Message from @Deleted User

Discord ID: 430563426750693388


2018-04-03 03:02:31 UTC  

Not directly elective

2018-04-03 03:02:34 UTC  

Hail Microsoft?

2018-04-03 03:02:39 UTC  

Hail GM?

2018-04-03 03:02:48 UTC  

The electoral college

2018-04-03 03:03:28 UTC  

Technically, the US could be set up so that the only voters eligible for federal elections are the mayors of towns.

2018-04-03 03:03:48 UTC  

not that I want that

2018-04-03 03:03:48 UTC  

It is still ldirectly democratic it's just that citizens votes are voting to choose the winning candidate for their state and then the states electoral vote is what counts.

2018-04-03 03:03:50 UTC  

If you want to go about splitting semantic hairs, please provide a clear definition of the disagreement, don't just say "you're wrong."

2018-04-03 03:03:59 UTC  

good thing anyone who suggests that would get lynched faster than a negro in the south

2018-04-03 03:04:02 UTC  

🎩
<:pepe_eyes:378719408362881024>

2018-04-03 03:04:12 UTC  

That's also only true of presidental elections

2018-04-03 03:04:15 UTC  

so does the majority of the united states decide

2018-04-03 03:04:19 UTC  

or is it weighted

2018-04-03 03:04:29 UTC  

State officials are voted for directly which in the long run is what matters more

2018-04-03 03:04:29 UTC  

hmmmmmmmmmm

2018-04-03 03:04:37 UTC  

i agree

2018-04-03 03:04:41 UTC  

let's bomb other countries guys

2018-04-03 03:04:44 UTC  

And that sucks lol

2018-04-03 03:04:46 UTC  

and spread "freedom"

2018-04-03 03:05:11 UTC  

Do you have a practical alternative to democracy?

2018-04-03 03:05:20 UTC  

yes, dictatorship

2018-04-03 03:05:31 UTC  

That isn't based on a pre-determined goal based on personal opinions*

2018-04-03 03:05:36 UTC  

The key difference between a democracy and a republic lies in the limits placed on government by the law, which has implications for minority rights. Both forms of government tend to use a representational system — i.e., citizens vote to elect politicians to represent their interests and form the government. In a republic, a constitution or charter of rights protects certain inalienable rights that cannot be taken away by the government, even if it has been elected by a majority of voters. In a "pure democracy," the majority is not restrained in this way and can impose its will on the minority.

Most modern nations are democratic republics with a constitution, which can be amended by a popularly elected government. This comparison therefore contrasts the form of government in most countries today with a theoretical construct of a "pure democracy", mainly to highlight the features of a republic.

2018-04-03 03:05:37 UTC  

@radeon Also, you realize that in a stratocracy, career politicians wouldn't really exist

2018-04-03 03:05:52 UTC  

If everyone were just slaves to the state, no problems would exist

2018-04-03 03:06:14 UTC  

apart from the fact everyone would be a slave

2018-04-03 03:06:31 UTC  

@NightOwl That's subjective.

2018-04-03 03:06:37 UTC  

so?

2018-04-03 03:06:44 UTC  

this has some good explanations but i do not totally agree

2018-04-03 03:06:45 UTC  

That's a really minor advantage versus the enormous disadvantage of denying rights to millions of people

2018-04-03 03:06:46 UTC  

The American constitution can have its amendments changed with enough votes, no?

2018-04-03 03:07:00 UTC  

what is with the strawmaning? @Deleted User

2018-04-03 03:07:01 UTC  

in the words of stratocracy "indentured servitude isn't morally wrong"

2018-04-03 03:07:01 UTC  

wut

2018-04-03 03:07:09 UTC  

@radeon Who says they want those rights?

2018-04-03 03:07:15 UTC  

And which don't they have?

2018-04-03 03:07:16 UTC  

@Deleted User how is that a strawman?

2018-04-03 03:07:30 UTC  

Yea you just confirmed you don't understand what rights are

2018-04-03 03:07:34 UTC  

the amendments by definition are changes to the constituion

2018-04-03 03:07:45 UTC  

Because you still act like they are granted to you and not intrinsic