people idiots even if it's true.

Plus it's in the interest of the rich and intelligent elite to have a dumbed down population that is servile regarding anything. Plus, a better quality of education and development of critical thinking regarding society will cause the masses on the bare minimum of existence to question why they earn minimum wage while carrying out the majority of the workload leading to unionization and possible strikes.
In many countries candidates obtain campaign funding via lobbying (legal bribe essentially) from rich interest groups for sponsoring laws that directly contradict the needs of the people. You have a politician taking corporate money on one side, and in order to not be called a shill, promises gold-paved roads, readily available panacea, some random terms like euroatlantic integrations, three times better wages etc. It's a broken system in an environment of today.

That leads to the conclusion that you cannot really have a representative democracy, or call anything democratic in a capitalist economic system.

Also administrations should be as streamlined and employ least people possible while maintaining efficiency. Public services like health, emergency services etc. need to be expanded.

VT's most likely to become president of 2017 & 2019
VT's leading expert on Slavology and anything Slavic-related, if you have some questions of Slavic nature, just send me a VM or a PM

Last edited by Stronk Serb; Yesterday at 08:01 PM.
Stronk Serb is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright©2000 - 2020
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2004 - 2020, VirtualTeen.org