Dangers of Democracy, It Don’t Mean Freedom

[LWW]

The politians and most people are confusing freedom with Democracy. Democracy is a majority and usually (usually is the scary word) through representatives.

If the majority of the people are against free speech then freedom, the bill of rights are in danger.

The founders feared direct democracy.

We should pay taxes which provides necessities for the community, this is where the representatives come in, the taxes should not be their pay checks.

Also socialism can’t function without capitalism, which is why socialism is also dangerous practice.

[Jtbny]

The politians and most people are confusing freedom with Democracy. Democracy is a majority and usually (usually is the scary word) through representatives.

If the majority of the people are against free speech then freedom, the bill of rights are in danger.

The founders feared direct democracy.

We should pay taxes which provides necessities for the community, this is where the representatives come in, the taxes should not be their pay checks.

Also socialism can’t function without capitalism, which is why socialism is also dangerous practice.

Dear Diary...

We are a mixed form of government and it seems to work as long as we don't drift too far to either side.

INB4 Taxation is theft

Edit: every elected position should come with term limits. Even appointed positions should be able to reevaluated, IMO.

[ElrondHubbard]

As I've always said,

"When I'm dictator, we'll have a much better democracy."

Vote for me!

[7Seconds]

Edit: every elected position should come with term limits. Even appointed positions should be able to reevaluated, IMO.

IMO term limits are a band aid. We need to limit party power to facilitate real reform, not individual power.

[LWW]

Dear Diary...

We are a mixed form of government and it seems to work as long as we don't drift too far to either side.

I agree, and I like that “things don’t ever get done”. Like this impeachment.

[7Seconds]

I agree, and I like that “things don’t ever get done”. Like this impeachment.

This idea is not as effective as it used to be, since the executive branch has now accrued a good bit of power to itself.

[LWW]

IMO term limits are a band aid. We need to limit party power to facilitate real reform, not individual power.

The party system does stink and is why democracy is dangerous. Term limits work because let’s go back to taxation and thieft, one persons necessities are not another’s. Take education, I’ll pay for libraries where people can learn on their own and learn critical thinking but I’ll not want to contribute too much to institutions that are based on judging on how well one has confirmed to those institutions that dictates ones’ future.

[Jtbny]

IMO term limits are a band aid. We need to limit party power to facilitate real reform, not individual power.

Maybe, maybe not. Either way I'd like to see less campaigning and more governing.

[7Seconds]

The party system does stink and is why democracy is dangerous. Term limits work because let’s go back to taxation and thieft, one persons necessities are not another’s. Take education, I’ll pay for libraries where people can learn on their own and learn critical thinking but I’ll not want to contribute too much to institutions that are based on judging on how well one has confirmed to those institutions that dictates ones’ future.

In states with term limits for state offices what happens is the only institutional knowledge is held by the bureaucracy and lobbyists, 2 groups not notorious for being responsive to the public. Writing legislation is a skill. With term limits, the unskilled politicians turns to seasoned bureaucrats, lobbyists, and, of course, their own party. Party officials would have even greater power.

The issues that need discussion are gerrymandering, voter suppression, and voting reform, not term limits.

[7Seconds]

Maybe, maybe not. Either way I'd like to see less campaigning and more governing.

I would like to see less campaigning as well then we could judge them on their acts instead if their election promises and words.

But in the end the problem is gerrymandering, campaign finance, voter reform etc. . It's not easy getting re-elected 7 times unless the election process makes it so.

[ElrondHubbard]

Maybe, maybe not. Either way I'd like to see less campaigning and more governing.

I have a plan for that!

[ElrondHubbard]

In states with term limits for state offices what happens is the only institutional knowledge is held by the bureaucracy and lobbyists, 2 groups not notorious for being responsive to the public. Writing legislation is a skill. With term limits, the unskilled politicians turns to seasoned bureaucrats, lobbyists, and, of course, their own party. Party officials would have even greater power.

The issues that need discussion are gerrymandering, voter suppression, and voting reform, not term limits.

The argument sounds good(and I agree on gerrymandering, voter suppression, and voting reform), but I don't think the problem you find with bureaucrats and lobbyists becomes less in the absence of term limits. With lawmakers in office for what amounts to an entire career, the bureaucrats and lobbyists form alliances and "good old boy" networks with them, and spend their time working to preserve all their positions, not just the politician's. The lawmaker becomes indebted to those unelected influencers, and start working for their benefit instead of the people who they are sworn to serve.

Term limits is sure not a panacea, and it won't end corruption, but there is a specific type of corruption that it can go a long way towards eliminating.

[7Seconds]

The argument sounds good(and I agree on gerrymandering, voter suppression, and voting reform), but I don't think the problem you find with bureaucrats and lobbyists becomes less in the absence of term limits. With lawmakers in office for what amounts to an entire career, the bureaucrats and lobbyists form alliances and "good old boy" networks with them, and spend their time working to preserve all their positions, not just the politician's. The lawmaker becomes indebted to those unelected influencers, and start working for their benefit instead of the people who they are sworn to serve.

Term limits is sure not a panacea, and it won't end corruption, but there is a specific type of corruption that it can go a long way towards eliminating.

15 states have implemented term limits for legislators and it hasn't stopped the corruption, with the added "bonus" of weakening their legislatures relative to their executive. Corruption doesn’t decrease just because there is a different ape in the machine. The position holds as much power as ever, and less experienced lawmakers rely more heavily on unelected staffers, lobbyists and so on.

I'm happy the conversation is about systemic reform, but I just don’t see how having arbitrary term limits improves on anything while limiting the options of the voter.

[OldFartTom]

Slightly tangential to the original post but I think this shows that these kind of concerns are nothing new. Democracy versus freedom, Liberalism (with a capital "L") versus actually being liberal, etc etc. These are age old and not a new debate to current day politics

Nearly finished it now, but noticed this when reading the other day "...I have often noticed that our Liberals never allow other people to have an opinion of their own, and immediately answer their opponents with abuse, if they do not have recourse to arguments of a still more unpleasant nature..."

Sounds like something that could have been written yesterday but it's actually in Fydor Dostoyevsky "The Idiot" first published 1869

Truly there is nothing new under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1:9) or my recent favourite that “History never repeats itself but it rhymes" Mark Twain

Edit: incidentally there's a book on this exact topic, tyranny of the majority against the individual etc. I was supposed to have read it at college but to my shame I never bothered. But if you're interested and have reading spare time https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Liberty

[eomrat]

In states with term limits for state offices what happens is the only institutional knowledge is held by the bureaucracy and lobbyists, 2 groups not notorious for being responsive to the public. Writing legislation is a skill. With term limits, the unskilled politicians turns to seasoned bureaucrats, lobbyists, and, of course, their own party. Party officials would have even greater power.

The issues that need discussion are gerrymandering, voter suppression, and voting reform, not term limits.

Who's votes are being suppressed?

[7Seconds]

Who's votes are being suppressed?

Individuals who are unable to cast a ballot because of artificial obstacles in voting laws.

[ElrondHubbard]

15 states have implemented term limits for legislators and it hasn't stopped the corruption, with the added "bonus" of weakening their legislatures relative to their executive. Corruption doesn’t decrease just because there is a different ape in the machine. The position holds as much power as ever, and less experienced lawmakers rely more heavily on unelected staffers, lobbyists and so on.

I'm happy the conversation is about systemic reform, but I just don’t see how having arbitrary term limits improves on anything while limiting the options of the voter.

I'm going to guess those states don't have term limits for governor, right? I could be wrong about that of course. But I'm not arguing that term limits alone will do anything. It would have to be combined with the other reforms we've agreed on.

Do you think the two-term limit for presidents should be lifted?

[ElrondHubbard]

Slightly tangential to the original post but I think this shows that these kind of concerns are nothing new. Democracy versus freedom, Liberalism (with a capital "L") versus actually being liberal, etc etc. These are age old and not a new debate to current day politics

Nearly finished it now, but noticed this when reading the other day "...I have often noticed that our Liberals never allow other people to have an opinion of their own, and immediately answer their opponents with abuse, if they do not have recourse to arguments of a still more unpleasant nature..."

Sounds like something that could have been written yesterday but it's actually in Fydor Dostoyevsky "The Idiot" first published 1869

Truly there is nothing new under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1:9) or my recent favourite that “History never repeats itself but it rhymes" Mark Twain

Edit: incidentally there's a book on this exact topic, tyranny of the majority against the individual etc. I was supposed to have read it at college but to my shame I never bothered. But if you're interested and have reading spare time https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Liberty

This is all very true. Of course, abusiveness towards those who disagree is hardly unusual from conservatives as well. I've been recently studying the history of Athens from the Persian Wars down to the Peloponnesian War, and in their assembly they were having almost identical conservative-liberal disputes that are taking place today.

[NorwichGrad]

Woke post.

Democracy is evil. Majority rule is evil. What if the majority is wrong? In fact, I would say minority rule is also evil, considering half of voters do not vote. Let that sink in.

America is a corpse being consumed by maggots. Liberals are rooting for the maggots. Conservatives are rooting for the corpse. And BOTH are rooting for Keynesian economics.

Statism is a cult.

If you think gubmint is the solution -whether you are lib or con - YOU ARE A BRAINDEAD FOOL. Have fun enjoying your slavery.

And yes, TAXATION IS THEFT.

[NorwichGrad]

Maybe, maybe not. Either way I'd like to see less campaigning and more governing.

"MORE GOVERNING."

Then you're a slave and you think authoritarianism is acceptable.

Govern yourself. Who are you to tell others how to live their lives?

[7Seconds]

I'm going to guess those states don't have term limits for governor, right? I could be wrong about that of course. But I'm not arguing that term limits alone will do anything. It would have to be combined with the other reforms we've agreed on.

Do you think the two-term limit for presidents should be lifted?

No, presidents should be term limited to avoid monopolization of the Executive branch and through it, the Judicial branch. In theory, many of the functions a President performs (with respect to the Executive branch) should be non-partisan although that doesn't end up working in practice. So with the lack of accountability and extreme power of the US presidency, one of the last checks we have is limited period of tenure.

[7Seconds]

"MORE GOVERNING."

Then you're a slave and you think authoritarianism is acceptable.

Govern yourself. Who are you to tell others how to live their lives?

Honest question for you. Do you consider your Ancap views to be a political movement, or more of a life philosophy, or something else? What do you do to advocate for it ? How does it affect your daily life?

I have many anarchist friends (generally much more to the left of where you are) they have differing opinions on this.

Just curious.

[LWW]

And yes, TAXATION IS THEFT.

It is, interesting enough my property tax has risen for the 7th year in row I just heard on the radio, how is that NOT thieft when I pay taxes already? This is organized crime mafia stuff.

And why in the hell would a mountain man who don’t use ANYTHING contributed by tax payers need to pay a tax?

So you are correct.

[ElrondHubbard]

It is, interesting enough my property tax has risen for the 7th year in row I just heard on the radio, how is that NOT thieft when I pay taxes already? This is organized crime mafia stuff.

And why in the hell would a mountain man who don’t use ANYTHING contributed by tax payers need to pay a tax?

So you are correct.

So, are you saying that taxation is only theft for snowflakes such as yourself who use no public services and live off the land as hunter-gathers? Are taxes ok, then, for the general masses who do use public services and rely upon them for their survival?

[fishnbrah]

i thought we lived in a republic

[7Seconds]

i thought we lived in a republic

The most specific description of our government would be a ‘constitutionally-limited democratic republic.’ Democratic republic, constitutional democracy, constitutional republic, western democracy, or simply a democracy, would all be generally accurate descriptions.

[Payton1221]

"MORE GOVERNING."

Govern yourself. Who are you to tell others how to live their lives?

I interpret what he wrote as simply doing the job they were elected to do: not looking for new ways to "govern" the people but not for the pursuit of getting re-elected either. Guitarist Tom Morello was an aide to Alan Cranston but became disenchanted when he realized that he spent most of his time RAISING CAMPAIGN FUNDS!

[LWW]

So, are you saying that taxation is only theft for snowflakes such as yourself who use no public services and live off the land as hunter-gathers? Are taxes ok, then, for the general masses who do use public services and rely upon them for their survival?

So your ok with using "taxation" to pay for people's mansions such as Commrad Bill? Whom we don't even "work for"????

Snowflakes are people who don't think it's "fair" that in capitalism their boss (or company owner) make more than they do, they protest instead of going out there and competing. I want my company to make lots of money. I could care less if my companies' owners don't pay "their fare share" as I'm aware that if they get hit hard, it only hurts me.

Do you even know what a snowflake is El. taxes enforced by the leader is theft all round. I said taxes are important, but you can't rely on someone else to manage it. Why would I tax the mountain of lives off the grid? I at least respect the hell out of that, don't know how that's being a snowflake, as the snowflakes only "talk" about living off nature, they don't really do it.

I think responsible people in communities are smart enough to figure out how taxes should be collected "when needed", some things are needed like roads etc. when the community is exposed to the expenses they know what is needed and when, we shouldn't NEED "the politician" to manage it for us. But people are lazy and I suppose don't mind to pay for that convenience.

[LWW]

i thought we lived in a republic

The politians, even Trump carelessly throw the word Democracy around and that’s the whole point of thread.

You are right as the founding fathers intended but they also used democracy and republic interchangeably, indirect democracy was more thier views.

[7Seconds]

The "taxation is theft" meme is about as useful for conveying complex ideas about libertarianism as "god isn't real" would be for an atheist and really fails to reach outside of the libertarian bubble. While technically correct there are probably better ways to get across the idea.

We should be extremely cautious about taxation, and the bar for what the government spends money on (and thus, what they need to raise money for) should be very high. Honestly, as a libertarian I find the government waste and what my money is being spent on much more frustrating then simply paying taxes.