Is democracy bad in itself

Or is it just the corrupt jewish version of it ?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=muWkbYRbIRk
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

nothing is good. it's more about the society isn't it? Athenian democracy sounds like a beautiful thing

humans need a hard leadership

democracy is stupid because 80% of people don't know anything about politics but are allowed to vote. no wonder that people like trudeau and merkel are allowed to rule over countries.

But can we build a society in 2017 which functions like the city of Athens? It seems idealistic to believe that such a system could work on a large, national scale. Maybe it can work on local institutions though, like corporations or municipalities.

Corrupt Jewish version is bad.

Germanic societies naturally form democratic communities, until subversive kikes try to control them

So is varg's idea of a tribal society redpilled?

If you have a good and strong leader a authoritarian free democracy is way better than a parliamentary democracy. Because the fuhrer can make faster decisions. When hitler rise to power the yearly gdp grow rise at more than 10%. Unemployment did not exist anymore. And jewish control was ended.

Athens was merely a town in terms of population. Cities are becoming obsolete and I can see the town concept coming back. Urbanity came from industrialization, with most jobs functional over the internet, people will stop paying the high rents of cities when they can move to the countryside and get things delivered to their door with Amazon + Whole Foods, for example.

Ask Switzerland

No that ignores things like economies of scale and the other benefits/necessities of living in a densely populated community, which makes things like educational research institutions possible

We just pray the one leading isnt retarded

Mob rule democracy is utter shit. A republic is the true government of the white man.

Democracy is the best form of government. It is the white man's system.

>But muh stupid people can vote!
It's the price of freedom. No system is perfect.

Communists, fascist, socialists and all other authoritarians are ultimately all weak willed cucks, who are afraid of being in charge of their own actions and facing the consuquences of said actions. A man who cannot choose is not a man at all. He an insect, following unquestionably the order imposed on him.

It's bad when there is no racial and cultural hegemony and the leadership is corrupted by outside forces (money Jews).

Women voting also destroys it because they vote with their hearts (heart and minds goyam).

But please dont mix pictures of our great Führer with disgusting spics movie characters.

National Socialism > Fascism

And NatSoc is best when the race is under attack and wants to collectively reach the stars and become supermen.

NatSoc is a form of fascism, thus a cuck ideology.
The Nazis were not even that pro-science anyway. Most of their technological innovation was directed at weapon research.

The white race is threatened only by itself. Self-hating whites far exceed the number of "the Jews".

>The Nazis were not even that pro-science anyway. Most of their technological innovation was directed at weapon research.
That's how you develop science and technology, retard. Most of the scientific and technological advances are made by the military.

You are right, the white race is threatened by itself, so you would agree democracy is a cuck ideology and a fascist ideology is the way to preserve it.

Christianity and anything semitic really is the problem.

Look at Japan, they were able to stay mostly homogenous and retain their culture despite democracy and losing WW2.

Once you let sandniggers and their beliefs in, it's over.

>Women voting also destroys it because they vote with their hearts
It's more that it attacks the family unit and greats a voting demographic politicians exploit.

creates*

Japan is completely western you retard.

Democracy is the best political system tried so far.
Too bad we don't have democracies, but jew run and manipulated ohlocracies instead.

Full democracy yes
Look at other democracies and you'll see that the best were democracies that only involved certain people

Why should all people vote on home-owning taxes and when only 20% of them are home-onwers and 80% are not.

The 80% will always abuse the 20% by asking for more gibs, but the system of owning a home shouldn't be too complicated and should be accesbile by everyone.

If you democracy discrimiates based on some factors that doesn't allow an equal chance for everybody to own a home and the choose not to.

Then 80% have no right to speak on the behaf of the 20% who have take the responsibility of owning a home.

And it's the job of the 80% to convice the 20% to vote to increase taxes on home-owning.And only those affected by the vote can vote.

This means that people that are on welfare cannot vote for welfare policies.

Voting inside a democracy should be limited to only those affected, or those that have something to lose in favor of another group.

Catering to old people for votes promising you will increaes pensios should be illegal.

It would work in an ethnostate and that's about it

emocracy (Greek: δημοkρατία dēmokratía, literally "rule of the people"), in modern usage, is a system of government in which the citizens exercise power directly or elect representatives from among themselves to form a governing body, such as a parliament.[2] Democracy is sometimes referred to as "rule of the majority".[3] Democracy is a system of processing conflicts in which outcomes depend on what participants do, but no single force controls what occurs and its outcomes.

Remember that in Greeks where the whole democracy started from you had cities states that only had 50.000 citizens, 500.000 slaves... Only the citizens that owned land were allowed to vote on politices.

Because if you asked everybody i'm pretty sure the slaves would have voted againts their masters EACH AND EVERY TIME

any democracy that gives voting franchise to women stops being a democracy and becomes an ohlocracy because women are far more prone to mob like behavior and supscetible to societal pressure

No, they were developed as a result of war. Nuclear energy, antibiotics and plastic surgery were not developed by militaries, but war helped to create them.

True
Women should get a right to vote only if they earn, shouldn't be implicit but so would Men.

You have a stable job for 5 years and have payed on taxes on time? you get to vote.

You reply on the state to pay welfare to raise yo child, you are not allowed to vote, and you'll have to convice those that pay for you welfare to vote in your favor. if you cannot then gtfo

Democracy is bad by itself but it doesn't help that we let 18 year olds and women vote.

look at it from a historical perspective. democractic governments last the shorted and only really work during peacetime. Ancient Greek democracy only let those who served in the military to vote, but once they got rid of that policy their civilization collapsed. The roman empire lasted thousands of years and it was a republic, but also went through several dictatorships. I don't need to tell you, you can read about it yourself.

All great philosophers, from Aristotle and, Hobbes, Hegel and Nietzsche, Zizek and Land, have agreed that democracy is shit. Some of them posit that democracy is merely the worst system but the least likely to degenerate into instability (as Aristotle suggests, when he ranks democracy as the worst out of monarchy and aristocracy, but it's degenerated counterpart better than the degenerated counterpart of aristocracy and monarchy), but all are convinced that democracy is shit.

Not only is it a system that allows fools and the easily led to take part in government, it's a system that inevitably leads to the madness we see today, of endless debt and retarded social spending.

The best system is the one is the one that Nietzsche espouses - aristocracy, where the great warrior caste is in full control, and where society is there to ensure that the warrior caste is given all it can be given to ensure their greatness.

Funny how all the people who advocate limiting democracy only make limits which do not affect them.

read up on what plato thought about it lol
it's a fucking useless system

Because Socialism has always worked so well amirite?

While Democracy has its flaws, it allows for unpopular leaders and politicians to be removed from power without bloody revolution. While this is sometimes due to media influence, it has also prevented leaders like power hungry leaders from doing what they want. Ironically enough, the often contradictory set of checks and balances governing the system of democracy has served us well much better over time than many other nations.

Even Nazi Germany, a nation often praised here for its technological and industrial power, failed when their leader became too obsessed with revenge and started a war they just couldn't win. Had Hitler not started the war, Nazi Germany would have dominated Europe economically, and technologically for decades, especially so in the aviation market. Hitler, and thus National Socialism, both failed when they started such a major war, having repeatedly pushed for more and more land until most the first world ganged up on them. And they failed again when Hitler tried to micromanage his generals' actions, losing him the Eastern front with heavy losses in the process.

It's that democracy is so easily corrupted that's the problem.

I wouldn't care if I couldn't vote, as long as the leaders and council would consist of intelligent people with common sense

Plato rejected Athenian democracy, saying that it was internally unstable, chaotic, anarchic and unable to allow a sufficient number of its citizens to have their voices heard

Ironically enough, Hitler is the reason why the white race is so small today. WWII killed 50 million people, mostly white. Easily the highest death count of any war

the jewish system is obviously retarded. political parties should be fucking abolished for a start, lobbying should be abolished entirely.
we actually have the technology now for direct democracy on individual issues, maybe make it like jury duty where 10,000 people get contacted in advance its their turn, if they prove they have done some research on a subject their vote counts.

ive no idea but decentralising is important, at the very least i should be able to say what % of my tax money should go towards whatever i want

democracy works but it's probably not the best system
>retards who don't know their ass from their dick get to vote
>muh majority rules, 50.1% is all it takes and you get everything with no compromise

obviously the best system is just letting the best most qualified person lead the people with some kind of council of other smart people check him/her, but it's also risky as fuck because you give people great power and have to trust they have the people's best interests in mind.

democracy as utopia as communism. human nature does not allow either of them.

Political intelligence and common sense are entirely subjective concepts. You just want an authoritarian government which reflects your ideology.

youtube.com/watch?v=muWkbYRbIRk And that's all I have to say about that

>While Democracy has its flaws, it allows for unpopular leaders and politicians to be removed from power
I can't believe that there are retards who believe this. Peter Mandelson, the architect of New Labour and the demographic destruction of the UK, even after getting voted out of Parliament became a High Commissioner for the EU. Mario Monti, PM of Italy, wasn't even elected into the position. And in your own country, cabinets can be composed of people who were never voted into office at all, like the poo in loo currently sucking off AT&T at the moment

It's bad when any nigger can be a citizen

Mr. Finland, I just want you to know that I have a poster of your incredible hero Samo Hayha..

hmmm maybe totalitarian rule stabiliwes countries with weak systems and economies and it was recorded that it really helped.... No wonder democracy wasn't around most of the time, because it's flawed and especially in a status of war, centralizing the power is better
Go educate yourself you seem like having a vocabulary of 50 words like every other pseudo-historian here

Yes, very true and since then and since the fall of colonisation in Africa, they started fucking like rabbits

Socialism is an Economic system you stupid fucking retard kys

>it's also risky as fuck because you give people great power and have to trust they have the people's best interests in mind.
That's why monarchy exists. If the king will give the kingdom to his son, he will do his best to ensure that he will give a stable, well-functioning country to his heir. Therefore the king work for the country, and thus for the people.

It is intrinsically bad.
Democracy assumes that the average person is knowledgeable enough to dictate national policy. Never mind that modern (((democracy))) is just a shield used by bankers and oligarchs to assert themselves, byway of the general populace's ignorance and complacency.

so thats why you become a republic, but no system is perfect.

But then, what about democracy on a local scale, like for a town, or a company.

Hitler's version was a social.
>The removal of degeneracy
>German heritage first
>Hitler youth

democracy is best
but there are no democratic governments on the planet only plutocracies and they have done a good job disguising it as democracy

I wouldn't attack other people's range of vocabulary since you yourself do not possess much of it. Also, you can tell the Latin name for that logical fallacy for me, Mr. Educated.

Authoritarian systems are admittedly more stable as long as the man in power is alive. However, men are mortal and large societal changes result when the change of power happens. Mr. Educated surely can find various examples from history.

Authoritarian systems are more stable in the short term while democracies are more stable in the long range, as they do not depend on a single person so heavily.

The problem with democracy is 90% of the people are yoo fucking stulid to wipe thier own ass, so obviously when you let these morons vote, they fuck themselves in their cuck ass and fuck the rest of us with them

>what about democracy on a local scale, like for a town, or a company
Sure localized democracy is reasonable, provided that the population in question is small enough to share a vested interest. But the issues arise when one assumes that a system that can work for a town, could also be implemented on a national scale without significant consequences. Specifically population's lack of understanding regarding national issues, and democracy's gradual loss of credibility over time due to money buying lawmakers.

Democracy is the epitome of evil