Only because of the deterioration of the aforementioned protections

Were we to actually minimize abuse of power, we wouldn't have bloated governments and corporations propped up by them. We wouldn't have these blatant coverups

Deterioration can only be argued in the 'States. In other western nations, such protections never existed. Even then, the US was not set up to prevent abuse, but to violently correct it

You never heard of Magna Carta? Rights of man? Democracty? Those are all an effort to curtail aspiring dictators, it is not perfect, they are just obstacles, they can be overcome given that the aspiring dictator is commited enough and the populace is indifferent enough, but it still kept us safe for a very long time.

Democracy is not reduction of hierarchal abuse, it is simply restructuring who has power. The magna carta was the result of a power struggle lol. It was powerful people securing their position with the threat of violence, and was immediately walked back at the nearest opportune moment. The rights of man is a book and not a structure, and the notion of rights must necessarily be upheld by the people via their own defense (as is the US system mentioned prior)

There's a reason why many philosophers argue against democracy, and why limits are always placed on the power of the majority my dude

Democracy is dillution of power, it seeks to reduce the ammount of power one person holds, less power in the hands of one person the harder it is to abuse. Magna Carta reduced the power of the king, sure enough it empowered nobles instead but even that was bettrer then absolute power of one man, it was just the firest step, and it stuck eventually. As for the rest of your post it is pretty much a tautology, of course ther will always be people seeking to get power for themselves, that is what i am saying, modern society worked very hard toi place obstacles in front of such people so they would not have a clear run for the throne.

@Redneo I would agree that ethnicity is important, but I think a challenge is seperating race from ethnicity. We make the mistake of saying white ethnicity, black ethnicity, etc. tieing it closesly with race or color

There should be more emphasis on freedom to choose an ethnicity without being called a traitor

I've been reading a book recently that analyzes community, and finds that free black individuals in the U.S. over time have split into 3 groups

One group focussing on intelectualism and joining the "white" ethnicity", another group that foccussed on build their own community mainly through church, and third the black musslims, that put a focus on extreme sense of black nationalism.

The first two seem to overlap quite a bit. Just because someone forms a distinct community doesn't mean they can interact seamlessly with a greater whole.

Imagine this. ",another group that focuses on building thier own community through video games,". You can our anime, football, or anything else you want on there. The term otaku really means to obsess over one or a hand full of things to the exclusion of being "mainstream". I'd say church could be seen as one such obsession if it defines someone. And I'd argue that doesn't mean you don't participate on larger society.

@DrYuriMom I think the point was more the one group intergrated into existing structure, whole the other set up a separate but compatible structure. If you think about stereotypical black churches vs stereotypical white churches. One group made their own church, the other group joined the existing church, if that makes sense

But white people make their own churches, too. Latter Day Saints, for example. They're more diverse now, but before the 1970's they were pretty much pure white.

Seventh Day Adventists are another good example of a church that developed in the US and started out chalk white.

These churches also tend to be insular with traditions and rituals that set them firmly apart, arguably more than black Southern Baptist churches.

@samoja democracy is mob rule my dude, which is harder to overcome than a single person. The magna carta wasn't upheld until it could no longer be held. The only obstacle that upholds liberty is force - force applied by the people against tyrants. Everything else is a measure of trust
This is why America is the least degraded of the Western nations. Until rather recently, relatively speaking, the people were allowed to apply military level force to government bodies, and as such they rarely needed to

@Beemann No, it's the threat of force combined with desire to get reelected, the issue is really human nature, people seem biologically predisposed to obey those they see as authority, that has been proven time and time again, that's how a dictator can cut trough red tape, first time he orders a government agency to do something illegal, and gets away with it it's game over.

arguing about the method of government and what races actually are is all fun, but what are you guys going to do when we are all going to die nomatter what race or creed we hold?

were in peak oil, peak coal is around the corner

@samoja m8, reelection is only a factor as long as everyone plays by the rules. Authoritarians dont stop just because their term is up. It's also funny that you say "first time he orders a government agency to do something illegal, and gets away with it it's game over." considering Canada and the 'States have both had government administrations break laws and curb the rights of their people. It is, in fact, now precedent that things work in that manner. I guess it's been game over for decades now. When's the dictator coming in?

May we acknowledge that it isn't just the executive branch which may break the law. Legislatures have a habit of passing laws which extend beyond the scope of their power and require the courts to axe.

I don't know if it's relevant, I haven't been paying attention. Just thought it offered some perspective to "one wrong move and it's over."

Oh, don't even get me started on the institutional corruption and overreach of the judiciary.

Most of the US government is unconstitutional

It'll take a convention of states to unfuck the US gubbamint.

The nation is in dire need of being reforged.

so whats tonights debate folks?

Is it economically feasible to recolonize Africa?

https://pjmedia.com/trending/students-believe-conservatives-are-evil-inhuman-uw-study-finds/

Does this mean anything important?

That conservatives better get ready to go to the happy fun totally not terrible gulags.

Its not like conservatives are much better than the left.

One side says pedo, the other says nazi is the only difference

I never hear them say pedo seriously.

Hey, criticism is fair, but are we really going to say that the conservatives are as bad as the current left?

Commie would be a more apt word of choice than Pedo

But I'd argue many of them embrace the term

If they want traditional gender roles with all the violence against women act crap and refusing to this day to let men vote (they can earn the vote by signing up to the draft just like women could vote prior to 1920, it just wasnt enshrined federally or in the UK they could vote just as long as men could if they fulfilled the same conditions EXCEPT being draftable)

well then yeah

Whereas calling someone advocating for minimal government a nazi is strictly untrue

yeah it is untrue

But calling a pedo is typicly untrue. Not neccessarily but typicly