Was democracy a mistake?

Was democracy a mistake?

Other urls found in this thread:

riosmauricio.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Hoppe_Democracy_The_God_That_Failed.pdf
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy:_The_God_That_Failed
independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/elections-2016-absolute-shambles-in-barnet-as-voters-turned-away-from-polling-stations-with-wrong-a7014411.html
pamelageller.com/2016/05/muslim-anti-semite-elected-london-mayor.html/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Nah, just America.

>tfw no anarchy

I don't know. I've never experience democracy.

But tossing out the rule of law was a mistake.

shouldn't you be firefighting right now?

I don't think anarchy is actually possible.

Democracy is a fraudulent system. It is designed to make people think they have choice when the vast majority of the time the candidates are bought and paid for by Jews or other special interests with lots and lots of shekels. Democracy is a joke. The founding fathers sought to circumvent much of this democratic nonsense by creating a Republic. Those efforts have long since failed. Jews have subverted almost every major political institution in the country and replaced the Republic with a Democracy.

I think you are right except the last line

>replaced the Republic with a Democracy.

It seems to me that it's become an oligarchy instead.

Of course it was. People aren't equal and giving the retarded masses any political power is national suicide. Even the founders of America didn't do that. But what they did was still bad enough.

we fugged up

I think you are right lad. Still, "muh democracy" is a huge common value here in USA. Should this be changed?

>hurr lets choose our leaders through a popularity contest
Naw man it's totally smart.

America isn't a democracy, I struggle to name any actual democracies (probably because they're not America and therefore completely irrelevant)

He can't. If he fights the fire, it wins.

All men are created equal does sound suspiciously like everyone gets a trophy

We are a republic. Our congress is a democracy tho.

Yes.

Democracy created SJWs.

It can't be changed in any positive way. There are three dominant philosophies in America, which have become and are becoming more every day global phenomena: Capitalism, Jewish Religion and Democracy (any form). And they all promote the exact same thing: sociopaths rising to the top and soaking up all power without any control measures, while giving the illusion of choice. We're already losing democracy, but it's being replaced by plutocracy/corporatocracy.

That would be christianity.

>Inb4 butthurt christians try to claim it's not when it totally is

No, but giving the vote to anyone besides land owners was. If you don't own a piece of the land, you shouldn't get a say. And if you are on welfare, you certainy shouldn't be allowed to vote because that's a conflict of interests.

then why are all the sjw's leftist atheists?

I like that that sounds better.

The main mistake was to think and to limit democracy as the rule of law and elections.
Democracy should be a conceptual tool implemented in as much parts of the society as possible (obviously you can't extend it everywhere).
GDH Cole wrote some interesting paths of reflexion with its guild's socialism (that should be tempered as his understanding of the relations between memberships, groups and actors is quite vague).

No, just universal suffrage. Only men of means should ge able to vote.
Women are too narcissistic and neurotic to have a say in how a country is run. Poor men on the other hand have nothing to lose by voting for Gib me dats.

Because culture changes over time *gasp*. Why are skinheads all white trash now when it started as a nigger thing?

Free will was a mistake.

> I don't think anarchy is actually possible.
anarchy is not just possible, it's as common as dogshit

every time the dindus riot and turn a city into a war zone, thats anarchy

every place where the "govt" is defined by "warlords" and "local militias", that's anarchy

every time you hear about a sandnigger deathsquad raiding a refugee camp and slaughtering the refugees, thats anarchy

anarchy is NOT some utopian daydream.
that shit only exists in the fevered imaginations of lefty nitwits when they cry about their special snowflake "anarcho-___________ism" that invariably winds up being indistinguishable from any of the myriad sub-flavours of marxism.

America is a Constitutional Republic. Representatives rule in place of the people.

you spelt wrong illusion* m8

I've put some thought into this, and I'm hung up on how the elite would try to prevent land ownership/any other voting requirement to disenfranchise people.

For example, let's say you can vote unless your net tax contributions past age 25 are positive. That is to say that you've put in (via taxes paid) more than you've taken out (via welfare) during your adult life.

Do you think there would be serious efforts to lower taxes on the middle and lower class so as to disenfranchise them completely? The richest 1% already pay 70% of all federal taxes. Would it behoove them to pay an even larger percentage in order to disenfranchise more people so that they would essentially have complete control?

Just playing devil's advocate here. I agree with your position in principle, but the practice could get dicey.

You are just describing people defying the rule of the government. That doesn't mean that the government doesn't exist.

agreeing with this post
even Proudhon's definition of anarchism is more close of a guild socialism than the wanker's vision of anarchism you can hear on tv-web-BS medias

Yes it is

Read this as to why:
>Democracy: The God That Failed
>Hans-Hermann Hoppe
riosmauricio.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Hoppe_Democracy_The_God_That_Failed.pdf

Wiki summary:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy:_The_God_That_Failed

Think of athiesm as... the bloodbank bus in highschool.

>5% donated because they genuinely wanted to help people.
i.e. Dawkins
>95% donated because they could skip class
i.e. Trigglypuff

> we are a republic
good job

> Our congress is a democracy tho
hol up there nigga!

congress is NOT a democracy.

the house is popularly elected, by district by district, though what could be called "democracy" but they are REPRESENTATIVES, hence part of a republican form

the senate is "democratically elected" state by state (huge mistake of course) but are still representatives, and thus REPUBLICAN.

the only "democracy" to be found in the US is the state and local plebiscite (commonly called "initiatives")

elected representatives are the core of the Republican Form, and are NOT democracy.

democracy sucks generally, and often winds up fucking over the demos because they are pretty damned stupid.

But how do you get the control of a piece of land (legacy, force[that can be understood as economic power], …)? That's an important ideological point and was used by most maoists guerillas in southern america and asia to justify warcrimes and coup.
Moreover today, with the numeric globalization, attacking the right to vote would pose a serious threat on the social peace

I agree with you. I wish that atheists would extend that consideration to Christians. (That 95% are retards and don't represent the belief intellectually)

If you liked this book I would suggest you this one : Emmanuel Todd: "The Causes of Progress: Culture, Authority, and Change (Family Sexuality and Social Relations in Past Times)"

LEFTISM created SJW's

the butthurt tumblrina professional victim class is the product of marxian social sabotage, in an attempt to undermine capitalism and the republic by exploiting the weaknesses of capitalism and the republic.

jews didnt create this shit, "democracy" didnt create this shit, and christianity didnt create this shit, MARXISM created those sacks of dicktips, and the marxists did it by design.

The problem with democracy in a nutshell is, in a system where nobody is policing the candidates for corruption, are the people smart enough to vote to save themselves?

The fact that there's even a question about Trump winning the election or not says a lot about that. The only guy that wants to rebuild the country, and it's an actual controversy.

Another fun fact: the election in London was tampered with. Voter fraud in the Muslim majority areas.

yeah congress is a component of our republic, but I meant that it functions as a democracy within itself. It's memebers vote as a democracy. We could maybe improve by having them elect representatives.

I once noted, in a university paper, that the USA was a republic.

My professor, who had a Ph.D in English, crossed that out and wrote "This is wrong, the USA is a DEMOCRACY."

I was literally dumbfounded that someone could get a fucking Ph.D and still think that. Fucking women.

> The fact that there's even a question about Trump winning the election or not says a lot about that. The only guy that wants to rebuild the country, and it's an actual controversy.

I'm quite neutral about Trump's election as I'm not an US citizen. But you can't say that the controversy is rather about his ability to get elected than about his programme.

> the election in London was tampered with. Voter fraud in the Muslim majority areas.

Will there be a commission?

lmao did you talk to her about it?

> democracy R Gud! cuz muh marxist navel gazer sez so!!

stuff that bullshit marxian twatwaffle right up your ass.

marxism cant win by violent revolution so now youre trying to win by subterfuge and erosion.

marxism doesnt work and we in the US dont want it.

if marxism was so sweet, why is belgium an irrelevant shithole swarming with sand niggers?

Lipstick doesn't help pigs to be pretty and PhD's don't help women to be smart.

sort of agree with this but you would have to stop outsiders buying land then

This is the problem with a lot of scholar. Their diplomas gave them sun sized egos.
You cannot have a conversation as they're 100% sure to be more right than you ever would be. (unless you get the magic paper ofc)

>statement without proof
nice

> skinheads started as a nigger thing
damn youre stupid.

"skinheads" were a subculture of the punk subculture with shittier music and shittier style.
it began among working class hooligans in england, not god damned niggers.
it started as a pleb tier trend among the white trash and remained there

You shouldn't be neutral, it affects you. Trump being elected is a signal to the rest of the world that someone is willing to stand up to Islamic conquest.

A commission? Never

Almost any system can be exploited

The trick, I think, is not designing a system that cant be exploited but designing one where the benefits of buying in and working towards shared goals outweigh the benefits of gaming it for personal advantage

> i don't understand what is wrote/i don't agree
> must be an evil jew/bolchevik/marxist

Woah calm down sugar. I didn't even mentioned marxism.
And where did you get that idea that Belgium was under a marxist rule (majority is extreme right-wing conservatives and center-right)?

My point is democracy as it exist in political system is uncomplete and that we should consider to renew it in accordance to our era.

Yes, and of course she didn't believe me, and wouldn't change my grade.

Thankfully, I was taking some type of government class at the same time, so I asked that prof. what he thought about the situation and showed him my paper. He was an old crusty fart, and he got legitimately upset about it.

He sent her an email and explained how fucking dumb she was I guess, cause she changed my grade.

I bet this bitch would have been a SJW nowadays, but this was about 7 years before the SJW fad came about thankfully.

>the election in London was tampered with. Voter fraud in the Muslim majority areas.
source?

Oh excuse me. Niggers AND wiggers. Still, it doesn't have that association anymore, now does it?

Democracy would be grand if man was as the founder thought he was.

The problem for democracy is diversity. It works best in homogeneous populations.

ur right, we need fascism.
no freedom, no conflicts, no problem.

Not when it was restricted to land owners. Even if it was open to non-whites and women, the land ownership requirement would fix a lot of problems.

> people defying the govt...
somalia
detroit
the LA riots (all of them)
ferguson
etc etc etc

i am describing the total breakdown of society in various places for varying durations.
that is anarchy.

anarchy is NOT:
a protest
a political theory
a cool new kind of socialism
an intelligent position
a solution to anything
something to strive for
a mystical unicorn utiopian dream indistinguishable from marx's "worker's paradise

anarchy is CHAOS and disorder, where the strong prey on the weak, and cannibalistic raiders wearing old tires for armour ride across a blasted desert landscape searching for gasoline.

give up faggot
you cant win this argument, because i dont give a shit about your Feels.

That's still just opening up your society to abuse and plutocracy.

By neutral I mean that I don't have any leverage on this election. Nevertheless, even if I'm clearly not a great supporter of his ideas (and also because I don't really see what he really wants to achieve as he's flip-flopping with electoral lies a lot) I think it will bring conflicts and change, which is needed.

> someone is willing to stand up to Islamic conquest

This "islamic conquest" is nothing more than a symptom and a scapegoat as most terrorist are national citizens who grew from parents, or grand-parents who migrates decades ago.
If we want to "stop terrorism" we need to go to the root of the problem. (and this might be some specific radical wings of islam, but it's a fallacy to think it is the islam as a whole)

A democracy can only be functional when only white, tax paying men can make decisions. Otherwise it's anarchy.

That's still just plutocracy.

> congress acts as a democracy..

werent you listening in jr high civics?

congress is NOT a democracy within itself even.

they operate through committees, bound by the tenets of the constitution (in theory) and serve the wishes of their individual constituents (in theory)

congress doesnt just run into a big room 3 times a week and vote on random shit.
that would be "democracy" and it would be an even bigger mess than our current fucked up system.

My understanding is that anarchy is an absence of government. Maybe we have different definitions.

> The problem for democracy is diversity. It works best in homogeneous populations.
Then we have lobbying and representative democracy systems that exist for this.
But I agree that democracy is really more efficient in smaller unity (like the panchayat in North-India & Nepal).

I'll just quote Yinger:
> «Separation is legitimate in a democracy when it does not deny any group access to the culture while giving others an advantage, when it does not so warp the personalities of some — by denying them hope and the opportunity to learn the skills and values of the society — that not only they but the whole nation suffers.»

A republic is a form of democracy

By definition we are a democracy

You niggers are fucking retarded

Back on point, no I dont think democracy was a mistake, as churchill once said, "democracy is the worst form of government, except for all others." In other words, democracy can suck, but its better then having someone like Hitler or Mao dictating your life. And before you Nat Soc faggots come out of the woodwork to defend hitler, keep in mind even Rommel wanted Hitler dead, and was subsequently given the choice to poison himself, or his family harmed.

No, it's how you avoid Bastiat's Warning about the voters voting themselves money.

independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/elections-2016-absolute-shambles-in-barnet-as-voters-turned-away-from-polling-stations-with-wrong-a7014411.html

pamelageller.com/2016/05/muslim-anti-semite-elected-london-mayor.html/

Chief Rabbi of London was literally not allowed to vote.

> didnt even mention marxism
yeah, you squeaked a few plaintive notes about your special snowflake "socialism thats totally not marxism, even though it looks exactly like marxism, but it aint marxism because i'm not a marxist! i'm a "socialist"!!"

refusing to admit your marxism makes you a Crypto-Marxist, the lowest form of leftist scum.

and youre the only one bringing up jews.
marxists love to blame the jews for all marxism's failing, but the fact remains, the chinks couldnt make marxism work, and they are 100% jew-free.

So a republic is a trustworthy one ?

> niggers AND wiggers
no, there were never any niggers involved at all.

claiming there were is patently retarded.

>I don't think democracy is a bad idea because Churchill
Daily Reminder that Churchill was literally Satan.

Reaganite retard. There is no way to give the wealthy preferential power without resulting in plutocracy like we have now. And the rich always vote in favor of themselves getting more money, regardless of how much damage they have to do. If they have to erase all borders and encourage racemixing to get their universal Brazil, then that's what they'll do.

Here's a great example. During the the Obama presidency, something like 3/4 of the American population were against illegal immigration. So what did the federal government do? Why they did what they always do after Raygun: they said fuck the will of the people and enforced what the rich wanted, breaking their own laws in order to do so.

I agree with what he said in that particular moment.

reposting from an old thread:

I was thinking that democracy could be refined into a system, where the population is divided into residents and citizens.

citizenship could be attained by fulfilling these two prerequisites.

1) Being born and having lived in the country for atleast 10 years

2a) doing citizenship service (basically our current conscription but voluntary)

2b) having atleast 2 childern and being a parent present in their lives (no single mother who ride the cock carousel)

toughts?

Also, what do you support as a system of government?

I feel like the only mistake with democracy is to assume that it's incorruptible

Which is of course what 99% of people seem to assume these days for some fucking reason. No system is inherently bad (with a few exceptions) but all systems are vulnerable to corruption down to it's very core

and on top of that democracy is only as functional as it's people

in a world of rampant stupidity democracy becomes a destructive force rather than one that inspires and innovates

You should quit whatever you are on, it's clearly not good for you.
If someone (me) say that there are paths in the theory (guild socialism) of GDH cole to improve democracy as it exists now, it doesn't mean that someone (me) is fully agreeing to the said theory.

And I don't blame jew, I was caricaturing you.
Finally, as I understand I need to explain things in simple terms for you:
Stop putting people in boxes before trying to understand their point, otherwise you'll condemn your mind to an infinite circlejerk.

very nice

> absence of govt
that's part of it.
the other part is the Total Breakdown Of Society.

in a tribal society there is no govt, yet society functions based on the family group hierarchy without any outside intervention.

even pirates were able to establish order among themselves without any government structure.

anarchy is disorder, usually resulting from a breakdown in governance in a complex society due to:
revolution (18th century france)
Marxist Insurgency (south america, since the 1900's)
the collapse of an existing system with nothing to replace it (south africa in the hands of the niggers)
a breakdown in an authoritarian regime, unleashing pent up tribal violence dating back to the dawn of time (pretty much all of west africa)
a m0slem insurgency (all of sandland at one time or another)
a natural disaster (new orleans after katrina)
or Niggers

> 2b) having atleast 2 childern and being a parent present in their lives (no single mother who ride the cock carousel)

Quite dangerous, not everyone wants to/can be a parent and it represent also very useful members of the society.

Of course you do and for the exact same reason both muslims and christians believe their personal sect of their personal religion is the best religion in the history of the world: because it's all you've ever known.

dat lowest common denominator, senpai

the point I'm making is that the scenarios you described still had a government, it was just being disobeyed.

what fampai?

> invoked a marxist author as a solution to america's problems
> "how DARE you accuse me of being a marxist!!!!"
> who else invokes marxist authors to solve america's problems which are the direct result of marxist sabotage?

either admit youre a marxist or stfu.

Too soon to tell

> in a tribal society there is no govt, yet society functions based on the family group hierarchy without any outside intervention

1) What are you calling "outside intervention"
2) Tribal society from where?
Ever heard about panchayat or 'assabiya?

I support a very complex system which has never been used. Meritocratic Empire. Capitalism would be illegal as well as ALL forms of currency. Barter would be allowed, but most things would be provided by community effort and distributed through state marketplaces/agorae/malls. The government would have a labor system to determine what labor was required to keep things running and assign the general labor force to each task until it was no longer needed and volunteering during for example planting and harvest would be encouraged. Mass automation and mechanization would also be employed. Personality testing would also be prevalent and anyone with sociopathic tendencies not only wouldn't be allowed to climb to the top of society, but would be immediately sterilized, if not outright terminated or exiled.

define democracy

Yes.

We need a neo-feudal pluralistic empire.

make me fagt

letting women vote is worse than anything

Fucking retard. Skinhead culture was ripped directly off of nigger bullshit. Get over yourself, faggot. Don't you have a CI meeting to attend?

> GDH Cole is a marxist
There is a huge difference between libertarian socialists and marxists…

This book is so fucking good. The footnotes have also given me many more books to read.

Letting most men vote is a mistake. Most people are idiots. That's exactly why democracy's retarded. And despite capitalist protestations, the rich aren't intelligent in the mass either.

No.
when govt breaks down, it ceases to be govt.

somalia has NO govt.
the talibs in afghanistan were NOT a govt.
Isis/isil/daesh is not a govt.
when niggers are rioting there is no govt, only your guns

the existence of a govt is predicated on it's GOVERNANCE (law, order, justice, redress of grievances, enforcement of contracts, protection of property, quelling of lawless violence through LAWFUL violence, etc) when that fails, there is no govt in the effected region.

when a bunch of niggers kick in your door with visions of rapine and plunder dancing in their heads, there is NO GOVT during that event, only you and your guns vs the niggers and their guns.

ie: anarchy.

Yes, but Trump will correct it very soon.