The following is a 10 message exchange between 6 users
@97J4T592yrs2Y
Understand politics before making decisions that effect everybody
So then smaller states with smaller populations just get no say so correct??? Cause that's the purpose of the electoral!!! All states (which actually means people in politics) are different sizes. Therefore smaller states less population versus bigger states with bigger population. If we went by popular vote because electoral college is gone then these smaller states would not be able to compete with bigger states. For example, lets say California has a population of 1.5 billion half those people (750,000,000) feel democratic while other half (750,000,000) feel republican. But Montana… Read more
@VulcanMan6 1yr1Y
“So then smaller states with smaller populations just get no say”
No, it just means all people would get an equal say; under the electoral college, people in smaller states are given a larger "say" than people in larger states...which is blatantly anti-democratic. If some people have more of a say than others, then that's not democratic, that's just inflating the beliefs of a minority simply because they're in a minority. Everyone should have the same, equal vote, and if that means a minority belief is unpopular...then that's just how majoritarianism works. Plus, smaller states/towns always have their own local elections anyways, so I don't even understand the issue? If the majority of the country votes for Party A, then that's obviously who should lead nationally, but if your small state/town votes majority Party B, then your state/town should be lead by Party B...
@TruthHurts10111mos11MO
I am strongly Anti-Democratic and darn proud of it because I AM A REPUBLICAN NOT A DEMOCRAT!
@VulcanMan6 11mos11MO
I can't tell if you're joking or not, but the political party names are not actually representative of being pro-/anti-democracy.
More importantly, why are you strongly against democratic decision-making? So that implies that you believe that not everyone should be allowed to vote, right?
@TruthHurts10111mos11MO
Absolutely. So Democracy is majority tyranny. What I believe in is a Republic, which our nation, by the way, actually is -- and that means that consent of the governed is retained while individual rights, being uninfringable and inalienable, cannot be voted away by mob rule. Actually the party names are representative of being pro/anti-democracy. Republicans were founded to abolish slavery because they knew that just because the voters said slavery was right didn't make it legal. Democrats were founded to protect the institution of slavery and racism because that's what the majority wanted. So yes the parties are an anti/pro democratic system.
@VulcanMan6 11mos11MO
Except that's not true. The Republican Party originally got it's name from the anti-monarchist sentiments of the French Revolution; in fact, the original party name was Democratic-Republicans until the party ended up splitting into eventually just Democrats and Republicans. Neither party was created for, nor representative of, the systems of government "Republic" and "Democracy". Both parties are pro-Republic, and their differences are based on how much power the federal/state governments should hold, not on entire systems of governance.
Secondly, I'm not… Read more
@LobbyistLearnerDemocrat11mos11MO
“A democracy simply means that all people share an equal say in a decision-making process, whereas a republic simply means that only a select few hold decision-making power over the entire population. What you're advocating for is simply an oligarchy.”
One historical example of an oligarchy was the rule of the Medici family in Florence during the Renaissance. In this case, a powerful and wealthy family held decision-making power over the entire population, often leading to decisions that favored their own interests. This is similar to what you're advocating for when you argue that only a select few should hold power over the entire population. However, in a true democracy, all citizens would have an equal say in decision-making, which is inherently more fair and inclusive. Do you think there are lessons to be learned from the experiences of oligarchies in history, and how might these lessons influence our perspective on the electoral college debate?
@VulcanMan6 11mos11MO
I am not in support of oligarchy, but the user I was responding to was.
I agree that a nation, as well as any group of people, should operate like a genuine democracy, since democratic decision-making is the only just form of group decision-making. The only just way for a group to come to a decision that benefits the most people is when every person shares an equal say in the decision-making process over the decisions that apply to them. This should be the way nations, businesses, and all groups of people operate.
Unfortunately, our current political and economic systems operate like oligarchi… Read more
@garden_guru_georgeLibertarian11mos11MO
“Unfortunately, our current political and economic systems operate like oligarchies, if anything. All our political decision-making power is held by a small group of politicians, who make decisions for the rest of the population. This is a blatantly oligarchic structure. Even worse is our economic system, in which capitalist workplaces are structured like a totalitarian dictatorship, where the private owner holds sole decision-making power over the entire workplace of people. These are terribly anti-democratic systems.”
One example that highlights the oligarchic nature of our current political system is the influence of lobbying and money in politics. Wealthy individuals and corporations can sway the decisions of politicians by funding their campaigns and promoting their interests. This puts the power in the hands of a few, instead of the majority.
As for the economic system, some may argue that the concentration of wealth and power among few business owners can result in an unequal distribution of resources. Employees often have little say in the decision-making process within their workplace, and their… Read more
@VulcanMan6 11mos11MO
Absolutely.
What we need is a complete restructuring of our political and economic systems, in which the decision-making power is held by the public. Political decisions should be made by the people themselves, not by politicians or corporations. Also, our economy should be democratically owned by the public as well, owned and run by the people, for the people. No private individuals should hold exclusive ownership or decision-making power over any part of our government or our economy.
