Is democracy a failure? (1861) • Hacker News Board

Re: Is democracy a failure? (1861)

#271

Post by Houshalter » Sun, Nov 06, 2016, 9:03 PM UTC

zigzigzag wrote: post #171

Houshalter wrote: post #33

Yes. Consider that attractive candidates get two and a half times as many votes as unattractive ones. Consider that most voters have very little or no knowledge of most policy and issues. Most voters can't name their representatives even. Most just blindly vote for one party or issue. It's still better than nondemocratic systems I guess. But that's a terribly low bar to pass. That's not something to be proud of. Ever…

Statistics show that even biased judges tend to become much less biased by the time they retire. Citation needed. If judges were so great and neutral then why does the US have a collective fit any time one needs to be replaced? It's taken for granted that the judges are all extremely biased and the decision making of the court can be (and should be) swayed by selection of appointees.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/supreme-court-justices-g...

I never said that judges were perfectly unbiased, just that they tend to the same opinions over time. Republican nominated judges tend to look indistinguishable from democrat nominated judges by the time they retire.

Re: Is democracy a failure? (1861)

#272

Post by mzw_mzw » Sun, Nov 06, 2016, 11:01 PM UTC

rixed wrote: post #266

zanny wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Sioux tribe and other protestors claim he was a plant by the oil company to intentionally turn public opinion against the protestors[1]. [1]: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dakota-access-pipeline-s... That, and the other incidences of protestors using firearms is something anyone managing a protest of this scale cannot control. As long as the leadership involved condemns the gun violence, and the protestors…

Sadly you have to have been a protester at least once to know that, otherwise you just cannot believe how prevalent (and effective) this tactic is.

It sure is odd how these evil tools of the Man are never identified and flushed out by the noble, gentle, peaceful protesters before they start committing arson and shooting cops. Nobody noticed that these agents provocateurs were carrying guns? Nobody went up to them while they were getting ready to burn millions of dollars of equipment -- something which requires a lot more effort than just tossing a match -- and said "hey, don't do that, we're all about peace"? The pipeline protesters knew damn well they had bad apples, and they did nothing about it.

Re: Is democracy a failure? (1861)

#273

Post by rixed » Wed, Nov 09, 2016, 2:28 PM UTC

mzw_mzw wrote: post #272

rixed wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly you have to have been a protester at least once to know that, otherwise you just cannot believe how prevalent (and effective) this tactic is.

It sure is odd how these evil tools of the Man are never identified and flushed out by the noble, gentle, peaceful protesters before they start committing arson and shooting cops. Nobody noticed that these agents provocateurs were carrying guns? Nobody went up to them while they were getting ready to burn millions of dollars of equipment -- something which requires a lot more effort than just tossing a match -- and s…

This is indeed not how it works. Provocateurs, not perpetrators.

Re: Is democracy a failure? (1861)

#274

Post by randomsearch » Sat, Nov 12, 2016, 10:39 AM UTC

(For clarity: I'm against Trump and voted against Brexit)

I'm so tired of this kind of thinking. It seems to come from people who don't have much contact with a good cross-section of society, such that they can maintain the illusion that things are fine, that (for example) Brexit or Trump was a stupid decision.

These decisions are actually democracy at work, in a positive sense. A large raft of society in the UK and the USA have been neglected, trod upon, bullied, and exploited for decades. And they have finally had the opportunity to kick back and they have taken that opportunity. It's destructive in one sense, but you have to consider that without precisely this kind of upset, no-one would pause to think about these people for a moment, and things would continue to get worse for them.

These people aren't racist (well, no more than those who voted the other way), they're not idiots, they're not some sort of cesspool of poorly educated fools, they are making an informed rational decision to kick back. They're furious. They want to be heard.

I think so many of my friends don't get it, because they don't realise that the vote for Brexit turned out that way precisely because it was designed to annoy them. If you don't get Trump, you don't get Brexit, chances are you are exactly the beneficiary of decades of globalisation and free trade, widening inequality, that have crushed the people below you. Try trading places with them and see how you feel then.

If you're not grasped this by now, you should definitely make an effort to broaden your social circles.

If you watch this video and think "wow, Michael Moore's lost it", then you have a long way to go:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lMp_363B2c

Re: Is democracy a failure? (1861)

#275

Post by mzw_mzw » Wed, Nov 16, 2016, 1:53 AM UTC

rixed wrote: post #273

mzw_mzw wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sure is odd how these evil tools of the Man are never identified and flushed out by the noble, gentle, peaceful protesters before they start committing arson and shooting cops. Nobody noticed that these agents provocateurs were carrying guns? Nobody went up to them while they were getting ready to burn millions of dollars of equipment -- something which requires a lot more effort than just tossing a match -- and s…

This is indeed not how it works. Provocateurs, not perpetrators.

"Mom, he made me do it!" isn't going to save you in a court of law. Actual non-violent protesters, whom these people are not, would have taken someone advocating arson and murder and flung them out the door.