Author Topic: Western Democracy  (Read 6018 times)

Zea_mays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 563
    • View Profile
Re: Western Democracy
« Reply #90 on: July 19, 2022, 09:13:02 am »
Another liberal reactionary article disgusting enough to pick it apart line by line:
https://www.vice.com/en/article/g5vg5x/we-cant-save-democracy-just-by-voting

Quote
We Can’t Save Democracy Just by Voting

In a country as fundamentally hostile to democracy as ours, limiting it to the political sphere makes little sense.

??? We can't save democracy through democracy, so we need more democracy? How braindead are these people?

Quote
It's a simple point that's been made over and over again in the wake of these decisions, but it bears repeating: That a handful of unelected officials can act against the interests of the majority in this way shows how threadbare our democracy is, and how deeply hostile our country’s institutions are to it.

??? Supreme Court seats were a major campaign issue which caused Republicans to elect Trump and a campaign issue for the parties to battle over the Senate. That's democracy.

Quote
The vast majority of decisions about how our lives are run, after all, are made without any input from the public. How our society’s resources are invested—what gets made, when, how, and why—as well as how the spaces and platforms that mediate our lives are run are all decisions made without much public input.

Good, do you want low-information Trump voters deciding how to run environmental policy?

Oh wait, the power of the unelected professionals at the EPA was recently limited in order to make it more democratic:
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/30/-supreme-court-says-epa-lacks-authority-on-climate-standards-for-power-plants.html

Quote
There’s a rhetorical commitment to political democracy, but it amounts to nothing if we don’t democratize everything and allow people to have a direct say in the things that affect their lives.

That's already happening actually. Trumpers (led by Steve Bannon, etc.) have been engaging in a campaign to win every single elected office from school boards on up, and have openly been boasting about controlling the entire "election apparatus" from the people who staff polling places on election day all the way up to secretaries of state who support the coup:
https://www.salon.com/2022/07/11/ron-desantis-handpicked-radical-far-right-secretary-of-state-will-oversee-his-race/

Quote
Voting is one of the main examples held up as proof of our democratic politics. For most of this country’s history, the United States was explicitly run as an apartheid state that withheld personhood, then citizenship, then suffrage from African Americans until 1965.

Yeah, because people voted for apartheid.

Quote
"The court's aim, much like the conservative legal movement's, is not theocracy but privatization," wrote McCray. "With privatization comes the license to discriminate more wantonly against those who have long had limited or no access to the public good and the resources that support it."

...That's literally what "democratization" of every aspect of our daily lives would entail. The elimination of any form of professional administration and replacement by whoever has the most campaign/propaganda/bribe budgets...

Quote
In the Federalist Papers and at the Constitutional Conventions, Madison was unambiguous about the threat he believed democracy posed to the proposed American republic.

Federalist No. 10 warned against the “mischief of factions,” defined as groups “united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community." Factions would be guarded against by limiting democracy in a few key ways: democratic involvement would be limited to representation not direct deliberation; institutions would be created to prevent a majority from monopolizing policy and making minority interests feel permanently excluded.

At the Constitutional Convention, Madison was more explicit in his antipathy for democracy. In one debate that took place in June 1787 over the design of the Senate, Madison laid out the vision of a body protecting the “minority of the opulent” from the threat of democracy. “Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests and to balance and check the other.”

In other words, the core problem with democracy for the Constitution’s key framer was the public and its ability to participate.

...Ok, and in our current system of universal suffrage we still have the mischief of factions (far worse than it ever was in history) and the opulent elites have arguably more power than ever.

Quote
Walter Lippmann—a journalist whose ideas about democracy and liberalism were widely influential in the 20th century—wrote extensively about the problem of the public and its unwieldy nature. In his 1925 book Phantom Public, he writes that “the public must be put in its place” so that “each of us may live free of the trampling and the roar of a bewildered herd." In the same book, he explains the public's role is not to "pass judgment on the intrinsic merits" of policy—public opinion is actually "a reserve of force brought into action during a crisis in public affairs."

Non-expert, low-information, reactionary judgment from the public is especially bad in times of crisis (e.g. the "non-binding" Brexit referendum), but being trampled under the bewildered herd of Trumpers in normal times is considerably annoying as well.

Quote
In Bouie's column as well, the articulation of slaveholder and statesman John C. Calhoun's explicit apartheid system as well as its more informal version found in the Jim Crow South could be read as continuing this long tradition of Madisonian (and fundamentally American) hostility towards democracy in the name of elite rule.

No, the majority of voters voted to take away the ability of "black" people to vote...

Quote
The thread running through both reactionary and liberal thought on democracy here is that when it’s not outright opposed, it should be sharply limited to a form that simply ratifies decisions made by elites.

What would things look like if we took democracy a bit more seriously—if we cultivated the public not as a force to be projected or crushed, but as the integral part of the body politic?

Hmm, in today's world of expanded universal suffrage, democracy remains a way to give legitimacy to decisions made by elites:
Quote
Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.


https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B

Whether 0% or 100% of citizens favor a policy, there is no statistical difference whether it gets enacted.

That means, if average citizens took something seriously enough that literally 100% of non-elites were able to agree on something, then, purely through voting and the democratic process, nothing would change.

This image needs to be posted any time a liberal says we just need to vote.

Quote
There are a multitude of remedies that spring from this prognosis that serve to more fully democratize our society. Some circumvent the democracy deficit in this country by applying pressure directly—uprisings and sabotage can serve to subvert some ends, hold feet to the fire, and crystalize further actions for movements to take. Dewey, a progressive liberal, may have shied away from these more explicitly insurrectionary methods, but still believed a revolution of sorts was necessary to save this country and the traces of democracy within it.

...What? Since universal suffrage isn't giving you the intended result, you try to "democratize" society using highly non-democratic means?  ???

Quote
A core thrust of Dewey’s philosophy was that democracy was not compatible with a system that prioritized private control—not just politics, but the economy itself.
[...]
At the time, Dewey was advocating for a new party to embark on a social revolution that would create a real democracy in America by reorganizing industry and production along social and moral ends, as opposed to private profit first and foremost. Public control and ownership of various sectors, undermining corporate control and concentration across the economy, erecting stronger barriers between the state and the private sector, prioritizing technological development that has a social purpose as opposed to an attractive or speculative profit potential, are all some of the principles that can orient us as we ask how to expand and cultivate democracy instead of following the lead of America’s major institutions and thinkers in curbing it.

That type of state control of society directed towards populist ends sounds like National Socialism or Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, rather than anything that is capable of existing under democracy.

Even liberals during Dewey's time (including Lippmann!) recognized this fact, and supported FDR becoming a dictator!

Quote
The greatest applause from the large crowd on the east side of the Capitol came when Roosevelt said that if his rescue program was not quickly approved: "I shall ask Congress for the one remaining instrument to meet the crisis: broad executive power to wage war against the emergency, as great as the power that would be given to me if we were in fact invaded by a foreign foe."
[...]
And so the approving headline FOR DICTATORSHIP IF NECESSARY ran in the New York Herald-Tribune on March 5, with similar notes stuck in the Inauguration coverage of other major papers.
[...]
In preparing for the broadcast, someone in the small Roosevelt inner circle offered the new president a typewritten draft of suggested additions that contained this eye-popping sentence:

As new commander-in-chief under the oath to which you are still bound I reserve to myself the right to command you in any phase of the situation which now confronts us.

This was dictator talk -- an explicit power grab. The new president was contemplating his "right" to command World War I veterans -- mostly men in their late thirties -- who had long since reentered civilian life.
[...]
But the commander in chief had no power over them. Here Roosevelt would be poised to mobilize hundreds of thousands of unemployed and desperate men by decree, apparently to guard banks or put down rebellions or do anything else he wished during "any phase" of the crisis, with the insistence that they were dutybound to obey his concocted "command."

That word -- "dictator" -- had been in the air for weeks, endorsed vaguely as a remedy for the Depression by establishment figures ranging from the owners of the New York Daily News, the nation's largest circulation newspaper, to Walter Lippmann, the eminent columnist who spoke for the American political elite. "The situation is critical, Franklin. You may have no alternative but to assume dictatorial powers," Lippmann had told FDR during a visit to Warm Springs on February 1, before the crisis escalated. Alfred E. Smith, the Democratic nominee for president in 1928, recalled with some exaggeration that "during the World War we wrapped the Constitution in a piece of paper, put it on the shelf and left it there until the war was over." The Depression, Smith concluded, was a similar "state of war." Even Eleanor Roosevelt, more liberal than her husband, privately suggested that a "benevolent dictator" might be what the country needed. The vague idea was not a police state but deference to a strong leader unfettered by Congress or the other inconveniences of democracy.
[...]
Within a few years, "dictator" would carry sinister tones, but -- hard as it is to believe now -- the word had a reassuring ring that season. So did "storm troopers," used by one admiring author to describe foot soldiers of the early New Deal, and "concentration camps," a generic term routinely applied to the work camps of the Civilian Conservation Corps that would be established by summer across the country. After all, the Italian Fascist Benito Mussolini, in power for a decade, had ginned up the Italian economy and was popular with everyone from Winston Churchill to Will Rogers to Lowell Thomas, America's most influential broadcaster. "If ever this country needed a Mussolini, it needs one now," said Senator David Reed of Pennsylvania, outgoing President Hoover's closest friend on Capitol Hill. The speech draft prepared for FDR brought to mind Mussolini addressing his black-shirt followers, many of whom were demobilized veterans who joined Il Duce's private army.
https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5525748

Quote
he magazine Commonweal, meanwhile, put forth the contention that Roosevelt should assume "the powers of a virtual dictatorship to reorganize the government".[6] Roger Babson called for limitations to be imposed on the powers of Congress, including the abolition of the United States Senate, while Will Rogers supported proposals to extend extraordinary powers to Roosevelt by writing that "Mussolini could take our country today and put people back to work at the rate of one million per month".[7] Roosevelt received letters from around the nation imploring him to assume extraordinary powers.[6]

The month prior to his March 1933 inauguration, Speaker John Nance Garner introduced legislation into the U.S. House of Representatives that would allow the presidency the unilateral authority to suspend congressional appropriations, abolish government departments, dismiss civil servants at his discretion, and reduce statutory appropriations and contractual payments, with Congress only able to check such measures with a two-thirds supermajority in both houses.[8] Bertrand Snell – leader of the Republican Party in the House – criticized the bill which, he said, would "make an absolute dictator of Roosevelt. It would give him more power than any executive leader in the world except Mussolini".[9]
https://web.archive.org/web/20210813031152/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roosevelt_dictatorship

Quote
"There's a long tradition and body of work in economics and democratic theory that shows you can't just have democracy in the political sphere—you have to extend democracy to other branches of life like the economic sphere," said Thomas Hanna, research director at the Democracy Collaborative.

...Oh, and what type of people have been writing these "traditions"?

Quote
“This tradition of economic democracy, of extending people's abilities and rights into economic decisions that impact their lives, their family's lives, their community's lives, you just don't get that with private ownership.”

That's called autocratic socialism. "Economic democracy" is literally private ownership where the most competitively successful and wealthy businesses control the outcome of democracy. Which is what we have now, and which is what Hitler pointed out as one of the biggest problems of democracy 100 years ago. (i.e. the competitive traits that made the "bourgeoisie" class successful in business made them successful in democratic politics, to the detriment of society.)

Quote
Putting the agriculture and energy sectors under public control might help preempt inflationary prices for key commodities, but it could also give communities more control over the sort of production that goes on, whose needs it meets, and the way their lives are shaped as a result. Nationalizing meat packers, electric or gas companies, oil refineries, grain traders, and other key nodes of various supply chains would give more room for designs that prioritize other ends than private profit (sustainability, labor conditions, zero emissions, etc.). A public healthcare system might bring down costs of medication or operations, but it could also liberate the army of people whose labor is subordinated to protecting private health insurance and its profits.

Breaking up or banning some of the tech platforms that mediate our lives might eliminate the more odious forms of labor underwriting their operation, but it would also give people a chance to create social networks and communities driven by interests outside of profit and regulatory arbitrage.

 ??? ::) How can anyone believe that is democracy? Moreover, presumably once the entire economy is nationalized/placed under a centrally-directed model, each sector will have to be managed by experts, rather than voted on by idiots who know nothing about running the world's most complex economy.

Seriously, read the quoted section again. Only someone brainwashed into a cult which worships democracy without thinking can think that in any way resembles democracy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_civil_religion

guest30

  • Guest
I'm recently doing a debate with the people who always support democracy even though there's a flaw on it. See this photographed Discord conversation



Photographed on Friday, 22th July 2022, 16 : 12 Jakarta Time


Explanation 1 :

Account named "Aetherius Cassius" say that democracy can resulting the wrong policy. And the majorities who made the policy will suffer. And I explained to him that his statements shows the flaw of democracy.

Account named "Zahra" said that democracy is needed for the sake the government really know the will of the people.

And "Aetherius Cassius" said that the modern world need liberal-democracy. Even though he already explained the flaws of democracy and emphasized by me.





Photographed on Friday, 22th July 2022, 16 : 16 Jakarta Time

Explanation 2 :

I'm explain that the democracy will allow people to do the bad things like exploit the another group of innocent people for the sake of majority will. But "Zahra" answered with pretending that historical facts is not result from democracy.

Then I explained again example of the evilness of democracy through how Bismarck forced to did German colonialism in "Africa"'s territory because of majority of inferior Germans wanted Germany to did that thing.





Photographed on Friday, 22th July 2022, 16 : 18 Jakarta Time

Explanation 3 :

"Zahra" said that showing of her ignorance on fact that the colonialism are result of democracy. And consider "imperialism" (Actually, the accurate term of European conquest is "colonization") is not part of democratic policy and consider it "non-issue" of the current conversation during that time. What an inferior girl...

And "Aetherius Cassius" got confused and answer with confusion, that such colonialism policy is politically "against democracy" and not a "triumph of democracy". Even though that colonialism was resulted from the will of majority during that time.


 


Photographed on Friday, 22th July 2022, 16 : 20 Jakarta Time

Explanation 4 :

I'm explaining again that majority will oftenly resulting oppressive policy. Like Jim Crow law, the Israel colonialism, and the democratic Western nations's invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. And "Zahra" with her inferior mentality consider that my explanation was based on "American's democracy", which according to her is "not a democracy." She not want to take accountability that the democratic system which she support is resulting many oppressive policies to the innocent communities.

"Aetherius Cassius" with his ignorance said that the tragedy of historical international relations are not relevant to the problem of democracy. Even though that invasions, racial oppression, and colonialism are more than one time explained, that it was happen because of democracy...



The Discord Group Doelian Society



Photographed on Friday, 29th July 2022, 10 : 43 Jakarta Time






guest30

  • Guest
Report of Debate with the inferior liberals and the democrats during Saturday, 30th July 2022

Picture of photographed debate conversation



Explanation 1 :

I'm explain that the democracy resulting unethical policies to the world's environment and the innocent peoples, like colonialism and unnecessary war.




Explanation 2 :

They rather blame the outdated meaning of democracy rather than acknowledge that the way of how democracy works. Which from there it resulting the unethical policies, unnecessary war, and colonialism. So they keep showing their wrong arguments.



Explanation 3 :

They merely explain that the democracy can solve the world oppression with using Rawlsianism's definition of democracy. Even though I'm already explain that the modern democracy still resulting big oppression to the non-Western world, which already using Rawlsianism. And another member explain that "white" people are minority if compared to the rest of the people in the world which out of topic



Explanation 4 :

She keep ignoring that the result of democracy on today's time which I'm already explained are "not relevant to the recent political-science theory". Actually, it's democracy which still used today based on "political-science theory", which keep today's world problem happening without strong opposition. What an inferior girl....



Explanation 5 :

I'm show the 2016 news poll about Colonialism by British Empire. Which 44 percents of the people agree that it was good, and only 19 percents who say it was bad. And I ask them to answer on how the democracy solve that problem.



Explanation 6 :

I already explain that Trump who won on 2016 which resulting oppressive policies to the innocents is because of democracy. But she still deny that it has relevance to the implementation of Aristotelian democracy.



Explanation 7 :

She begin to ask a question which really out of topic, like questioning my ages. It means she fail to answer my arguments and fail to make the arguments about the evilness of democracy were wrong.



Explanation 8 :

Some member explain that the people don't have to agree to what the idea is. So he justify the people not agree with opposition to what I say that colonialism, bullying, racialism is bad.



Explanation 9 :

She keep saying that liberalism said that racism is bad. If it was like that, then why the pro-colonial mindset from the British people still exist? She even ignore the fact about colonial polls which I've shown on previous conversation before... She is ignorant inferior unterfrau...



Explanation 10 :

I'm answering with show the list of oppressive ideological movements. And she questioning me about what I think on Jewish people which not relevant to the topic discussion.



Explanation 11 :

And a member just consider me as an "oppressive" only because I'm want to do that. So he disagree if we want to oppress the oppressive movements for the sake implementing the community of people which free from democratic tyranny and Zionist people's domination for example... The liberals attitude just make our struggle for reviving the fatherland hindered. And he mentioned me as "double standart" without any reeason.

The sudden ban on me from their Discord group close the discussion. So, the only way to debunk our ideological arguments is with banning, judging, and mocking. That is the proper way, remember that...

Apologize if the sentence above is make you feel got satirized when debate with us.


Discord Grup "Young World Federalist"



Photographed on Saturday, 30th July 2022, 15 : 10 Jakarta Time











SirGalahad

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 317
    • View Profile
Re: Western Democracy
« Reply #93 on: August 01, 2022, 02:53:46 am »
They’re misguided fools. They have their hearts in the right place with some of the things that they say, but they’ve been fooled nonetheless. Their claim that supporting autocracy to put an end to oppression is a double standard and makes you no better than the original oppressor, is like saying that it’s a double standard to support self-defense if you hate violence.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2022, 02:55:27 am by SirGalahad »

ajomagurd

  • Guest
Re: Western Democracy
« Reply #94 on: August 04, 2022, 05:46:47 pm »
I'm one of the people that was in one of those screenshots. You want to debate still?

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11039
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Western Democracy
« Reply #95 on: August 04, 2022, 06:18:29 pm »
If you want to debate, you are welcome to start a new topic here:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/



guest30

  • Guest
Re: Western Democracy
« Reply #96 on: August 06, 2022, 12:13:23 am »
Debate with the Communist who always support Democracy no matter how flaws it's implementation result...

Date : Friday, 5th August 2022 Jakarta Time



Photographed on Friday, 5th August 2022, 21 : 24 Jakarta Time

Explanation 1 :

I'm explaining the weakness of democracy. That is always promoting the interest of majorities even though their will is violating the rules of law.



Photographed on Friday, 5th August 2022, 21 : 37 Jakarta Time

Explanation 2 :

He answered that socialist has no anything to do with autocratic systems, which explicitly explain his flaws about communism too alongside the democracy.



Photographed on Friday, 5th August 2022, 21 : 42 Jakarta Time

Explanation 3 :

I explained to him that I disagreed with the communism



Photographed on Friday, 5th August 2022, 21 : 42 Jakarta Time

Explanation 4 :

I'm showing again the example of the flaws of democracy. showing how the Westerners keep harming the world's environment today and keep ignoring the sufferings of the rest of the world because of their aggressive colonialism and diplomatic exploitation until today. And I'm declared that I'm Sukarnoist  who disagree with communism.



Photographed on Friday, 5th August 2022, 21 : 49 Jakarta Time

Explanation 5 :

I threaten to expose that group's conversation to public. And showed to them that I'm already informing with sources about the secret pact between Soviet and Israel to help each other, but got timed out by the admin before... And he explained that Western oppression keep happening because the majority of Westerners don't have sufficient money to replace the commodities which product of export labour. It means democracy even cannot solve the Western's oppressive behaviour. And he who debate to me proudly without guilt declared as Westerner.



Photographed on Friday, 5th August 2022, 21 : 52 Jakarta Time

Explanation 6 :

I'm saying that working class of the West keep the Western oppression and domination happening until today to him. And I ridiculed him with asking that where is the power of the dictatorial proletariat...



Photographed on Friday, 5th August 2022, 22 : 00 Jakarta Time

Explanation 7 :

I'm explaining that democracy keep allowing the majority ignoring the oppressive result of economic progress. That is exploiting the another communities's resources forcibly if the resources of the economically progressive nations inadequate. The matter about democracy is everything allowed if the majority wants it.



Photographed on Friday, 5th August 2022, 22 : 05 Jakarta Time

Explanation 8 :

He keep talking that it's not democracy who cause the Western oppression happened. Even he pretending that there's no democracy on the West. Although the West recorded today as the most democratic nations on this world.



Photographed on Friday, 5th August 2022, 22 : 05 Jakarta Time

Explanation 9 :

I'm explaining again that the West still oppress the innocent non-Western nations even though they are already implement the democracy. Like invading Iraq which led by Saddam Hussein, defeat and bring Libya which led by Muammar Kaddafi, into conflict, French indirect modern colonization of "Africa" nations (Frenchafrique), and invasion of Afghanistan.



Photographed on Friday, 5th August 2022, 22 : 10 Jakarta Time

Explanation 10 :

He implicitly explain the weakness of democracy from the argument which he said before. Even the majority cannot control the leader's power when he/she did something oppressive to another communities.



Photographed on Friday, 5th August 2022, 22 : 12 Jakarta Time

Explanation 11 :

I'm also exposed the communist female unterfrau who had Discord account named "Pickaxe and Rifle" who also joined on that inferior communist Discord group



Photographed on Friday, 5th August 2022, 22 : 16 Jakarta Time

Explanation 12 :

He keep denying that borgeoisation is not result of democracy, even though they are result of capitalism economic system and democratic liberalism way of life. And he considered the democracy during the Eastern European nations became communist "were implemented the real democracy". Even though the Soviet-bloc were not seriously to defeat the colonialism and liberalism, I'm already said about that to him on the previous conversation before...



Photographed on Friday, 5th August 2022, 22 : 37 Jakarta Time

Explanation 13 :

Until the end of conversation, he still denied again and again that democracy was the problem and borgeois people are the result of democracy way of life. So I can consider the flaws of democracy and Communist Marxist Socialism is not less evil than the liberal relativist colonialist

Photographed Information of Discord server "Marxist-Leninist Internationale"



Photographed on Saturday, 6th August 2022, 12 : 06 Jakarta Time

The people whom I debate, named DarthLeninus#5001



Photographed on Saturday, 6th August 2022, 12 : 06 Jakarta Time


guest30

  • Guest
Re: Western Democracy
« Reply #97 on: August 18, 2022, 09:57:40 am »
Another Example of Debate on Democracy on Discord Group "Republic of Jayford"

Date :

Session 1 : Sunday, 14 August 2022, from 23 : 14 until 23 : 46 Jakarta Time

Session 2 : Monday, 15 August 2022, from 00 : 07 until 01 : 17 Jakarta Time


See this photographed Discord group's conversation below :



Explanation 1 :

He complained about the result of dictatorship which only satisfy the leader and his co-workers and terrorized people. Including the Hitler's Germany which terrorized Europe. But He not complained every single time about the colonialism which suffered all of the "colored" people by the "white" people's nations of democracy



Explanation 2 :

He said that everybody wanted to rule the world. Of course I replied to him that forbid the liberals and the colonialist to rule the world was a good thing.



Explanation 3 :

I showed to him that discuss with the government was the best way to solve problem on non-democratic nations rather than merely did a revolt and protest. But he begin to answered my knowledge argument with only judging



Explanation 4 :

I'm said that the mass death tragedy for defeat the oppressors and sacrifice for the anti-colonialism's national ideal were not a bad thing to him.



Explanation 5 :

And he considered me as "Neo Nazi" only because I don't wanted to live side by side with the people with different opinions. Because I'm said that I don't want to live with the liberals and colonialist mindset... Since when the "Neo-Nazis" didn't like colonialism...



Explanation 6 :

I'm said to him that even though "South Korea" was developed without oppressing other nation. They actually were developed by the assistance from the United States which resulting the development with threatening their neighbors like Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) .



Explanation 7 :

I'm explained to him that with the authoritarian government, the problem of liberalism, discriminative and colonialist mindset of the people will easily controlled and hopefully will removed.



Explanation 8 :

I'm explained to him that liberalization of Nusantara resulting economic unfair distribution and forced resources's exploitation by the foreign nations (West and China) which resulting unfair trade between Nusantara and the Western powers and China, the nations which commited most largest resources exploitation to our homeland.



Explanation 9 :

He still complained about the decisive action to removed the people who had contrary beliefs and worldview to the state, if the state were non-democratic authoritarian. And he not answering my knowledge arguments with facts again and again. I'm already explained to him that the non-democratic approach was the only effective way to solve the oppression of society


Discord account named G.S. Sundang was a Malaysian Western man who debated me

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11039
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Western Democracy
« Reply #98 on: August 18, 2022, 01:09:26 pm »
"I showed to him that discuss with the government was the best way to solve problem on non-democratic nations"

Actually the best response to disagreement with an autocratic government is emigration.

"He still complained about the decisive action to removed the people who had contrary beliefs and worldview to the state, if the state were non-democratic authoritarian."

Yes, because you forgot to mention that people should be allowed to emigrate.

(Also, we are opposed to authoritarianism. People's private lives are of no concern to the state.)

guest30

  • Guest
Re: Western Democracy
« Reply #99 on: August 18, 2022, 06:25:36 pm »
@90sRetroFan

Quote
Actually the best response to disagreement with an autocratic government is emigration.

This argument can be used back by the democrats to attack us when we complain the nation's democracy and dissatisfaction to it.

Quote
(Also, we are opposed to authoritarianism. People's private lives are of no concern to the state.)

If the people's private live tend to resulting reproduction without permit from the state, camouflaging secret illegal political movements, and spread their private's life to public whether through electronic tools like social media or photos, but the values is contrary to the national ideals. Then who will make them put in order?

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11039
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Western Democracy
« Reply #100 on: August 18, 2022, 07:42:48 pm »
"This argument can be used back by the democrats to attack us when we complain the nation's democracy and dissatisfaction to it."

No, don't you get it? It is democracy which discourages emigration by offering dissatisfied people a chance to change the government by voting in the next election, thus persuading them to stay indefinitely! It is democracy which leads to two sides with opposing ideas perpetually living in the same country because each side thinks it can get its way in a few years' time by gaining majority support and thus forcing the other side in the minority to go along with it! It is democracy which leads to people in the minority ultimately paying decades of taxes to support policies they disagree with, because they think next time they can get the other side to pay taxes to support their own policies (which the other side disagrees with)!

Compare it with a business. If there is only one boss and everyone else is an employee, then all dissatisfied employees can simply quit. But if instead everyone is a shareholder, then the dissatisfied shareholders buy more and form coalitions until they are in control of the business, and then the remainder who have lost control now do the same thing (buy even more and form new coalitions) to try to get control back, and so on. It is obvious that the point of shareholding is to get the dissatisfied to invest further. It is the same with democracy.

"If the people's private live tend to resulting reproduction"

Then it is not private.

"camouflaging secret illegal political movements"

State-encouraged activities can also camouflage this.

"spread their private's life to public whether through electronic tools like social media or photos, but the values is contrary to the national ideals."

The two should be openly compared side by side. Suppression only proves the national ideals feel threatened.

The reason why so many people out there erroneously conflate democracy with free speech etc. is because of attitudes like yours: wanting to combine autocracy with censorship. We are here to break this false link, and the way to do so is to show that we as autocracy supporters defend free speech at the same time.

guest78

  • Guest
Re: Western Democracy
« Reply #101 on: August 18, 2022, 07:51:06 pm »
Only a foolish autocrat would not support free-speech:


However, only fools in general believe that there are no consequences associated with saying whatever one pleases and whenever one pleases. Every action in life has consequences associated with it.

We did not create this world and make it so, Yahweh did!

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11039
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Western Democracy
« Reply #102 on: August 19, 2022, 03:26:12 pm »
https://vdare.com/posts/npr-ipsos-poll-majority-believes-the-invasion-at-the-southwest-border-is-an-invasion

Quote
Fifty-three percent believe it is true or somewhat true that illegal aliens are invading the country. The breakdown: 76 percent of Republicans and 41 percent of Democrats, and 47 percent of Independents.





Why do leftists still support democracy?

guest30

  • Guest
Re: Western Democracy
« Reply #103 on: August 21, 2022, 08:12:09 am »
Source : https://www.bnnvara.nl/joop/artikelen/schokkend-maar-zes-procent-van-nederlanders-denk-dat-kolonialisme-slecht-was

The article post written on 07th July 2021

Quote
Dutch colonial language :

In een moedige zet bood Femke Halsema kortgeleden een algemeen excuses aan voor Amsterdams voorname rol in de slavernij. Maar wat hebben excuses voor zin als op dit moment de helft van het land vindt dat kolonialisme iets is om trots op te zijn? En 94 procent het niet wil bestempelen als iets negatiefs?

Quote
English colonial language :

In a brave move, Femke Halsema recently offered a general apology for Amsterdam's prominent role in slavery. But what's the point of apologies if right now half the country thinks colonialism is something to be proud of? And 94 percent don't want to label it as something negative?



If we allowed democratic thinking work, then based on the polls graphic result  above. We allow that the majority of people to see the European colonialism as a good thing. Even though they not directly saw the oppression, mass forced work, mass murder, and unfair treatment between the colonizers and the colonized people by their ancestors. And their government possibly can be justified not to accountable for their colonial past, because the majority was not feel it as a problem and a bad thing.

The 7 European nations above, only Germany whose people are mostly see their nation's colonial past were bad rather than who proud of it. The others are still mostly proud and see their nation's colonialism was a good thing. And the Netherlanders are the worst thing we ever see on how they see their nation's colonialism in the past...

If the majority of Europeans not to be forced to condemn colonialism. In the future they will see the colonialism as a good thing, and possibly they will make more destabilization and oppression to the rest of the world again for the second time. Today's NATO army's and economic oppression just a beginning.

This make me remembering this event and want it to be happen again.



Source : https://maken.wikiwijs.nl/74014/German_occupation_of_The_Netherlands



Source : https://id.pinterest.com/pin/578994095819021661/

The vaterland's troop's invasion of Netherlands map

guest78

  • Guest
Re: Western Democracy
« Reply #104 on: August 21, 2022, 01:49:38 pm »
You know what has always fascinated me about the Judeo-Masonic democracy model is the fact that all western countries military's are authoritarian, whilst the public and it's institutions are democracies. In other-words, authoritarianism is used to protect democracy in western countries. Likewise in the Judeo-Masonic model, the Freemasonic Supreme Council members are not elected by Freemasons but appointed, only in the lower level lodges of freemasonry is democracy used. Only authoritarian systems can protect democracy? How is this not hypocrisy by western democracy worshipers?