U.S. could lose democracy status, says global watchdog
U.S. could lose democracy status, says global watchdog
You're viewing a single thread.
- Democracy isn't a status given by some watchdog.
- Democracy is shit
So you're all for dictatorships then?
Democracy and dictatorship is not a dichotomy.
It kinda is, everything falls on that scale, either people are being represented and representing themselves or they aren't. Everything else is just the mechanics of that.
Was Roman Republic a dictatorship?
I don't know much about Romans. Eventually it became an empire with an emperor and all though.
Oooh edgy.
I'll guess they are a college freshman or younger.
Anything else than democracy is shittier
"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…"
Winston S Churchill, 11 November 1947
Demonstrably false.
Go ahead and demonstrate it then
Easy: democracies don't last long compared to the other forms government. So they can't be better than other forms of government.
We await patiently for your demonstration.
What's the longest lifespan of a democratic state in human history? Now compare it to the average lifespan of monarchies, for example.
okay russian shill, go back to /ML/.
The measure of whether a system of government is good or bad is not "how long it lasts".
It's the main criterion. If the system doesn't last, then it's shit regardless of what it is. The main purpose of the government (and any organization, for that matter) is to exist for as long as possible, everything else comes second. I wonder what other criteria do you have in mind?
- 482 years
- 636 years
Roman Republic wasn't a democracy. It was ruled by aristocratic families. Lol.
The argument is that they were a democratic republic.
several popular assemblies of all free citizens, possessing the power to elect magistrates from the populace and pass laws; and a series of magistracies with varying types of civil and political authority.
If you're referring to direct democracy, I suppose we could consider the Athenian democracy, though I think there are other examples from different regions on the planet through antiquity.
Popular assemblies composed of common citizens could maybe decide where to put a public toilet on a street. Most laws were passed by the senate (composed of aristocrats), and consuls/other top magistrates were appointed by the senate.
So you were there and knew everything about it?
Look, Mr./Mrs.
iAmATotallyReasonablePersonAndNotAnInsufferableCunt, are you going to provide some evidence of whatever point you're trying to make, or should we do this tit-for-tat some more?Either way, no sweat. Happy to yell at the clouds with you until the heat-death of the universe.
It was ruled by aristocratic families.
We're not so different after all!
Only for those who prefer the taste of boot leather.
What do you mean by that?
- Do you mean electoral politics is fundamentally flawed?
- Do you mean direct action by the working class (workers democracy) is better than liberalism?
- Or are you just begging to have the orange tyrants foot deep down your throat?
-
Yes. Obviously.
-
No. Both are shit.
-
No.
Looking at your past comments would suggest you're a bootlicker
Well, seems like your deductive capabilities are subpar. Don't try suggesting thing again, you suck at it.
-