well maybe i sort of understood the text wrong but well thats what i got from it

maybe you wanna read into some of his stuff or maybe not well its not really worth it

The idea is about your views being represented, and your views having an influence on the economy/country
So i think his objection stands

I trust you tbh, and from what you've told me the guy sounds like a very dumb one, who should be the example of an inefficient voter in democracy. Maybe that's why he opposed democracy in the first place, lmao. I might read a few things about him when I have time though

This is what democracy appeals to. Individualism. YOu having an influence. "if you dont like it just vote for someone else" revolves around the idea of you as an individual having the capacity to change anything

@Ater Votum are you for democracy now lol?

What are you now?

my friends girlfriend couldnt stop complaiming about him like as if she had her period

but now i read one of his texts and i have to say she was justified

but it was still a bit annoying

@Sentient23 Direct democracy yes

Oh yikes

And you're a orthodox "christian" too?

That is a utopian statement:
> The idea is about your views being represented, and your views having an influence on the economy/country
> So i think his objection stands
@Sentient23
That can't be true, because it literally can't work as a system. Yes, if Democracy works correctly, then other views are also taken into consideration and have influence on other individuals, but Democracy's promise, is that the will of the majority of the people turned into reality.

Also Democracy doesn't appeal to Individualism, not necessarily.

Yes it can't work, that's my point
It does appeal to individualism? The whole idea of "If you dont like him just vote for someone else bro"
That's individualism. Have you had any conversations with proponents of democracy from a anti democratic perspective? This is always the objection once you ask them why political opponents should be allowed to maintain their exististence if they promote instability

@Ater Votum read hoppes book on democracy

well for me democracy is more about sticking together and finding the best solution for the majority as a country

but if its not like that in practice

which it often isnt then obviously thats a valid criticism

i dont get leftist ideology trying to make everyone as individual as possible

and then also people from diffrent cultures

im not a fascist that wants everyone to be the same

but why force diversity thats just stupid

diversitiy is actual cancer in a political sense

imagine having a country for people thinking like this (germans in germany) and a country for people thinking like that (turks in turkey)

isnt that so much better?

there would be a much larger happier majority

Democracy as it currently is (Representative Democracy), can't work indeed, but Direct Democracy (and preferably with a few alterations) can work, and it can work very well, actually. I've had countless debates with anti-democratic people, and it's actually true what you say - claiming that democracy appeals to individualism is a standard argument against Democracy; but I just surprise these people when I prove them wrong.

In order for one to claim that Democracy appeals to Individualism, one must think that the definition of Democracy is the one that you posted: "The idea is about your views being represented, and your views having an influence on the economy/country." And yet again, that's simply not the definition of Democracy. Democracy promises that the will of the majority becomes reality. Not that the individual's views have an influence on the country's politics. That simply can't work. The idea of democracy is the __collective__ effort of all the majority to agree on, say, a law that needs to be passed. Therefore, collectivism, not only between the people who make up the majority, but between all the voters of the country, is required for Democracy to work properly.

We need direct democracy

Is the US in a way, a direct democracy?

Not at all. It's a Representative Democracy - a "democracy" in which people vote for their rulers.

In Direct Democracy the rulers are the people.

Ah :)

:>

@Ater Votum Could you justify direct democracy?

Also, you do realize that democracy is incompatible with Christianity as it allows for bums and immoral people to allow and advocate morality. Which is particularly forbidden thru out the bible

@Sentient23 it makes the decisions that will satisfy the most people

So what?

thats all the justification you need

Why should the will of the most people be satisfied

This entails relatviism

I hope you realize that right

Which is incompatible with Christianity

well if most peoples wills are satisfied then society works better

if people are happier and so on

the thing is by human nature you arent completely selfish

for example my teacher said what if the majority doesnt want special driveways for wheelchair people to get up stairs of public places

but its obvious an average human wouldnt want a wheelchair person to suffer

except if you somehow tell him wheelchair people are lesser than normal people

but a neutral person wouldnt think this

on the other hand people dont want for example mosques to be built in europe because they make themselves feel uncomfortable and make islam have a foothold in Europe.

and so they have the right to make this decision on a moral basis because building those mosques actually hurts the majority thats why they want to get rid of them

luckily an average human is actually smart enough to make rational decisions

an iq of 100 is pretty okay for that the thing is they need to be educated right as well

I never said im selfish dude

I never implied that selfishness was the drive between my morality

I asked why should satisfaction of the people be the drive here?

And why are you avoiding answering my concern about Christianity?

Are you a christian still or have you become an atheist?

i guess the reason people like psychopaths and such are allowed to vote is probably just practicality i mean it would probably be better to take away the right to vote of people with certain antisocial brain specialities.

well i said that society works better if more people are satisfied

Works better in what sense?

its obvious theres more happiness all around and more productiveness

well what i said people are happier which means that they are more efficient in whatever they do

I don't care about happiness of my society. Productiveness can be achieved via brainwashing and mandatory state propaganda, can it not?

i mean you can argue efficiency doesnt matter but well

I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing that those things can be achieved via a totalitarian state

well happiness is important

I disagree

i mean if you dont believe in the value of that then really nothing means anything. i mean if you dont agree on what the actual definition that all humans and animals agree upon is important then nothing is

i mean really isnt

that doesnt justify hedonism

because living hedonistic actually creates more unhappiness/suffering

But regardless I don't want to dwell into that, if totalitarianism can be used to achieve the same things which are the reason you value democracy, why not value it? Why value democracy over totalitarianism?

well again that's moral relativism. Moral relativism is again incompatible with Christianity. Yet again, are you a christian? Yes or no

i mean saying suffering/happiness doesnt matter thats like saying something good isnt good. its just an invalid statement its what all animals and humans agree upon. what makes us happy and decreases suffering is the literal definition of something good. the word good derives from exactly those emotions. if suffering/happiness doesnt matter then what does? theres no actual value in being efficient or being smart. those are all things we value because society has taught us to value them but theres no actual value to them. what is universal upon every organism that is capable of feeling though is that bad feelings are bad and good feelings are good. thats where the words of good and bad derrive from so if youre using those words to describe anything they have no meaning in your mouth. its an invalid statement to make

well i told you already im a Christian

i must have told you that a million times

No its not remotely the same? Your analogy would only be true if the "good" was constituted by majority consent. Which is false. What the majority perceive as good is not the same as what is good. If the majority of the people converted to atheism tomorrow, it wouldn't refute Christianity which you said you believe in. What the majority agrees on is irrelevant. What is good is god, and what god reveals to us what good is. If certain things which are "good" come at the expense of happiness, then yes happiness shouldn't be the basis of your world view. What is good is not derived thru emotions lol. What is good is derived thru god.

If you are a Christian, then you cannot be in favor of direct democracy since the bible advocates monarchy and strong governence, if you want me to provide verses i will. THerefore, if you genuinely seek that which is good, and you believe that the bible is divine revelation of an all good god, then you oughta reject direct democracy in favor of something like a monarchy. But regardless, I don't see where anywhere in there have you addressed my concern about being able to use totalitarianism to reach the goal which you say makes democracy "good"

brb have to shit

i know the bible wants that

i mean thats what they did here

for many centuries

i mean of course you can say the execution was wrong

but if you argue like that saying that everything that is good is only what god proposes then that makes sense

and obviously a monarchy is the way to go

Yes, so my question is, if your own worldview asserts that monarchy is a superior option, and a more moral option, why don't you adhere to it?

The Bible doesn't really prescribe a form of government

Incorrect, verses incoming

well as it seems im not as christian as i thought i would be

Deuteronomy 17:14-20

Romans 13:1-9

i dont feel comfortable simply arguing with what god proposes as right and moral the be that and as such we would need a monarchy strictly built on those rules

1 Peter 2:17

@Ater Votum Well do you not believe that the bible is divine revelation?

one good thing about the system on a purely objective level is that it always follows the bible and if the monarch wants to deviate from it he wont be listened to replaced by someone actually following it and thus it would be a very safe system so i guess it doesn't sound bad after all

i dont know enough about religion to really make a decision about it

@Ater Votum start praying the rosary, and pray for the grace of your faith

it seems like you're deviating from faith, pray my friend

i will try to